The e-mails, the comments, the controversy, the stir; I have to explain why I crowned the AR-15 (and all its variations) the best gun for TEOTWAWKI (see original post). The way some of you responded, you’d have thought I’d insulted your mother, because your top choice wasn’t mine. I need to break this post into a two-part weekend post, SHTF homies. I gotta explain. It has to be done.
I know most of you already have your own belief on what the best SHTF/TEOTWAWKI gun is, and I suspect most everything I’m about to say here won’t change your mind, but it might, particularly if you base your opinion on most of the SHTF related blogs out there criticizing the AR-15, overstating its disadvantages and never fully explaining its many advantages. I should also preface this post with the note that there is no single gun that will meet every need. For this reason, people should reference my Top Ten list again and buy 10 . . . of each. 
The single biggest criticism of the AR-15 is usually its cartridge size. Stories get cited of soldiers needing to hit insurgents 3-4 times in the torso in order to bring them down. In Part I of this two part post I’ll respond to this criticism. In Part II I’ll describe the many other advantages to the AR-15 that either aren’t mentioned or fully defined on survivalist sites.
The Criticism - it’s a “varmint round” that has no business on the battlefield.
Critics happily say this and move on; but as is often the case, there’s more to the story. We need to look more deeply. A typical varmint round in a .223 is a 40-55 grain bullet. A typical .223 varmint rifle will have a 1:12 or 1:14 barrel twist. Virtually all of the the boxed .223 rounds you’ll find at stores like Wal-Fart and Dick’s Sporting Goods will be 55 grain full metal jackets. I can only assume, since critics rarely specify which cartridge they’re referencing, that they’re speaking of this more common cartridge. The military originally issued a 55 grain copper-jacketed lead-core bullet. The “bad performance” stories from the Vietnam-era are the result of this cartridge and a poor, original M16 design that has since improved exponentially. The 55 grain bullets are great if you’re hunting groundhogs or coyotes, but for SHTF purposes? Not my first choice.
Today’s standard issue cartridge for NATO forces is the 5.56mm M855 62 grain bullet with a metal-jacketed, lead alloy core and a 10 grain hardened steel penetrator tip inside. This penetrator tip provides semi-armor piercing capabilities that improves the AR-15’s ability to puncture hard targets. It can penetrate both sides of a steel helmet 700 yards away.
“Penetrates both sides of a steel helmet 700 yards away,” you say, “but what of these stories of soldiers hitting insurgents 3 or 4 times before they fall down? What good is it then? I’m sticking with the AK.”
Hold up. The problem with the M855 is that it was originally designed to penetrate an enemy’s protective vest from a distance while still having enough power to deliver damage. Your average insurgent isn’t equipped with protective vests, however. The M855 round can zip right through an unprotected opponent rather than mushroom or tumble. ADDITIONALLY, today’s soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan is now using an M4 variation of the AR-15. The barrel length is only 14.5″ which means that the bullet does not have the extra 5.5″ of barrel length found in an M16A2. This greatly affects the cartridge performance, because the bullet does not have the extra time in the barrel to increase velocity.
The M855 cartridge is great for penetration purposes in a small cartridge. I recommend everyone have a pile. They’re great for SHTF purposes . . . but still not my first choice. What survivalists want in 5.56mm cartridges is what many Special Forces units are already using, something beefier, like the Black Hills 77 grain Mk262 cartridges. These bullets weigh 24% more than those of the M855. What the Mk262 loses in M855 penetration it gains in terminal ballistics, so for your average non-body armor wearing insurgent, the Mk262 cartridge will deliver a more lethal hit, more combat damage.
Read this portion of a larger Guns and Ammo article (here):
When a five-man Special Forces team looking for Scuds in Iraq ran into a reinforced Iraqi infantry company, the future looked grim for the Americans. Facing overwhelming odds, it was quickly decided that three men armed with sniper rifles would cover a hasty retreat back to the LZ. With these odds death–or worse–seemed certain.
Yet the ensuing firefight did not go as the Iraqis had planned. Rather than being overwhelmed, the three Americans instead put down a hail of highly accurate rifle fire. Advancing against this murderous wall, entire sections of Iraqi infantry were simply cut down. Screaming and rattling away with their Kalashnikovs on full auto, they were knocked from their feet by carefully aimed shots. When staggering losses finally broke their spirit, the surviving Iraqis either threw down their weapons or simply ran away. Scattered about lay the bodies of 167 of their comrades. The Iraqi dead lay in mute testimony to the Americans’ tenacity and marksmanship skill.
With the criticism of poor terminal performance leveled by many on the 5.56×45, you would think those 167 Iraqis were cut down by 7.62mm M14s. Such was not the case. They fell to 5.56 Mk 12 sniper rifles firing 77-grain Mk 262 Open Tip Match ammunition. Developed to offer increased accuracy, range and improved terminal performance over the standard 62-grain M855 load, the Mk 262 has performed quite well in actual combat.
Those that know AR’s know this is true. Cartridge selection, barrel twist, and barrel length all offer quite different results. These 77 grain bullets are not yet standard issue for U.S. military personnel, and if you’re loading them in your own AR-15, you really need a 1:7 barrel twist to fully stabilize the larger bullet as opposed to the more common 1:9 twist found on most AR’s. These larger 5.56 77 grain (and up) bullets are getting used more widely and they still retain the very high level of accuracy one comes to expect from an AR-15. People that criticize the .223/5.56 cartridge as a useful SHTF round should first specify exactly WHICH variation of the bullet they’re referencing. They need to specify what barrel length and what barrel twist. All of this matters, but rarely gets discussed. A 77 grain hollow-point (or similar) bullet from a 1:7 20″ barrel offers dramatically improved terminal performance over a 14.5″ barrel shooting an M855 cartridge.
The now seemingly age old debate between the AK and the AR generally comes down to ballistics, reliability, and accuracy. It’s widely accepted that while the AR is far more accurate the AK delivers a greater punch. The 77 grain bullet closes that gap, and if it’s *punch* that you’re after, skip the AK-47 altogether and go straight to the .308 M1A or FAL. That way you have superior *punch* AND you retain accuracy.
Tomorrow I’ll cover the factors BEYOND ballistics that help make the AR-15 the best SHTF gun.
- Ranger Man
24 responses so far ↓
1 1919A6 // Dec 22, 2007 at 4:03 pm
The original AR-15 (M-16) had a twist of 1-14 and the 55 grain FMJBT was barely stabilized. The purpose of this combination was the almost immediate tumbling of that bullet upon entering the enemy’s body. Massive energy dump and massive tissue distruction. These were the first ones to Vietnam with the SF advisors and WORKED! However, the military in its infinite wisdom wanted a rifle to use against Soviet eskimos therefore took the infant M-16 to Alaska and found that the 1-14 would not stabilize the 55 grain bullet at all. Change the twist to 1-12, accuracy improved in Alaska but the effect on VC targets in 120 degree Vietnam was disappointing to say the least.
The comments about 1-7 and 77 grain bullets in the hands of specially trained SF unit in Iraq is hardly an universal mark of effectiveness. Comment of Carlos Hathcock, his bolt action 30-06, and his M-14 armed spotter who wiped out the NVA company!
2 ryan // Dec 22, 2007 at 5:14 pm
I think your disclaimer about the “best SHTF gun” was accurate but I think “best SHTF assault rifle” would be closer to your intent. It is a great post comparing the balistic effectiveness of different 5.56/.223 bullets. I read something on another blog that partially settled the 9mm vs .45acp. debate “stopping power is a worry of those who can’t hit the ten ring, talk less and practice more”. I think it fits well in this situation also. If you put rounds in an imaginary dinner plate in the middle of their chest just about any gun will do the job.
That brings us to the big advantage of the AR-15 family. They are accurate and thus more likely to hit targets then alot of other guns, definintely anything soviet.
3 Angry Oracle // Dec 22, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Well stated. There are always two and half sides to every story and no universal truths when it comes to firearms and ammunition selection.
4 Mike in MN // Dec 22, 2007 at 8:53 pm
That was a very well done argument. Thank you, I’m keeping it for future reference.
Anything will do if you, the shooter will do. If the shooter can’ t put rounds on target, nothing will save them.
And if one keeps in mind that no gun is a magical one shot anywhere on the opponent will drop him deader than last nights pork roast with one bullet nonsense, one can really see than gun debates are people really just circle jerking.
It’s what a lot of “What’s the best?” debates completely miss.
5 Dennis // Dec 22, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Another plus to the AR family is when the SHTF there will be all those dead National Guard and RA troops lying around for resupply.
6 Dr. Richard // Dec 22, 2007 at 9:02 pm
One more advantage of AR-15’s is that they are a bit more affordable than M1-A’s, even when one buys high-end trijicon or aimpoint scopes. I have both but .308 ammo is getting quite expensive. There are also some good carbine operators training classes available at the Quantico Shooting Club at the Quantico marine base, Blackwater NC, Frontsight, etc.
7 Luis in Utah // Dec 22, 2007 at 10:23 pm
great post. If you can’t hit the target with the AK, what good does a “greater punch” do?
8 1919A6 // Dec 22, 2007 at 10:25 pm
I just love these X vs. Y articles and opinions.
The only “best for the situation” is the ONE YOU HAVE IN YOUR HANDS at the time!
9 DW // Dec 22, 2007 at 11:16 pm
1919A6……..you got it!
10 1919A6 // Dec 23, 2007 at 12:18 am
To gain a real understanding of WHY the 223 is ballistically INFERIOR, one needs to go back to the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth century. The individual or small group of individuals will be in the same predicament as the infantryman of that era. The rifle will be the only arm available to deal with a multitude of situations that will unfortunately require dealing with COVER. Trees, walls, glass windows, sheet metal of vehicles, etc.
The 22 bullet does not have the mass nor velocity to defeat COVER. The 30 bullet in the 7.62 NATO round is not much better, BUT it IS better. COVER will be an issue and there being nothing else readily available to deal with it.
Thus, the targets will be harden by cover and the 30 gives much better penetration of COVER than the 223.
Don’t get me wrong, I like 223, even got a couple of them; but it’s like this - Nobody in their right mind takes a Bowie knife, a BIG Bowie knife, to a GUN FIGHT on purpose!
11 R. Stephen Dorsey // Dec 23, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I agree with your Part 1 analysis and would like to add a few comments of my own. As the last Captain of Ordnance at Springfield Armory, I was also the Project Officer for the Special Purpose Individual Weapon (SPIW), aka “the dart rifle”. That 3000+ fps weapon fired an extremely light, finned metal dart that, on hitting anything fiberous, turned into a fishook that dumped all of its energy on the target. And it wasn’t fazed by 1/4 in. steel plate, either. However, as one of your respondents noted about the deflection of the .223 on brush, it simply would not “dig” for an enemy. That is roughly true of the current .223s but it is not the kiss of death to chosing the AR, either, in my opinion.
What I haven’t read in the comments to date is any knowledge of the XM or M193 round which was commonly used with the early M16s (and is not being used in Iraq now). That bullet (see gelatin tests in The Ammo Oracle) literally explodes into fragments deep in the target at higher velocities. That velocity restriction gives me the same terminal results (nasty) within 140 yards with my 16 in. bbl. Bushmaster with a 1:9 twist rifling. This same bullet is found in the Israeli-mfg. Q3131 and Q3131A ammunition found in Winchester white boxes. After 140 yards from my 16 in. barrel, the bullet only delivers the much-maligned “ice pick” effect. So, long range sniper it’s not but that’s what the .308 is for IF YOU MUST SHOOT AT THAT RANGE. (I personally feel that most long range SHTF shots might better be saved for closer, more certain hits. The important question here, for me, is do I want to give away my position and to what advantage? )
Another option I didn’t see discussed is a simple, very cost-effective reload using a bullet like the 55 gr. softpoint Nosler. This lethality of this load is not restricted to velocity and will begin to open on impact (but continue to “dig”). From the 16 in. Bushmaster, 1:9, at 50 yards this bullet blew conical holes in the test soggy catalogue (3+ in. thick), emerging with a hole about 7/8 in. wide. And, this same reload gives me 1 minute of angle accuracy at 100 yds. That’s good enough for me. While there must be soft point .223 bullets out there that will explode on the target surface (or so I read on some blogs), this is not the case with these Noslers.
As to the defeat of cover, I fully agree that both the .308 and 7.62mm x 39 will be better (though the Russian round isn’t in the league of the 7.62 NATO round). I shot this comparative test back in the 1960s with the M14, the M16, the AK and the SPIW. The SPIW round was worthless, the M16 slightly better and the M14 destroyed the brush and kept on digging - sometimes sideways. However, the 7.62mm NATO round requires a heavy rifle and, for weight, gives significantly fewer rounds available for the shooter. The scenario will drive the choice of calibres IF YOU HAVE A CHOICE. If you don’t, become competent with what you have and reserve your shots for hits, not hope.
Regarding the 9mm, another much-maligned calibre. I didn’t sign the Geneva Convention. Therefore, the bullets exiting the muzzle of my Beretta are not FMJ and are as lethal as needed. I love the .45 Auto round but it has the same drawback as the .308 in terms of number of rounds in the magazine. And, a larger capacity .45 Auto just doesn’t fit my smaller hand. Bottom line: If I can hit it with my 9mm, it will develop a larger hole than 9mm/.35 cal. and that should provide some immediate incentive to the target to modify its behavior.
Finally, I won’t get into a discussion of the urban myths that have grown up around the M1 Carbine (e.g. won’t hit, won’t stop a target, etc.). My experience with the M1 Carbine is that the FMJ bullet will penetrate all the way through a man and then some. FMJ will penetrate light metal. e.g. helmets. However, as with the .223, the bullet is everything. With a hollow point or soft point “hunting” bullet, the M1 Carbine becomes a very lethal little gun that is inexpensive, reliable, accurate and VERY handy. And, it takes 30 rd. magazines that are available everywhere. With this bullet, the 100 yd. terminal ballistics are everything you could reasonably ask, i.e. plenty adequate. If targets were likely to be varied, a shooter could carry a couple of 15 rd. magazines with FMJ and the balance in soft points. Bottom line: I don’t care what Uncle Alvin said about his wartime experience with the carbine. A good M1 Carbine is an excellent,, lethal weapon for the 150 or so yard engagements when given the right ammunition. And, its handiness is even better than the AR family of “shorties”.
Responding to the implied criticism of the testing of the M16 in Alaska and its failure to perform well (the ammunition), there was a reason for the test. For any of those who have missed lying in the snow in eastern W. Germany when the temperature was 4 degrees Farenheit, the air is a lot denser than in the swamps of Viet Nam. That dense air has a marked effect on the midrange ballistics of lighter bullets. When you’re outnumbered over 4 to one, that sort of thing makes a difference. Hence the test and the changes it wrought.
12 Jerry in So IL // Dec 24, 2007 at 5:02 am
I can say this, IDOC use the 55gr SP 223 out of there Mini 14s. The last inmate shot trying to escape, was DOA with a less than perfect torso shot at 450 yards from a tower Mini. One shot, and drop one from the count!
13 1919A6 // Dec 25, 2007 at 1:36 am
R. Stephen Dorsey - I was in W. Germany opposite the Warsaw Pac with the M16A1. As with anything, WHY is very pertinent to ask, thus the M14 was just as good as the M16A1 with the 1-12 barrel because the U.S. Forces in W. Germany during the Cold War might as well had the code name “U.S.S. Arizona” for that was the purpose of those forces - to insure that if the Soviets attacked Europe the population of America would stand with them after losing ALL those AMERICAN in the first wave of Soviets!
Frankly, a mix of 556 NATO and 762 NATO is the better solution. The better shots with the 762 NATO and the rest with 556NATO. Something on the order of the USMC mix of M1s to BARs in Korea.
14 Michael Z. Williamson // Feb 19, 2008 at 3:02 am
191A6: Your information is incorrect. I’ve posted elsewhere on this blog, but will summarize again:
1:14 was insufficient to stabilize bullets in cold Arctic air, a consideration during the Cold War. They changed to 1:12 to remedy this.
It DOESN’T MATTER what twist rate you use. ALL rifle bullets tumble on hitting flesh, due to the denser medium. The twist rate is only relevant to the LENGTH of the bullet you are shooting. 1:14, 1:9, 1:7, all same as far as tumbling in flesh goes. 1:0.00005 still would.
“Turns cover into concealment” is utter BS. Myth. Armchair bravado. But if you want to lay a $100 down and do side by side penetration tests, I’ll be glad to take your money. Both 5.56 and 7.62 will shatter cinder blocks and keep going. Neither will penetrate a standard sandbag. Both will punch Level IIIA armor (actually, two of them). One of many demonstrations can be seen here: www.TheBoxOTruth.com
Ranger, I hate to disagree with you on your blog, but you’re backwards on bullets. 55 gr M193 shatters at speed and creates devastating wounds. The twofold problem with the current engagement is that a 14.5″ barrel doesn’t get the round past critical velocity for even half the distance that 20″ does, and the M855 round is too sturdy and massive to shatter. It’s a decent mid-range shooter (300-500 meters). It’s not a good choice in closer combat. The lighter bullet at faster velocity yields better energy on target and wounding.
As to “varmint” rounds, keep in mind that a coyote has a thicker skin than a human, and a different profile and internal arrangement. Apples and oranges.
Incidentally, if I can only have one gun, it’s my Remington 870 with an 8 round tube and an ACOG.
Number 2 is an M4:)
15 Davion // May 23, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Here is my two cents… I personally own and fire both an .223 AR15 (16″) and an .308 AR10 (20″).
Ballisticly, the 10 makes much larger holes in things. But in the end of the world scenario, I would have to grab my 15. It all comes down to weight. My fully loaded 10 w/ scope and ammunition weighs a hefty 14lbs compared to my 15 which weighs in at around 8.5lbs.
Yeah I agree shot placement is key. But in a SHTF situation I can carry a lot more ammunition for the weight. And as an added bonus my wife can handle the weight and recoil of the .223 chambered AR15.
Just my two cents….
16 Holy SHTF Sweetness! Don’t You Just LOVE a Recession? // Jun 27, 2008 at 5:42 pm
[…] Numba 1 - New Perspectives This one is much better than “musical inspiration” :-S. Tough times are forcing people to rethink their ways, and in many cases, this means more time at home, more family dinners, less busy schedule, less purchasing of useless CRAP, and a greater focus on the more important things in life . . . . like curling up in a ball in the basement with your mighty AR-15. […]
17 Top Ten BEST Cartridges / Calibers for Hunting // Aug 1, 2008 at 5:03 am
[…] Numba 7: .223 Remington This cartridge is scoffed at by many when it comes to large game, but, unless you’re on safari, it’ll surely get the job done. It’s fast and accurate. The magazine article refers to it as a “small-caliber 30-06, but more affordable.” Makes sense to me . . . . plus it also fits the mighty AR-15. […]
18 Kevin // Oct 14, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I personally am a fan of 7.62 - if I shoot someone I want them to go down and stay down (unlike the army that wants to create wounded for buddies to carry away). It seems to me that whatever your caliber, it would make sense to alternate FMJ or armor piercing with expanding bullets in your mag. That way you can go thru cover/armor but also have the lethality on an unprotected zombie. Also, it seems that after going thru steel plate, an FMJ might be larger caliber than it started, although probably less massive.
19 Buying Bannables - The Rush is On! // Oct 29, 2008 at 6:51 pm
[…] of being banned. You know what I’m talking about, don’t you? That’s right - the Mighty AR-15 (and similar such pieces, high capacity mags, the AK, […]
20 Kyro // Oct 30, 2008 at 11:22 pm
If you can afford it, get 2 each of the following:
AR-15 Variant in 5.56mm Nato
AK-47 or AKM Variant in 7.62×39mm Soviet (1 in 5.45×39 is ok for fun)
FN FAL, M1A/M14 or HK G3/91/CETME in 7.62mm NATO (AR-10 too is ok I guess)
Remy/Mossy 12 Guage Shotgun with tons o’ buckshot and slugs
.45ACP, .40 S&W or 9×19mm pistol that you like and works well
Lots of ammo
Lots of mags
Web Gear/Chest Rigs/Mag Carriers/holsters
Boots
Cleaning Gear for your firearms
With this your tool box will be complete, and you can choose your tool accordingly.
If I had to pick ONE end-all, be-all rifle to have I’d pick one of the aforementioned rifles above and practice with it a lot.
Use what you have, apply strategy and tactics accordingly to your capability. Rinse, repeat.
If things go bad, be sure I’ll pick “a long and a short” no matter where I go.
21 ERIC @ RWAZ // May 21, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Don’t forget, those whacky Tailbans are highed up on opium & cocaine unlike the general populous here in the USA. So a couple extra rounds to take them down sounds about right. Bubba all hungover on Budweiser should only take one well placed lead pill to drop his overweight ass.
22 Kyle // Sep 15, 2009 at 3:40 pm
I’m an army veteran of 2 tours in Iraq and I never saw a stopping power issue with 5.56/.223 rounds, which my M-4 fired.
23 Milo // Sep 27, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Just use .223 hollow point.
You are not the miltary and are not bound by the Convention.
24 unknown // Nov 16, 2009 at 5:49 pm
me a couple of good knifes a 22long rifle a bow and some arrows are all i need when shtf is what u got that counts
Leave a Comment