Modacity shooters' thread

Grain doesn't have a size, grain refers to weight of the actual bullet... Are you referring to the cartridge size? Cause .22 LR and .223 use a very similar bullet, but a different cartridge size.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freelancer

Grain doesn't have a size, grain refers to weight of the actual bullet... Are you referring to the cartridge size? Cause .22 LR and .223 use a very similar bullet, but a different cartridge size.

---

I believe he meant the weight is the only real difference. As in it is miniscule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freelancer

.223 / 5.56 isn't that much heavier than .22 LR and will still do the job. Probably even more common nowadays than .22 LR...

---

A brass casing almost three times longer and almost twice as wide with that much more powder is not that much heavier? Say what? Sorry, but .223 is a lot heavier than .22 LR. It is also not more common than .22 LR, not in the United States. If it were, then .223 would be cheaper than it is.

If you can't deal with the weight difference between 300 rounds of .22 LR and .223 you probably won't need to be worrying about what guns you're going to be taking in case of raptor invasion.

Just sayin.

No, I'm talking about the difference between carrying 450 rounds of .22LR and 300 rounds of .223. I'd rather have the 450 rounds of .22LR. You also totally ignored the point about .22 LR being far and a way easier to find.

But hey, if you want to take .223, more .22LR for me. No, I'm not sharing when you run out of .223.

.22lr shoots about 50 yds before it drops. Id rather have a .223 that shoots 300

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

I would take:

1. A .22 Ruger Mk. III - .22 is so ubiquitous and easy to make that you would have to be insane to not include a single firearm that uses it.

2. M1897 shotgun - reliable, easy to fix, 12 ga., slam fire

3. .223 or .308 R700 rifle - sometimes, you just need the range to be safe. Also, if you break a Mauser action, you are a dumbfuck.

I favour extreme reliability over firepower. Your (general) semi-automatic bullshit isn't going to help you much when a critical part breaks and there is no replacement. It also isn't going to help you when the guy with the bolt-action Winchester magnum simply kills you from afar. And make no mistake, no semi is as accurate or durable as a bolter and rapid fire is useless if it skews your aim even more. This is survival: shoot first, ask questions later.

---

:downs:

Don't honestly know why we are arguing about rifles when I put the .22 in a pistol.

Yeah but the .22LR is more than a little under powered for just about anything. Between the two I'd take a .223/5.56. You can shoot small game, defend yourself, hunt bigish game... Oh wait thats all the purposes of my shotgun!

.223 is fine for taking down a Deer the usual way, I wouldn't try and Elk or Moose unless I could take a perfect ear/eye shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freelancer

.223 is fine for taking down a Deer the usual way, I wouldn't try and Elk or Moose unless I could take a perfect ear/eye shot.

---

As opposed to a 1 ounce slug out of my shotty.