Comment on the optimal gun for a hardcore prepper? by dickie

Parent Post: the optimal gun for a hardcore prepper?

dickie · 5/24/2026, 10:12:37 AM · permalink

9 bumps

hyokkim · 5/24/2026, 6:03:25 PM · permalink

7 bumps

dickie · 5/24/2026, 9:40:39 PM · permalink

6 bumps

hyokkim · 5/25/2026, 5:49:28 AM · permalink

'' If your carry gun survival plan involves a mud bath you have larger problems than your holster choice.''  
  
I can easily envision having a pistol out either in rain, or after a hard rain, with mud pools all over the place, even well within the city limit.   A lot of mud pools in Omaha, after a hard rain.  
  
''An unfixable jam is why you carry a backup. Two is one, one is none.''  
  
Yes, but not in a hard prepper scenario.  Extra gun cost far more weight, especially in hard prepper scenario; one could carry far more ammo/food/water.   A sacrifice that may not be worth it in hard prepper scenario.  
  
Remember you may have to walk carrying all that stuff, not drive in a hard prepper scenario.  
  
Even through rough terrain, like they say, ''Up in the mountains, an ounce equals a pound.''  
  
''On the 3lb trigger — any of these guns ship at 5.5lbs from the factory. A 3lb pull is an aftermarket modification. Springs are consumables. Annual maintenance, new springs.''  
  
No, that was factory stock from Glock, back in the day, to 90s, Glock did offer 3lbs trigger from the factory.   In a hard prepper scenario, one may not have the luxury of replacing a trigger spring annually.  
  
''If your reliability is degrading at two years you have a maintenance problem, not a Glock problem. This isn't controversial. You don't get to install a race trigger and then blame the manufacturer for the ignition reliability of your race trigger.''  
  
Like I had said, Glock did offer 3lbs trigger at one time till 90s.   Glock trigger system puts the striker in compression after putting the round in the chamber, unlike 1911 hammer cocking system.   1911 can remain cocked with a round in the chamber, without wearing out the hammer spring practically for 100 years or longer.  
  
''Stayed with 9mm when everyone chased .40. The FBI eventually agreed. Skipped the detour entirely.''  
  
I agree on this one; FBI/Miami shoot out was a tactical failure, not an ammo failure.   Ironically, had FBI used FMJ, instead of HP, it would have stopped the fight early!     
  
''Grizzly isn't on most people's threat matrix. If you're not running a trapline in Alberta the whole conversation is academic.....''  
  
Not.  Bears/woves will be coming to town to eat after the implosion, sooner or later.     
  
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/germans-and-russians-wwi.html  
  
Just imagine how much worse, with all those dead corpses in cities.  
  
https://wildernessmarksman.com/why-bears-are-appearing-more-often-near-urban-neighborhoods/  
  
''The Luger cold-weather claim doesn't hold. The toggle-lock mechanism you're crediting for reliability is precisely what made it infamous on the Eastern Front. The Wehrmacht transitioned to the P38 largely because the Luger fouled, froze, and jammed in ways simpler actions didn't.''  
  
No, that is false.  Wehrmacht transitioned to P38, because it was easier to manufacture in large number; Wehrmacht kept issuing Lugers almost till the end of the war, and German factories still kept churning them out.     
  
  
Not only that, Finns who had used Luger more in combat, in cold, cold weather, more than anyone, loved them!   They could not have enough of them!   They only went on producing Lahti only because Germany was not interested in proving more Lugers, since they wanted to keep more of them for themselves.  
  
What you said about Luger unreliability in cold, mud, frost is a hogwash, just ask the Finns!  
  
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/the-luger-in-finland/  
  
''The AR-15 being mud proof is news to everyone who's ever cleaned one.''  
  
Videos do not lie.   I didn't say it was easy to clean; I said mud proof unlike AKs or any other battle carbines/rifles out there.  
  
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/WLH0Q7Wp0lA  
  
'' ''As for .45 stopping a grizzly — .45 ACP is subsonic, low velocity, and not the round you want for the job.'' ''  
  
What is optimal round for grizzly is not necessarily velocity, but how dense the bullet is, and the angle by which the bullet enters the bear.   Hard cast, flat point 45acp is a known, reliable bear stopper at close range.   High velocity, supersonic, but hollow/soft point bullet will not likely stop a charging grizzly.  
  
Obviously, hard cast flat nose 9mm will stop a black bear, or even a grizzly if the shooter does his part; 45acp is far more likely to do so.

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=62#9  
  
''The 1911 accuracy at 100 yards I'll give you. A tuned gun in good hands, absolutely.

Though if you're taking 100-yard handgun shots at a grizzly, the bear isn't the one who made the tactical error.''  
  
......why I had said, man-sized target.   
  
''Federal HST 9mm +P in the magazine. F in the chat. Literally.''  
  
+P would wear out the barrel, and the gun prematurely.   Not for hard prepper scenario.   
  
For a lone hard prepper, one would want to standardize on one cartridge, one that would work on all potential threats in N.A.  with enough controllability/accuracy/penetration; nothing fits the bill like 45acp hard cast flat point.   But underwood has some interesting design that replicates that with far less recoil, why I am also interested in getting both buffalo bore, and underwood.

4 bumps

dickie · 5/25/2026, 7:00:33 AM · permalink

3 bumps

hyokkim · 5/25/2026, 8:58:46 AM · permalink

''The barrel wear argument is technically valid and completely irrelevant to everyone involved.''  
  
I forgot to mention controllability as well.  +P is less controllable in rapid fire multiple shots than standard.    This could be an important matter when one is surrounded by multiple opponents, human or otherwise, such as hungry, nasty pack of pitbulls or wolves.  
  
This could become far more important if one is firing one with thick gloves, when one's hand size is already smaller than optimal for the gun, or when one is firing when one's hand is wet, and/or raining, reducing one's ability to control the gun in rapid fire at multiple moving opponents.  
  
I can see why many PDs and militaries adopted Glock for cost/easier training reason; I am talking for one lone prepper in a hard prepper scenario.  
  
Heck, just look at the Russians, as pragmatic as they are, they've adopted Makarov after using Tokarev!   They did it for primarily cost/controllability reasons, and rightly so.  
  
If I were to adopt a pistol for my own military, I would give everyone an option to carry his own gun, so long as they qualify.   Let's get real, no nation ever won a war because of pistols.   For anyone who doesn't want to pay for his own pistol, I would issue Walther PP Super, in 9mm ultra, cheapest way to produce most bang for buck gun.   Lighter than most 9mms anyway, and bigger than PP/PPK so that no 'Walther bite' for those with meatier hands.  
  
Now, for the point man in CQB Assault team, carrying ballistic shields, I would mandate a revolver, most likely Mahurin in 357 (Mahurin has long term service record with excellent reliability, durability, accuracy, and its trigger reach is most user friendly, about the size of K-frame, Korth is more of L-frame), 6'' barrel, with gold dot front sight, fixed rear, with QD Low power fixed scope optionally carried, and high capacity speed loader.  
  
https://soj.ooo/p/freethinkers/post/42ec520f810ab91792d6e7344796d9b0  
  
For those covering the point man, they would be armed with Luger, with its 'fixed' barrel (it actually moves a little bit), its reliability is not affected when pressing it close to the edge of the ballistic shield, for more firepower and faster reload in CQB scenario.   
  
The next in line would be carrying 'heavy artillery', GM6 Lynx in 50BMG!  
  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hseWOv2fvF4

1 bump

dickie · 5/25/2026, 1:40:29 AM · permalink

1 bump

Signature