|
On September 18 2011 03:14 Brethern wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2011 15:15 dogabutila wrote:On September 17 2011 13:07 Percutio wrote:
Not sure what is with all the shotgun hate in this thread. For most people and most situations if you had to pick one it would be the best option.
The vast majority of people and situations aren't going to have a fully decked out arsenal and be properly trained to use it. With that in mind most people aren't going to have many magazines to reload their weapons and are going to be slow in doing so relatively speaking. They will also not be good enough to really take advantage of any weapon's range or accuracy. Additionally the firepower of the shotgun can help a ton and again most people won't have that much ammo for the shotgun.
If someone was decked out then the shotgun still stands out for its reliability, versatility, power, and efficiency.
Hell at that point you could pick up magazines for your shotgun and even though the ammo is heavy it isn't terrible in comparison to how much damage you can do with it. The range becomes less ideal considering someone is really decked out but with the right ammo you can still shoot pretty damn far. You don't know jack shit about firearms and shooting do you? On September 17 2011 05:23 wongfeihung wrote:On September 17 2011 05:05 Brethern wrote:![[image loading]](http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/6889/gunse.jpg) Uploaded with ImageShack.us ![[image loading]](http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/6562/guns3.jpg) Uploaded with ImageShack.us I'm good also I'm oh so not fighting zombies sober. My initial thoughts on your setup... + Show Spoiler +Also, is that a Remington or a Mossberg? I can never spot the difference off the top of my head. It's hard to tell because the most obvious differences are the control locations. Namely the safety and the action release. From the angle in the picture it's really hard to tell unless you spend craploads of time with them. Don't feel bad that you can't spot the difference, most people couldn't from the picture given. The Remington has the safety located pretty much on the frame just above the trigger guard and the action release forward of the trigger guard on the left side. The Mossy has the safety on the top of the gun, near the back of the receiver before the stock. The action release is near the back of the trigger guard on the right hand side. Wut? the safety on the mossberg is on the front of the trigger guard. As to shotguns and why people choose them. They are rugged and like being treated rough they can take anything for 2 3/4 to 3.5" shells depending on the model and with practice you can hit targets up to 200 yards with them. If you find a shell that you can't fire you can take it apart and reload the shot and powder into a shell that fits your gun.
The Maverick has a crossbolt safety like the Remington, but in front of the trigger guard yes. When people are referring to shotguns as Mossburgs or Remingtons they are referring to 500 series or 870 series shotguns. Not Mossy Maverick 88's. Mossburg safeties are traditionally located on top of the receiver. If you didn't cheap out on an already cheap shotgun you would know this.
200 yards from a rest with slugs and no wind. Too bad the effective range is far lower. Just because you can ring a gong or make it through paper doesn't make it an effective round at that range. CS and SD means slugs bleed off energy really fast.
And that isn't something you can't do with regular rounds anyways. Reloading is reloading.
Why people shouldn't choose them? They have no significant advantages over a rifle. They have some advantages in terms of firepower over a pistol, but then become limited by mobility issues in real close building combat. Really, there is only a short range where the shotgun could be arguably considered superior to a rifle, and not mobility restricted like a pistol would be in the same ranges. Shotguns don't penetrate body armor. Shotguns do not blow things up like in video games. Shotguns are not significantly more reliable then DI rifles, and not at all more reliable then piston driven systems. Then, shotgun ammo is far less valuable in terms of weight vs volume vs utility then are certain handgun rounds or rifle rounds.
This does not even consider the inherent usage problems with standard shotguns like loading, limited capacities, and ease of use when compared to anything magazine fed.
Rifle rounds don't even start with that much less muzzle energy then shotguns do, and carry the energy far better. They have a far better effective range and have far better inherent accuracy. They have a higher sustained, accurate rate of fire and provide barrier penetration that shotguns do not. They can punch through most body armor and don't have any mobility issues that shotguns do not.
If you are going to carry a longarm, why would you NOT choose something that is easier to use/operate, easier to load, and is all around more effective? The right rifles are actually more reliable and rugged then shotguns.
With all this said if you still believe shotguns to be superior, then why do militaries issue rifles rather then shotguns? It would HAVE to be something specific to zombie fighting which makes shotguns better, but in an apocalypse scenario, rifles become even better then shotguns due to the inherent nature of round effectiveness vs weight and space.
Shotguns over handguns? Maybe, again, there is only a limited range in which shotguns are better then handguns. Zombies any farther then 25 yards don't really have to be engaged, and then pistols are just as easy to operate and far easier to shoot while moving. Neither are going to be of good use against raiders with armor, but pistols can be shot 1 handed. And loaded one handed. CQB use of cover strongly favors handguns over shotguns or rifles.
So, shotguns are really only better then handguns from 25+ yards without use of cover and only has slight advantages over rifles 75 yards and in. Against people trying to kill you, rifles are clearly better choice. Against zombies, shotguns only give you an advantage in range that you aren't going to take advantage of because you'd want to conserve ammo until they get closer and show hostility anyways.
|
On September 18 2011 12:09 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 03:14 Brethern wrote:On September 17 2011 15:15 dogabutila wrote:On September 17 2011 13:07 Percutio wrote:
Not sure what is with all the shotgun hate in this thread. For most people and most situations if you had to pick one it would be the best option.
The vast majority of people and situations aren't going to have a fully decked out arsenal and be properly trained to use it. With that in mind most people aren't going to have many magazines to reload their weapons and are going to be slow in doing so relatively speaking. They will also not be good enough to really take advantage of any weapon's range or accuracy. Additionally the firepower of the shotgun can help a ton and again most people won't have that much ammo for the shotgun.
If someone was decked out then the shotgun still stands out for its reliability, versatility, power, and efficiency.
Hell at that point you could pick up magazines for your shotgun and even though the ammo is heavy it isn't terrible in comparison to how much damage you can do with it. The range becomes less ideal considering someone is really decked out but with the right ammo you can still shoot pretty damn far. You don't know jack shit about firearms and shooting do you? On September 17 2011 05:23 wongfeihung wrote:On September 17 2011 05:05 Brethern wrote:Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us I'm good also I'm oh so not fighting zombies sober. My initial thoughts on your setup... + Show Spoiler +Also, is that a Remington or a Mossberg? I can never spot the difference off the top of my head. It's hard to tell because the most obvious differences are the control locations. Namely the safety and the action release. From the angle in the picture it's really hard to tell unless you spend craploads of time with them. Don't feel bad that you can't spot the difference, most people couldn't from the picture given. The Remington has the safety located pretty much on the frame just above the trigger guard and the action release forward of the trigger guard on the left side. The Mossy has the safety on the top of the gun, near the back of the receiver before the stock. The action release is near the back of the trigger guard on the right hand side. Wut? the safety on the mossberg is on the front of the trigger guard. As to shotguns and why people choose them. They are rugged and like being treated rough they can take anything for 2 3/4 to 3.5" shells depending on the model and with practice you can hit targets up to 200 yards with them. If you find a shell that you can't fire you can take it apart and reload the shot and powder into a shell that fits your gun. The Maverick has a crossbolt safety like the Remington, but in front of the trigger guard yes. When people are referring to shotguns as Mossburgs or Remingtons they are referring to 500 series or 870 series shotguns. Not Mossy Maverick 88's. Mossburg safeties are traditionally located on top of the receiver. If you didn't cheap out on an already cheap shotgun you would know this. 200 yards from a rest with slugs and no wind. Too bad the effective range is far lower. Just because you can ring a gong or make it through paper doesn't make it an effective round at that range. CS and SD means slugs bleed off energy really fast. And that isn't something you can't do with regular rounds anyways. Reloading is reloading. Why people shouldn't choose them? They have no significant advantages over a rifle. They have some advantages in terms of firepower over a pistol, but then become limited by mobility issues in real close building combat. Really, there is only a short range where the shotgun could be arguably considered superior to a rifle, and not mobility restricted like a pistol would be in the same ranges. Shotguns don't penetrate body armor. Shotguns do not blow things up like in video games. Shotguns are not significantly more reliable then DI rifles, and not at all more reliable then piston driven systems. Then, shotgun ammo is far less valuable in terms of weight vs volume vs utility then are certain handgun rounds or rifle rounds. This does not even consider the inherent usage problems with standard shotguns like loading, limited capacities, and ease of use when compared to anything magazine fed. Rifle rounds don't even start with that much less muzzle energy then shotguns do, and carry the energy far better. They have a far better effective range and have far better inherent accuracy. They have a higher sustained, accurate rate of fire and provide barrier penetration that shotguns do not. They can punch through most body armor and don't have any mobility issues that shotguns do not. If you are going to carry a longarm, why would you NOT choose something that is easier to use/operate, easier to load, and is all around more effective? The right rifles are actually more reliable and rugged then shotguns. With all this said if you still believe shotguns to be superior, then why do militaries issue rifles rather then shotguns? It would HAVE to be something specific to zombie fighting which makes shotguns better, but in an apocalypse scenario, rifles become even better then shotguns due to the inherent nature of round effectiveness vs weight and space. Shotguns over handguns? Maybe, again, there is only a limited range in which shotguns are better then handguns. Zombies any farther then 25 yards don't really have to be engaged, and then pistols are just as easy to operate and far easier to shoot while moving. Neither are going to be of good use against raiders with armor, but pistols can be shot 1 handed. And loaded one handed. CQB use of cover strongly favors handguns over shotguns or rifles. So, shotguns are really only better then handguns from 25+ yards without use of cover and only has slight advantages over rifles 75 yards and in. Against people trying to kill you, rifles are clearly better choice. Against zombies, shotguns only give you an advantage in range that you aren't going to take advantage of because you'd want to conserve ammo until they get closer and show hostility anyways. Cheap is when I get six pooled. The mossy maverick is an inexpensive shotgun. It fires large enough rounds to kill anything in north america and is rugged enough that it will last 20+ years and still be reliable.
|
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/ycJIN.jpg)
Relevant
|
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =(
|
On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =(
*Zombies learn burrow. "Ohhh Shhiiii..."
It's funny how people think they could use a sword and slice hordes of zombies. Try swinging a sword or bat at a tree constantly for 2-3 minutes and see how tired you get.
|
On September 18 2011 12:44 Lifter wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =( *Zombies learn burrow. "Ohhh Shhiiii..." It's funny how people think they could use a sword and slice hordes of zombies. Try swinging a sword or bat at a tree constantly for 2-3 minutes and see how tired you get.
Ye, I have an unsharpened katana I won in a Warhammer fantasy tournament a few years ago. I'm also weak as shit, seems like compared to some of you guys with the guns I'm pretty fucked :D. I did learn a thing or two about exploding knives from dead island though! 
|
AK-47. one of the few rifles that can endure the kind of ass kicking a zombie apocolype would bring and still work.
Might not be the most accurate, fastest fireing or have the best attachments but it will always fire and tahts what matters
|
On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =(
At least that means we don't need to worry about looters shooting us.
Besides I support the "Run + Avoid + Hide" plan far more than the "Guns Blazing" plan. If you're ever in a situation where you NEED to shoot them, then you have a shit plan.
|
My fists. Nice and simple.
|
On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =(
Then what's that wooden thing I took a picture of?
|
Canada11379 Posts
On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =(
Oh we still have guns, they're just in the hands of fewer people. When the long-gun registry went in, a lot of people gave up their guns- but often to their friends who were going to register anyways because of hunting. My dad got 4-5 extra that way from friends and family that couldn't be bothered. I imagine the same number of guns are still out there.
Granted, we're nothing like the States. The States and Africa are probably the most prepared for a zombie apocalypse as they're awash with cheap guns. But I'd like to think in Canada we have an advantage. Fight or flight? I think we could run and hide pretty good up here. Not very many people to infect and a friggin lot of land to hole up in. North could be a little rough, but the west coast wouldn't be that bad as the weather's pretty mild. Lots of forests to hide in and lakes to drink from. The Prairies could be a little hard to hide in, but if you had a high powered rifle, you could easily pick off from your front porch your one neighbour that got infected.
But as for me? Just a big ol' knife. My best plan is to get the hell out.
|
On September 18 2011 12:22 Brethern wrote:
Cheap is when I get six pooled. The mossy maverick is an inexpensive shotgun. It fires large enough rounds to kill anything in north america and is rugged enough that it will last 20+ years and still be reliable.
It's a cheap shotgun. It's made of significantly inferior material and put together by mexicans. Not something I would rely on 20 years after unless it's a safe queen.
Care to address the rest?
|
On September 18 2011 14:04 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 12:22 Brethern wrote:
Cheap is when I get six pooled. The mossy maverick is an inexpensive shotgun. It fires large enough rounds to kill anything in north america and is rugged enough that it will last 20+ years and still be reliable.
It's a cheap shotgun. It's made of significantly inferior material and put together by mexicans. Not something I would rely on 20 years after unless it's a safe queen. Care to address the rest?
I go by what experienced gun owners tell me. it's well built and works well.
|
http://tf14.imgur.com/all/
VEHICLE -4x4 4runner with A/T tires, roof rack, winch bumper, lights, jack, etc. Also can get 40+ MPG if going under 35 and I'm in no hurry and can carry a shit ton a supplies. -5 gallon containers
LOCATION -My family owns a lake cabin on a secluded lake in Maine. Plenty of wood, supplies already there, game around, fish, etc. -Water is fed by natural fed spring from out by the creek straight to the house. -Also since it's up far north it will be less crowded as government will probably tell people to go south due to warm weather and large southern cities to use as hubs.
WEAPONS -22 rifle Why? A 22 can kill pretty much all small game and all big game if shot in the head or vital spots with right velocity and ammo is DIRT cheap so you can stock pile the shit out of it. -Merlin 30-30 lever action, good all around rifle and cheap ammo -9mm Glock. Good brand, durability and a solid side weapon. -Silencer's for 9mm and 22 -Combat knife -Katana. Lightweight for its durability and strength. -Crossbow. Accurate, powerful, retrievable bolts
SURVIVAL -Motorcycle body armor, hockey helmet with visor, gloves etc. -Winter and summer clothes NOT pictured. -Rope -Sharpening Kit for weapons -Climbing Kit -Essential Tools -Axe -Idodine tablets as backup for water -Non-battery powered flashlights -Flares -Non-battery powered compass survival watch -Back up compass -High quality combat and hiking boots -Cold weather sleeping bag -Crowbar (Also weapon) -20 gallon water jug -Complete road maps and geographical maps. -Medical Supplies
PERSONAL -PLAYBOY<<<<<<<<< -Books to pass time Will probably best to be alone for survival but for sanity sake I'd like my best bud or girlfriend with me.
|
On September 16 2011 16:48 decafchicken wrote:SUP ZOMBIES? gg. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sGhAm.jpg) (this is 1/4 of the gun safe.)
^ Thread Winner. Can i buy a gun off you?
|
On September 18 2011 12:09 dogabutila wrote:
200 yards from a rest with slugs and no wind. Too bad the effective range is far lower. Just because you can ring a gong or make it through paper doesn't make it an effective round at that range. CS and SD means slugs bleed off energy really fast.
Hahaha. I love watching hickok45.
|
On September 16 2011 16:48 decafchicken wrote:SUP ZOMBIES? gg. (this is 1/4 of the gun safe.)
I don't get why you guys get so many different guns for a handful of people. Wouldn't it be better if you got less guns and more ammunition? 5+ guns for a single person seems overkill to me when a person could get 3 guns with more ammunition for the same amount of money.
Nice guns though, seriously.
|
^ Hard to have a good comparison for guys.
For my girlfriend though, I ask her why she needs so many different kinds of shoes. Wouldn't you have more money for makeup, dresses (since you can only wear those once..), or handbags? Red shoes, black shoes, same design just different colors. Others are just weird or barely different from other ones she has. Others are completely different. But of course, they all match with something else or only work for certain occasions. Maybe some of them only work with one outfit. I wouldn't understand she says. I'll take her word for it.
Same thing with guns though. Each has it's own role and use. Might be the same exact gun, but in a different chambering, different uses. Maybe it's a completely different gun, optimized for these situations and not those.
On September 18 2011 14:09 Brethern wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 14:04 dogabutila wrote:On September 18 2011 12:22 Brethern wrote:
Cheap is when I get six pooled. The mossy maverick is an inexpensive shotgun. It fires large enough rounds to kill anything in north america and is rugged enough that it will last 20+ years and still be reliable.
It's a cheap shotgun. It's made of significantly inferior material and put together by mexicans. Not something I would rely on 20 years after unless it's a safe queen. Care to address the rest? I go by what experienced gun owners tell me. it's well built and works well.
Ask any gunsmith if he would rather have a moss mav 88 or a mossy 500. All of them are going to take the 500.
|
On September 18 2011 13:08 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 12:36 HeisHere wrote:
euhh... 6 sentries, perma force field ramp... GG zombies ^^
i live in Canada.. no guns here... =( At least that means we don't need to worry about looters shooting us. Besides I support the "Run + Avoid + Hide" plan far more than the "Guns Blazing" plan. If you're ever in a situation where you NEED to shoot them, then you have a shit plan.
its quite easy to be in a situation where you NEED to shoot them, though I do agree that the run, avoid, hide, run plan is far superior especially if they are attracted to gunshots
|
My house has a tonne of solar pannels, that supplies well over the amount of electricity that I use. I also live in a rainforest with not many people around where I live. I think they would be the only things going for me. I don't really have any weapons. I have chainsaws and building saws however they need a powerlead to run. I could use them as long as i stay near the house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/gunse.jpg/)
![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/195/guns3.jpg/)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HZ9Gi.jpg)
