[Faran Brigo]

IMO, bolt action rifles belong solely in the marksman/sniper niche, for ordinary combat situations they are largely a no go. Against fast moving humans, you need a higer rate of fire, and against hordes of zombies you need higher magazine capacity than the 5-10 rounds they usually can load.

Of course you're going to use them if you have them, what I'm trying to do here is dispel the silly notion that bolt actions are preferable to semiautomatic/automatic rifles and carbines. I'll follow up with a deeper comparison (possibly side-by-side) when I have the time.

Penny for your thoughts people.

[Dave Of The Dead]

I would prefer a semi-auto. I like to keep cool under pressure and being able to spray and pray is not my cup of tea.

[Hitman]

I do know with the exception of a few , most hunting rifles are not up to the task of a hard millatary life. compair a good WW2 bolt gun with a new one such as the remington 710 that walmart sells to see what I mean. most hunting guns also have very thin light barrels that really start to move around when they get fired more than a few times in a row . dedictated sniper rifles have heavy bull barrels and are in common calibers . the other problem is volume of fire. most hunting guns have a fixed mag that hold 4-5 rounds. when empty they have to be re-loaded one round at a time. I'd also wager that most that would be found would have a cheaper scope on it that is not quite tough enough for me to bet life on. barrel longgevity is also a concern , some of the hotter magnimus are known to burn a barrel out in 200-300 rounds , thats several lifetimes to most hunters (I know some hunters that have ammo thats 10+ years old because the shoot one shot to make sure it hits then one per deer) . some one doing some serious thinning of zombie #'s or keeping them at bay will go through that # in short order . ammo supply is also going to be an issue . I have more .30-30 (200+ rounds) and .30-'06 (260+) than most hunters will ever buy in a lifetime for their gun. that small # would be a drop in the bucket for a busy sniper.

[mattifikation]

One benefit they would have over most semi-autos is that bolt action guns don't normally require magazines, which might be in short supply once there is no.. well.. supply.

One less thing to keep track of, one less thing to run out of, one less thing to carry.

Of course, the trade-off is slower reloading and lower ammo capacity.

[Slayer]

Military surplus bolt action rifles are excellent weapons against the zombies, but only under certain circumstances. They are fine if you are on the roof of your stronghold, or at a distance, and their accuracy is decent, and they won't use as much ammo as other types of weapons. I wouldn't one one if I was on the ground in close, but for most other affairs, they will do fine. Even with iron sights they do pretty well, Mausers, Enfields, and Mosin Nagants, I prefer Mosins because they are cheapest and their surplus ammo is cheapest. And their ammo is in spam cans, excellent for long term storage. Mosin Nagants are rugged reliable weapons and easy to use, they would be the primary weapon for defence on the roof of my zombie safehouse.

[Faran Brigo]

Magazines are reusable, and I think the advantage of not using magazine is more than offset by the fact that if there's more than 5 zombies after you, you're going to have to reload, and you might get tagged in the process. Think about walking through a suburban area with zeds coming from every direction, say, 11, which is not a particularly large number. I have an M16A2 with 30 round mag, you have a springfield rifle. All other factors being equal, I could take more than double that number without reloading, you're going to have to reload, by hand, at least 3 times, more if you miss. Even if you keep moving, you're taking more risks than I am.

[john154]

I love my Le-Enfields. My grandpa killed germans in italy with one, I have a 90 year old SMLE and its the most reliable gun I have. Thats all the testimony i'd ever need to trust one in a runing fight. With it's big, hard hitting round you can plug one zed and have that slug go right through two more. Its bayonet is two feet long and you could kill a man with a sinlge stroke of the solid wood stock. A wise man once said "you can't allways have what you want but sometimes you get what you need."

[bandits1]

john154 said:

I love my Le-Enfields. My grandpa killed germans in italy with one, I have a 90 year old SMLE and its the most reliable gun I have. Thats all the testimony i'd ever need to trust one in a runing fight. With it's big, hard hitting round you can plug one zed and have that slug go right through two more. Its bayonet is two feet long and you could kill a man with a sinlge stroke of the solid wood stock. A wise man once said "you can't allways have what you want but sometimes you get what you need."

I'm sure your Lee-Enfields are trusy, hearty firearms -- but are you saying you'd choose it in most situations over a modern, high-capacity, selectable-fire assault rifle? That's crazy-talk.

Bolt-actions have their place in any team's arsenal, no doubt, but it's certainly not in relatively close-quarters vs. multiple opponents.

[Faran Brigo]

The Lee-Enfield has a bit of an advantage since it's got 10 rounds capacity. The problem with the Enfield, I've heard, is finding adequate ammo in quantity. There's still surplus ammo that uses cordite instead of nitrocelulose, and it will corrode the barrel if you don't clean it regularly.

But former commonwealth countries have plenty of surplus ammo, so I guess it's not much of a problem. In the U.S. though, good luck finding enough .303 british.

By the by, the .308 can also penetrate more than one skull, but I think it would be very rare that you actually get the opportunity to take advantage of that. It's not like they march towards you in straight lines like WW1 soldiers.

[mattifikation]

Magazines are reusable, but they also wear out. They also get dropped, lost, banged up, etc.

Of course I'd prefer a semiauto over a bolt action, for as long as I had magazines. Once the mags are gone though, you'd be dumb to opt for a gun that required you to have them.

[Faran Brigo]

Everything wears out, with the amount of rounds you're going to use in a massive outbreak, 6 magazines will probably hold out longer than the barrel of the gun itself, so I think that's a moot point Matt. Besides, lever action rifles don't use magazines either and they have a higer rate of fire.

Both semi-autos and bolt action rifles are going to require regular (or at least ocassional) maintenance by a gunsmith, or at least someone with machining experience, if you want to keep them accurate and extend the life of the mechanism (and you will want to, once they stop producing spare parts). That person can also repair and refit banged up magazines.

All of that aside, for me the ability to make a stand against medium sized groups of zombies is a good trade-off for the reduction in ruggedness, considering that for one, it's not a big reduction and two, zombies usually come in large numbers.

[JakAttak]

I must say even for snipers if you have access of course would prefer a semi auto military sniper rifle such as an M-60 or dragonuv.

[john154]

No I wouldn't choose a Le-Enfield over a modern rifle but here in Canada modern rifles are few and far between on the civilian market. Whats more is the you don't need so many bullets if you shoot more deliberatly and you don't need to shoot a badguy more then once with 8mm, .303 or .308.

I've got a new(2007) production australian Le-Enfield that chambers 7.62/.308 and takes m-14 mags. This takes the great ole rifle and makes it better yet. No I wouldn't be too keen on going door kicking with one of these mofos but if you take the time to shoot properly these old boys can represent.

[JakAttak]

oh yea there's a reason it was Britain's fave sniper rifles for a long time.

[john154]

I'd ike to pose a quesion. In the event of the breakdown of civil law and the outbreak of a zombie infestation which of he following weapons would you choose if only these two were available to you?

Both have 60 rounds of their respective ammunition.

1)Le-Enfield. 1000m range, 10 round mag, one shot stopping power and tack driver accuracy with a bolt action

2)Sten gun. 50 yard range, 32 round magazine, low stopping power with poor accuracy but automatic capable.

I'd choose the former for its versitility and reliablity.

[Faran Brigo]

The enfield, the sten gun is an unreliable overheating piece of junk that misfeeds because of the side magazine and is made out of stamped metal which will bend if you're not gentle with it.

I'd like to ask a couple now myself

Which would you pick between

1) An M1 carbine and a springfield?

2) A kar98 and a G-43?

[john154]

The above are all fire full power cartriges. Naturally you'd choose the two repeating rifles because they are each one step above their opposing option in the evolution of the battle rifle.

Thats like asking whether I prefer a M1 Garand or a M-14.

[Faran Brigo]

Actually the M1 carbine uses a smaller (intermediate between handgun and rifle) cartdrige than the Garand, though the Kar and the G-43 share the same ammo.

That was the point actually, comparing bolt action rifles with other kinds of rifles, not submachineguns or shotguns or any other small arm.

[john154]

Hah. I'd read "Garand" instead of "carbine." My bad. I think we're trying to prove differnt points here. I pulled the sten gun option out of my hat because above i nthe thread guys were sayin "why use a bolt action when you can have a AR-15." I mean to steer the discussion away from modern rifles because you likely won't find one if you stuck at grandpa's place and rummaging through the basement...or if you live in canada.

[Faran Brigo]

In the U.S. there's a chance grampa came back from 'nam, so you might find an M16A1 or an AR actually.

The point I'm trying to make is that the zombie survival guide's foolishness of a bolt action being better than a semiauto rifle in a zed outbreak all other things being equal is absurd.

It's true, if it's going to take you a couple of secs to get another shot ready it will force you to TRY make your shots count. But that's like tossing a kid who doesn't know how to swim into a pool without a life jacket so he "tries harder". You'll be more careful aiming no doubt, but if you don't get the hang of it, you might not get the chance to learn from your mistakes.

No amount of pressure or time between reloads however will make you better at firing if you don't practice and train for fire discipline, that's true with all kinds of firearms, not just rifles. Besides I'd rather waste a few bullets than get bitten, bullets I can get, a cure for zombification ehhh...