nikto

no reason for her to be splitting kindling, she had plenty. There's far safer ways to do it and she was running her yap to her cam, big no no when using a blade. She also had far more important things to be doing.

set the blade atop the wood and baton it. Other hand doesn't have to be anywhere near the action-interface. few of these people seem to have much experience, Mike was doing great but wussed out over missing his wife. must be nice to be able to throw away millions of $ WTF would these people DO if they had to go to war for 4 years, watching buddies die and get maimed every day?

these show-people should either be asleep, or doing something! making cordage, making nets, making bird or fish or crawdad traps, making grass mats, etc, All this laying around on your dead ass won't cut the mustard. Until such time as you've got 6 months worth of stored food, everything you do should be focused toward that goal, every day They are stupid about where they build their shelters, about the size of said shelter, and they are stupid about having fire around debris. They are too lazy/stupid to dig and use a latrine, to make and carry spear/gigs and digging/throwing sticks, as well as bolas. and slings and belts with which to carry such weapons.

they dont make containers. Even if you have to coal burn it, you can have a several gallon wooden container in one day. If there's bamboo, you can have many containers in a couple of hours. You've gotta be able to boil a day's supply of water in a couple of hours, so you have safe hydration after working, and are freed up to do other things.

you need pottery, in order to be able to store food out of the reach of insects and rodents. you need to mud up vs the bugs and the sun, and you need grass matts for sleeping and to wear vs the bugs/sun. I've never seen anyone make any. I've seen a few headgear and footgear, but rarely.

if a woman told me she was a vegan or would not share body heat, I'd tap out on the spot and save myself the agony

John in AR

Topic E

boati

anyone can see, right here, that I start hundreds of different topics, dozens of times more than you can manage. or more than all of you put together can manage. There's posts of mine here that I made 2 years ago and are still withing 5-6 of the last post on that sub-thread area. you've never had an original idea in your life, none of you.

BigBassMan

Mel, you are a babbling idiot.

John in AR

Which is why you're angrily responding to a post I made 4 1/2 years ago...?

Your post wasn't about some original idea, it was about someone on a TV show incorrectly batoning wood. Batoning wood is something that most of us here have done, and something that you have repeatedly said shouldn't be done anyway.

And FWIW, the "Topic E" comment (even from more than four years ago) is absolutely accurate. The 'list of topics' from way back when:
See? You could just start a thread titled "Topic E" and accomplish the same thing. If you like, I can start adding the correct labels to your threads again.


But regardless, it was over four years ago, John. It's okay to let things go and not fester over them. With all this claimed 'original thought', you could reply to some of the questions & comments in the threads you do start, rather than ignoring your own existing threads & starting new ones ad infinitum. That would be cool.

Garand

Well stated!

boati

that's right, batoning is an unnecessary risk to take with your blade, but if you're gonna do it, then do it right, on small wood, gently, or baton your axe thru the wood. Best to baton a wooden wedge into a saw kerf, actually and there's almost zero reason to split wood in the first place. There'ss zero reason to heat with wood, if you know what to take and do. The age of a post has nothing to do with whether or not people have learned anything. You half dozen nitwits, there's no hope of you learning anything, but there's dozens of other people view these posts. Every forum has 20-50x as many lurkers as they have posters.

BigBassMan

Everybody needs a few laughs a day. You provide that.

John in AR

Actually, I learn things all the time. This week I learned how to play a couple christmas songs on the xylophone so I can do them on the musical targets. Still have to practice & improve before I’ll be able to do it decent, including reloads mid-song. Because in the real world, practice and skill-maintenance actually matter.

Another thing I recently learned is regarding a condemnation I often hear about leverguns in magnum handgun calibers - that ‘they won’t feed the non-magnum counterpart’; ie, a 357 won’t feed 38’s, etc. Earlier this month I learned that my new 24” stainless 357 does fine not only with 38’s, but even with 38 wadcutters. I’ll probably never use wadcutters in it, but it’s nice to know.

Kind of like your leaf- and trash-stuffed wilderness sleeping gear for use in an imaginary apocalypse. You’ll never use it for real, but you seem happy to have learned about it. And by way of validation of what you’ve learned, it must work to some degree if you have no other options, since homeless people have been doing it for years.

At work (if you recall what work is), I learned of, and purchased a sample of a new cellular transceiver for security alarm systems. If it works as advertised, it will save some of our customers a lot of money at the 2021-2022 3G sunset, and may save us some customers at the same time. Good for everyone, but I do realize you don’t have a ‘work’ frame of reference, so it may not mean much to you. That’s okay, there are still enough of us productive people in america to support you.

Fwiw, you have also learned some things recently. Things like people actually can and do take game cleanly at long range without using a 50BMG. You used to think that wasn’t possible, but thanks to this forum, you’ve learned that you were mistaken. And as you say, learning new things is good.

You’ve also learned that with the advances in firearm tech, the suppressed 223 ar with 22 rimfire conversion (that you and I both like so much) has thankfully been eclipsed by the more-compact and more-capable suppressed 300bk setup. That was something you evidently weren’t familiar with; but now you know & agree. At least, you appear to agree, since you never made any rebuttals or pointed out any errors in my info in the thread where I explained the advantages. Principles don’t change, but technology and options change; and it’s good to see you finally accepting (learning) that.

BigBassMan

Whoever said the lever carbines would not feed spl. rounds? My Marlins in 357 an 44 mag. feed spl. rounds without a fault. Use them most of the time. 44spl. with 6.5 Unique, 38 spl. with 4.5 Unique. SWC, never tried a full WC cause I never load them. Heard that 44 Mag. will shoot out of a 444 but never tried that. .45 LC will shoot the 45 Cowboy brass just fine. Wonder if 45 AR will work in it, might go out an try chambering a round it an see.

Garand

I had a Marlin M1894S in .44 Mag that would not feed ,44 Spl flawlessly the first time I tried it, it would also not feed LSWC .44 mags either. But for 14 years it was a fantastic competition rifle using LRNFP bullets. I have a Chiappa "Alaskan" in .44 magnum that loves LSWC. Which is great since bullets are only $80/1,000. My wife has 2x Uberti M73's for match use and they work flawlessly with .38 spl 158 grain LRNFP.

Garand

John in AR

No comment, John...?

Dorobuta

Starting hundreds of posts on the same 5 topics is not an accomplishment.

Especially, since you've never done a single thing you've posted. What credibility do you think you have? You often post contradictory stuff. You assert that things will go the way you think they will, but you don't have any practical experience to back up ANYTHING you post.

You stated that you cannot provide proof because you don't have a yard. Are you a 10 year old pretending to be an adult? An actual adult would be embarrassed to post that excuse. Don't you have a drivers license? I'll bet, if I knew the city you lived in, I could find plenty of places you could apply your field craft, simply by looking on a map. But then again, you admit to not knowing how to use a map.

I'm back from my initial hunting trip, my buddy got a deer, and I'm heading back down to the border on Wednesday, to hopefully fill my tag. We are a buck only state, no doe tags. I probably saw 200 does over the weekend and few spikes and fork horns. I have an area staked out that nobody hunts because it is very close to the border wall construction area. We saw a few decent bucks as shooting light faded.

Dorobuta

why don't you put your BS into practice, and ACTUALLY DO these things? Are you afraid to? why not make videos? Be a good way to prove to the show you should be on it - or are you just lying again?

Nobody thinks you have any credibility. prove them all wrong, if you can.

boati

you're just too dumb to remember it. The suppressed loads are so short ranged and feeble that they are not worth giving up the GI ammo and .22 unit. You still have to brain the guy or he's likely to make noise and then there's have been no point in having the silencer and the subsonic ammo. All of you are scared you can't hit the 6" brain circle of a moose or bear at 100m with a supersonic load and a scope, so htf are you going to brain a man at more than .22 subsonic distances with a subsonic load that you're not zeroed for? The subsonic load's POI is WAY off from the supersonic load's POI at 100m. I can brain a man at 70m with the 60 gr Aquila subsonic 22 ammo. So why bother with the 300 BO? Twits that can't reliably hit the brain of a big animal at 100m better NOT be shooting at men's brains at that distance, eh? So you're stuck between a rock and a hard place, having wasted hundreds of $ on a 300. thinking you're smart. That's called the dunning-kruger effect. you THINK you're smart, but you aint.


btw, stupid, why would you have to brain a deer with a 223 softpoint? the brain hits are required only for the bigger animals and yes, they DO have a 6" brain diameter.

Garand

Melvin, you are truly a legend in your own mind! No need to pay attention to reality, is there?

Dorobuta

irony, pure comedic gold.

you also don't know anything about the .300 blk - it's a great round, and outperforms your short AR. it is designed for a 10" barrel length. With Supers, I'm getting more velocity than you are, and have more energy. with subsonic, I'm quieter than you are with your .223 load, and still have better energy than your .22 rounds.

why not post the details of the fire-fights you've been in, since you seem to know so much about them? I've read you have a severe flinching problem, which is why you say such stupid things, projecting your failings on everyone else. Come on, post the details of your battle experiences. You claim to know what others can and can't do. Of course, you were shown to be totally ignorant and out shot by a 10 year old. Guess you'll never be one in a hundred such children either....

John in AR

If by 'suppressed' you mean subsonic, those are to take the place of the .22 rimfire conversion kit. And they're HUGELY more capable than the 22 rimfire is, especially when both are fired from an 8-10 inch barrel as we're talking about here.

(And if the 22 load you're shooting isn't subsonic, you may as well be shooting the 223 thru the silencer, because it will have a supersonic crack just as the 223 will.)

So a 200-220 grain, 30-caliber bullet is 'feeble', yet your 36-40 grain, 22-caliber bullet at the same subsonic velocity will 'rock your world'; your words, not mine. Okay.


You really believe that at those ranges, a subsonic 22 rimfire and a full-power 223 fired from the same barrel are closer to the same zero than a supersonic .300bk is to a subsonic 300bk from the same barrel? Wow, John; your info is even more outdated than I realized, and I was assuming WAY outdated.

John, I've owned and used a Ciener kit for at least 15 years, maybe 20 or even more. It was a GREAT thing when it came out, it's been a fun and handy thing for a lot of years, and it's still neat. I like it, I've taken game with it, and I've put thousands of rounds thru it. I still have mine and have no intention of getting rid of it, and you've seen me recommend it many times for many years now. There is absolutely no reason I'd wrongly disparage it.

And the short-barreled 223 with Ciener kit is simply NOT as versatile or capable as a short-barreled .300 blackout. The 223/22LR setup has two advantages - ammo weight and ammo cost. If using your parameters of 84 rounds of full-power ammo being all that's necessary for any survivable shtf, and 200 rounds of subsonic (eg, 22 rimfire) ammo, those two advantages are basically rendered moot.

In all other areas, in a short-barreled platform .300 substantially outperforms the .223; and again, I have both and like both, so I have no reason to say it if it weren't true. From a short 8-10 inch barrel, the full-power .300 outperforms the 223 from the same barrel length. That's simple math and undeniable. And for the subsonic applications, the .300 again WAY outperforms the 22 rimfire; doing things that the 22 rimfire simply can't do. And the .300 doesn't need a conversion kit. It doesn't need specialty magazines either; it can use any standard AR magazine. It doesn't have the reduced reliability inherent in rimfire ammunition that the .22LR conversion does.

The Ciener kit doesn't take much time to swap; you're right about that. But with the .300 combo, the swap time is literally zero, because there is no conversion to swap to. You just decide which mag of ammo to use.

That's funny. The Dunning-Kruger effect is simply overestimating one's owns ability due to a lack of objective self-awareness. I've never overstated my abilities; I'm careful to keep personal claims on the conservative side. I rarely make claims and when I do, I usually post pics or video to confirm.

You, on the other hand, constantly claim outrageous skill with absolutely no corroboration. THAT is the Dunning-Kruger effect, and you - by your self-aggrandizing words and total lack of corroborating evidence - are absolutely the best example of it of which I'm personally aware.


You very recently said deer had that size brain, not moose:
Oops...

John in AR

C'mon, John. How about some actual dialog on what exactly is the advantage of one caliber over another in this limited-ammo scenario. You keep saying "I already told you", but you never actually do. You claim that it's important to use "the GI round", but why; if a person won't survive to need more than three loaded mags (which you've said), what's the urgency of it being a government-issued caliber?

I pointed out numerous disadvantages of subsonic 22LR's thru the rimfire adapter compared to using subsonic .300 rounds that don't need an adapter. What - specifically - is incorrect in any of my statements. If you can't dispute a principle, logic dictates you must then either accept the principle or acknowledge that you need to further study the principle. It's really that simple. If I'm wrong, show which of my statements is/are wrong. If you can't find any errors, then you can't find any errors. Very simple.


This part though:
I don't think I've seen anyone post any such thing. Fear of not being able to hit a 6" target at 100 yards with a scoped rifle..? Most people can do that under field conditions pretty easily.



I never said a brain hit was necessary on deer. You're the one that brought that up, iirc at the same time you talked about a deer having a brain 6 inches in diameter (which is way off).

Unlike you, I've taken deer with an AR carbine in 223, and even posted pics of one. Didn't bother with trying to get a brain hit, and never said it would require a brain hit. You're the one that brought up braining deer, and said their brain was a 6" circle; not me or anyone else here.

Seriously. Don't run off to the comfort of a prescription bottle; tell me what is wrong in my post above regarding the 300bk caliber in this scenario.