Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:58 pm
I will throw in my opinion on a shotgun here. Save less than lethal ammunition, there is nothing a shotgun can do that a rifle can't, but a lot a rifle can do that a shotgun can not.
One of the problems with a shotgun slug, as yall can see from the "Impala Test", is penetration through the target, or through other materials on a miss.
Buckshot has a very limited range. My patrol shotgun with Fed reduced recoil loads is no more than a 15 yard gun before pellets start leaving a body target.
An AR on the other hand is a great gun at 0 or 500 yards, very little chance of overpenetration with proper ammo selection, and terminal performance is awsome.
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying having a scattergun in the trunk is a bad thing, but it has some limitations. I am partial to rifles, and there is certainly nothing wrong with a Winchester 94, but AR's seem to be cheap right now (bought one for $600 the other day), ammo is cheap, and modular as well.
Sorry about the ramble, just thought I'd through that out to stir the pot.
Glenn
One of the problems with a shotgun slug, as yall can see from the "Impala Test", is penetration through the target, or through other materials on a miss.
Buckshot has a very limited range. My patrol shotgun with Fed reduced recoil loads is no more than a 15 yard gun before pellets start leaving a body target.
An AR on the other hand is a great gun at 0 or 500 yards, very little chance of overpenetration with proper ammo selection, and terminal performance is awsome.
Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying having a scattergun in the trunk is a bad thing, but it has some limitations. I am partial to rifles, and there is certainly nothing wrong with a Winchester 94, but AR's seem to be cheap right now (bought one for $600 the other day), ammo is cheap, and modular as well.
Sorry about the ramble, just thought I'd through that out to stir the pot.
Glenn