Can someone explain why exactly a 5.56/223 bolt gun is a shit

It offers zero advantage over an AR-15

>>32485065
Because I'd rather not have a bolt action chambered in a intermediate round

>>32485065
>defense
>bolt gun
>223

Yeah that's a no for me.

>>32485080
>>32485081
Check the second point.

>>32485081

This.

Would you want a full-size Beretta 92 in .380?
It would work fine but it's stupid.

>>32485106
Because the armed forces of pretty much every major western country uses 5.56 NATO.

I own a 223 savage 12 FV. You can load 75gr bullets(1:9 twist, otherwise I would go 90gr bergers) in it well beyond ar15 mag length and really push the capabilities of the cartridge. I even shoot it out to 700-800 yards easily/ If you're looking for a bolt action rifle (especially one you can shoot a lot without breaking your shoulder) this is the way to go.

To be fair, I own both an AR15 and my savage in 223. The AR15 has a WOA barrel w/ 223 wylde chamber, which is extremely accurate, but I can do much better with the bolt gun and it's stock and cost about as much as the AR15's barrel.

A lot of guys that shoot longer range will pick up a 223 because it's a lot cheaper to shoot, saves their match barrel, and doesn't destroy their shoulders.

You could also use it for varmint hunting and pest control.

In a self defense situation, I would be grabbing a bigger gun or one with more rounds down range capability, i.e. AR15/AR10/Larger Caliber Bolt Action.

I find it's cheaper to reload and more fun to shoot compared to my bigger calibers.

>>32485065
Because .22 is not legal for hunting in most states. That's really it, bolt actions make poor defence guns for obvious reasons but any is better than none.

>>32485095
They also dont want to ban Mini14s or Remington 750s. Just because you want a gun that wont trigger antis doesn't mean you have to restrict yourself to boltguns.

>>32485065
>plenty of ammo all over the place
This is true of many common rifle cartridges.

>antis don't usually want to ban them
Antis want to ban everything, this doesn't matter.

>low recoil
Only really helpful for rapid fire. In a bolt gun you're not really getting a lot of benefit from this feature. A grown man can comfortably fire much more powerful rounds.

>good for hunting, defense and fun
It's not a top choice for hunting animals past a certain size. It's also not the best for HD from a bolt action, bolt action is a retarded HD choice.

The best "if you can only own one gun" choice is going to be an old-fashioned 12 gauge shotgun. They just plain are capable of doing the most different tasks, albeit never as good as guns purposefully designed for those particular things.

>>32485095
Buy one when they ban AR15s then (=never in noncucked states).

>>32485065
>Bolt gun
>All purpose

Have I died and gone back to Verdun? Of all repeating actions in common use today bolt action is by far the slowest. Combine that with lack of long range potential with the cartridge and lack of ultra lightweight options and you have something that is neither fish nor fowl. You can get a semi-auto for the same price or not much more with little weight penalty.

Now if you just want a cheap plinker, have an affinity for bolt guns, or are unable to procure semi-autos for some reason, by all means. All-rounder it is not.

Check all the ammo websites, .223 is a Varmint round, it is not legal to shoot deer sized game with it anywhere. You have to shoot something like a 22-250 to be able to kill a deer.

The only reason that .223 became famous is that it was used as an assault rifle round. It now is being MISUSED as a field rifle round for which it was never intended

>>32485065
Because it's in 5.56

File: 1456954812931.jpg (36KB, 480x534px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 480x534px

>>32485065
>caring about gun grabber's fee-fees at all

>bolt action
>good for defense

>.223
>good for hunting

nogunz pls go

>>32485065
>no such thing as an all purpose rifle

I know scout rifles try to fill that niche...

Personally I love my hog hunter (.308) & my half dozen AR15's - but neither are all purpose rifles

Probably find my ar15 match rifles more enjoyable to shoot - due to accuracy at 600+ yards with less expensive ammo


But there is a reason I own 3 M1 Garands & a FAL too

File: 20140512_172832.jpg (297KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1200x1600px

>>32485896
Pic related

>>32485151
Your post has no replies or argument because the people posting on this thread are retard mall ninjas.

I second everything you said. I own a 300blackout in a Ruger American ranch. For shots within 100 yards it is an ideal deer gun.

I wouldn't call a bolt gun in 223/5.56x45 a do all rifle. Sorry...I should be using normal terminology..."5.56 is dur wrung caliber"...Fucking caliber fags.

A do all rifle covers all possible scenarios and one scenario is dealing with an aggressive threat. That perfect right is subject to debate but it's safe to say it's an autoloader, it shoots well, takes a common high capacity magazine, and is chaimbered in 308. I don't own an ar10, but that's what I described.

>>32485065
An all purpose rifle should be able to deal with most North American game at a range of around 400 yards. The 5.56 is not a cartridge that can do so. If you remove hunting medium-large game from the need then a bolt gun in 5.56 is very useful.

File: 1432184632346.jpg (10KB, 243x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 243x200px

>>32486431

>>32485065
personally if I was getting a bolt gun I'd get something better at removing deer, especially if I already had a AR
for low recoil 22lr boltguns are quite enough fun

The only reason I'd consider a .223 rifle would be for target shooting or varmint hunting.

>>32485123
Yes, but not in fucking bolt action rifles.

File: 1467725369632.png (18KB, 641x573px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 641x573px

>>32485065
.223 was invented in order to handle better in full auto and to allow a grunt to carry more ammo on their person.

You however, are not a grunt.

You do not have a gun which fires full auto.

You are not carrying 100 rounds of ammo into a battle.

You are not a government which needs to factor the costs of buying millions of rounds into their standard issue bullet choice.

You are not the target audience for .223.

In both of the scenarios you listed

>hunting
>SD

.223 is the wrong choice. Unless you live alone in an area where the nearest house is more than 500 yards away, .223 can still over penetrate, despite many police teams adopting it over pistol caliber carbines. Just because .223 is a safer choice over 9mm doesn't mean it's the best choice.

.223 is also unsuitable for hunting anything larger than a dog. Pigs, deer, elk, black bears, all require .30 cal bullets. hunting any of those animals with a .223 is unethical (using hunter ethics), because they rarely put down the animal and cause it to suffer.

>inb4 I shot a deer with a .223 and killed it

What these people won't tell you is the numerous times they had to track a deer after they shot it because it limped on in pain for a mile before it collapsed.

In short, there isn't a do everything rifle or bullet.

>>32485095
Here's news flash to you, once anti-guns succeed in banning ARs, they'll go after the bolt guns too. That's why they're called anti-guns.

Why do I keep seeing people confuse 5.56 w/ .223? Do people not know that they are different rounds?

File: 1450627252740.jpg (7KB, 188x268px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 188x268px

>>32486938

>>32486480
You were schooled.

>>32487070
If by schooled you mean putting out contradictory points while calling people retards for the sake of calling people retards then sure

>>32486938
What I dislike are the morons and YouTubers who contribute to this "caliber" nonsense. I think it's related.

My point is newer gun owners have developed habbits of not being descriptive. If you went up to any one of these people posting in this thread and asked: what would you like your barrel chaimbered in? They would more than likely respond with confusion.

Everything is described by caliber now and retards do that.

>>32487087
Nope schooling in that you're an uneducated gun owner.

I like the idea of a bolt .223 but the Mossberg MVP price in that caliber is the upper limit of what I think they should sell for

>>32485065
>plenty of ammo

This is true of pretty much any common caliber. 7.62x51 is probably about the same, and 7.62x39 is still easy and cheap to get.

>antis don't usually want to ban them

You say that like that's a good thing.

Banned guns are almost always grandfathered in.

>good for hunting

Bullet's too small. 7.62x51s really what you want for North American hunting versatility, but some of the larger intermediate catridges (7.62x39, 6.8 SPC, etc.) would also be okay.

>defense

Bullet's large enough to kill a person, but the action's a major disadvantage in close combat, and I'd rather have something that can turn cover into concealment.

You might want 5.56 over a more powerful round if you're in a situation where penetrating cover could be a problem, but virtually all such situations demand a much shorter and faster gun.

>fun

I know it's .223, but it's not .22.

What you're looking for is really the Desert Tech MDR with one of the barrels I mentioned, assuming it ever actually ships. Compact, light, autoloading. Barring that, it's either a Scout Rifle or a light DMR-ish rifle in one of those calibers, depending on your priorities.

>>32485827
You can hunt deer with .223 you mong. Just depends on the state.

>>32485065
>all purpose rifle
.223 isn't an all purpose round

>>32485827
You sir, are retarded. It's legal to hunt deer with in Oregon.

>>32487315

>>32487339

>>32485827
>Military rounds can't be used to hunt with
>Millions of game animals killed with .30-06, .308, 7mm Mauser, 8mm Mauser, 7.62x54r, 6.5 Swede/Carcano/Japanese, .303 British, .45-70, and .223
>Multiple manufacturers specifically load .223 for hogs/deer.

Get your fuddery out of my /k/, nigger.

File: 61.webm (444KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 480x480px

>hurr .223 can't kill muh Durr

Is there a worse fudd meme?

>>32487475
>ethical hunting is a meme
only on /k/owadooty

>>32487502
>.223 isn't ethical

>>32487475
You would think fuds would kill deer with a 223. In a bolt gun there normally cheap to buy and shoot. Fuds are always cheap. Of course...300 to 450 bucks is probably to much for fuds.

>>32485896
scout concept is valid if
one is rational enough to see it's role
no half measures will do though

>>32487360
While he isn't particularly correct, this is is also not what he said. To address his point myself it is certainly legal to hunt with .223. Plenty of people take coyotes with it and with the right load and shot placement white tail is also a possibility. Might not be ideal but it is legal in lots of places.

>>32487902


scout rifle is a retarded concept from an old fudd, as much as i love boltguns they are never going to be as practically tactical as a meme15

>>32487149
California has removed grandfather protection for magazines greater than 10 rounds.

I'm sure they are not goig to care much for registered assault rifles with bullet buttons.

>>32488254
>A possibility

You are underestimating the round. People take deer every year with .357 Magnum pistols or less without issue, there's no reason why you couldn't use a .223 out of a rifle with proper bullets and have equal if not better results. Cuck laws aside .223 is perfectly serviceable for removing antler. Even California, for all of it's horrible gun laws, doesn't give a hot gay fuck about what caliber you use so long as it's center-fire.

>>32486431
Shut up fagot, there is no point in being an old fudd when I am in my 20s.

>>32485123
They also use 7.62 Nato. Get that instead for a bolt gun

>>32485065
Because a .308 fits all of your criteria except maybe low recoil, and with a decent buttpad even that's a non-issue.

You can get an old .223 hunting rifle way WAY lighter than an AR, and they will literally never jam on you. I mean, if you aren't heartbroken over it not being semi-auto they can be amazing for super long hiking trips.

>>32486897

I wouldn't say .30 caliber is necessary for deer. I took my first deer with .22-250. Also .270 win, 6.5 Creedmoor, .243, etc. are all good for hunting deer

>>32488395
Clearly not. You're busy being a moron.

>>32485065
I've been thinking of either a Ruger Ranch or a CZ 527 both in 223 for coyote hunting. Something that is light and small and can be carried easily through rough spots. I would not feel as bad beating the shit out of the ruger while hunting. Any advice /k/?

>>32486431
>Fucking caliber fags
>A do all rifle covers all possible scenarios...and is chaimbered in 308

>>32491037
Ruger American is a good gun... However, don't be upset if you get bad mags.

>>32491076
Yeah I forgot Winchester. Glad to see you think I'm right though. Now go fucking make me dinner bitch.

>>32491103
>Now go fucking make me dinner bitch

I think you're old enough to pour your cheerios yourself now. I'll still pour the milk for you, though.

>>32491037
you shouldnt feel that bad beating the shit out of a cz its a easily replaced currently produced gun that comes with ironsights

>>32491128
Of course you will. Your obedience is nothing but expected.

>>32485080
It's way cheaper.

>>32486921
Don't know why but I loled at this.

...but it's true.

>>32487516
Post a pic of a deer you tagged with a .223, and tell us how long you had to track it after you shot it.

I'll wait.

>>32491156
You can get and upper and lower for less than $400 now if you find the right sale. Any bolt gun in .223 that isn't an axis is going to be near the same price.

>>32491274
Not even him, but you're somehow moving goalposts AND grasping at straws. It's impressive really

>>32485095
So? Once you have one there's nothing they can do about it.

>>32485065
For bolt gun in interemediate round something like 7,62x39 would be better choice. Something that that would work for hunting without magdumps/dog like shot placement.

But.

Why wouldn't you just use .308? High recoil doesn't matter in manual reaperet.

>>32485065
What's wrong with .308? It's basically the same except you can legally hunt animals larger than squirrels with it.

>>32488518
7.62 Nato is OK in a .308Win bolt action

>>32491156
Not really. I bought a Ruger American in 5.56 and it came to 500 dollars with the optic and FFL fees (solid it later)

Meanwhile i just got a pretty nice AR build from PSA for around 600 with everything (FFL fees, rear sight, mags, everything) you can go way cheaper than that too. If I wanted to I could have gotten a budget AR15 for even cheaper than the Ruger American.

Don't get me wrong the Ruger American is a fine rifle, but I plan on getting one in .308 next time. Eventually there might be a time where a 5.56 bolt gun is way cheaper than an AR, but that time is not right now.

>>32485095
WHO CARES

>>32491669
On the contrary, I'm proving

1. The guy isn't a hunter
2. He's just talking out of his ass

>>32485065
>5.56/223 bolt gun is a shit idea for a all purpose rifle?
Who said this? Apparently they know nothing about bolt action rifles or firearms for that matter.

How's the quality of these Ruger bolt guns?

Is it shit?

I'm a guy that gets really picky when it comes to finish and overall quality.

Are these similar to Norinco shit?

>>32485080
fpbp

>>32485095
dont comply like a little bitch

>>32491156
>"gee im sure glad i saved 200-300 bucks so i can shoot a bolt instead"

>>32493421
not either of them, but i know a couple dudes who hunt with hornady .223 loads and have no problem dropping deer.

>maybe you just have shit shot placement?
>maybe you shouldn't use ball ammo?
>maybe you should stop being fud?
>maybe you're just bitchmade?
>maybe you shouldn't be so green peace?
>maybe you shouldn't be so P.E.T.A. ?
this whole thread is garbage. buy one because you like it, dont try to justify it in some bullshit way.

>>32488328
Bong chipping in. In England we have a minimum calibre and bullet energy requirement for shooting deer (even Muntjack). This is to prevent hunters wounding with unsuitable calibres/loads.
Any .22/5.56 doesn't cut it, which is why .243 and .270 are popular.

>>32493940
Here's the run down on my ranch in 300cuckout.

Finish is meh. I'm not one to care about looks. I'm mechanically ocd but not with cosmetics. I will say it's a light rust magnet.

The magazines are shit. Mine that came with the gun worked great but I have seen others not so lucky. I wanted a backup mag and that thing should never left Ruger.

Stocks are not perfect but the bedding/pillar system they use is good. Then again mine is just a 300 blackout...So it doesn't produce much recoil.

Accuracy is...Meh. I'm still hoping my barrel is still breaking in but I'm about 80 rounds in and it hasn't settled down. I use HPR 150 gr sp and get inch a half at a 100. Why do I use HPR? The truly bad thing about this gun...It has a weak firing pin spring. It can't handle the slightly harder primers on Barnes and hornady ammo. Barnes will miss fire like 1 out of 20 but the Hornady loads will missies every round. SB, Sig, Remington, HPR, all their primers don't give this gun a problem.

>>32485095
Why do you care so much about anti-americans feelings?