You are the professional, not me. All I know about E&E comes from books. I imagine that you have a lot more practical experience.

The only thing that moved me to comment is contrast between what I read in the history books and what I read in modern survival forums and such. It seems to me that the key difference between people who have escaped throughout history (be they POWs, escaped slaves, or fugitives from justice) is the quality of the people chasing them and the speed at which they are able to move.

If you can make 6 miles a day over rough terrain (i.e. you are not talking any trails and moving through the brush) your pursuers have to cover 113 sq miles if they are not sure which direction you ran. If you can make 8 miles, they have to cover 200 some miles. If you can make 10 miles they will have to cover over 300 miles. Granted, those figures are inflated because those chasing you will have some indication of where you are going. But the fact remains that a small increase in speed will greatly increase the work load on those chasing you.

Most people doing manhunts or looking for lost people first look at a map and try to figure out where it is likely that you will be. If you can get out side of that zone you have a much better chance than if you try to remain undetected within that zone. I think we can all think of a recent fugitive who almost escaped detection from a massive man hunt just because he managed to get a few yards outside of where they thought he would be.

All that was just a long winded way of saying that I think more people will die because they took too much then because they took too little. It is very easy for most of us to imagine situations where we need this or that. It is very hard for us to imagine how much slower a few extra pounds will make us. Most people who make up E&E plans on the internet are focused on covering every eventuality, not on moving as fast as possible while leaving as little trace as possible.

The thought behind my load out was, "How can I move as fast as possible and still sustain myself if I shook pursuit?" In a real situation, I would not take near as much food as I listed. But you said 100 miles so I figured I would be cheating if I took less.

I think given your experience you would be a fool if you did not take an AR. But given history, I suspect most people would be better off shaving every single pound that they possible could and still have a hope of sustaining themselves at the end of the journey.

I hope we never do large scale tests of that theory though.

If my safe was open and I would have anything thing to grab, it would be my SF medical handbook and anything of value. Handbook to buy goodwill and money to raise an army to defeat said hoard while you guys run for the hills. Guns are tools. Your mind's your weapon. That's just the Green Beret in me talking. Or maybe it's the rum. Probably the rum.

For academics, M4 clone (any type) with.22 conversion, pistol (any type) 9mm Luger. Anything else is dead weight. Sorry honey, didn't mean you.

I didn't see this mentioned anywhere else on the board via the search button, but in this scenario would it be a good idea to acquire one of these?: Colt LE901

I have not handled one, but the versatility of having both a carbine .308 and 5.56 AR platform with only one receiver seems like a good idea. The Bushmaster ACR appeared to me to be too maintenance intensive to quickly change calibers, whereas this seems to be an easier transition. If it can take a run of the mill 5.56 upper I imagine it could take a .22 conversion as well? Does anyone have any experience with this rifle that they would like to share in respect to it being/not being an option for this emergency bug-out?

Here is a youtube video: LE901 video

You would need another upper for 5.56, with the bolt carrier and charging handle. At that point, you are within a couple of pounds of humping two complete carbines.

A .22LR conversion unit uses the .223/5.56 barrel for the bullet to engage the rifling. The 7.62 upper would not work for that system.

I suppose a case could be made for a .308 carbine, and a dedicated .22LR upper, but again, the upper with conversion unit and CH probably weighs a lot more than a .22LR pistol and probably almost as much as a 10/22 Ruger.

Your call, looks gimmicky to me.

TR

.40 Glock with conversion barrel?
 

In regards to sidearm selection-
Would any of you consider it a benefit to carry a Glock .40 with a 40-9 conversion barrel? I have no personal experience with them but I have seen them mentioned here before by QPs, so I am assuming that at least some people have had some luck with them. If they are reliable enough, I would imagine that having a pistol that could shoot .40 or 9mm and a rifle that could shoot .22LR and 5.56mm would be a pretty powerful, lightweight package. If you have the conversion barrel in your weapon and it loaded with the 9mm JHP carry ammo of your choice, for the weight of a few empty .40 mags and the original barrel you can shoot whatever .40 you pick up or have at your destination. I know that I have a wider variety of ammo at my eventual location than I could reasonably carry weapons for, so having one pistol that allows me to shoot two fairly common rounds may be a benefit.

That being said, there are people on here far more proficient and experienced than I and I would really like to hear your input. Thank you for your time.

Ok, getting in on this one late but...

Grab the AR in its case. I keep 12 loaded mags in the case which gives me 360 rounds. My 1911 immediately goes on the hip. Bug out bag will have another 10 loaded mags for the AR and 500 rounds for the 1911. That give me a total of 660 rounds for the AR and 529 rounds (counting the mag in, 2spares on the hip and one round in the pipe) for the 1911.

The 5.56 will take any game in North America. So, we will be fed. It is small enough to take rabbits and powerful enough for moose, elk and if you put a couple. Rounds in, even buffalo. It is really the perfect bug out weapon of our time.

However, my buyout situation in reality is much different. I drive a semi and haul food products. Most likely, I will get notification with 40K pounds of chicken in the trailer or like now, 38K of potatoes. Fuel on board will allow for 1000 miles wherever I want to go(but will go shorter distance to have the engine fuel available to put into the reefer unit). I have contacts throughout he country as well as set locations that I have planned based on where I happen to be at the time. No matter where I happen to be, 200 miles/3.5 hrs will be my max driving for safe harbor.

In the truck, I happen to have my 1911 (stays on my hip unless in Cali or OR) with 1K rounds, my primary AR with 1500 rounds (660 already loaded in mags) and my .308 Savage with 250 rounds. We carry enough food (not counting load) for 2 weeks and at least 5 gallons of water on top of whatever we have to drink otherwise. CB, satcom and internet access all available in the truck (satcom is only direct to company) along with cell phone. We have every thing in the truck you would have at home except a shower. So, we are in our bug out vehicle constantly. And yes, in a SHTF scenario I would not shy away from stealing my load to provide food or stealing any one else's load if it became necessary. Most likely, I would get in touch with some other trucker friends and we would combine resources. Build a compound out of trailers with he tractors (houses) in the center.

Not to mention that if you are shooting .22 through a .223 barrel, it will be inaccurate as hell. The bullet does not properly engage the rifling and the twist rate is too slow. Just stick with the 5.56/.223 and you can do whatever you would need.

Not sure how many times you have tried this, but I have four conversions and have run them on at least a dozen uppers, including my issue weapon.

It is not a BR-50 rifle, but it will do the job for putting down varmints, collecting small game at reasonable ranges, or eliminating sentry animals. You just need to practice with it and learn the capabilities and limitations of the system before using it to stay alive.

The .22LR bullets mic the same diameter and recovered bullets show full rifling engagement, by my tools.

The twist is much faster with a .223/5.56, particularly with the newer 1x7" and 1x9" rifles. The older 1x12" and 1x14" are not far off the preferred .22LR twist rate. That difference is why dedicated uppers are available with the optimal twist rifling for precision work.

As far as the Glock conversions, if they will run reliably with just a barrel change, that could have merit, especially if you wanted to collect ammo along the way, and anticipated finding lots of 9x19. I think the breech faces are slightly different between the 9x19 and .40 S&W barrels, maybe the extractor keeps it close enough to center for the firing pin to reliably ignite the primer.

As with everything else, try before you buy, if you can, and make sure you know what it will do before betting your life on it.

TR

Not done a 22 conversion, but from the friends that I have that have done it, they report a greatly reduced accuracy as compared to a dedicated 22. However, they say it is good enough to hit 4" circles at 50 yards. Although this could provide a great weight saving on ammo, carrying a second dedicated upper negates the benefit of the 22 ammo weight.

Ultimately, we all have to figure out what is best for each of us in our potential environment. In the desert areas, you would obviously have to pack more water and set up for longer range shooting than in a forested environment. Urban areas, fire and maneuver as well as fast movement are a priority. In some cases, even facing a vastly superior number, you may be best off just hunkering down and bunkering your residence.

I'm surprised people aren't grabbing for AK/AK Variants. If a bunch of hooligans are taking over, chances are that's their weapon of choice, so ammunition would be easy to come by. Personally, I'd grab my 700PSS, AK, Glock 19 (I love the 1911, but that would probably have to stay behind. Ammunition sourcing may be an issue for 45 in a SHTF situation), and my Ruger MkII, as far as specifically weapons go.

TRU, what do you consider to be a reasonable amount of weight (food, water, shelter, guns, ammo, etc.) to carry in this scenario?

TR

If the time comes that I would have to source handgun ammo, the handgun would be available too. Until then, I trust the 1911 more than any of the wonder 9's. Also, given the probability that the BGs wil most likely be government forces (not necessarily military), AR variants or NATO rounds are those most likely to be carried by the BG. I always preach to stock up on what your potential enemy carries (in a non military situation) and I see our greatest threat coming from NATO or our own government. Civilian situations will eventually rise out of that, but the primary threat is what the founders thought of when they added the 2A to the bill of rights.

Eta: in most instances, I would consider 100 pounds of supplies plus the weight of the loaded weapons (not spare ammo) to be good enough to get you to safe harbor. I figure on 30 pounds of ammo, 10 pounds of clothing (a few changes), 20 total water, 25 food and then some accessories. Just a generalization but a decent base line.

Mentalist, have you humped 130 pounds of gun and supplies lately, in a tactical operation?

TR

Hmmm. Mentalist - I think you might want to reconsider your assumptions. I've jumped and then carried 130+ pound rucksacks. I was also in my 20's and in the best shape of my life. I now have a number of interesting prescriptions that I partake of when my body decides to remind me of the abuse it has been subjected to over the years. If you're forced to hoof it with 100 lbs of crap plus weapons and ammo without that semi you're used to depending on you're not going to make 100 miles without getting scarfed up by the opposition.

I've read some interesting approaches to the problem but don't consider most of them to be particularly viable. Perhaps it's time to relook the original "challenge".

Emphasis is to refocus the discussion. Many of the participants in this discussion appear to have overlooked/ignored the set parameters of the scenario. Interestingly, TR has given some specific and (I think) generous allowances with the already packed BOB. Many of you wanting to include the kitchen sink on your packing list would benefit from reading "The Load of a Nation". The basic premise (overburdened soldiers are not combat effective) was sharply reinforced during Operation ANACONDA.

Personally I'm concentrating on what it takes to break contact, discourage pursuit, reduce signature, and maintain my physical condition over 7-10 days of tactical movement so I can reach my destination and recover/prepare for Phase II. Food for thought - Having a prepared destination and knowing what to do when you get there is something everyone participating in this "thought experiment" should be giving due consideration. MOO, YMMV.

Is it dark or light outside?

In a perfect world, I'd like to take a long gun...but it may not be feasible if drawing unwanted attention and several 911 phone calls spoils my plans to blend in and move discreetly amongst the sheep...:D

If by land I'd take the AR (light weight, more ammo) if by sea, I'd prefer the HK-91 in .308/7.62.

Probably in five-minutes or less, I'd be abandoning my abode with the pistol on my hip and three mags. Work out the extras on the run and acquire weapons and ammo through recovery...

:munchin