Accuracy vs firepower

[Wingwiper]

Having weapons versus having Spears does NOT establish ACCURACY, it establishes Firepower. If I shoot 100 accurate shots and kill 100 of your men and I have 10 buddies who do the same, you will lose 1100 men at my expense of 1100 rounds fired.

Now if you are talking about 11 guys with good weapons and they want to spray down the entire area with AR fire, then you will have expended probably 10 times the ammo and accomplished less than 10% of the effect.

ACCURACY is worth a lot more than Firepower. Time is also critical, if you have 5000 enemy troops attacking your 11 men, you may be able to turn them around if you drop 1100 of them in the time it takes to fire 100 shots each. That has happened many times in the wars. Guadlacanal it happned, the Alamo it happen (for awhile) and in Korea it happen and it happen many many times. You can make your 10 men worth a lot more if they fire accurate shots versus 10 men having the firepower but not able to shoot accurately. They will be out of ammo and the enemy will over run them.

[tlarkin]

Originally Posted by Wingwiper

Having weapons versus having Spears does NOT establish ACCURACY, it establishes Firepower. If I shoot 100 accurate shots and kill 100 of your men and I have 10 buddies who do the same, you will lose 1100 men at my expense of 1100 rounds fired.

This is called efficiency.

Now if you are talking about 11 guys with good weapons and they want to spray down the entire area with AR fire, then you will have expended probably 10 times the ammo and accomplished less than 10% of the effect.

This is inefficiency.

ACCURACY is worth a lot more than Firepower. Time is also critical, if you have 5000 enemy troops attacking your 11 men, you may be able to turn them around if you drop 1100 of them in the time it takes to fire 100 shots each. That has happened many times in the wars. Guadlacanal it happned, the Alamo it happen (for awhile) and in Korea it happen and it happen many many times. You can make your 10 men worth a lot more if they fire accurate shots versus 10 men having the firepower but not able to shoot accurately. They will be out of ammo and the enemy will over run them.

This is called, strategy. If you are outnumbered and you know it, bottle neck your enemy or make them engage you on your terms.

however, it all comes down to efficiency. If the Chinese were right about one thing, it is this. Which is why they would be a threat if they (or should I say when they) become the world power.

[Wingwiper]

ACCURACY is EFFICIENCY or I should say, EFFICIENCY is the result of ACCURACY.

Either way, I would rather have 10 guys beside me who could hit their targets and made every shot count, than 10 guys who sprayed the area and hoped for the best.

[andrew cochran]

Yeah but you need both. And you ain't gonna always have ten buddies ready to hit their mark.

[mitch_mckee]

Engaging in battles is a good way NOT to survive.

[tlarkin]

Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

Engaging in battles is a good way NOT to survive.

Also, considered efficiency. Every second you spend fighting for your life is a second more you risk your life.

[nathangdad]

In WW2 the American 8th Air Corp fired 99 million rounds of
.50 caliber machinegun ammunition yet it was the P-51 fighter,
a lack of fuel, and planes destroyed on the ground that brought the
Luftwaffe to oblivion. In this case volume of fire in broad daylight
failed to achieve the desired objective of downing German fighter
planes at a level necessary to reduce risk to the four engine
bombers.

If anyone wants it, I will post my reference book on 8th Air statistics.

It is reasonable to think a home invader has taken drugs and/or alcohol
to an extent the noise from firepower volume may not have that great
an effect. That is why I always suggest measuring distances from bedroom
down hallway, from far corner of living room to front door, etc. then practice
firing at torso targets placed at those ranges from prone, kneeling, crouching,
and standing positions with a 12 gauge shotgun. I feel the shotgun should
be loaded with alternating triple ought buckshot and slugs.

My vote is for target acquisition and hit over volume of firepower.

[andrew cochran]

Originally Posted by mitch_mckee

Engaging in battles is a good way NOT to survive.

VERY VERY VERY true!

[Mad Hatter]

Simple, I would take my Panther .223 carbine.. An awesome combination of both !! Excellent accuracy and more than enough firepower..

[samuel]

Originally Posted by andrew cochran

I like accuracy and firepowere but in a defence situation at close range I would take firepower.

Right on!Experience was my teacher.Our firepower always won,no matter how out numbered. sam.

[andrew cochran]

Exactly!

[Wingwiper]

You can have all of the FIREPOWER that you want, but if you can't hit what uyou are aiming at, it is pretty worthless. This is the factor the Military learned in 91 when the folks within the convoys were unable to defend themselves from lack of training which would have enbaled them to have ACCURACY and ABILITY. The MTU was enchanced to include all levels of soldiers and train them to hit their targets.

Many training sites now have a EST and SIM Center which will give the soldier training as an individual and as a Fire Team. These facilities have everything from a 9mm to a 105mm and the enormous large screen gives the YOU ARE THERE feel.

Many soldiers if they don't have the ACCURACY to start with will not live long enough to obtain the experience.

[patrick70]

you need both.In a close up situation I would want firepower,yeah we all know how important accuracy is,but up close,in real life, your adrenalin gonna be pumping and you might not have the time to take precision one shot one kills.

[BigEd63]

Hello I'm new here and don't want to step on any toes just want to give my opinion on the subject.

For and individual, family or a group debating over which firearm and or caliber for a SHTF weapon is a waste of time.

First, look over your individual situation you may be in; be relaistic otherwise the only person you will be fooling is yourself.

Second, select your firearms and calibers based on the above.

Third, secure enough support items for them like ammo, magazines, cleaning supplies and spare parts to maintain them.

Fourth, and last but not at all the least is shoot, train and keep familar with your weapons enough to be able to use them to the best of both your and their ability.

For the record I do love and shoot my 9mm Glock's, .45 ACP 1911's, .308Win and .223 rifles equally and also do a bunch of shooting with various .22's for training as well.

Shoot, train, have fun and live long.

[KingMusa45]

i like a balance when i can find it but thats hard to do on my budget.im looking to mod what i have to get as much of both as possible.

[ash]

I'd rather hit my target with a .22 than miss with a .50 cal.

[andrew cochran]

Hey BigEd I don't mean to interupt but what part of Arkansaw do you live in?

[Rex in OTZ]

Just saw The Winter War again, seems when they get in the thik of it they call in the Sumoi fella's to bail them out, was a fair article in SGN a couple mos back on the Sumoi 9mm's

[Coeloptera]

I really like a mix, which is why I love the .357 Magnum. Probably my favourite handgun caliber. I have seen human beings shake off multiple hits from a 9mm (at least as long as I was watching, which wasn't long). I don't think I've even heard of someone shrugging off .357 Magnum or greater no matter where it hit them (so long as the hit was solid).

Hitting the target is obviously vital, but if you hit somewhere off-center with a low caliber you may very well just be facing an enraged assailant.

When I was a mortician I saw some gunshot fatalities. I did see one with a 9mm, but the killing shot was point blank, back of the head, after one in each thigh. The thigh shots didn't even knock the guy down, he bent over to grip them (the shots were at very close range) and his killer placed the gun within 2 inches of his head and fired. The wounds in his thighs were rather small and didn't really damage the surrounding tissue too much.

If I'm off enough to hit a bad guy in say...the arm, I want to be reasonably sure that arm is going to be shattered and useless, if not partially severed by that shot. I want a leg shot to immediately render him incapable of advancing.

I don't know. I tend to think of it like trying to stop a tank. I couldn't really do it with a handgun, but I need to place a rocket reasonably in order to stop it.

Since it is safe to assume that any assailant I may face would be a human being, I work from what's going to stop a human being with the least amount of effort while allowing me to maintain the highest degree of accuracy for that effort. I just don't trust that putting 3-6 .22s anywhere but his head would do that.

I guess a .45 is a good compromise. Does anyone know what the stop rate is on .40s?

- Coeloptera

[Rex in OTZ]

the 9mm would be a stopper if used with proper bullet's and within its effective range
A fmj 9mm is just a hole puncher, In a old Army Medical officers corp report "Indian wars" survival rate of battle field casultys wounded by arrows was high as 89%
arrow's were pretty good hole punchers kinda like a 9mm
You put a proper hunting head on a arrow to create a wound channel and you have something, a 9mm hand gun loaded with black tallons is another story.
As far as fire power the russians learned there lesson the hard way in WWII they came out with SVT 38 & 40,the PPSH, then the SKS then the AK-47 the guy who throwsthe most leead wins
John Dillenger learned that early on, so did Bonny & Clyde
Ask most small varmet shooters they love semi-auto's for hunting
Last night reading a book just out by a marine sniper back form Iraq
they had allot of misses in that book because they took allot of time setting up the shot and missed allot of chances becaues of slow manipulating bolt rifles
i could see a good use for a 400yd semi-auto scope mounted rifle with mild recoil, like a 7.62x45 or somthing like a 250 Savage, or 257Roberts.