Life PhilosophyPreparedness

Q & A Day……food storage, water filtration, .223 versus 5.56 – oh my!!!

25
Share

 

Ask a question and I will give you an answer. It can be about pretty much anything – politics, firearms, current events, survival, preparedness, or “Is it OK to yell MOVIE in a crowded fire house?“ – whatever.

Go ahead – “make my day.”

JR

  *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *

From the Supply Depot: RECOMMENDED ACTION MOVIES

Twister

Dante’s Peak

Volcano

The Core

Into The Storm

line

Looking for Preparedness Supplies? Check out the Fantastic Selection from The Ready Store.

The Ready Store has been an industry leader for years. Founded in 2002 they have grown to be one of the largest survival & preparedness supply companies by providing excellent prices and superior customer service. 

From food storage products to camping supplies The Ready Store carries it all.

line

Need clean water? 

SAWYER MINI WATER FILTER (1)

You might also like

25 Comments

  1. CaptTurbo says:

    OK, I’ll bite. Why would anyone buy a .223 rifle instead of a rifle that is designed to eat 5.56? I certainly wouldn’t.

    Reply
    1. JR says:

      I rarely see an AR in .223 but they are out there. I wouldn’t buy one either UNLESS it was a heck of a deal. The Mini-14 is chambered in .223 however my understanding is Ruger endorses shooting either .223 or 5.56 in it.

      Reply
      1. 3rdMan says:

        The Mini I had back in the 90s has 223/5.56 stamped on the barrel, but you’re right there are some AR barrels out there marked .223 only.

        Reply
    2. goingray58 says:

      I have a friend that has a REM 700 HVY BBL he drives tacks with using .223 and loads them himself with heavier that 55 gr 5.56 mil spec.. It will handle 5.56 .. it just changes the POI greatly … short shots in a pie plate aren’t affected.

      Reply
    1. JR says:

      jh – sport them both with pride! Remember – one is none and two is one. Where the belt with suspenders as a back up.

      Reply
      1. Rick says:

        I have to disagree with this one. I should have had suspenders the day I fell off my bike. I had a belt. BUT, if I had suspenders my groin-ish area would be constricted. Kinda like you do not wear a tie with a short sleeve shirt.

        Reply
    1. JR says:

      secondrecon – .308 all day and my reasoning is solely based on the availability of ammunition. Seems like for every 5-8 boxes of .308 I see one box of 7.62 Nato. Obviously if the firearm doesn’t come in .308 then get the gun and stock up on ammo.

      Reply
      1. secondrecon says:

        The 30.06 and the .308 are my go to weapons I used them so long in the Corps . But I am not going to kick the .223 or the 5.56 outa bed for eating crackers. Just saying.

        Reply
    2. goingray58 says:

      the .308 is 12,000 PSI stronger than the 7.62×51 Nato, and they are slightly different in dimension.. but not markedly. 50K PSI vs 62K PSI might be a bigger deal on an older weapon .. the round in NATO appeared in WWII taking place of the 1903 bolt gun 1936 – 1942 dev and implementation, later models improved. The “Garand” and machining of the day might cause a problem. The modern ones I’ve seen so far accept either. Some .308 auto recoil spring setup will not feed well and you get smoke stacks.. catching the brass by the neck as the new round is being chambered or not if the bolt doesn’t go back far enough with recoil to catch the next round. They fire them just fine .. You also have to pay attention to twist rate .. the more twists per inch the longer the bullet stays in the barrel and more pressure is developed. Typical is 1:10 .. atypical is 1:12 (some FN barrels).

      If you want some pictures
      http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/03/13/graphic-breakdown-of-308-vs-7-62×51/
      Same questions I asked as I was building one on an AR platform.

      GG58

      Reply
  6. goingray58 says:

    OK .. here’s a question .. If you spend a lot of time thinking about this stuff .. you have preferences.. Most everyone would rather Bug In .. be around all your stuff etc..
    There are all kinds of explanations .. or why’s .. Physical ability, medical issue, age, a passel of kids.. no Bug Out Location.. Money etc etc . . we all have our reasons and they are mostly equally valid.
    You might have your location defense all that all done.. and even if you live in a bunker, if enough force is brought to bare, You have a choice.. Leave or be overwhelmed.
    IF that is true, then I asking to hear from everyone’s reasoning for WHAT woudl bee your signal to leave.. To early and it’s is a hardship, to late and you might be better off staying.. or NOT. That is likely the most difficult decision of all..
    Cache’s along the way, multiple alternate routes, Bug out vehicle ..
    Let’s hear it .. I know what I think .. I am asking what others think..
    This is a back to basics question.
    GG58

    Reply
  7. Lightning says:

    GG58- Good question .Since everyone’s situation is different every one of us will make that decision based on variables. That said- seems to me my signal would be-IF staying to bug in would be too dangerous ( ex. a nuclear explosion or a tornado hit, fire, mini ice age, etc. then we would have to bug out. Otherwise we will bug in. ( we are too old and physically limited to bug out ) .
    My question to everyone : Has anyone thought of having the ability to bug out to heaven should there be a nuclear explosion or chemical attack that would result in a horrific slow death? I have .Its hard to discuss but a possibility. Lightning
    PS We are getting severe rain and possible flooding in our county and snow is coming tomorrow.

    Reply
    1. goingray58 says:

      Thought about it .. sure… I get stuck on two points.. 1.) If it’s against an aggressor I fall on the “take as many as I can with me” side. 2.) Never can tell what God has planned. Maybe he’ll save me and maybe he needs to use me to teach someone else.
      About the most I’ll admit to considering seriously is something for pain while I wait. I may feel differently when I am yet older and or very unhealthy and hurting .. but for now that is my take personally.

      Reply
  8. Lightning says:

    JR and everyone.Question . I noticed our neighbor down the road whom we havent met yet has put up a storage container with exhaust fans and recently purchased a small travel trailer.I would like to introduce myself and see if they are prepping (I believe they are) or should I leave a note in their mailbox or should I refrain from
    meeting them -your opinion is welcomed..Thanks Lightning

    Reply
    1. goingray58 says:

      I’d go introduce myself with a gift. Eggs from my chickens, Honey from my bees. If the discussion went there naturally I might talk about homesteading. Maybe farming… and let it go. They have an obligation to personal security, like you do. Feel someone out and see what your impressions are, and theirs of you. Invite em for board games, oa cookout .. whatever you are comfortable with. Let em be comfortable with you and or you them. it’ll come up or it won’t. Then you can decide to bring it up in future. But I never met a stranger. It’s just my personality style. Everyone is a little different.

      Reply
  9. Jan Freeman says:

    Hello,
    I know I am two weeks after the stated date of this Q&A, but I hope you will answer as I am rather desperate. Over at your old site http://seasonedcitizenprepper.com/ , there is a great and practical article “Feed a family of 4 for 1 year, for less than $300.” My question is: Given that kidney beans must be thoroughly soaked and boiled to get the toxins out, why the use of red kidney beans in the soup as opposed to any other bean? What is the necessity and advantage of the red kidney bean? I am in the process of using this plan so I hope you can shed some light on the issue. Thanks so much for your time.

    Reply
    1. JR says:

      Jan – I am not the originator of the article and will just offer a word or two. It is possible the original author may not have been aware of the toxins issue. The recipe calls to bring the soup to a boil nd then let simmer. If you boil for 10 minutes – the toxins are destroyed.

      As far as other beans the toxins are present in many bean types just at lower levels. I’ll also add many people think the entire “toxic bean” dilemma is a myth or at a minimum overstated. I suspect it is real however most normal cooking and recipes destroy the toxin thus people who have eaten tons of red kidney beans without getting sick are hesitant to believe it.

      All – the original recipe is here – – http://seasonedcitizenprepper.com/feed-a-family-of-4-for-1-year-for-less-than-300/

      Reply
    2. JR says:

      BTW Jan – this post was great and very popular however it falls short of a years supply of food for 1 person. It only accounts for 120 days. I believe the author makes note of adding other foods to the soup to compliment it. I am working on a similar topic to see the true cost and make up for a one-year food supply for one person with low budget in mind. Thanks!

      Reply
  10. Jan Freeman says:

    JR – many thanks for the reply. I look forward to your upcoming article on this topic. In it, you might consider dealing with the issue of “what is the ultimate and preferred bean” for such an endeavor, and what are the relative advantages of one bean versus another.

    Sam Cogley, manager for the Historic Workshops of Old Salem, NC indicates that the toxin Phytohemagglutinin in Kidney Beans is a very real problem. He says that for many or most people, it can build up in the body over time and eventually lead to neurological problems in middle and old age – when the functionality of the liver and gall bladder reduces. He also says that boiling the beans for at least 20 minutes is required to truly destroy the toxins, and thus that cooking beans in a slow cooker as many people do between 170 and 180 degrees is absolutely useless as far as toxin removal goes. I myself have no knowledge of such things, but I have heard that Cogley is a reputable resource.

    Although the old article is great from a conceptual point of view, I should have mentioned that I too had found the amounts in the article far too small to achieve the stated goal: the amounts need to be tripled to just get a 1 year supply for one person. In my own planning, using the article’s information as a starting point only, I am estimating that a satisfactory supply of these items for a family of 3 will run just under $800 – if done just right.

    That said, for those interested in the original article and how it now plays out, I will mention the following about pricing and sourcing mentioned in the article. The items mentioned as coming from Sam’s Club – those are accurate and Sam’s is the best price. For the items the article suggested purchasing 1 lb bags from Kroger (a grocery store), I have found that the one and two pound bags are cheaper at Walmart than at any grocery store. I also found that Walmart Online carries much more than the Walmart physical stores; you can get many of the beans, grains, etc. in 4, 5, 10, and 20 pound bags at Walmart Online (which are a much less expensive per-pound price than lesser sizes at Walmart, and are also a much less expensive per-pound price than the same sizes elsewhere), and you can have free 2-day shipping for pick-up at the physical Walmart store of your choice. Finally, the article is wrong in saying Whole Foods sells large bulk bags of Barley. The local Whole Foods manager explained to me that they have never had or sold premeasured large bags of barley, rice, or other grain. Their concept of “bulk” is that they have large bins of each commodity and you yourself scoop into small bags what you want, at a rather high price.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *