Always a fun game
Posted by TFG on March 15th, 2008
Kim du Toit’s Crossing America Challenge
The Challenge:
You have the opportunity to go back in time, arriving on the east coast of North America circa 1650, and your goal is to cross the North American continent alone, taking as much time as you need. When/if you reach the opposite coastline, you’ll be transported back to the present day.
Your equipment for this journey will be as follows (taken back in the time capsule with you):
* enough gold to buy a horse and a mule (or two horses / two mules, whatever), and provisions for the first five days’ travel;
* a small backpack containing some clothing and toiletries;
* a winter coat, raincoat and two pairs of boots;
* waterproof sleeping bag;
* an axe, a large sheath knife, a smaller blade, and a “toolkit” knife like a Swiss Army or Gerber Multitool;
* a box of 1,000 “strike anywhere” waterproof matches;
* a topological map, binoculars and a compass;
* a very small toolbox, including a firearm cleaning kit and a few spares for your firearms;
* and a U.S. Army First Aid kit.Weapons:
* ONE long gun (and 800 rounds, but no scope)
* ONE handgun (and 1,000 rounds)That’s it.
The question: which long gun, and which hand gun would you choose to take with you?
#1, I would be in absolutely no hurry to reach the west coast and be transported back into 2008, except to see my kids again. But I also reckon I could make my peace with them before I jump into the transporter, and I could figure out a way to signal them from three and one-half centuries ago and make sure that they invested in Google and bet on the Bosox to win the World Serious.
#2, my choice would again be the venerable .44 as the caliber for both long- and handgun. I see not much need for anything more involved than a standard lever-action Winchester carbine, and a thumbbuster Colt SAA model, both with fixed sights. I haven’t fixed on the mix between .44 Magnum, .44 Special, and .44 birdshot-snakeshot-mercury-laced-lead-bullet. But I can tell you that I’d be perfectly happy with naught but .44 mag. Yes, the random rabbit I have to shoot for food might require two rabbits being lined up perfectly for a decent meal, but this is 1650 North America. Food just isn’t going to be a problem, what with all the other supplies. Besides, who wants to kill, gut, skin, and cook a rabbit every damn day when there are 500 billion bigmouth bass ain’t never seen a lure? Freaking whitetails will probably be walking up to you begging to have their throats cut, too. No, your problem is defense, and large game for when you’re tired of bass.
#3, there are some really interesting combos in the comments.
#4, if I were forced into seperate ammunition camps, then it would be the .308 for the rifle, and the .44 for the pistola. The rifle would be the Steyr Scout if money was no object. And I’d probably stay with my trusty Ruger Super Blackhawk for the hand, but I’d want some bad-ass grips on it. Like, bois’d'arc, or something that just didn’t wear. Ivory would be good. I’d be tempted to go with a 12 guage shotgun as the long gun, too. Lots and lots of things can be done with the 12ga.
Hmmm…seems like all I’m missing from this list is the Steyr Scout (duh) and the .44 lever-action carbine.
And, really now, who’s guaranteeing that you’re not going to have to walk across America in 2008, anyway? That would be a good game, too, and it’s something worth throwing into the pot.
March 16th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
The Steyr Scout would rock, as would the .44. Build quality with the Scout would bother me, fiddly break-able bits and so forth, sez I, but it’s a sound idea.
On the other hand, Kim’s most attractive and most heterosexual commenter (”commentor”?) just weighed in on the issue, a Mister “CrunchyCon”, and he decided a Kifaru-modifed Remington 700 in .243 Winchester and a Smith and Wesson 686 in .357 Magnum (6″ barrel, which he didn’t specify, just like was used by Nan Wyatt’s husband to murder Nan Wyatt in 2003) would be the best options, due to the rather handsome and bulky “CrunchyCon” build but probable tendency to flinch and the ability of “CrunchyCon” to hit and kill about 99% of everything “CrunchyCon” tends to hit with pretty much any .243. The .357 revolver is just plain durable-you can load up good small-game .38 Special loads with so many good bullet variations, and of course the .357 Magnum offers a veritable myriad of self-defense/Injun-murderin’ options.
CC, er, The R Man
March 16th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
You’ll get no argument from me on the Rem700 .243. I’d never heard of the Kifaru before, but they look as fiddly as the Steyr. Neither one of which looks all that fiddly, but I’m not out using them all the time like you are (pout, pout.) But, flinch? You’d work that out in a couple of days.
I personally have never even held a Steyr Scout, but Jeff Cooper designed it, and that guy knows rifles like I know…gimme a minute…well, he knows ‘em pretty dang good.
But some of the comments about lever actions made me think a bit more about the bolt action. The 700 would be a top choice, too, no question. But, I’ve never ever seen a lever action not work. I also re-thought the semi, too. If I were forced into a semi, it would be my all-time favorite, the M1A SOCOM 16, again in .308. Mainly, and really only, because of bears. I just think the bear situation is bound to be worse than people are expecting. Plus, it’ll likely knock down a buffalo for food and hides and everything. There’s not much question about the durability of the M1A…but I wonder how it would hold up being lubed with bear grease?
At the end of the day, though, I’d take my .44 mag. Elmer Keith loved it. I’m comfortable shooting it, and I sincerely think it would take care of 99% of the situations you’d encounter. But so would a lot of other combos. Me, though, I’m a simple man, and I’d rather not have to think too hard about dividing up ammo between this, that, and the other. Maybe I should, but frankly, I’d just as soon get on the trail, ya know?
March 16th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Lost my comment, so here’s an abrreviated version.
Big gun for close range, probably a .45. Since this hypothetical exercise is a long, long time ago, I might go with a double action revolver rather than semi-auto, since they are simpler and more likely to still be functioning at the end of a this particular trip. The number of shots can be sacrificed for reliability in this instance.
Little gun for long range, maybe a .270. That’s still got a lot more range and accuracy than anything anyone alive in the 17th century ever experienced in a firearm. It also helps that it is lighter and easier to carry.
As for the rest of the items, there’s a lot of modern items in there that folks back then never even dreamed of. Makes you appreciate how tough the old bastards were, or maybe just regret how soft we have become.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:41 am
There’s no competent gunsmith for the sorts of repeaters I’ll aim on taking, so I’m looking at reliability, reliability, reliability. I can’t decide between an M1 Garand or a Yugo SKS for the long arm, but I am dead set on a Glock 17 for the handgun. When I pull the trigger, I want to hear a bang.
And yeah, I’m worried less about taking down game than I am about the savages what are my forefathers.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:05 am
After much thought the M1A SOCOM in .308 And .44 mag wheel gun Colt or S&W for my relatives.I would take a southern route west.I thought about my Judge and My savage O/U .3030/ 12 guage but I would want firepower
March 17th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
I suppose the flinch thing could take care of itself. I was kinda also thinking about the lighter .243 ammo being easier to carry in bulk, but really, not *that* much lighter than .308. I kinda thought about just taking my old Chinese SKS (light ammo there, but heavy gun with a crap trigger-still, it’d keep shooting no matter what and I could do any repairs with a rock and twigs and vines, ala McGyver or the Professor from Gilligan’s Island) and my .44 Ruger, but thought it might be fun to pretend to get new guns, as it always is.
I saw and handled one of the Steyr Scouts within weeks of them hitting the market, and when you heft it, you think, OH YEAH, this makes perfect sense! On the other hand, that Steyr action is soooo well put together, I fear a single grain of sand might gum up the works (late gunwriter and Kenyan hunting guide, and indeed, a Texas resident, somewhere down near LBJ Lake, until he died-Finn Aagaard claimed that a client had that happen with a Steyr Mannlicher on a hunt one time), and also, the plastic bits feel cheap and flimsy. I mean, the built-in bipod is a cool idea, but I bet it’d come loose and make noise and just feel cheap in my left hand. The back-up, flip-up sights, again, really cool idea, they’re right there under where the scope sits, you have like an 11″ sight radius, but they’re plasticky and fiddly. Colonel Cooper didn’t ask me, but I’m thinking a Mauser ‘98 action might make more sense from a durability standpoint, and beef up the bipod and sights-that’d make it just about perfect, I think. Then again, from “To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth,” we notice that indeed, he did have like 4 or 5 prototype “Scout” models built up, and the Steyr is designed to improve on weaknesses of each prototype.
As a non-related aside, I was at a big local gun show on Saturday, and thought of Mister Chaffin-someone had a 1970s FIE-imported German-made Weihrauch kinda-sorta copy of a Colt Single Action Army in .357 Magnum, in fair-to-good condition, and I bet I could have talked the guy down to $200, and well, despite a weird flared-bottom grip frame that reminds one of an ample ghetto booty, they’re supposedly strong, accurate handguns, if you believe the lads at http://www.gunweek.com and http://www.leverguns.com. The same gun is sold now through European American Armory as a “Bounty Hunter” and prices are still reasonable, if memory serves.
The R Man
March 17th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Well, I sure don’t need to know about any more cowboy guns, especially $200 ones. I’ve already got two. The sad thing is I want more — the .22LR, the .45LC, the .357/.38. The bird’s-head grip, the Bisley, the ghetto booty. Blued, stainless, nickel, case-hardened. In fact, my most desired model right now is still the case-hardened bird’s head with mumble-mumble grips. No, don’t even go asking me why, with my big paws, I want a birdshead. I just do. They’re purty.
See, that info on the Steyr makes a difference to me. If bolt-action were a must, I’d almost assuredly go with the Rem 700. I think it’s Mauser-based, but I don’t really know that. I do know it’s a worker-bee. I shot it every year for ten years with very little maintenance, and practically none on the trigger and action.
Phelps, I still worry about any semi on this kind of haul, but I’ve seen those Glock torture tests, and they’re convincing. If only they had a grip geometry that didn’t make me shoot 5 feet over my target’s head.
Too bad there’s no place left to go and do this. I guess some South American jungle might be available, but too many exotic reptiles, like snakes, for me. Still, we should look and see. I’m about ready to chuck it all.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Paul Moreland (http://paulmoreland.com), a “missionary kid” who lived in Araguaina (?) in Brazil as a kid in the 1970s and 1980s (he’s 42 now) used to write all sorts of stories about hunting and fishing in the jungle in that part of rural Brazil (north central), and it’s darned impressive, despite goofy Brazilian gun laws (handguns limited to 300 foot pounds muzzle energy, long guns to about 900, so .44-40 leverguns and .38 Special revolvers are somewhat common-I think Brazil has the second-largest civilian-owned private arsenal of small arms, after the U.S., even now), and pricey ammo (.22 LR rimfire ammo was $10 per 50, like 25 years ago, and now I think Moreland is paying like $12.50 a box in Colombia, last time we exchanged emails), just how much shooting he and his acquaintances did. I, too, would thoroughly enjoy a circa 1919 Teddy Roosevelt-type South American adventure.
That Glock would be awfully hard to beat, really, but for some reason, I don’t hit small targets with any 9mm autopistol I’ve shot-I mean, yeah, plenty good for hitting the “kill zone” at 10 yards like some mall ninja/tactical Tommy, but I’m used to picking off squirrels at 30 yards with my .22 pistols and feel I could do better precision whacking with a .357 revolver with a decent trigger.
The 700 is kinda-sorta Mauser-based, and they’re fine guns, but the one thing that would worry me is the tendency for extractors/ejectors to go wonky-I don’t know anyone who’s had this problem, but it can happen with them maybe more than some other popular bolt-action rifles. Also, and I’m going from memory here, in J.Y. Jones’ excellent, “One Rifle, One Man, One Land,” (or something like that-it’s a coffee-table book about this doctor who’s used his .30-’06 Remington 700 ADL, bought new in 1974, to kill all sorts of trophy animals on 5 or 6 continents, usually with one shot, and using, if memory serves, very pedestrian ammo, like the cheap stuff from Wal-Mart), shoddy brazing can make the bolt handle of the 700 come off in your hand, as happened to him-again, if memory serves.
Sixguns are just darned cool-they may not make a lot of sense nowadays with all the more modern competition, but there’s something elemental and primal about they way they feel in the hand and the connection to a simpler time. Okay, this is where the doctor from “Idiocracy” would be saying, “There you go talking like a fag again (R Man)”.
The R Man
March 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
…another thing-I found a neat old article from http://www.gunblast.com/Paco_WineRoses.htm about that revolver I’d mentioned, well, the modern version of it. I know the Ruger simply must be stronger, but this is not a bad Colt kinda-knockoff a’tall, methinks.
The R Man
March 17th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
I keep coming back here and wondering if you could buy a horse or a mule in around 1650 in North America. I’ m not sure. I don’t remember when the horse was introduced, but it had to be after 1500 - is 150 years or so enough to populate the continent?
Also, I have my doubts about any of the Indian tribes caring much about gold, as far as being valuable, to them. Many of the tribes, if not most of them, would kill you for your axe and knife, and they’d worship you for your multitool. I think I would definitely take the northern route, staying in territory that would be far beyond any contact with tribes that had contact with the Spanish in Mexico. Cabeza de Vaca was not well treated at all, along the Gulf Coast route from Florida to Mexico, while many years later on the northern route, Lewis and Clark did fine with tribes unfamiliar with whites.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Interesting observation about the horses and mules-I’d kinda thought about that, but actually, yeah, there were English settlements up and down the east coast by 1650 that surely would have had horses and mules, surely. Also, the route thing-I’d not put much thought into that, but good point. For some silly reason, I pictured myself taking a path roughly parallel to Interstate 70 and then heading southwest to LA-again, not much thought there, but I’ve driven much of the route in question. However, as my old history professor pointed out to me, (and Kevin, at http://www.publiustx.net, was there and can back me up on this) “You know, Mister (R Man), there were no interstate highways in 1775.”
The R Man