Best Zombie Weapon? [Pix] [UPDATEDx21] Major Revision

What would the best close combat weapon be, for disposing of zombies, as well as being a useful tool?

Kukri/Machete	15.6%	[ 506 ]
Shovel/E-Tool	11.6%	[ 377 ]
Blunt Instrument	9.5%	[ 309 ]
Western Swords (Europe and further)	6.8%	[ 222 ]
Eastern Swords (Asia and further)	8.0%	[ 261 ]
Katana (Despite the fact that it will need ample polishing, sharpening, and will chip or break in a week)	8.2%	[ 265 ]
Other (Please specify)	11.1%	[ 360 ]
POLL WHORE	10.6%	[ 343 ]
We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and, so do I.	12.5%	[ 406 ]
A full commitment's what I'm thinking of. You wouldn't get this from any other guy.	6.2%	[ 200 ]
Total Votes:			[ 3249 ]

[Nickstermin8r]

Fresnel

Nickstermin8r

I would've said a Dragunov sniper and a hatchet, but K-mart seems to be in short supply of SVD's, so I'll stick with a Beretti shotgun and a hatchet.
After all, what zombie-related ANYTHING ever was lacking in gratuitous shotgun orgasms?
Yeah, I know.
And hatchets? Well, what more is there to say? heart

Whoah, I totally typed "Beretti," didn't I? What I meant was Benelli.
Or perhaps a scoped Remington .32 . . . ? So har to choose. . .

That's why you can go back and edit your posts.

.32ACP is a pocket pistol round. Remington has never made anything in that caliber, and if they had, a scope would be pointless.

Don't they? Damn, that text was tiny. What's it, a .30? Aha! Here we go, .243 Winchester.
Guns are NOT my forte. I kinda just raped this from a Cabella's catelog and Fallout 3 >.>

[Fresnel]

moonbreaze

Miku Akayuki

I'm liking that Kukuri/Machete option. The blades themselves aren't ridiculously long and awkward, nor are they overly heavy to my knowledge. Though I've better chance with a blade than a gun in close combat. I'd prefer to snipe them if I could, keeping as much distance between them and myself as possible. The longer the range the better as I'd be finding a high place where I could see them coming from all angles, hopefully it (my gun) has a scope. I'm not running around where something could come up behind me. Even if they're only jogging, I'm not taking chances.

Of course if they could climb I'd want something light that I could easily fire downward. Hopefully something that would knock them off, or maybe screw up their hands/feet so they could no longer grip, then when they fall they go splat. End of story. Depending on how long I'd be up in that high place, I'd want something light than can carry a reasonable amount of ammo w/o needing a refill. Not just 5 and you're done. I also don't want to bowl over from the recoil.

Most pistols will destroy the bone structure in a hand beyond usage. Slight problem with your plan though, You're going to have to come down for food and water eventually. If you only plan on carrying one weapon, I'd sugest a .22 of some sort. Plenty big enough to destroy the bones in a hand, or kill with a head shot which would be easiest if they are climbing up at you, minimal kick, and strong and light enough to be used on the ground.

.22s are really hit-and-miss, no pun intended. I've often posted here the story of the elderly Marine gunny who put a .22 into the head of a home invader at near point-blank range. It ricocheted off his skull, the guy picked himself up off the floor and ran out the front door, bleeding. Utterly failed to kill him. .22LR isn't a round I'd trust my life to, unless I had no better option, or it's a starvation situation. It's a great small-game round, but not much more.

[Shuyajin]

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

[Nickstermin8r]

Shuyajin

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

Disturbingly thought provoking. . . .

[uryu ishida]

Fresnel

zindel 14

Alright my original set has changed a lot over the time I've been reading this thread, my new set would be

For Primary either the AR-15, AK 47, or PPsh 41. (All semi automatic versions)
reasons

AR-15: Is accurate, not much kick, big mag, reliable, long range, light, easy to clean. (I would have six 30 round mags and 120 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

AK 47: Medium kick, more stopping power and penetration, extremely reliable, cheaper, but not as accurate and less range. (I would have one 40 round mag, four 30 round mags, and 120 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

Oh come on, I can hold 120 rounds in one hand. Six 20-round boxes of ammo is nothing. You should pack more, intermediate ammo is small and light for exactly this reason.

Quote:

PPsh 41: Short range, reliable, big mags that are light enough to use (36 or 75), really light, low stopping power, cheap ammo, light ammo, simple in desgin which makes it easy to clean and take apart. (I would have seven 36 round mags, one 75 round drum mag and 200 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

The PPSh was issued with drums originally, but the 72 round drum could only hold 60-some rounds before it started overfeeding and jamming, and it was incredibly unreliable to begin with. Around '43 they began issuing the 36-round boxes, which fixed the reliability issues. Now, we've had 65 years to improve the original design, but I'm not sure anybody's bothered to do so, so you might stick to the box mags. Not sure how common its ammo is... what is it, 9x18 or 7.62x25TOK? I think it's x18, but I have no idea how common that is. Don't try 9x19 Parabellum, you'll fail miserably and possibly blow up the gun.

On another note, the M1928 Thompson was originally also issued to the British with 50-round drums, but those were largely unused because they tended to rattle. Loudly. So the M1 Thompson was designed to only take the 30-round stick mags. Drums haven't found much love on the battlefield until very recently, with the Beta C-Mag series.

Quote:

(Note all of these choices are equal to me and I would only use one of these guns)

Secondary would be the Glock 17 for sure with three 17 round mags and a 50 round box in my backpack. I can't get over the reliability, low kick and huge clip of this little pistol!

You know that Glock 9mm mags go out to 33 rounds (for the Glock 18), and there exists a +2 extender, right? Just make sure to get OEM Glock mags. My brother bought some of the other ones, and they suck d**k.

Quote:

For melee I'd have a normal crowbar, maybe one of the extended ones, a boot sheathed bowie, and a cold steel kukri sheathed at my side.

Cold Steel makes a shitty knockoff of the kukri. If you want a utility knife it'll do, but if you want a kukri, it's not. At all.

Quote:

Another note my style would to be stay more stationary, keeping up fortified areas and if moving only moving 1-4 miles a day or so.

Group, or no? Fortification is easier in groups.

If everyone would take up a collection of $600, Icoudl test the reliability of tyhe PPSh-41 for you...

Yes, it's 7.62x25TOk. I do believe that there are other versions in other calibers, and Russia ia experimenting with bringing back a 9mm Luger version to replace their current SMG. I personally love the gun and the caliber. 7.62x25TOK acts like .357MAG out of a pistol in flesh, but it's got half the recoil and three extra rounds. (most of the pistols held 8 in the mag).
As far as I know, no one likes the Beta-C mags for combat. At all. They're range toys because of how big and bulky they are. And expensive.
But man, that's still 60 rounds of .357MAG goodness at half the recoil. And pretty damn accurate, too. Most places that sell ammunition are pissing the stuff, too. It's the only caliber I could afford to shoot, but I sold my CZ-52 because it was uncomfortable to shoot. With the advent of several new producers of the Sterling carbine and pistol in 9mm LUGER and 7.62TOK, I may eventually get me a 7.62TOK carbine. Several people have built AR-15 uppers that use Sterling magazines, but nothing commercial as far as I know. I also love the M1 Carbine, as you know. Coincidentally, 7.62TOK fits M1 Carbine magazines, albeit only 6 rounds before they start tilting. I would LOVE a 7.62TOK M1 Carbine!

It really ******** hard to type from across the room, even with the magnifying utility. Stupid ******** ac adapter. It started smoking on me and quit, so I'm stuck using my old laptop, which has a broken screen, and is currently hooked to my TV.

[Fresnel]

uryu ishida

Fresnel

zindel 14

Alright my original set has changed a lot over the time I've been reading this thread, my new set would be

For Primary either the AR-15, AK 47, or PPsh 41. (All semi automatic versions)
reasons

AR-15: Is accurate, not much kick, big mag, reliable, long range, light, easy to clean. (I would have six 30 round mags and 120 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

AK 47: Medium kick, more stopping power and penetration, extremely reliable, cheaper, but not as accurate and less range. (I would have one 40 round mag, four 30 round mags, and 120 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

Oh come on, I can hold 120 rounds in one hand. Six 20-round boxes of ammo is nothing. You should pack more, intermediate ammo is small and light for exactly this reason.

Quote:

PPsh 41: Short range, reliable, big mags that are light enough to use (36 or 75), really light, low stopping power, cheap ammo, light ammo, simple in desgin which makes it easy to clean and take apart. (I would have seven 36 round mags, one 75 round drum mag and 200 rounds of ammo in my backpack)

The PPSh was issued with drums originally, but the 72 round drum could only hold 60-some rounds before it started overfeeding and jamming, and it was incredibly unreliable to begin with. Around '43 they began issuing the 36-round boxes, which fixed the reliability issues. Now, we've had 65 years to improve the original design, but I'm not sure anybody's bothered to do so, so you might stick to the box mags. Not sure how common its ammo is... what is it, 9x18 or 7.62x25TOK? I think it's x18, but I have no idea how common that is. Don't try 9x19 Parabellum, you'll fail miserably and possibly blow up the gun.

On another note, the M1928 Thompson was originally also issued to the British with 50-round drums, but those were largely unused because they tended to rattle. Loudly. So the M1 Thompson was designed to only take the 30-round stick mags. Drums haven't found much love on the battlefield until very recently, with the Beta C-Mag series.

Quote:

(Note all of these choices are equal to me and I would only use one of these guns)

Secondary would be the Glock 17 for sure with three 17 round mags and a 50 round box in my backpack. I can't get over the reliability, low kick and huge clip of this little pistol!

You know that Glock 9mm mags go out to 33 rounds (for the Glock 18), and there exists a +2 extender, right? Just make sure to get OEM Glock mags. My brother bought some of the other ones, and they suck d**k.

Quote:

For melee I'd have a normal crowbar, maybe one of the extended ones, a boot sheathed bowie, and a cold steel kukri sheathed at my side.

Cold Steel makes a shitty knockoff of the kukri. If you want a utility knife it'll do, but if you want a kukri, it's not. At all.

Quote:

Another note my style would to be stay more stationary, keeping up fortified areas and if moving only moving 1-4 miles a day or so.

Group, or no? Fortification is easier in groups.

If everyone would take up a collection of $600, Icoudl test the reliability of tyhe PPSh-41 for you...

Yes, it's 7.62x25TOk. I do believe that there are other versions in other calibers, and Russia ia experimenting with bringing back a 9mm Luger version to replace their current SMG. I personally love the gun and the caliber. 7.62x25TOK acts like .357MAG out of a pistol in flesh, but it's got half the recoil and three extra rounds. (most of the pistols held 8 in the mag).
As far as I know, no one likes the Beta-C mags for combat. At all. They're range toys because of how big and bulky they are. And expensive.

I know the Germans had PLANS for them, but when the Bundeswehr lost interest in the H&K MG36, it died. They may or may not still use C-mags in the various G36s though, I can't say. If not for the regular forces, which I doubt, then for their SpecOps.

Quote:

But man, that's still 60 rounds of .357MAG goodness at half the recoil. And pretty damn accurate, too. Most places that sell ammunition are pissing the stuff, too. It's the only caliber I could afford to shoot, but I sold my CZ-52 because it was uncomfortable to shoot. With the advent of several new producers of the Sterling carbine and pistol in 9mm LUGER and 7.62TOK, I may eventually get me a 7.62TOK carbine. Several people have built AR-15 uppers that use Sterling magazines, but nothing commercial as far as I know. I also love the M1 Carbine, as you know. Coincidentally, 7.62TOK fits M1 Carbine magazines, albeit only 6 rounds before they start tilting. I would LOVE a 7.62TOK M1 Carbine!

Wikipedia notes that whenever a PPSh was captured by a German, said German would usually have it converted to 9mm, because it was a much better weapon than the MP-40. If the Germans could afford to do it in wartime, it can't be very difficult at all. And I'm sure German High Command didn't want to d**k about building special magazines for these few captured guns, it also follows that the original x25 magazines must feed 9mm pretty well.

Quote:

It really ******** hard to type from across the room, even with the magnifying utility. Stupid ******** ac adapter. It started smoking on me and quit, so I'm stuck using my old laptop, which has a broken screen, and is currently hooked to my TV.

I've tried that before. Epic b***h. I was wonder what was wrong when I finished reading that first sentence.

[Fresnel]

Shuyajin

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

What brings you to think they're simply HUNGRY?

[Nickstermin8r]

Fresnel

Shuyajin

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

What brings you to think they're simply HUNGRY?

Well, all they do is eat brains and make more zombies. . .
And when you get up close and look at their faces, you realize they're like little toddlers crying out for sustenance. And, y'know, a hefty crowbar to the temple.

[Shuyajin]

Fresnel

Shuyajin

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

What brings you to think they're simply HUNGRY?

The fact they would tear you to pieces to satisfy their hunger? Does it get simpler?

[moonbreaze]

Fresnel

moonbreaze

Miku Akayuki

I'm liking that Kukuri/Machete option. The blades themselves aren't ridiculously long and awkward, nor are they overly heavy to my knowledge. Though I've better chance with a blade than a gun in close combat. I'd prefer to snipe them if I could, keeping as much distance between them and myself as possible. The longer the range the better as I'd be finding a high place where I could see them coming from all angles, hopefully it (my gun) has a scope. I'm not running around where something could come up behind me. Even if they're only jogging, I'm not taking chances.

Of course if they could climb I'd want something light that I could easily fire downward. Hopefully something that would knock them off, or maybe screw up their hands/feet so they could no longer grip, then when they fall they go splat. End of story. Depending on how long I'd be up in that high place, I'd want something light than can carry a reasonable amount of ammo w/o needing a refill. Not just 5 and you're done. I also don't want to bowl over from the recoil.

Most pistols will destroy the bone structure in a hand beyond usage. Slight problem with your plan though, You're going to have to come down for food and water eventually. If you only plan on carrying one weapon, I'd sugest a .22 of some sort. Plenty big enough to destroy the bones in a hand, or kill with a head shot which would be easiest if they are climbing up at you, minimal kick, and strong and light enough to be used on the ground.

.22s are really hit-and-miss, no pun intended. I've often posted here the story of the elderly Marine gunny who put a .22 into the head of a home invader at near point-blank range. It ricocheted off his skull, the guy picked himself up off the floor and ran out the front door, bleeding. Utterly failed to kill him. .22LR isn't a round I'd trust my life to, unless I had no better option, or it's a starvation situation. It's a great small-game round, but not much more.

This is just my understanding, so correct me if I'm wrong, but rifles have an optimal strike zone which starts far from being fired at point blank, the bullet simply doesn't have as much stoping force just after leaving the barrel.

Besides, I prefer to go for chest shots. There's a reason why cops and military are taught to go for center chest shots, bigger target, hitting targets vital organs or splentering ribbs, which could damage the organs themselves. If you have a large enough calaber you can stop the heart by hitting the sternem, probably not a .22, but even causing the heart to skip can do some serious damage. Shooting the chest gives a chance to hit the organs directly and destroying them, where as a head shot requires that you go through a thick peace of bone before it does anything, unless of course you can shoot strait through the eye. If you are going to shoot at the head, you might as well shoot at the neck. wind pipe, aorta, and spine, if you hit, directly or not any of those, you are incapacitating the target, if not killing them right away. Even if you miss the neck and hit the lower jaw, the bullet and bone fragments are just as likily to hit any of those three vitals that traval through the neck.

[Fresnel]

Shuyajin

Fresnel

Shuyajin

Baked beans. No seriously, you'd be surprised what it would do.

No one considers food as a weapon against the hungry.

What brings you to think they're simply HUNGRY?

The fact they would tear you to pieces to satisfy their hunger? Does it get simpler?

What makes you think it's a hunger to eat? And I REALLY want to know why you think this hunger could be satisfied.

[Fresnel]

moonbreaze

Fresnel

moonbreaze

Miku Akayuki

I'm liking that Kukuri/Machete option. The blades themselves aren't ridiculously long and awkward, nor are they overly heavy to my knowledge. Though I've better chance with a blade than a gun in close combat. I'd prefer to snipe them if I could, keeping as much distance between them and myself as possible. The longer the range the better as I'd be finding a high place where I could see them coming from all angles, hopefully it (my gun) has a scope. I'm not running around where something could come up behind me. Even if they're only jogging, I'm not taking chances.

Of course if they could climb I'd want something light that I could easily fire downward. Hopefully something that would knock them off, or maybe screw up their hands/feet so they could no longer grip, then when they fall they go splat. End of story. Depending on how long I'd be up in that high place, I'd want something light than can carry a reasonable amount of ammo w/o needing a refill. Not just 5 and you're done. I also don't want to bowl over from the recoil.

Most pistols will destroy the bone structure in a hand beyond usage. Slight problem with your plan though, You're going to have to come down for food and water eventually. If you only plan on carrying one weapon, I'd sugest a .22 of some sort. Plenty big enough to destroy the bones in a hand, or kill with a head shot which would be easiest if they are climbing up at you, minimal kick, and strong and light enough to be used on the ground.

.22s are really hit-and-miss, no pun intended. I've often posted here the story of the elderly Marine gunny who put a .22 into the head of a home invader at near point-blank range. It ricocheted off his skull, the guy picked himself up off the floor and ran out the front door, bleeding. Utterly failed to kill him. .22LR isn't a round I'd trust my life to, unless I had no better option, or it's a starvation situation. It's a great small-game round, but not much more.

This is just my understanding, so correct me if I'm wrong, but rifles have an optimal strike zone which starts far from being fired at point blank, the bullet simply doesn't have as much stoping force just after leaving the barrel.

Not true with conventional bullets. Many handguns can fail to fire if the weapon is physically touching the target, the popular 1911 among them. The slide can get pushed backwards slightly, cracking open the chamber (pushing it out of battery) and preventing the firing mechanism from completing the action and knocking the firing pin all the way forward. If it DIDN'T stop the bullet from firing, there's a chance the gun would explode in your hand, because the brass bullet case is unsupported by an external steel chamber meant to take the pressure of firing. There is also a slight chance that the muzzle being pressed up against a solid object could create enough of an obstacle to stall the bullet and cause a gas overpressure in the barrel, and again explode the gun. But the muzzle velocity of a gun is the absolute fastest it'll go, and k=1/2mv^2. Velocity is very important. From the bullet's point of view, it's most effective the instant the back end of the bullet leaves the barrel.

This doesn't hold with Gyrojets, but those haven't been made in twenty-five years, they were rare to begin with, and the only surviving examples were poorly engineered from the get-go.

Quote:

Besides, I prefer to go for chest shots. There's a reason why cops and military are taught to go for center chest shots, bigger target, hitting targets vital organs or splentering ribbs, which could damage the organs themselves. If you have a large enough calaber you can stop the heart by hitting the sternem, probably not a .22, but even causing the heart to skip can do some serious damage. Shooting the chest gives a chance to hit the organs directly and destroying them, where as a head shot requires that you go through a thick peace of bone before it does anything, unless of course you can shoot strait through the eye. If you are going to shoot at the head, you might as well shoot at the neck. wind pipe, aorta, and spine, if you hit, directly or not any of those, you are incapacitating the target, if not killing them right away. Even if you miss the neck and hit the lower jaw, the bullet and bone fragments are just as likily to hit any of those three vitals that traval through the neck.

The chest is a big target, and doesn't move much. The head is much smaller, and bobbles around quite a bit. The only common method that I know of that involves aiming for the head is the "Mozambique Drill", where you allow muzzle rise to walk the bullets. One in the gut, one in the heart, one in the head. Three quick shots, bangbangbang. .22LR is underpowered if you're trying to kill a man with anything less than a bullet through the eye, and even then it's not physically large enough to guarantee a kill. There's still a chance it'll just scramble s**t and leave the guy a vegetable. Most bullets are capable of breaking bone, so if you did hit a man in the sternum with a decent bullet, it'd break a hole through it, throw off bone-shrapnel, and probably blow a big messy hole through the heart, stopping it incredibly quickly. A cheap 1x2 is capable of stopping a .22LR dead in its tracks. I doubt it could penetrate bone.

And the aorta is part of your heart. I think you were looking for 'jugular'.

[Dringdar]

None of the above. In a zombie outbreak, your best bet is to run. Sure, you can kill one, maybe two zombies with that western longsword, but then the horde will just swallow you up. The only way you have a snowballs chance in hell, is with a concrete bunker on a tall hill, with machine guns - like thirty - ample supplies - I'm talking millions of bullets, hundreds of pounds of food, medical supplies, etc - and enough guys to shoot stuff in a 360 degree circle. Then, then and only then, do you have any hope. ...Picture D-Day movies, hundreds of guys running at machine guns. Same principal.

[Ms Truffle]

Dringdar

None of the above. In a zombie outbreak, your best bet is to run. Sure, you can kill one, maybe two zombies with that western longsword, but then the horde will just swallow you up. The only way you have a snowballs chance in hell, is with a concrete bunker on a tall hill, with machine guns - like thirty - ample supplies - I'm talking millions of bullets, hundreds of pounds of food, medical supplies, etc - and enough guys to shoot stuff in a 360 degree circle. Then, then and only then, do you have any hope. ...Picture D-Day movies, hundreds of guys running at machine guns. Same principal.

Zombies don't tire. Doesn't matter how fast you run, you'd be bitten eventually because the zombies don't let pain hinder them.

And I don't know where you live, but the number of zombies in an area would be directly proportional to how many people that area previously had. There aren't any hordes in the desert. There aren't many hordes in suburbia. The only reason hordes would exist at all would be when a bunch of zombies all chase one lone, running survivor who has nothing to defend himself with.

Also, you *can* go unnoticed. If anything, the reason you'd need millions of rounds and machine guns is because for every one zombie you kill, ten more would be attracted to the area because of the fact that you are firing machine guns. (Which, by the way, civilians cannot get their hands on in one month.)

[Ms Truffle]

Miku Akayuki

I'm liking that Kukuri/Machete option. The blades themselves aren't ridiculously long and awkward, nor are they overly heavy to my knowledge.

Lol. You ever held a kukri? They aren't very awkward, but god DAMN are they heavy.

Quote:

Though I've better chance with a blade than a gun in close combat. I'd prefer to snipe them if I could, keeping as much distance between them and myself as possible.

Several problems here- you aren't a sniper, and can't become one in a month, and for every one zombie you killed that didn't need to die, two more would be attracted by the sound of continuous gun fire. Also, you'd be wasting ammunition on something that wasn't yet a threat to you.

Quote:

The longer the range the better as I'd be finding a high place where I could see them coming from all angles, hopefully it (my gun) has a scope.

Look, shooting isn't easy. And it's obvious I have to tell you this, because you're actually thinking of shooting from a high place, which makes judging distance very very difficult.

Quote:

I'm not running around where something could come up behind me. Even if they're only jogging, I'm not taking chances.

But you are. By shooting things that pose no immediate threat to you, and thus wasting ammunition and attracting zeds that are actively looking for the source of the noise.

Quote:

Of course if they could climb I'd want something light that I could easily fire downward.

Accurate shots from high places are really hard to pull off.

Quote:

Hopefully something that would knock them off, or maybe screw up their hands/feet so they could no longer grip, then when they fall they go splat. End of story.

Except, how are you going to get down safely when the zombies keep coming? Shooting off guns is like sending off a signal flare for everyone on the ground.

Quote:

Depending on how long I'd be up in that high place, I'd want something light than can carry a reasonable amount of ammo w/o needing a refill. Not just 5 and you're done. I also don't want to bowl over from the recoil.

Does this gun have a name?

Quote: