Seriously...how innaccurate are AKs?


PDA






Andrewsky
November 5, 2007, 10:46 PM
I always hear that AKs are so innaccurate.

I'm wondering if this is just a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Lots of AK owners think AKs are innaccurate so they don't give it a proper break-in, they don't modify the trigger, they don't get better sights, they use the cheapest ammo available, and they don't maintain it as well as they would another rifle. So when they go and shoot it, yes, their AK is very innaccurate.:uhoh:

Let's say you took an off-the-rack Yugoslavian AK in 7.62x39mm. You give it a good break-in, you use handloads, you solidly mount a 10 power scope, and you maintain it, what kind of accuracy in MOA can you expect?

If you enjoyed reading about "Seriously...how innaccurate are AKs?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
yesit'sloaded
November 5, 2007, 10:51 PM
I'm going to say everyone I have seen shot or shot or have friends that have shot have been from 7 to 2 MOA. The 7 was a homemade job and the 2 was a Vector at 50 yards. Average is about 3-4. More or less a nice AK is on par with a good SKS.

Crunker1337
November 5, 2007, 10:52 PM
The original AK47 assault rifle operated on the principle of quantity over quality. When you have 100 soldiers spraying 7.62x39mm at you, accuracy is not something that they necessarily need.

Now, today, the AK47 is the most common gun in the world. Civilian AK clones here in the US can be had for $250 easy. They are still very cheap and attainable.
This means that many civie AKs don't have the accuracy as a rifle designed for precision.

But modern higher end AKs are accurate enough for deer-hunting, I'm told.

wisocki
November 5, 2007, 11:01 PM
I imagine most inaccuracy accounts come from ****ty ammo being put through ****ty wasr 10s. Some people hear it from soldiers who deal with poorly taken care of aks over seas.
I have 3 aks. 2 are stamped, and get 3 inch groups at 100y. My arsenal SAM7 get 2 inch groups with good ammo. It has been broken in properly, and is milled. These factors may contribute to accuracy.
The sights on an ak are close together, and therefore harder to be accurate with. If you have an ak, put an eotech or other red dot on there. I did, and was suprised how much better it made me.

Some aks, but not all, are capable of ar accuracy.

Kalashnikov
November 5, 2007, 11:02 PM
Depends on the ammo. Good ammo gets pretty good results. It won't drive tacks but remember that the average human head is about 3 MOA at 100yds.

aspade
November 5, 2007, 11:07 PM
3 MOA at 100 yards is about the size of a baseball.

Deer Hunter
November 5, 2007, 11:12 PM
1 MOA = 1 inch at 100 yards.

My saiga can do 2 MOA when I get lucky.

esmith
November 5, 2007, 11:23 PM
It isnt just the barrel condition that supposedly affects accuracy. I hear that when someone is shooting an AK for bursts that the offset center of gravity on the AK bolt moves the muzzle direction more than that of other guns.

dstorm1911
November 5, 2007, 11:26 PM
heres the results of a totally shot out wore out AK I tossed together in 45 minutes for a demonstration.......

http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=31796


Esmith, I build some of the most accurate custom AKs many of which will shoot MOA all day long with no change any center of gravity etc... And yet no effect on accuracy..... 99% of AK inaccuracy can be traced directly to shooters who are either unfamiliar with AKs, improperly trained in accurate fire completally or simply not comfortable with the ergonomics of the AK based rifle when clamped in a shooting machine I can get excellent accuracy out of pretty much any AK and regularily match the groups we get outa the custom FALs etc...

Titan6
November 5, 2007, 11:31 PM
All the ones I have run across are quite bad. Spend as much as a base line AR on them and they will become almost as accurate as an AR.

This is a combat weapon where most engagement ranges are under 100 meters. Designed to function under adverse conditions with a minmum of maintenance. Not a target gun.

tnieto2004
November 5, 2007, 11:58 PM
3 MOA seems about normal for a AK

686S&W
November 6, 2007, 12:05 AM
I've had a bit of an issue with my cousin's WASR-10. Seems the trigger like to bite when the bolt slams home. Thought I was just letting my finger off the trigger until I read about the phenomena online. Perhaps it's fear of a stinging trigger finger that may also affect accuracy.

Coronach
November 6, 2007, 12:12 AM
It all depends on the AK.

As with all guns, build quality counts for a lot in the accuracy department, but it probably counts for more with the AK due to the wide variances in types of materials, clearances, tolerances, countries of manufacture, assembling companies (*cough*Century*cough*) and even different designs. My Vepr will do 2 MOA if I'm doing my part. My SAR-1 is 3-3.5 MOA. It borders on 4 if I'm not paying attention (those blasted sights SUCK).

Now, that's holding sights and ammo constant. Improve the AK's sights, and watch the practical accuracy go up. Sure, the gun is mechanically no more accurate, but most people will get smaller groups with a good optic, or even just better irons.

Add in ammo that is not churned out by the truckload by underpaid vodka-soaked workers...

Add in a good trigger...

The point is that while you may never make an AK into a true precision rifle, you can do a lot better than a box stock SAR-1, with fairly minimal investment.

Mike

dstorm1911
November 6, 2007, 12:38 AM
686S&W, have your friend visit this artical

http://www.gunsnet.net/Linx310/slapfix.htm

Takes about 5 minutes to eliminate the Century trigger slap issue with a file or as described in the artical a dremel tool its a very basic correction of a Century poorly cast disconector

esmith
November 6, 2007, 12:44 AM
when clamped in a shooting machine I can get excellent accuracy out of pretty much any AK

Alright that is fine, but you are misunderstanding what i said. I said when going full auto or in semi bursts, because the bolt's center of gravity is offset, it will move the gun more than that of one that is perfectly symmetrical. Now im no expert and im not sure that this is a sound logic, but i saw a special on the history channel about this and it sounded like it made sense.

Wolfgang2000
November 6, 2007, 12:48 AM
My SAR 1 also shoots about 3" to 4" MOA. I've found that Wolf is the worst. Lapua will shoot a little under 3".

I never understand why people want to turn a combat weapon into a match weapon. The tighter the tolerances the more accurate, BUT the tighter the tolerances that less reliable it will become. In an interview Gen. Kalashnikov stated that he purposely designed the "AK" so that a hand full of sand could be thrown into the action and it still work. That is what a combat soldier, or anybody that is betting their live wants.

Reliably is not as important on a range. Some where on this forum you will find a accuracy test someone did between the AR and the AK. I think the AK did well. Yes the AR did better, but not that much better. My SAR1 will constantly hit a milk jug at a 100 yards with a cobra sight attached. That is good enough to do head shots. That good enough for me.

If you want a match rifle buy a rifle designed for the match. If you want a combat rifle the get a rifle designed for combat.

jpwilly
November 6, 2007, 12:48 AM
How many shots "groups" are we talking about? I shot 3 shots into less than a 2" group with my Lancaster (1.6mm reciever new chrome lined bbl) pretty quickly from the bench...then I shot a fourth time and my group was now 4" the 5th shot was 3" so on so forth shooting Wolf. The rifles are plenty accurate. I don't know why you would compare an AKM's accuracy, a Carbine, with a target rifles accuracy??? Shooting 10 shot groups the approximate size of a soft ball is plenty of accuracy for hunting BGs or deer. My only problem is duplicating that accuracy when not shooting from a bench!

JHansenAK47
November 6, 2007, 12:48 AM
Supposedly some of the custom yugos can shoot 1 MOA if it's built right. They have thicker receivers and none of their barrels are chrome lined. I'm sure they were using a new barrel with some match reloads.

SpeedAKL
November 6, 2007, 12:53 AM
Depends on who/where you're getting your AK from. The milsurp guns, usually brought in by Century, are of indifferent accuracy. AKs were meant to be cheap, reliable, and easy to control under automatic fire. Typically, accuracy on the guns increases with assembly quality - thus, the Romanian WASRs are about the bottom rung of the latter when it comes to accuracy. The Yugo, Hungarian, Polish, etc. models are a little better. The AKs that start to get real decent accuracy are the higher-end guns built by specialty shops here in the US - Arsenal, Polytech, Vector, etc. The Russian Saigas and VEPRs are pretty solid as well.

Eightball
November 6, 2007, 01:03 AM
Well, here's a story about mine. After consistently skipping a bowling pin from 230 to 250 yards with my M1 Garand and its irons, and doing rather well hitting them with some rough "blasting" handloads I worked up at 15 yards (not made for accuracy, by any means--made to go bang), I put a pin out at 45 yards, and could not consistently hit a bowling pin. Well, some may claim "shooter error", but I can do fairly well at 500 yards with a WWI Mauser's irons (consistent hits, just slightly off the target--or so my spotter told me), and do quite well with a Garand at 240 and a revolver at 15, but couldn't hit squat at 45? It frustrated me, so I sold it and bought an AR which, when I do my part, will at least hit the target every shot (though, I haven't had a chance to reliably zero it in as of yet...I'll work on that one).

YMMV.

dstorm1911
November 6, 2007, 01:07 AM
esmith, that history chanel video is a running joke amongst folks who actually know and build AKs....... it was intentionally setup to show the M16 as superior accuracy wise than the AK, An actually an AK without a rate reducer is VERY accurate in FA (I own several registered as well as dealer sample FA AK based weapons) when the rate reducer is added then the harmonics go to cr#p however ya do not test any rifle for MOA accuracy in Full auto in the first place.... thats the first step to rifle accuracy ya are running in Semi auto or manual mode and would be exactly what the original post was asking about...... not FA accuracy, the AK will have more muzzle climb in FA than the 5.56 caliber M16 will simply as a result of fireing a 124 grn .30 cal bullet in FA as opposed to a 55 grn .22 cal bullet in FA.......... basics of firearms design and onea the things that makes the history chanel video such a joke, also the very first thing any real shooters notice right off the bat about that video (its ALL OVER the net BTW) is that the shooter is properly squeezing the trigger on the M16 but is very overly exagerated jerking the trigger when fireing the AK........... another firearms basic ya will find that the 5.56 cal version AKs will run right along with a basic AR15 for accuracy...... ya know an apples to apples comparison rather than an Apples and oranges comparison...... gues that center of gravity issue doesn't effect a 5.56 cal AK?


Eightball, see above about AK ergonomics being the largest factor with most shooters some simply cannot shoot one accuractly especially if they are much more familiar with traditionally stocked rifles..........

George Hill
November 6, 2007, 01:10 AM
Accurate? My Vector anchored a small coyote at 225 yards with one shot, off hand. That's accurate enough.

esmith
November 6, 2007, 01:27 AM
Yeah dstorm im sure the history channel is all out against AK variants and is just making that to assure us all of how good the M16 is.

ya do not test any rifle for MOA accuracy in Full auto in the first place

First, tell me where this is carved in stone and why can't you.

thats the first step to rifle accuracy ya are running in Semi auto or manual mode and would be exactly what the original post was asking about

what kind of accuracy in MOA can you expect?


Sorry, no, i don't think he ever said anything about what accuracy would be in semi bursts or in controlled steadied single shots.

Anyway i never said that what the video said was a sound and correct logic so don't get all pissy with me.

Bartkowski
November 6, 2007, 02:33 AM
First, tell me where this is carved in stone and why can't you.

You could test in full auto, but it wouldn't show the guns capabilities.

About the original post, I would say that you should be able to expect decent accuracy with good ammo. (2-3moa)

George Hill
November 6, 2007, 02:50 AM
"First, tell me where this is carved in stone and why can't you."
If you don't know, I can't explain it to you.

MAX100
November 6, 2007, 03:37 AM
AKs were not designed to be very accurate. They were designed to be very reliable under adverse conditions, lay down a heavy rate of fire, accurate enough to get the job done and low cost to produce. Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov will tell you he design the AK47 with loose tolerances to be very reliable which causes a lose in accuracy. He went more for more durability, reliability and low cost to produce than for accuracy. An Aimpoint, EoTech or any other good Red Dot sight is right at home on an AK47. I believe a scope would be out of place on one. A scope kind of defeats the purpose of what an AK47 was designed to do.


GC

Prince Yamato
November 6, 2007, 03:50 AM
I'm an average shot. I can hit center of mass at 230 yards with the iron sights. Good enough for me. Is it as accurate as an AR, no. But in a combat situation where you're being shot at and you don't have time for precision aiming, I'd say all things start equaling out.

I think the people who tell you the gun is inaccurate never bothered to adjust the front sight.

JWarren
November 6, 2007, 07:49 AM
It seems that there are a lot of "rules of thumb" out there. And there are many with varying experiences.

I don't think any tell the whole story.


An AK CAN be accurate.

But it seems to be a function of the quality of the build, the parts, and any "improvements" done to the rifle. There is an element that considers the user obviously. AK triggers DO take a bit of time to get used to. Once you learn one, it's not a big deal to know the break.

An AK can also be rather unaccurate. Again, all functions of the above.


My experience with various manufacturers is limited, and much of what I learn comes from the experiences of others on forums like THR. But of the ones I *Do* have personal experience with, I have seen wide variation in accuracy myself.

My chrome-lined Vector Underfolder hits anything I've aimed at. I've not tested grouping with it due to the nature of when I carry it. But I've taken shots out to about 75 or 80 yards at relatively small targets and it's never taken more than one shot to drop it. It's killed cotton-mouth moccasins with one shot from across a 35 yard-wide pond. If it can hit a snake in the head at that range, I am not all that worried at what it can do.


Before that I had a wood stock Century SAR-1. After I got through refinishing it, it was a beautiful AK. And it was wildly inaccurate when compared to the Vector Underfolder. I'd estimate it's MOA at somewhere around 4-5. Now, the Vector has a Tapco G2 Trigger and the SAR-1 had a Century trigger. There was a BIG BIG BIG difference in how well the trigger broke.


Lastly, my Deer rifle is a converted Saiga 308. Now we are getting into apples and oranges. First, we have a different caliber-- 308. Next, we are now measuring accuracy with high-quality rounds (Wincester Ballistic Silvertips) verses cheap "surplus" (Wolf). Finally, my Saiga 308 sports optics where both the Vector and the Century were using stock iron sights.

It is also important to note that I have done extensive work to my Saiga 308 both externally and internally (polishing FCG).

It is more often than not a 1 MOA rifle. Conservatively, I'd call it a 1.5 MOA rifle when conditions are not as favorable such as hunting (no bench rest, etc.)

Good enough for me.


As I see it, the first function of accuracy in AKs will be found in the iron sights. They are not condusive to accuracy. They are, however, good for target aquisition. It's a trade off. I think quality iron sights will be one of the best improvements that can be made to an AK for accuracy. And since I really don't consider the sights a real measure of the accuracy of the rifle itself (many don't even have irons on their firearms), they are not a measure of a rifle's inherent accuracy.

It's on the list to add a set of Mojo peep sights to my Vector Underfolder. I plan on adding them to the Saiga 308 as BUIS as well.


The second function of accuracy that can be improved on an AK, as I see it, is the trigger. As mentioned above, a Century trigger (to me) seems to be a lot more sloppy than a Tapco one. I've heard great reviews of the RSA adjustable trigger as well.


The next fuction of accuracy that can be improved on an AK (in my opinion) is Length of Pull (LOP). Frankly, I don't shoot as well with a short LOP. I feel "squished" up, and it shows in groups. Now I CAN fire a shorter LOP fairly well, but not as good as a proper one. (BTW... I am not what you'd call a large guy-- 5"7")

For my Saiga 308, I worked it to have a 14" LOP by using a ACE stock and 1" recoil pad. I am still deciding if I want to increase the LOP slightly. I can easily increase it by as much as 1.5." We'll see.


While I prefer a "fatter" pistol grip, I don't know that it really affects that much. I have an adjustable palm-rest grip on the Saiga that I really like.



Of all that I mentioned, I made no major reference to the actual mechanics of the rifle. The gas system is the same, the massive piston and bolt-carrier is the same. The barrel is the same. I did mention that it wouldn't hurt to use a Tapco or better FCG-- but most have something comparable anyway. If I didn't, I'd be looking for something to replace it with.


And I stress this again... my most accurate AK is in .308-- not 7.62x39. There ARE differences in the characteristics of those calibers. And there are differences in the quality of ammunition I've shot in them.


I do know this... the last AK I'll be adding to my collection will be the Saiga 7.62x39.


Anyway... hope this helps and as often said.... Your Mileage May Vary.



-- John

stubbicatt
November 6, 2007, 08:48 AM
My buddy has a SLR 106 with a scope that will shoot an inch at a hundred for ten shots.

WASR-10
November 6, 2007, 10:59 AM
my WASR-10 firing Wolf will do between 3 and 4 MOA @ 100 yds, and I was never trained to shoot. with Tiger it is actually worse, i have yet to shoot anything else through it.

Gordon
November 6, 2007, 11:33 AM
With South African surplus ball from the 80s my preban Yugo RP shoots 2" at 100 meters with an 2X scope on the Ultimak rail. My pre ban Feg with a 4MOA Aimpoint shoots rapid fire groups of 4" at 100 meters.

1lostinspace
November 6, 2007, 11:48 AM
3 moa with iron sights using Barnuel soft points.

They are more accurate than given credit for.
Ar/m16 are more reliable then given credit for.

the naked prophet
November 6, 2007, 12:27 PM
My cheap WASR-10 (which came with a great TAPCO trigger!) can keep all the shots in an 8 inch Shoot-n-see target at 250 yards, shooting off a rest with a Kobra red dot sight. It's harder to use the regular V-notch sight.

The AK just fits me, and well. It's easier for me than a "traditionally" stocked rifle.

REOIV
November 6, 2007, 12:28 PM
My WASR 10 out of the box did baseball size groups at 50 yards and pie plate groups at 100 (Me standing and shooting) with surplus and wolf ammo all day long.

What else do you need out of a 300 dollar gun?

The damn thing is a work horse and tough as hell.

I slapped a red dot on it, tweaked the sights a bit and at 50 yards it went from baseball to large golf ball sized groups.

When most situations where you'd need to use an AK will be under 100 yards and most likely 50 yards or less. The accuracy is perfectly fine especially with the cheapest ammo around.

Hokkmike
November 6, 2007, 12:35 PM
At 220 yeard off hand I could put 90% of my bullets inside of a standard paper plate. From a rest at 50 yards - fist sized!

ClickClickD'oh
November 6, 2007, 12:51 PM
Aks shoot minute of Bad Guy out to 300. That's all you need from a combat rifle.

HGUNHNTR
November 6, 2007, 12:56 PM
Accurate enough for its intended purpose. Altering the purpose of the rifle alters its capabilities. If you require more accuracy than it gives you, simply acquire a different rifle.

strat81
November 6, 2007, 01:09 PM
First, tell me where this is carved in stone and why can't you.

How many full-auto matches did you see at Camp Perry this year?

This is like saying XYZ sports car handles like crap when you run it at full-throttle the entire length of a track.

dstorm1911
November 6, 2007, 01:12 PM
Original post by "Andrewsky"

"Lots of AK owners think AKs are innaccurate so they don't give it a proper break-in, they don't modify the trigger, they don't get better sights, they use the cheapest ammo available, and they don't maintain it as well as they would another rifle. So when they go and shoot it, yes, their AK is very innaccurate.

Let's say you took an off-the-rack Yugoslavian AK in 7.62x39mm. You give it a good break-in, you use handloads, you solidly mount a 10 power scope, and you maintain it, what kind of accuracy in MOA can you expect?"

ESmith, was in know way gettin "pissy" sorry if ya feel that way was simply replying to your own posts previous in which ya site the history chanel findings as a viable explanation etc... as ya can see in the quote from the original post above the OP is reffering to an off the rack Yugo AK with custom trigger, handloads etc... looking for optimum accuracy potential the "off the shelf Yugo" mention alone clearly disqualifies any refference to FA AK accuracy seeing as how ya cannot purchase a FA AK off the rack in the USA secondly it would be clear from the use of precision HLed ammo etc.... I'm sorry if you were not able to see this to be the case and therefore went on a tangent about FA AK accuracy based on your understanding that the OP was requesting info regarding a FA yugo AK purchased in the USA off the rack etc...

Now as to Mr. Andrewsky's original questions, my custom AKs are for the most part all based on a YUGO, all get either a new ZASTAVA barrel or a GM match grade barrel (same one used by Century) they all get RSA FCGs (remember to loc tite the set screws after final adjustment) All get side rail optics rails (the UFs get the Zastava made UF rail from PA arms), when the virgin kits are assembled the barrel is squared to the trunion as a first step the trunion is then squared to the bolt face and headspace is set (before the trunion is ever mounted in a reciever or barrel pin hole is milled) the barrel pin hole gets milled and then the gas block is fitted to the barrel and the gas port location marked the gas block is then pressed off the barrel is pressed outa the trunion and then the sight blocks are pressed on and centered using 2 lasers one an in chamber bore sighter the second mounted externally shooting a beam down barrel centerline from rear to front the beam is aimed through the rear sight notch and hits the tip of the front sight post when both dots are dead ontop of each other at 25 yards forming a single dot then the sight block pin holes are milled a lined is marked down the barrel centerline on all 4 sides next the extractor cut is made at the chamber, a lead slug is driven into the bore under the gas port and the gas port is milled at 90 degrees rather than angled for a cleaner in bore port profile the barrel is now ready to be blued and assembled.

Next the Nodak spuds reciever is assembled starting at the trigger gaurd the reciever is checked for square then the virgin mag stop plate is fitted several mags are used to determin the correct thickness to mill the plate to in order to get the mag lips dead square with the lower bolt rails and then its milled and riveted in place under the TG next the front trunion is squared to the reciever and the rivet holes are milled then its riveted in place, next the rear trunion is fitted to the reciever and also squared (if the trunions are not square to the reciever ya can introduce stress and warpage to what started as a perfect reciever when riveting) if its an UF the rear trunion UF mounting hole is milled slightly undersize so the stock can be hand fitted for a lap in fit on the locking pins. Mag latch is now fitted and its pivot hole milled in the trigger gaurd mag latch is then installed and tested with 33 different Military mags from several countries now the reciever gets blued the barrel is then pressed in and barrel pin installed it is then re-fitted with the twin lasers and the sight blocks and gas block are installed if everything is still straight and square the pins get installed..

Now we move to the Bolt and bolt carrier they get squared to each other, if needed areas are built up with TIG welding and re-machined to get the bolt square to the carrier with carrier and bolt rail grooves perfectly squared to each other the carrier and bolt are then checked against the recievers rails if everything is correct they will glide along the reciever with no lube and no noise, the bolt is now assembled with the FP hole getting polished no burrs inside to collect dirt or oil it is then fitted with a Spring loaded FP and the extracter gets fitted and tensioned....... the last step of Bolt group assembly is a tube type milled recoil assembly and a new Wolf +15% recoil spring instead of the twin wire recoil assemble that comes standard.

Now for the FCG it gets polished and adjust to the owners preference for single stage or two stage, pre-travel / ovr travel and pull weight it is then loc tited and we move on to fitting the selector stop/safty......

The last step the dust cover is fitted and the rifle and all parts including the FCG are engraved with the reciever serial number (virgin parts are unfinished and non numbered including the trunions etc...) it is ready for test fire, it is function tested first with 100 rnds using Chicom SC ammo next it gets mounted in the shooting machine for accuracy testing, it is now loaded with handloads for initial testing 20 rnds if any are outside of 1.5" at 100 yards I start looking for the problem all will shoot a single ragged hole if the grenade sight is raised to go to manual mode BTW ...... it is then tested with several brands of over the counter ammo anything over 3" in 20 shots and there is a problem.......

JWarren
November 6, 2007, 05:47 PM
I notice a lot of folks with WASR's commenting on having no problems with triggers because they have a Tapco FCG.

I've heard this before. Some Century AK's used to have Century Triggers and some have Tapco ones. Having shot both, I can tell you that the Tapco over the Century makes a world of difference-- it will change how you feel about the firearm.


Please don't take my criticism of the SAR-1 with Century Trigger as a slap to WASR owners. I'm slapping Century's trigger.

-- John

MAX100
November 6, 2007, 06:56 PM
The way I see it is you can waste time and money on trying to make an AK more accurate or you can put your time and money towards a rifle that will give real consistent MOA accuracy like the AR15 with a free floated bull barrel. I love the AK for what it was designed for but it wouldn't be my weapon of choice when I am looking for consistent MOA accuracy.


GC

f4t9r
November 6, 2007, 07:00 PM
close enough for most that know what they are getting. I would like to get one but do not plan on target shooting for bullseyes with it.

wcwhitey
November 6, 2007, 07:19 PM
I was wondering if anyone has done any experimentation with ammo for the AK. Seems to me like the quality of much of the surplus does not do anything for the AK's reputation of poor accuracy. It does however reinforce it's deserved reputation for reliability. Cheap ammo is half the fun I realize but my AR does not group as well with Wolf as it does quality ammo have to assume the same for the AK. Just wondering?

jonboynumba1
November 6, 2007, 07:27 PM
I've owned several SKS's and several AK's

Most any good sks (chinese included) with the right brand of ammo for the given gun (some like given brands of russian ammo...Barnaul seems to do really well in most commie stuff fort me YMMV Wolf does pretty average.

3 chiacom SKS= 3-4" best groups with average being more like 5-6" @100yards
1 Russian SKS 2-3" with favorite commie ammo 2" with remington SP (best one I ever had....nice Tula I think it was...pretty gun to...for a plow

AK sporters:

Norinco NHM-91 (RPK size varient of mak90) roughly 21" HBAR
averaged about 5" groups @ 100 yards I don't think I ever found anything better than 4-5" and that was about the best you could get. It had a pretty decent (for a plow) trigger and balanced nicely. No real accuracy advantage to the heavier longer bbl. other than it was nicer under recoil and you could get on target faster for it. I ran CASES through that gun and it was a lot of fun...but about as inaccurate as the average mini-14 (piss poor)

I owned a few SAR-1's They jumped around a little more but would shoot about the same as the bigger heavier gun and looked WAY cooler...I really liked my little commie plows. The last one we bought you'd be lucky to get a 6" group at 50 yrds offahdn taking your time. Benchrested at 100yards you might keep all the rounds on a piece of notebook paper...most being in a dessert plate sized cluster evenly dispersed.

I bought a WASR-10 hi-cap no-ban after all that went away and I got some AR's I wanted one with all the evul features...it made the SAR-1's look good. Total piece of junk. Now some of the milled AK's I've seen can shoot alongside the SKS's I "hear" about them shooting as well as an AR15...I've never seen on shoot as well as the Russian SKS I owned though (I've also never seen a stock mini-14 that would honestly shoot as good as it either)

Now I have everyone mad at me I guess...but that's what I've seen and I've borrowed and shot a lot of them besides the above I've owned and lived with. I really always wanted to like the mini but everytime I borrow one to shoot it's about as depressing as printing paper with a plow...sometimes worse...and then there are the lack of decent mags for under $40 a piece (factory 20 rounders being the only good highcaps I'd trust from what I've both seen AND heard from others) I've had cheap 30's that ran well enough for plinking.

To 200 yards you can easily hit a mansized target pretty regularly with a properly zeroed Ak...at 300 you should be able to quickly adjust hold over or pop rear sight to nominal 300M setting at get "on the paper" on a fullsized "bad guy" poster walking it in. But it's more like correcting artillery than shooting a rifle at that point.

the AK's with milled recievers are so heavy I wouldn't want one...the Veper is heavy as heck to. I love shooting plows for fun at cans...for anything serious I'd preffer a good AR hands down. You'll never know until you have both so you may as well just plan on getting both sooner or later ;) They are both a LOT of fun in their own way.

PS- on the ammo issue...some guns shoot russian steel cased BETTER than US ball or SP (most AK's will have fewer problems with their extra sloppy chambers with steelcased than with brass cased actually) Some rifles do like US made ball...the Russian SKS I owned was the only one that showed a marked improvment with remington SP hunting ammo. There are many threads out there comparing different AK rounds accuracy and even among imports many rifles showed pronounced prefferences for a given type...as bullet construction varries a lot in some cases.

I remember reading one such thread years ago that showed Barnaul and some other brand (I wanna say Norinco or SA cheetah or something like that?) would group a few inches tighter in many chinese plows...the hollow metal base bullets seemingly sealed better on the rough/oversize bores. They emplyed a similar design in machingun ammo as I recall reading t compensate for badly worn bores. I'm sure someone here must have a link to something like that.

Floppy_D
November 6, 2007, 07:35 PM
It is good for what it was made for. You should be able to hit a transition target out to 200 yds on the average, and it will feed reliably almost every time. The upside to the AK is that if you miss, you can count on the next shot firing as planned, as it will cycle every time.

dstorm1911
November 6, 2007, 07:37 PM
WC Whitey, actually there are tons of sites on the net that have done exactly what ya ask.... hint some creative Google searches can yield ya tons of info regarding AK accuracy and Ammo.....

Max100......... if all your doin is punchin paper plates then theres nothing wrong with an AR15 but....... out here in the AZ deserts they have a poor rep for reliability when the sand starts blowing...... and If I gotta reach out an touch someone MOA I'm not gonna be using a .22 when a .30 cal bolt gun can do it so much nicer ;) if ya like an AR at 300 yrds firein a .22 ya'll really like hittin the exact same target with an AK and......... at half the cost of your bull barreled AR ........... ya will HEAR the steel ring too BTW as opposed to guessin if the .22 actually hit it..... it really doesn't take much to get a super accurate AK if ya start with a YUGO........ start by modifying the grenade sight so ya can still use the sights with the gas valve turned off....... ya now have a very accurate straight pull 7.62x39 bolt gun...... do that with your AR :) flip the valve open and ya can fight off the hords of marauding paper plates launching their counter attack for killin their leader

the totally tricked out Yugo outlined above actually cost half as much as a Bushy or DPMS AR BTW........ AND is uneffected by the ammo fed to it or the environment its used in as opposed to the super finicky AR at the same level....

MAX100
November 6, 2007, 08:52 PM
The AR15 can be had in 22lr all the way up to the 50BMG.

The AK needs more than a good trigger and sights to make it a consistent MOA accurate rifle.

This is why so many love the AK and why so many buy them. No one buys an AK47 for accuracy.

The AK, has loose tolerances, feels like it will shake apart (but doesn't) and won't make any friends at the marksmen club. These loose tolerances are the open secret to the AK's almost jam-free history. It's also why you can drag it through mud, leave it buried in the sand and take it out a year later, kick it with your boot, and it will fire like it was cleaned that morning. Again, because of its imprecision, the AK can fire poorly produced ammunition as well as ammo that has been sitting and deteriorating in the jungle or desert.

Also read this:

When the Defense Department offered M-16s to the Iraqi police and army, they refused. They wanted AKs which had to be bought from Jordan (the weapons actually were made in Germany). Indeed, like their brethren in Vietnam, many US soldiers are using AKs in Iraq despite official sanctions against the practice.


GC

Eightball
November 6, 2007, 08:58 PM
In re: earlier posts, I will admit, the ergonomics of an AK are peculiar at best. AKs are good for keeping rounds within silhouette targets at under 300m, that is undeniable. However, if you decide to pick up better, more accurate rifles to shoot with at smaller targets, and go back to the AK, then the AK seems to not be too accurate anymore. It's all a matter of perception--I used to think 2.5MOA from my AK was pretty nice, until I started getting 1MOA out of my Garand and 1.25 out of my M1 Carbine (and am hoping to be somewhere in between there when I get a chance to zero out my AR).

The big issue I've noticed is that they perform well enough if you dump enough money into them; I am of the mindset that I want my firearms to perform well from the get-go. But, if you're just looking for a nice, fun tool, then an AK is plenty accurate. If you're shooting for accuracy, it's not. Let your function dictate the tool of choice, not the other way 'round.

And Dstorm, though your post was insightful, the OP was about AKs, not the SKS. Different platforms, different capabilities, different ergonomics and sights altogether (depending on country of origin--yours is a Yugo, I presume?). And, using a period every once in a while to demarcate where sentences end and begin wouldn't be a bad option, either ;)

dstorm1911
November 6, 2007, 09:15 PM
eightball....... I am talking about AKs not SKS...... the Yugos also buit AKs partner.......... in fact if you READ the OP you will find that he was askinf specifically about YUGO AKs......... they happen to be known for some of the best accuracy from AKs........... where in the world did you get anything at all pertaining to an SKS from my post BTW???? it is describing step by step the process for my custom YUGO based AKs that I build..... been building AKs and accesaries for AKs only for 17 years so I might not have learned enough about em yet to know what I'm talkin about yet?

jpwilly
November 6, 2007, 09:19 PM
Also, my Lancaster has the TAPCO G2...its much better than my first AKM'S trigger!

Titan6
November 6, 2007, 09:34 PM
When the Defense Department offered M-16s to the Iraqi police and army, they refused. They wanted AKs which had to be bought from Jordan (the weapons actually were made in Germany). Indeed, like their brethren in Vietnam, many US soldiers are using AKs in Iraq despite official sanctions against the practice.


Max100- The IA have been begging for ARs since the get-go. The Iraqi's all even used to prefer Berrettas to the Glocks they were issued. Many still do. They finnally have started to get M-16s after four years of begging and are thrilled.

Show me a conventional US soldier using an AK over an AR, even one... much less "many" and I will show you a poor soldier.

jlbraun
November 6, 2007, 09:47 PM
The IA have been begging for ARs since the get-go.

...because that's what the Americans had and what the Americans have is automatically better.

The Iraqi's all even used to prefer Berrettas to the Glocks they were issued

...because that's what the Americans had and what the Americans have is automatically better.

Just because the Iraqi army prefers something doesn't make it better. :rolleyes:

elmerfudd
November 6, 2007, 09:50 PM
dstorm,

What do you usually charge for one of your Yugos and do you have a website?

ndh87
November 7, 2007, 10:13 AM
I imagine most inaccuracy accounts come from ****ty ammo being put through ****ty wasr 10s

hey :mad: be nice.

I have a ****ty WASR-10 and i use ****ty cheap ammo, even before i changed the brake and put the mojo sighs on it worked just fine.

I think it has alot more to do with the shooter than the ammo and the firearm.:neener:

SSN Vet
November 7, 2007, 05:18 PM
it is what it is ..... a battle rifle... 2 to 3 MOA

the bad rap comes...in my opinion....from people who insist on comparing it to an M16/AR15, which is an exceptionally accurate rifle.

mljdeckard
November 7, 2007, 06:04 PM
jlbraun is absolutely correct. The IA know little to nothing about arms. My little brother is in Talafar/Mosul with 1st Cavalry, and just spent 6 mos training them. The vast majority of them didn't know how to use the sights on the rifle at all. They all thought that Americans have miraculous technology, and this is why we are impossible to defeat. And while I will admit that in some cases (M1A2 vs T-72) this is absolutely correct.

Any AK I've ever fired is minute-of milk-jug accurate at 100 yards. for quick, short range shooting, any accuracy difference between an AR and an AK is negligible. Placed in the hands of soldiers who know or care little about maintenence, I would tell them to keep their AKs.

jpwilly
November 7, 2007, 06:04 PM
+1 the bad rap comes...in my opinion....from people who insist on comparing it to an M16/AR15, which is an exceptionally accurate rifle.

Also, I have found with both my SKS's and AK that Wolf produces inconsistent ammo...nearly 1 in 5 will be flyers and you can count that 1 in 10 will be a flyer. The SilverBear I have shot only shows about 1 in 10 to be flyers and sometime very few. I've not handloaded but sure I could eliminate most flyers by doing so. The rifles shot consistant 3-4 MOA overall but can do better.

atblis
November 7, 2007, 06:39 PM
Depends on the AK
Depends on the shooter
Depends on the ammo
Depends on lotsa things

2-3 inches at 100 yards is really good for an AK


"ya do not test any rifle for MOA accuracy in Full auto in the first place"
First, tell me where this is carved in stone and why can't you.
Because you're not using the same point of aim for each shot. That doesn't tell you the accuracy/precision of the gun, but rather the controllability under full auto. Accuracy/precision would figure into that, but would not be distinguishable.

Omaney
November 7, 2007, 07:06 PM
I can't say that I've ever tried to hit anything smaller than an armadillo with my WASR 2 (5.45 x 39). But that armadillo is dead and the WASR was plenty accurate. BTW Tapco FCG installed is pretty clean.

Guitargod1985
November 7, 2007, 07:35 PM
AKs are about as accurate as they need to be IMO. I'm not exactly a marksman as of yet, but I can hit an eight inch plate 4 out of 5 times at 100 yards and 3 out of 5 times @ 200 yards with open sights. No bench rest by the way. That's good enough for me. Think about it - I mean if it were a man-sized target, he/she would be in some serious trouble

RockyMtnTactical
November 7, 2007, 07:50 PM
A lot of it has to do with the ammo, the individual AK (believe it or not, there are varying degrees of quality between AK's), and the shooter. Also, caliber can play a part. The 7.62x39 is not particularly accurate at ranges over 200 yards. It is heavy and slow, and therefore has a bit of a rainbow trajectory.

They are not an inherently accurate semi auto and weren't meant to be.

wisocki
November 11, 2007, 10:51 PM
you don't test the accuracy of an AK with a WASR 10. Do you people know that WASR 10'S are some of the ****tiest AK's you can buy?

sturmgewehr
November 12, 2007, 01:36 AM
Some aks, but not all, are capable of ar accuracy.
False. I would like to see the AK that could shoot 1" at 100 yards with factory ammo. It would be 1 in a million whereas the AR's can regularly do it. Let's keep it real, AK's are good for 3 inch groups at 100 yards if you have a good one.

ClickClickD'oh
November 12, 2007, 01:48 AM
False. I would like to see the AK that could shoot 1" at 100 yards with factory ammo. It would be 1 in a million whereas the AR's can regularly do it. Let's keep it real, AK's are good for 3 inch groups at 100 yards if you have a good one.

Ohhhhh reeeeeeeeeeeaaallly.

http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r100/mdorbust/11-11.jpg

This group was shot at 100 yards using 1982 British produced, de-linked machine gun ammunition. Center to center the three furthest imacts are all 1.25 inches apart.

Seriously, AR fanboys... get over it. The AK platform is not that inaccurate.

Prince Yamato
November 12, 2007, 02:39 AM
I think some of the "AK is inaccurate" crowd are the same crowd that cries about "chicom guns" and "never ownin' a ter'rist rifle". Latent cold-war fear.

I like my chicom ter'rist guns. They do what I need them to do and could probably do a whole lot more if I was a better marksman.

Personally, I'm more scared of M-1s and M-14s chewing off my piano-playing fingers than the AK. And as far as the AR-15... bah... too expensive and too capitalist for this peasant. :D

swingset
November 12, 2007, 02:56 AM
Three things about AK accuracy (as the owner of many many variants over the years).

1. They are not universally "anything". I have had examples that shoot 1.5" groups with good ammo, and some that couldn't shoot 12" with ANY ammo. That kind of inconsistency isn't common with most western service rifles, IMHO.

2. Ergonomics, to include sights and triggers, do much to inhibit shooters with the AK. Some shoot them well, but most do not. This is where rifles like the AR, a very tolerant rifle, on the whole have it whipped for accuracy.

3. I've never owned a semi-auto service rifle (and I've owned a bunch), that has such a wide range of ammo available, and that quality of that ammo make such a difference in accuracy as with an AK.

I love much about the AK, but I count it's accuracy to be a detriment....then again, it's not supposed to be a tackdriver right?

elmerfudd
November 12, 2007, 03:11 AM
Quote:
False. I would like to see the AK that could shoot 1" at 100 yards with factory ammo. It would be 1 in a million whereas the AR's can regularly do it. Let's keep it real, AK's are good for 3 inch groups at 100 yards if you have a good one.
Ohhhhh reeeeeeeeeeeaaallly.



This group was shot at 100 yards using 1982 British produced, de-linked machine gun ammunition. Center to center the three furthest imacts are all 1.25 inches apart.

Seriously, AR fanboys... get over it. The AK platform is not that inaccurate.

I take it that was shot with a Saiga .308. Mine doesn't shoot quite that well, but I can regularly get groups under 2" with ammo that it likes. My Saiga .223 does even better and even my SAR3 will easily shoot groups under 3". I honestly can't see any practical reason to go the AR route. My AK's are more than accurate enough for their intended purpose and if I have a need for tack driving accuracy I have bolt actions. Others may disagree, but for a defensive/SHTF rifle I'd rather have the reliability of the AK over the ergonomics of the AR.

I know that not all AK's are accurate and I did once have a MAK90 that was a 6 MOA rifle, but the design itself is capable of far better accuracy than it is given credit for.

atblis
November 12, 2007, 09:24 AM
This group was shot at 100 yards using 1982 British produced, de-linked machine gun ammunition. Center to center the three furthest imacts are all 1.25 inches apart.

So a guy makes a statement about AKs and the rarity of a 1" gun , and you put up a single 1.25" 4 shot group. What does that prove?

ClickClickD'oh
November 12, 2007, 10:53 AM
So a guy makes a statement about AKs and the rarity of a 1" gun , and you put up a single 1.25" 4 shot group. What does that prove?

Well first off, his claim was that a "good" AK is good for a three inch group. Well there you are, a 1.25 inch group out of a fairly cheap AK. In fact, one of the cheapest you can buy here in the US. 1.25 inches is < 3.00 inches so I don't think that point needs to be further contested. Don't worry about the .25 above a one inch group. Given a calm day, some non-corroded twenty five year old de-linked ammunition and a shooting rest I'm sure that .25 inches can be reduced. Now, either I have a one in a million rifle as per the posters claim, or the inaccuracy of the AK platform is being exagerated.

goon
November 12, 2007, 11:26 AM
It depends on the caliber and I think that is because of the varying quality of ammunition.
The 5.56 VEPR I had would probably have more than less kept up with a comparable AR but I've never shot a 7.62x39 version that even came close.

If you enjoyed reading about "Seriously...how innaccurate are AKs?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!