CCW AK-Pistol (7.62x39)


April 12, 2008, 06:20 PM
What are the pros and cons of an AK-style pistol (7.62x39) for CCW, be it a 8", 9.5" or 11" barrel ?

Has or is anybody currently carrying something similar to this?

Would it be possible to later file with the ATF for a SBR tax stamp and add a stock for it?

Thanks for all your opinions!

God Bless America


If you enjoyed reading about "CCW AK-Pistol (7.62x39)" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
April 12, 2008, 06:46 PM
Pros: None that I can see.
Cons: It's huge and the mags can stick out.

Your can submit a tax form for an SBR any time and convert one of these (others already have done so).

April 12, 2008, 06:47 PM
Pros: Odds are free room and board for 10 to 20 if you need to use it for self defense.

Cons: Odds are free room and board for 10 to 20 if you need to use it for self defense.

April 12, 2008, 06:49 PM
I say go for it if that's what you want to do. Just make sure you your shoot is good. My biggest concern would be over penetration.

April 12, 2008, 07:19 PM
Consider the fact that your jury most likely will NOT be completely made up of former KGB agents or current members of a semi-exclusive club out of Brighton Beach.

April 12, 2008, 07:23 PM
Well, it isn't really suitable to concealed carry. It's a pretty big freakin weapon, even sans buttstock and with a short barrel. That big mag doesn't help any.

Now, would it make a decent vehicle quick access gun? Probably. It would also make a good platform for conversion to SBR, as mentioned above.

April 12, 2008, 07:24 PM
I have to agree, might not play well in the jury box. if it the absolute only thing you own/have to use, that's differant, might make a dang handy RV gun, but as a dedicated CCW piece, well, not unless it's a Katrina situation, then most normal rules are "suspended", according to theory.
Overpenetration might be a bit a problem...

Prince Yamato
April 12, 2008, 07:31 PM
It's a pistol, so it should be legal to CCW. It would probably be better in place of a "truck gun". Or something of that sort. I wouldn't carry it under a trench coat or anything like that, except maybe to and from a range. It also depends on your state. If it's some place like Texas, then people may be more open to it. If it's CT or NY, then probably not.

I think the self-defense thing is moot. If you unload an entire clip into somebody, then yes, you probably will have a hard time defending yourself in court. If you shoot the person twice, well so what? You shot them twice. Lots of people in America own AK-47s. You could make the same argument about shooting someone with a Sig with a threaded barrel. "The barrel was threaded for a silencer?! What?!?! Are you an assassin?"

The NFA suggestion is good, BUT in many states, you can't CCW an NFA weapon.

April 12, 2008, 07:43 PM
Pros: The bulk of such a weapon makes it likely you'll leave it home and carry weapon that's properly suited to CCW.

Cons: Everyone's gonna ID you either as a CounterStrike kiddo, or a mall ninja wannabe.

April 12, 2008, 08:24 PM
Bad ergonomics on the safety... how fast can you draw, reach across with the off hand, release safety, acquire sight picture and squeeze? Plus all the sticky-out bits like the front sight, and the charging handle. Oh, and if the worst should happen and you have to fire, imagine the report and flash... remember you wouldn't be wearing ear defs.

Of course on the pro side is that this has a goodly amount of power. Plus you can probably find small capacity mags which are smaller than the 30-rounder.

April 12, 2008, 08:59 PM
I had added a Bushmaster pistol to my carry permit. I had done that because I was told that no way would it go through. It did go through since it is classified as a pistol. However I never did carry it and when I renewed my permit it was not added. I saw no reason to keep it on the permit. So it can be done. I just don't see myself having any need to do it again.

April 12, 2008, 09:46 PM
Keltec PLR-16 maybe, similar size but a little smaller and the caliber is .223/5.56

April 12, 2008, 10:26 PM
You'd probably get shot while pulling it out, pulling a mag out, inserting the mag, and racking the charging handle.
You could leave the mag in but when standing to the side it would look like you are well endowed and happy to see everybody.

April 12, 2008, 11:41 PM
Some states limit the size and / or weight of a ccw piece.

I can see it as a handy woods gun ending up under a poncho, or in a SHTF situation, but its not really workable for everyday ccw.

April 12, 2008, 11:45 PM
pros: it'll scare the crap out of the criminals
cons: it'll scare the crap out of police, your mom, and the prosecutor

April 13, 2008, 12:03 AM
This is some kind of late April Fool's joke, right?

Honestly, I've never seen why anyone would want an AK pistol. It seems to me you're getting the worst of both worlds - the bulk of a rifle with the (relative) inaccuracy of a pistol.

April 13, 2008, 12:16 AM
I think it would be a good idea... if you lived in Liberia.

M2 Carbine
April 13, 2008, 12:35 AM
If I was still on the road I'd probably have my AK pistol, AR pistol or Kel Tec PLR in the vehicle.

Not interested in carrying it though.

The AK pistol is a big tank of a gun but it is almost as accurate and powerful as the rifle.

The .223 pistols are much lighter and generally more accurate.

The Wiry Irishman
April 13, 2008, 12:40 AM
Does Milt Sparks make an IWB for it?

My friend has one. They're tons of dumb fun, but of no practical use. I kept joking that I wanted to borrow it to shoot the centerfire portion on the Indoor State bullseye championships.

Decided to go with the 1911 instead.

April 13, 2008, 12:41 AM
For giggles (and on the way to the range) I've carried my PLR-16. With a 10 round magazine, it hides comfortably under a light windbreaker.

April 13, 2008, 12:42 AM
:eek: As much I as I would love to cheer you on for choosing so ambitious a concealed carry weapon, I cannot in good faith.

Unless you feel a definite need for some serious protection, the bulk alone would be, well, balking. Stuffing that fierce puppy IWB is going to print more than a surprise Harry Potter sequel. :uhoh:

The Lone Haranguer
April 13, 2008, 12:43 AM
What will you use for a cover garment? All I can think of is something like a trench coat or Aussie "duster" coat. That might look a little out of place. ;) More seriously, it might be seen as looking for trouble if you were to actually use it. Neither is what CCW is all about.

I can see it as something to have in your vehicle, but a folding-stock carbine would take up little if any more space.

Leif Runenritzer
April 13, 2008, 12:43 AM
AFAIK, it's because of these little, deadly toys that we can't import surplus 7.6239, as it's now armor-piercing handgun ammo.

Number 6
April 13, 2008, 12:58 AM
AFAIK, it's because of these little, deadly toys that we can't import surplus 7.6239, as it's now armor-piercing handgun ammo.

No, that would be Olympic Arms making AR pistols in 7.62x39.

Oleg Volk
April 13, 2008, 01:39 AM
A friend carries an HK SP89 for about two weeks...then he went back to regular pistols.

April 13, 2008, 01:41 AM
Oh, for Bob's sake, why?

April 13, 2008, 05:09 AM
I actually use mine fairly often.

My CCW permit specifically says HANDGUN ONLY on it. This keeps me from keeping a rifle handy in my vehicle. In my state ammunition loaded in the magazine constitutes LOADED. The only way I can carry an AK is to have the magazine out of the weapon, magazine empty and ammunition loose. That sucks.

So when Im traveling I will toss my AK pistol in between the seats in the minivan. Its a pistol so Im good to go. Works great for my purposes.....would never consider it for much else.

April 13, 2008, 01:29 PM
This is probably a bit too much for a CCW. If you like rifle calibers try the Automag III in 30 carbine. It can actually be carried in a pocket, and draws reasonably well.

Here's a link:

This is for the new one from High Standard, there are a few of the original AMTs still floating around, saw one at the last Tulsa show.

April 13, 2008, 01:43 PM
Pros: Fecalation factor when you pull it out.

Cons: Unless you're that 1000-lb. guy who wears a bedsheet, you're going to have a hard time concealing it.

April 13, 2008, 01:51 PM
I will qualify my answer. I believe that we should have the right to make the informed decision. For me, I would not carry one, due to size. However, if some how, someone can reliably keep it hidden, why not?

April 13, 2008, 01:52 PM
I agree with bob. Good luck convincing the DA and jury that you weren't looking for a fight after the fact.

April 13, 2008, 02:24 PM
A lot of people here are quick to rush to judgement about what is and is not good for all situations and everyone.

The handgun that is big or bulky is likely to be left behind more, which that long thing with a magazine sticking out of it at nearly a right angle is clearly not suitable for the casual comfortable roles of a carried on the person self defense weapon in a city.

In a vehicle it can be just fine.

I also could see it as a decent trail and backpacking firearm. Most of the time it would swing on a sling concealed and unconcealed. However if you heard or approached others you could roughly conceal it and never startle anyone.
It would be smaller dimensions and less weight than most long guns, yet still be suitable for most 4 legged and 2 legged predators.

So no I wouldn't use it for carry in the city, but the laws of a state apply in a lot more places than just in town.
What might be suitable for someone mixing and mingling on city streets can be very different than what is good in a vehicle subject to the same limiting laws, or in another portion of the state hiking down a public trail in a remote wilderness area known for mountain lions, meth production, and criminals growing and guarding marijuana crops who can attack you at random before you realize you stumbled into the wrong place.
A person is still limited in such situations to what they can carry concealed legaly to get there along the length of thier trip, so often a long gun is unsuitable, yet the power of a long gun is desired. With some parts of a route more public, some going through national or state parks for at least some of the route, and various other reasons why something that complies with concealed carry laws, but is also more formidable than most pistols.

I like to think of it for example similar to a street legal dirt bike. Sure it might not be suitable to drive around town with on daily basis, and if you started a poll asking who would consider it good general transportation, you would get many of the same "no, dont do it" responses as seen here.
Yet in many offroad places like the mountains or deserts it is people with such a vehicle that can legaly get to a lot more trails than a person with a vehicle that is not legal to drive on the road for brief periods, and need a secondary vehicle to legaly transport the offroad vehicle from point A to point B.
By having a vehicle less ideal for a single role, but capable of multiple roles they actualy get to do more freely and go more places less hindered by the law.
This gun is such a gun. One that can comply with concealed carry law for brief periods, but is not primarily suited for that role. It is not as good as a long arm for long arm roles. It is not as good as a pistol for concealed carry roles. Yet it can be suitable for some dual purpose roles where it still needs to comply with concealed carry laws for at least portions of a trip or outing.

You don't have a sometimes answer on your poll so I won't vote. It is not a great idea in most daily roles. So the first choice is bad.
I am sure where it is a good choice, so the second choice is bad.
And I do think so on occasion for limited roles, so the third choice is bad.

April 13, 2008, 02:34 PM
I think the only time this would be nessesary is in a state of emergency like: National disaster (Huricane Tidlewave) anytime LEOs would be of no help!!

April 13, 2008, 02:36 PM
I think the only time this would be nessesary is in a state of emergency like: National disaster (Huricane Tidlewave) anytime LEOs would be of no help!!
Well the law does not magicly change when you need it to in an emergency.
What is legal now is what will be legal then when you have no LEO help most places, but run into national guard and police checkpoints that will hold you strictly to the law on occasion (or will confiscate your arms if they see them like during katrina.)

I can assure you that out in the wilderness state law still applies many places, especialy if you are not hunting. If you stumble on some meth location or marijuana patch like many of us who do much hiking in the pacific mountain ranges have, then I can assure you no LEO are going to be around anytime soon. Even if automatic weapons fire is being discharged at you. You are on your own against the individuals that may not wish to let you get away to report thier location.

April 13, 2008, 02:41 PM
my post has nothing to do with the law , Im simply ansewring the origanal poster.

April 13, 2008, 03:03 PM
How easy would it be to drill and tap the receiver for a folder? I KNOW that installing one would require a $200 tax stamp prior to modification.

April 13, 2008, 03:05 PM
that makes sense I guess wilderness use

April 13, 2008, 04:51 PM
Well, I guess it would be excellent for self defense but it would seem to be hard to aim without a laser of some sort.

I'd say impossible to conceal unless your a big fan of heavy coats year round.

And good luck defending yourself if court if you ever had to use it.

I guess I would ask why you wanted to carry an AK pistol instead of the many other excellent choices?

If I was that worried about going somewhere where I might need to carry an AK pistol, I wouldn't go there.

April 13, 2008, 04:57 PM
It would be more suited to open carry.
Just get a side hanging sling. If OC is legal where you are, of course.

April 13, 2008, 05:59 PM
Do I need a tax stamp to install a FrontVerticalGrip or is that just a NO-NO?

I'm afraid I'd draw too much attention to myself OC'ing.

April 13, 2008, 06:42 PM
Vertical foregrip on a pistol is a no go unless you get the tax stamp. Once you have that no problem, depending on the NFA laws in your particular state of course.

George Hill
April 14, 2008, 12:26 AM
You are joking, right?

April 14, 2008, 12:35 AM
I voted for #3 for somewhat obvious reasons.

April 14, 2008, 08:13 AM
You'd be drowned in legal bills from having to prove in court that you weren't looking for trouble with a handgun like this.

It's also one thing to carry a pistol with a 17 round 9MM magazine, it's quite another to carry an AK-47 pistol with a 30 round banana clip full of rifle ammunition.

Not just dumb, but begging for arrest and bankruptcy.

April 14, 2008, 08:36 AM
I think it would carry quite nicely if you wear a backpack every where.

April 14, 2008, 08:51 AM
And people gripe about carrying a full-size 1911.....

Here's the deal. The purpose of a handgun is convenience. We don't carry handguns because they're more accurate, more powerful, easier to aim, or have a higher capacity than a long gun. Handguns are generally deficient in all of these areas. We carry handguns because they're small and portable.

What this has done is remove the only upside of a handgun in an effort to remove two of the cons (capacity and power.)

Aiming is still difficult because you still can't use your shoulder to steady it, and now power has swung in the other direction and will not only kill the guy you're shooting at, but will almost definitely endanger anyone behind him for a mile. Bear in mind, in a defensive situation you don't get to pick the arena. Could be near a park, school, subway, etc. and it's YOUR responsibility to make sure that you don't cause more harm than you prevent. Criminals can harm indiscriminately, we can't.

Ignoring the jury argument for a moment, although it is valid, the weapon itself is awkward and NOT suited to defense. It would serve better as an offensive weapon, when you are attempting to gain the upper hand on someone else.

You want the real deal? If you and I were standing 15 ft apart, and I had my 1911 in a holster and you had your AK pistol slung, you're the dead man.

By the time you've gotten that monstrosity up and swept off the most unergonomic safety on planet Earth, I've already run my gun dry and am changing mags.

It's big, it's loud, it's a whole hell of a lot of fun, but you'd get yourself killed trying to use it.

M2 Carbine
April 14, 2008, 10:34 AM
The drum mag does make it a little hard to conceal.:D

April 14, 2008, 12:53 PM
M2 Carbine wins. :)

April 14, 2008, 01:43 PM
If you can afford the work to have it done, you can afford a better choice.


April 14, 2008, 01:55 PM
As many said, it's doable, but I can't think of a good reason. If you are in a firefighting situation, you'd probably be outgunned by someone who has a conventional weapon with good training. Not to say anything bad about 7.62x39mm (I have an AK too), but the ergonomics, difficulty of drawing/aiming in a close quarter situation that usually involves CCW makes this disadvantageous.

April 14, 2008, 02:51 PM
Don't know for sure if this is a joke / troll thread, but I'll bite anyway, just to see what serious answers could be given... in case he's not joking. ;)


1) You'll be [much] more closely taking advantage of your RIGHT to bear arms, as spoken of in the 2nd Amendment. You'll be well-armed against criminal government attempting to take our liberties away from us by force. Hey, it could happen, and has happened in the past. It sounds weird to hear this now, in this nations, but never underestimate the power of growing criminality in government. There's a reason why the founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights, and remained very skeptical of government! If you read the TRUE context of the 2nd Amendment, it means that citizens are to be armed with similar arms to their nations' military, so the military cannot be corruptly used against us, by corrupt government. If the citizens of North Korea all had AK-47s, then mr. Kim Jong Mentally-Il would be dead right now, or running for his life in the woods, crapping his pants all the way through. :D

2) You'll be well-armed against criminals holding up a bank with AK-47s or AR-15s.

3) You'll simply scare the #!@% out of a criminal attempting to rob you at gunpoint with a mere pistol or knife in his hand; then you can rob him in turn. :D

4) You'll be well-armed against any criminals breaking into your house, that's for sure, as well.

5) It's much more powerful than a pistol, which'll therefore stop a criminal quicker, as compared to a pistol.

6) It'll more likely penetrate through a bullet proof vest a criminal might be wearing at the time of a bank robbery, or one breaking into your house.


1) Government will look at you as if you're a criminal possibly looking to illegally use the AK-47 to rob a bank, or store.

2) If used in self defense, the prosecutor in court might hype up the reason "why" you'd use an AK-47, since it's "overkill" and you're supposedly just looking to spill blood unjustly.

3) Might overpenetrate and hit another person behind the criminal.

4) It'll be very difficult to conceal in hot weather, unless you want to sweat your ______ off carrying it with a jacket on... and in that case you'll get everyones' attention as to questioning why you're wearing a jacket in hot weather, and thus think you ARE hiding a big gun (or bomb) inside... thus making the "concealment" part of carrying it POINTLESS!

April 14, 2008, 03:09 PM
Looks like a fun not-CCW but OCW out in the woods, or even better it looks like it could potentially be a decent gun to rig up a cross-drawesque carry ensemble while backpacking. Similiar to a shoulder holster, but attached to the weak-hand side of the backpack.

I don't think I would buy one though, I just don't have the disposable income right now. I'd rather get a CZ.

If you enjoyed reading about "CCW AK-Pistol (7.62x39)" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!