AK-47 How to make it more accurate?


PDA






beeenbag
February 23, 2010, 11:10 PM
I went to the gun shop today with a friend of mine and he is really interested in a romanian ak thats there. His only problem is the gun dealer told him it wasn't as accurate as the AR platform. He is on a bit of a budget but so thats why he doesn't want an AR. What are some mods he could do to this AK to help tune it in some. I know nothing about AKs so I'm sure this is the place to ask. Thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "AK-47 How to make it more accurate?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mongo4567
February 23, 2010, 11:20 PM
Don't believe everything a dealer says, you might find that some AKs are very accurate. They are like all guns, some more accurate than others. The milled receivers and new barrels tend to be very accurate. I haven't seen much help with tuning them except a better trigger or a scope; the short sight radius makes it very hard for some people to shoot them well.

atlanticfire
February 23, 2010, 11:23 PM
An AK is just that an AK. It was never designed or meant to be a precision instrument. Get an AK shoot it a lot and have fun:evil:....now guys commence with the” you can do this with a Saiga” crap.:rolleyes:

The milled receivers and new barrels tend to be very accurate
Very true, but they tend to be as expensive as an entry level AR...

jpwilly
February 23, 2010, 11:24 PM
The AKM design doesn't lend itself to the accuracy advantages of the AR design.

You may want to comb through this site and even http://www.ar15.com/forums/board.html?b=4 for more info.

beeenbag
February 23, 2010, 11:39 PM
See I dont know what makes the AK "not accurate" so thats why I was asking. I didn't know if you could buy an after market barrel or tighter bolt assembly or what.

schlockinz
February 23, 2010, 11:43 PM
how accurate do you need?

beeenbag
February 23, 2010, 11:45 PM
well im sure hes not gonna be varment hunting with it but his motive for buying the gun is to target shoot and home protection. Hope that helps.

schlockinz
February 23, 2010, 11:46 PM
I don't see why a 2-3MOA ak wouldn't be acceptable. I hear that the saiga 223's are fairly accurate. That'd be about half the price and same ammo.

Otherwise, look at the S&W M&P AR's, I've seen them in the 700 range lately

jonnyc
February 23, 2010, 11:50 PM
Want a more accurate AK? Design a better trigger, install better sights, and oh yeah...use a different cartridge. They are what they are.

jpwilly
February 23, 2010, 11:59 PM
What makes and AR accurate and an... AK not as accurate are very similar things so here we go:

AR Free Float Barrel... AK Nope those handguards and gas tubes put different pressure points on the barrel.

AR Bolt lockup square and true and repeatable... AK Nope that giant beefy reliable gas piston and bolt carrier group really slam and twist everything around shot to shot.

AR Milled Reciever AK (Most) Stamped reciever and they do flex when fired.

AR Great Trigger with aftermarket drop in...AK Good Trigger but still only a couple decent aftermarket ones out there.

AR Great sights...AK Sights can get you Minute of Man not MOA.

The AK is really accurate when you consider how unrefined the rifle is and how simple they are to build vs the AR. But when measuring accuracy in group size you need repeatability from shot to shot. Things need to be as consistant as possible for every shot and the AKM moves a little more and just isn't set up to be as accurate. But for what they were designed to do they do that job very very well.

AK103K
February 24, 2010, 12:01 AM
One of the biggest myths on the internet is, "AK's are not accurate".

For the most part, they will shoot fine if your a capable shooter, and your realistic about what your shooting. If your looking for a bulls eye type target rifle, the AK probably isnt the best choice. If your looking for a rifle that will make good, COM hits on a man sized target out to 300 yards or so, it will do fine. Mount a red dot on one, low and up front on the gun, and it will keep up with all the other rifles with a red dot on them, and I think you'll find the hits on target are pretty much the same. Same goes for the iron sights on targets that dont have an aiming point.

All you really need for the AK, is a good Russian sling, some decent mags, and a case or two of a decent lot of ammo. A good sight tool, like the one from B Square, is also a plus. If you have the extra money, a good red dot on an Ultimak rail is worth the extra, but by no means necessary.

I have AK's from one end of the price scale to the other, and they all pretty much shoot the same. The ones that I troubles with, were ones made here from parts. That may have changed somewhat now, but personally, I'd prefer a gun that was originally made in the country of origin.

Ammo can be an issue. Wolf is probably the worst, as it can be very inconsistent. Sometimes one lot will shoot great, while another lot will be terrible. You just never know until you shoot it. The old Barnaul, or one of the "Bears", which I believe is Barnaul in a new wrapper, are your best bet, and their soft points are usually the best of the lot.

Generally, you should get 3-4" groups at 100 yards out of any of the rifles with ammo they like.

schlockinz
February 24, 2010, 12:07 AM
What about the tech-sights peep sights? I like them on my norinco

Coronach
February 24, 2010, 01:07 AM
The best things you can do to improve the practical accuracy of an existing AK (as opposed to theoretical things you can do to the design):

1. Get better sights. Tech sights or a RDS are good ideas.

2. Get a good trigger. The Tapco G2 is a good trigger.

3. Try different types of ammo to see what your gun likes. Often, a gun will group nicely with one type and shoot mediocre (or worse) with most everything else.

Mike

rangerruck
February 24, 2010, 01:11 AM
you really can't tune an ak , but I would def get one of these, then cowitness a scope or some type holo site, with a green laser.
http://texasweaponsystems.com/

nothing else is near as good, and nothing else will put a site, back by your eyesite, not mounted way forward., and nothing else will allow you to put to sites in the same line, on the same mount.

all the stuff mentioned above will help with the feel and ergos, and therefore help accuracy a tad, but it is just a bit.

Or forget all the above, and get a Saiga, galil, or tantal; but mostly a Saiga. they are moa capable,
if you are good, and you get some ammo it likes.

hank327
February 24, 2010, 01:25 AM
Your basic plain jane AK can have pretty good practical accuracy if you do your part as the shooter. Check out this video of what a Romanian WASR AK can do at 230 yards.

http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45#p/u/27/kwMmhSWRu3Q

Girodin
February 24, 2010, 01:34 AM
First I would determine how much accuracy you need before you worry about it.

One of the biggest limitations most AKs face is the crap ammo that people feed them. You can not shoot the cheapest ammo you find and expect to match rifles shooting high grade ammo.

If you are going to shoot the AK with open sights, from field positions with wolf ammo the rifles mechanical accuracy is unlikely to be the weakest link in the chain.

shephard19
February 24, 2010, 02:17 AM
The AKM design doesn't lend itself to the accuracy advantages of the AR design.

You may want to comb through this site and even http://www.ar15.com/forums/board.html?b=4 for more info.
The AR design does not lend itslef to the reliabilty of the AK design! ;)

tkopp
February 24, 2010, 02:29 AM
I put a 1x scope on my AK and found that to be a great improvement over the iron sights. Puts me at about 3 MOA at 100y with surplus ammo. Honestly, working with a dot, I'm not sure if it's me or the rifle that's keeping me at 3 MOA. That's also about how accurate I am with my m1 carbine at 100y with its scope at 1x, so I assume I still have some room to get better.

ChuteTheMall
February 24, 2010, 02:41 AM
Start with better ammo before investing in sighting systems; master the AK as it is before attempting to reinvent it.

CZ223
February 24, 2010, 05:21 AM
Have your friend shoot an older Mini 14 before he shoots the AK. It won't make the AK shoot any better but, by comparison, he will be much happier.:D

elmerfudd
February 24, 2010, 05:33 AM
A typical AK with typical steel cased ammo can shoot about 4" groups at 100 yards. Most shooters aren't up to doing that with the stock sights however. AK sights aren't made for precision accuracy and very few American shooters know how to shoot well with iron sights.

If you're like 90% of shooters, getting a good mount and a reasonably decent scope is the #1 thing you can do to improve your accuracy with an AK.

You can also start out with a Saiga. They have consistently been my most accurate AK's. 2 MOA isn't an unreasonable expectation with one.

Next is ammo. You can't expect to get good accuracy with cheap ammo. Accurate ammunition requires consistency and precision and that tends to cost money. If you buy an AK in a nontraditional caliber like .223, then that opens you up to buying match grade ammo over the counter. If you get a 7.62x39, then you'll have to roll your own for top performance. When you're going for accuracy, the right ammo makes a world of difference.

Lastly, you should consider replacing the trigger. RSA makes a good unit and with a grinding and polishing, you can make a G2 shoot just as good as an RSA.

AK103K
February 24, 2010, 10:08 AM
Start with better ammo before investing in sighting systems; master the AK as it is before attempting to reinvent it.
This is your best bet.

Learning its manual of arms, and becoming comfortable and experienced with the rifle, will make 99% of all other complaints go away.


Most shooters aren't up to doing that with the stock sights however. AK sights aren't made for precision accuracy and very few American shooters know how to shoot well with iron sights.
I tend to agree, and that goes for all types of iron sights too. Shooting realistically from field positions is another problem, but also a whole other story.

I do find it interesting that the AK's iron sights are the same as most hunting rifles that still have them (and actually better than many), and the same as "most" military iron sights, yet they are somehow inferior. Yes, they may have a slightly shorter sight radius, but I have current commercial rifles with a similar sight radius, and I rarely hear anybody complaining about them.

If you dont take the time and effort to learn to shoot properly, it doesnt matter what you have on the gun, or even what kind of gun you have, your results wont be all that good.

All scopes do is let you see the target better. They dont make the gun shoot better, and in many cases, the scopes and their mounts can cause more aggravation than the gun itself.

Red dots are not scopes. They are sort of an in between type sighting device. They simply take the alignment issue of the iron sights out of the equation and focus it onto one dot. Where they really shine is, they are very fast to use, and enhance the guns use in a more realistic manner. They usually do not provide results that are better than the iron sights, if you can shoot iron sights, as they usually offer a less precise aiming point.

Adding peep or aperture sights to an AK may or may not help you. Personally, I dont think they are necessary, and in some cases, I think they just aggravate things.

The Mojo type put the peep way to far forward to be used as a true peep. The couple of the rear mounted type I've seen, put them, or parts of how they attach to the gun to close to your face, which forces you to not mount or hold the rifle properly. You need to have your head down and forward to properly do so, with your nose at or alongside the rear of the top cover, which these type sights tend to interfere with.

If you look at the "real" AK variants that have peep sights, they are mounted more forward on top of the cover. These are not some aftermarket thing either, but factory engineered and issued sights and do work. I believe Krebs has something similar, but no one else seems to want make the effort to take on the top cover.

If you want to add a red dot to the AK, you have to make some serious decisions, and you may end up spending more than you paid for the rifle if you want something that works without making concessions.

If you go cheap on the dot sight, its probably not going to last very long under moderate use. By cheap, I mean anything that isnt a mil spec type sight. In the long run, you'll end up spending more on the cheap sights that you will buying the better ones outright.

The mounts are another issue, and everyone seems to have their favorite. The best I've found so far, has been the Ultimak rail that replaces the upper hand guard. Its well made and engineered, rock solid, and proven. It sits the lowest of any of the other mounts available, and allows you to cowitness your iron sights through the tube of the dot sight with the right dot/mount set up. The rifle shoulders and shoots just like it does with the iron sights, and you have the same cheek weld. This set up puts the dot low and out front, out of the way of your field of view, and out of the way of handling the gun. You also dont have to remove it to clean the gun.

Most all the other rail or red dot type mounts position your head to high and to far rearwards to allow you to shoot the rifle naturally.

Your going to have to decide what you want the rifle for, and what you can afford or are willing to spend if you want to go this route.

Trigger wise, the best triggers are the original factory triggers(I dont mean the crappy US replacement parts). Next to them, the best I've found are the Red Star Arms. I have one of the Tapco G2 triggers in one of my guns, but its coming back out, as its worse than the Century trigger it replaced. I know a lot of people rave about the G2, and I probably just got a bad one, but if I decide to do it again, it will be another RSA trigger.

Other than slap, I've never understood the complaints about the AK's trigger. Everyone I've shot, even the ones with slap, have been better than any of the stock AR/M16 triggers I've ever shot, and of all the AK's and AR's I have or have had, only one AR has had a nicer trigger, and thats because its a tuned match type trigger.

MechAg94
February 24, 2010, 10:35 AM
I would have to agree that the AK shoots as good as some other rifles that people don't complain about. The iron sights are just as good as the stock irons on many lever guns out there.

With my Vepr or my Saiga, I can shoot 2 to 4 MOA groups all day long with just about any ammo I have. They are very consistent if not tack drivers. I am sure there are "bad shooting" AK's out there, but mine do okay on accuracy.

Now when you start trying to shoot at 200 or 300 yards, the groups spread out a lot more, but they will with other similar ammo also.


IMO, it depends a lot on how good you are with standard iron sights and what sort of accuracy you are expecting. If you go in wanting to same hole, you will be disappointed.

TIMC
February 24, 2010, 01:27 PM
It has all been said pretty well above. The AK like most other battle rifles is made to fair accuracy (minute of soldier) not moa and to funtion in adverse conditions of the battle field. There are exceptions but the AK is not one of them. I can easily hit a man size silhouette at 200 yards with mine but I am not exactly sure where on the target I will hit.

To answer your question simply....
AK-47 How to make it more accurate?
Move closer to the target!

If you want an accurate battle style rifle there are others out there much better suited for the job

AK103K
February 24, 2010, 01:45 PM
The real answer here is, if you want an accurate rifle, learn to shoot. If you havent already done that, it really doesnt matter what rifle you buy.

benEzra
February 24, 2010, 03:11 PM
A 7.62x39mm AK will not be as accurate as a typical 5.56x45mm AR. However, there are some things you can do that will help an AK shoot as well as a typical .30-30.

(1) If it comes with a slant brake, replace it with a flash suppressor, quality AK-74 style brake, or (if nothing else) a barrel nut to protect the threads. This step alone can help quite a bit, and is cheap.

(2) Don't expect great groups with cheap plinking ammunition. Quality ammunition makes a difference if you're shooting for groups.

(3) Upgrade to an optic or at least better sights (though some people can shoot pretty well with the factory sights, with practice).

(4) Shooting from a rest is tricky with a 7.62x39mm AK due to barrel harmonics; you may have better accuracy shooting from prone or braced arms, or shooting from a sandbag under the receiver and NOT the barrel or forend.

Maximo
February 24, 2010, 03:29 PM
I found that my AK had been abused slightly from another owner. Upgraded to a the tactical quad rail system, ordered a new gas tube housing with out the hand guard backing plates, removed the factory front sight post, added a nice upper scope assembly with 3 different configurations, 6-way adj. stock, and a 4 in. flash break.
Shooting an AK is just what it was built for, running through the jungle and close combat arms. AK's are not meant for sniper grade shooting, only close combat, less then 100 yards, end of story. You can develop a good shooting accuracy with your weapon by plenty of practice and learning how to repeat with the many minor flaws in the particular weapon of choice. Don't mean to come off as a guru of AKs, there are no two weapons alike in their shooting capabilities. Mine had problems, I just learned to work around what I could not fix or tweek out. Happy shooting, Maximo

nathan
February 24, 2010, 05:41 PM
A thick receiver and heavy type barrel shines in accuracy. Polytech AKs and Yugo M 70AB2 have been tight groupers.

essayons21
February 24, 2010, 05:50 PM
I bought a set of Mojo peep sights for mine, which greatly improved my accuracy with the weapon. 3 inch groups at 100 yards with Brown Bear. I'm sure better ammo would have produced better results, but minute of pie-plate with an AK is plenty good for me.

WASR-10/63s come with the Tapco G2 trigger, which is quite nice, even compared to stock AR triggers. On mine I used aluminum shims and JB Weld to tighten up the magazine well and eliminate mag rattle. No effect on accuracy, but the gun is now nice and tight.

This site (http://www.ak-47.us/Romanian.php) offers a number of at home fixes to improve upon the Romy platform.

I have since removed the Mojo sights as I acquired more accurate semi-autos and decided to let my AK be an AK.

rd2007
February 24, 2010, 07:01 PM
I love how accurate I am with my AK and only wish I could do the same with the handguns I own. I'll never understand why people always say it isn't accurate.

sarduy
February 24, 2010, 07:33 PM
what's an example how accurate a ak can be

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=358803&highlight=saiga

sarduy
February 24, 2010, 07:43 PM
I love how accurate I am with my AK and only wish I could do the same with the handguns I own. I'll never understand why people always say it isn't accurate.

because some of those people want moa accuracy out of a rifle and bullet that isn't moa... now... can a bolt action with moa accuracy be used in CQB or in rapit fire.. NO.

different tools for different jobs.

skidooman603
February 25, 2010, 07:24 AM
Added MOJO sight to my Tapco 2 triggered AK and it did improve. It will never shoot a clean target at 100 yds but that was never the intent.

mshootnit
February 25, 2010, 10:26 AM
The best way to make a Romanian AK into a more accurate AK is to trade it for a milled Arsenal which came factory stock with a Steyr chrome lined barrel.

pitty920
March 2, 2010, 04:54 PM
No, This is the real anwser wise asses!

Move your rear sight back as far as possible, and you will notice an much better grouping and greater distances, this is a tried and tru method that has been incorporated on the Newer AK's of today, so yes shooting better will help, but the AK's sights are too close together to be accurate enough at a distance, so move em back its not too hard.

d2wing
March 3, 2010, 08:32 PM
The dealer is correct. The AK is not going to shoot anywhere near as accurately as an AR. Yes you can tinker with it but it's still not comparable for accuracy to an AR. However as many of these guys say, it's good enough for them, as well as the millions of commies, and taliban. They seem to prefer Toyotas and yugos too.

camslam
March 3, 2010, 08:49 PM
After taking the advice of several people that have already posted in this thread, I put an ultimak rail and CompML3 red dot on my AK and it is plenty accurate for my needs.

Out to 100 yards I am VERY consistent on where I want to place my shots. 150 I start to struggle and at 200 yards, speaking honestly, I'm not that great. :o

I am under no illusion that the accuracy problems are the guns fault and not mine. I'm just not that good of a shooter at 200 yards right now. That will come with time and practice as ammo prices continue to come back to a reasonable level.

I always laugh when people get in here and bash the AK and say it is innaccurate, etc.. Not to be said lightly or with any disrespect, but if the AK platform was so inaccurate, can any one explain all the deaths that have occured from it? I mean there has to be some explanation other than they got lucky?

I'm just sayin... :scrutiny:

elmerfudd
March 3, 2010, 09:44 PM
I suspect that most deaths attributable to the AK resulted from close range or a high volume of fire, something that has probably been true of most military firearms since the matchlock. The overwhelming majority of soldiers worldwide are not marksmen. There are only a handful of countries that really stress marksmanship. The rest basically rely on spray and pray and even among the countries that do believe in aimed fire, you can bet that almost none of the soldiers are shooting with MOA accuracy in the middle of a firefight.

camslam
March 3, 2010, 09:59 PM
I suspect that most deaths attributable to the AK resulted from close range or a high volume of fire, something that has probably been true of most military firearms since the matchlock.

I won't argue that, it obviously is just as relevant in regards to the AR as well. My point is the AK is plenty lethal and plenty accurate for what it is designed to do. While there may be a select few that fight all their battles from 300 yards and further, I believe most ground infantry battles are probably a bit closer in proximity.

M1key
March 3, 2010, 10:21 PM
You want an accurate AK? Get an AK-74 or Saiga in 5.45x39. Mine will shoot a little under 1.5 MOA.

Ignition Override
March 3, 2010, 10:33 PM
A check on Youtube could illustrate the comparison.

Watching the well-known show from the Military Channel (etc), for example "The Ten Top Combat Rifles", or whatever the proper title, shows the AK barrel's flexing with the high speed camera.

pitty920's comments reminded me of "Tech sights", which sells peep sights for $45 and $60. SKS owners report much-improved shooting.

Al LaVodka
March 4, 2010, 12:03 AM
I love how accurate I am with my AK and only wish I could do the same with the handguns I own. I'll never understand why people always say it isn't accurate.
Man, you took the words right out of my mouth! To "make" the AK more accurate simply realize it is a really big, really heavy, really reliable, accurate enough PISTOL.

Same for the M-1 Carbine.

Al

thebaldguy
March 4, 2010, 12:04 AM
I can shoot 5 inch groups without a scope. I might do a little better with open sights on a different rifle. Try using one of those Russian side mount scopes made for AK rifles. My eyes are still pretty good, but I am noticing that these scopes help out a lot in accuracy as I get older. Being able to use the exact aiming point with a scope helps out quite a bit as the AK sights aren't the greatest in the world when combined with aging eyes.

Ammo may help accuracy as well. I have heard that the mass produced eastern block ammo does have some variations in powder weights. Handloaders may get a great load that helps accuracy as well. Just remember that this is not your super accurate Winchester/Remington/Savage/Mossberg etc. bolt action hunting rifle with a nice 3x9 scope.

nathan
March 4, 2010, 12:10 AM
4 inch grp at 100 yds is common . It kills a man easily . 8 inch grp at 200 yds is common. It hits a man easily as well.

MJ
March 4, 2010, 12:55 AM
The doctrine was built around a suppression system to get the soldier close enough to use the grenade. Mobile fire power to keep heads down till Ivan put the granate45 in your hole. We had some nice milled Chinese AK's in '67 that had very good accuracy to 100 yards and a bit more but where the excelled was 25~30 yards laying down suppressive fire in the assault to grenade range. Translations of training pamphlets stressed this doctrine.



Cheers
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v130/montereyjack/ee27d9b6.jpg

elmerfudd
March 4, 2010, 02:20 AM
I won't argue that, it obviously is just as relevant in regards to the AR as well. My point is the AK is plenty lethal and plenty accurate for what it is designed to do. While there may be a select few that fight all their battles from 300 yards and further, I believe most ground infantry battles are probably a bit closer in proximity.

I think those of us who like to shoot often develop unreasonable expectations for how accurate a combat rifle should be. We sit at a bench with perfect lighting, well rested, shooting scoped rifles off of sandbags at a measured 100 yards and are generally able to shoot 3 MOA or less. We feel that a really good rifle/ammo combination might shoot 1 MOA or less and that one that shoots 4 MOA or more pretty much sucks.

A soldier in combat on the other hand will be shooting from an improvised position. He's probably scared to death and has just completed a flat out sprint with 100 lbs on his back. His heart's likely beating at 160 bpm or so, sweat is streaming down his face into his eyes and he hasn't had any real sleep in the last 48 hours. Bullets are flying at him and he's probably lucky if he's shooting a 3 foot group at 100 yards.

So obviously I think the AK has more than enough accuracy for it's intended purpose, but the M16/M4 has far better sights and optics mounting options and I think that's a big advantage.

Lloyd Smale
March 4, 2010, 08:37 AM
heres my take on it. i like accurate rifles. you can preach to me all day that under field conditions a guy cant take advantage of a 1moa accurate gun but ill argue that. Even if you are only capable of holding a gun well enough to shoot 5 inch 100 yard groups, if your given a gun that is only capable of 4moa your going to shoot a much larger group then you are with a gun that shoots 1moa. You have to figure gun error and shooter error seperately and not combine them. If a gun shoots 4moa it means the bullet may land anywhere in a 4 inch circle for point of aim. So say it hits on the outer edge 4 inches from the point of aim now you combine that with the average shooters error under pressure which we will say just for argument is 5 inches. Now you have the possibility of being 9 inches from where you wanted to place that bullet and that could easily be a miss. Now take the 1moa gun and do the same and your only 6 inches away and have a much better chance of a good hit. Accuracy is our freind even at a 100 yards and dont be fooled into thinking otherwize. Another senerio when its a big advantage is in heavy brush when trying to snake a bullet through a hole in the folige. Dont get me wrong i like aks. there amazing guns for the reliability they have but theyd be a far more amazing gun if a guy could be guranteed one would shoot at least 2moa.

Ill got this route. I own a ar in 762x39 an ak and used to have to mini 30s. the mini 30s went. they are no more accurate then the ak and not as reliable. My ak runs cheap wolf ammo forever without cleaning it. It never misses a beat. My ar running wolf will usually go about 500 rounds before it gets so clogged up it wont run and maybe will have one failure to feed somewhere in the the first 500. As a civilian even in a survival situation i will never need to shoot anywhere near 500 rounds it will probably be more like one or two rounds and i will have long boring days to clean my guns. Bottom line is if one had to go it would be the ak. the ar shoots moa with good loads and 2moa with wolf and i wouldnt be willing to give up that precision to insure i can take on the whole arab region of the world in one battle. Bottom line is in a situation like that your probably going to be dead before you can swap clips anyway.

AK103K
March 4, 2010, 09:09 AM
Theres more involved than just the gun here, ammo, and more importantly, the shooter, which I think is usually the weakest link, also play roles.

I also think a lot of this is just over talked instead of over shot. If more actual shooting was going on, it would require less discussion. There is usually more talk about the problem, than there is work done to resolve it, especially from those who complain.

The problem here too is, many of those joining in the fray are not talking about the same thing. You have everything from casual recreational shooters to dedicated target shooters trying to discuss something that is covering a lot of ground, along with a lot of perceptions and expectations, both in the guns themselves and how they are used.

More often than not, those that complain about one gun, have no real experience with it over what they say is better, which they tend to have a lot of experience with. If you switch things around, and put some time in, I think you'll find things rarely get worse, and the gaps begin to close.

Another thing I have noticed a good bit at the range too is, those who have trouble shooting the AK, many times, dont do all that well with the AR or anything else. Again, as almost always, we're back to the weakest link.

Al LaVodka
March 4, 2010, 09:30 AM
I think those of us who like to shoot often develop unreasonable expectations for how accurate a combat rifle should be... We feel that... one that shoots 4 MOA or more pretty much sucks.

A soldier in combat... improvised position... scared to death... just completed a flat out sprint with 100 lbs on his back. His heart's... at 160 bpm... sweat is streaming... into his eyes and he hasn't had any real sleep... Bullets are flying at him and he's probably lucky if he's shooting a 3 foot group at 100 yards.

So obviously I think the AK has more than enough accuracy for it's intended purpose...
It does does it? Although I personally would say that the gun should be MORE accurate to help offset the human warfighter conditions cited, this begs the question: what assault rifle combination is LESS accurate than an AK?

Exactly... It's a big pistol that shoots bad ammo reliably so the inaccuracy is built in, with love, from Communist countries the world over FOR the world over. For the OP: learn it, live it, love it back. If you say they're for suicide missions I won't argue. But at least they, and their ammo, are cheap and look tacticool.

Al

benEzra
March 4, 2010, 10:12 AM
A check on Youtube could illustrate the comparison.

Watching the well-known show from the Military Channel (etc), for example "The Ten Top Combat Rifles", or whatever the proper title, shows the AK barrel's flexing with the high speed camera.
That video is largely bunk, if it's the one I'm thinking of. Most of the movement in the slo-mo video, if you look closely, was the cleaning rod bouncing. Yes, the AK does have a little more barrel flex than some rifles, and it becomes noticeable if you try to benchrest it off the barrel, but that video doesn't do it justice.

A more pertinent observation is that the clown shooting the AK was slapping the trigger like he was shooting marbles, and could barely even get on a B21 at 200 yards; a rack-grade AK should be able to put every round in the magazine on a large pie plate at that distance, assuming a rest and using halfway decent ammunition. Using that technique, he'd have done about as badly with a Garand. The other guy shooting the M16 wasn't too hot a shot, either, but at least he looked like he was trying to stay on the paper.

elmerfudd
March 5, 2010, 12:37 AM
It does does it? Although I personally would say that the gun should be MORE accurate to help offset the human warfighter conditions cited, this begs the question: what assault rifle combination is LESS accurate than an AK?

I've owned FAL's that were less accurate than most of my AK's, although on average an FAL is probably slightly more accurate. In my experience, a typical FAL is about a 2-3 MOA rifle while a typical AK is about a 3-4 MOA rifle. Your average rack grade Garand isn't going to shoot much better than that.

It's also really not practical to expect much better accuracy than that on a large scale, since most military ammo isn't match ammo and never will be.

What makes more sense is to make the weapon itself easier to shoot accurately under bad conditions. Good ergonomics, adjustable stocks and optics are all things which will have much more impact than making the rifle itself slightly more accurate since we're talking a difference of maybe 2" at 100 yards. Even AK's are more than accurate enough to make head shots at 200 yards and torso shots out to 400. The main thing handicapping them isn't inherently bad accuracy, but inherently bad sights and bad ergonomics.

sarduy
March 5, 2010, 12:39 AM
AK-47 How to make it more accurate?

practice with it, the ak is more accurate than what you think... when you master (as in...hitting everything you shoot) the iron sights get a reddot or a scope.

boricua9mm
March 5, 2010, 07:50 AM
Don't shoot Wolf. Outside of that, you can experiment with different flash hiders, remove the flash hider altogether, and install a better trigger/give it a trigger job.

For what it's worth, I shoot Wolf almost exclusively, but I don't expect my rifle/ammo combination to do any better than minute-of-pie-plate.

Al LaVodka
March 5, 2010, 09:46 AM
...a typical AK is about a 3-4 MOA rifle. ...more than accurate enough to make head shots at 200 yards.
To make it more accurate? Avoid head-shots with a gun whose defender is happy with a 6" to 8" group at 200 yards. Who the heck's head are YOU thinking of, Mr. Mackey in Southpark!?

Al

Orion8472
March 5, 2010, 10:20 AM
Hehehe, Al. Yeah, that would make it better for us if insurgents had a Mr, Mackey head. :p

d2wing
March 5, 2010, 03:31 PM
3-4 moa is good for a headshot at 200 yards? Having been in combat, I could never find anyone willing to hold still while I waiting for a nice day to set a bench. The only head I saw that big was on a really big animal with tusks and a trunk.

fireman 9731
March 5, 2010, 03:44 PM
Ammo can make a big difference in AKs... try a lot if different ammo, my AK likes soft points, especially Silver Bear soft points. I get at least 1 MOA better with them than FMJs or Hollow points.

winchester '97
March 5, 2010, 10:03 PM
Tech sights plain and simple. It was designed to win battles and be extremely durable, not snipe people, its more than accurate enough to generate a torso shot at the distances most people can hit a man with irons. the reason people say the ak is so poor accuracy wise is the sights. put those same sights on you AR and see how you do.

elmerfudd
March 6, 2010, 01:25 AM
To make it more accurate? Avoid head-shots with a gun whose defender is happy with a 6" to 8" group at 200 yards. Who the heck's head are YOU thinking of, Mr. Mackey in Southpark!?

Perhaps you have a head much smaller than that, but most people don't.

http://www.dimensionsguide.com/size-of-a-human-skull/

Notice it's entirely consistent with what I said earlier, but then simply checking your hat size would have confirmed that, or maybe not...

Al LaVodka
March 6, 2010, 01:58 AM
So, would it be more like Barnaby Jones shuffling, or Canon rolling, out of their big cars, aiming their 2" barreled Detective Special at the fleeing badguy a footbal field away and shooting him in the leg? Or more like The A-Team, one of your favorites, where nobody ever actually got shot despite all the lead they were spraying!? This really big pistol you extol is just capable of head-size groups and you're recommending headshots at 200 yards. In a fight. I'm here to tell you...

Someone's been watching too much TV, and, it isn't me.

Al

elmerfudd
March 6, 2010, 02:23 AM
You seem to be the one bringing up TV shows. If you can't get reasonable accuracy out of an AK, the problem most likely lies with you.

Are they as accurate as an AR? No, and I never said they were. Are they accurate enough for killing people out to 400 yards? Yes, and there are millions of dead that confirm this.

AK103K
March 6, 2010, 09:24 AM
Someone's been watching too much TV, and, it isn't me.
That may be, but in the same vein, you must not be getting out with your AK to much.


If you can't get reasonable accuracy out of an AK, the problem most likely lies with you.
As it does with most things shooting related.



This was shot at 200 yards with an AK that is generally considered to be the bottom of the bucket as AK's go, a SAR1. Ammo used was Wolf, 154 grain SP's. The lower group was fired from a rest using the "slightly" canted iron sights to confirm zero, the upper group was fired from a cross legged sitting position at a fairly steady cadence.

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27ff9e8590e00000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D550/ry%3D400/

This was shot at 100 yards, using a an AK from the other end of the price spectrum, a Krebs converted Saiga AK103K, with its 14" barrel and an Aimpoint with a 4moa dot, and again, from a cross legged sitting position.

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27fd338d8fb00000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D550/ry%3D400/

The "head" on the targets are 6" across, in case you cant read the rule.

Al LaVodka
March 6, 2010, 12:39 PM
You seem to be the one bringing up TV shows. If you can't get reasonable accuracy out of an AK, the problem most likely lies with you.

Are they as accurate as an AR? No, and I never said they were. Are they accurate enough for killing people out to 400 yards? Yes, and there are millions of dead that confirm this.
Elmer, you are ignoring the point -- EVERYTHING is more accurate than an AK. And alot more people have been killed in war by disease and art'y -- how "accurate" are they? What's with the continued defense of these really big pistols!? I'm not knocking AK's for they are what they are, I'm just stating comparative facts vs. feelings and the defensive folks are making my point for me. I will concede the sights really suck -- I actually find them kinda insulting but I'm American so I also regret tens of millions of these POS's being handed out to every insurgent in the third world. Their prevalence doesn't make them good -- most voters liked Obama once too.

And, (not so) sadly, I don't have TV which is why I have to refer to hit shows from the '70's and '80's. Somehow I thought I needed to connect on a different level. If your life depended on a making a single 200 yard shot? Admit it! You'd pick up an AR, or anything else, before an AK if you were given the choice.

Al

AK103K
March 6, 2010, 01:06 PM
EVERYTHING is more accurate than an AK.
Your basing this on what? Not actual experience I have to assume.


If your life depended on a making a single 200 yard shot? Admit it! You'd pick up an AR, or anything else, before an AK if you were given the choice.
I have both, and I'd use either, without any hesitation. Then again, I actually own both, and shoot both, and I know what I personally can do with both.

Now if I'm going to shoot a "target" match for bulls eye score, I will take the AR over the AK, as its a whole different subject and use, as well as type of gun, and the AR I'd choose for that, would not be the same AR I'd choose to use in a fight (I have both of them too). My "target" AR shoots tiny little groups, my standard, red dot/iron sighted AR's, shoot very much like my red dot/iron sighted AK's, when shot the same way, and at the same targets.

Al LaVodka
March 6, 2010, 06:49 PM
Your basing this on what? Not actual experience I have to assume.



my standard, red dot/iron sighted AR's, shoot very much like my red dot/iron sighted AK's, when shot the same way, and at the same targets.
It is true, unlike perhaps yourself, I have not fired every make of gun in the world, but own more than most people and shoot more than most even know exist including full auto. To this day. Still, you got me. Well, maybe not -- you know what happens when you assume. Then you went and said that standard AR is as accurate as that AK and lost everybody, again. lol Yes, my mileage is different than yours...
Al

jsamuel77
March 6, 2010, 07:21 PM
I own a Vector Arms AK-47 that I have harvested several good deer with the last 2 years. I got better accuracy from this rifle by changing the "slant" type muzzle brake and going with the "birdcage" type common to the M16A1. It made a big difference in my shot groupings. (Half inch 3-shot groups at 50 yds.) I am using a 6X Leapers Mini Scope for sighting. Before the muzzle brake change it was hard to get a 3 shot group under an inch and a half. Understand, the AK-47 was designed to be an automatic rifle(firepower) with semi automatic capability. The AR was designed as a semi auto(accuracy) with automatic capability. Enjoy the AK.

ol' scratch
March 6, 2010, 08:39 PM
See I dont know what makes the AK "not accurate" so thats why I was asking. I didn't know if you could buy an after market barrel or tighter bolt assembly or what.
Loose tolerances are the main problem in the AK. It was made that way for a reason. You can pack it full of crap and it will still fire. If you found a tighter bolt assembly, you would still have the problem of barrel and receiver flex. Check out this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

Keep in mind that different people have different thoughts about accuracy. The AK is robust and as it has been put before accurate 'enough.' It is not an MOA rifle.

My advice is to purchase an AK and enjoy it for what it is. A word of warning. I owned a WASR and it was a POS. The sights were canted from the factory and I was constantly messing with it. It wasn't accurate even for an AK. I think part of this was because it was built by Century Arms.

AK103K
March 6, 2010, 08:59 PM
Then you went and said that standard AR is as accurate as that AK and lost everybody, again. lol Yes, my mileage is different than yours...
It appears that we do have different experiences, and I suppose a lot of that is how we shoot, and maybe some more of that, is what we are expectations are.

I dont shoot targets with real discernible aiming points, and I dont shoot off a bench. While I do shoot at targets, I rarely "target" shoot anymore, and most of it is more realistic in nature, than structured and scored. A good hit is a good hit, a bad hit, a bad hit. I'm lucky enough to have a range where I can do that. I know many dont have the luxury, and are forced to shoot and practice "unnaturally". Then again, maybe the way I shoot is unnatural to others here.

As I said earlier, when both rifles are equipped with red dots, and shot on the same course, in the same manner (generally standing, sometimes drop to sitting or kneeling, with the sling around my neck, and not used for support), the results on the targets with both rifles are very similar. Both have good "hits" in the same general area.

If I were to "target" shoot, I would not choose the AK, as its not a target rifle, nor am I claiming it is. I also would not choose my Colt SP1 or Armalite M15A4(C), or my Bushy Dissapator, as they are not target rifles either. My M15A4(T) is, and shoots like one, as do my NM M1A and match built M1. Then again, I would not choose any of the later, to shoot the way I do with my AK's, or SP1, or M15A4(C). Funny thing is though, when you feed those match guns GI ammo, and shoot them like the others, they too seem to shoot about the same as the "lesser" guns. Who on the internet would have thunk?

But hey, thats all just my experience, yours may well differ, and thats fine, we all need work somewhere. I know I do, but I keep at it. :)

beeenbag
March 8, 2010, 12:19 PM
I really didn't mean to start an AR vs. AK war. All I wanted to know was a website to a few cool add ons that might help accuracy. :neener: Im still watching the post if anybody has any ideas. :what:

bludog_3
March 8, 2010, 12:38 PM
I got 2" groups with my Arsenal SGL-31 first time out shooting surplus military ammo with iron sights. Took bead on a whistle pig 75 yards out and cut him in two with one shot. An AK doesn't need to do much better than that. Oh, and by the way, put 165 rounds through it and no jams. AR's are great but I hate the double feeds...

d2wing
March 8, 2010, 01:08 PM
beeenbag, if there are any they are on here as far as I know. You might try a side mount red dot or scope. The top cover ones tend to move around. It's not going to ever be a tack driver.
I checked someones link to head sizes but that was only in gay european liberal measurement. As an American I have no idea what that crap is.
But I do know that 2 beer or soda cans side by side are about the size of a brain. Less on some guys of course. Like metric sizes. Anyway, if you put 2 beer cans in a bag,have someone hang it where you don't know where it is, have it swing behind rocks and brush. Then walk into the area and when you see it, shoot it by the count of two. That would be a more realistic idea of how effective your battle rifle is. Now even at a range offhand can you hit a pair of beer cans offhand at 200 yards at the count of 2, you are really good with any rifle. with a 4 moa rifle which is a spread of 8 inches, your odds aren't good even if you and the target are standing still in the open. It beats the heck out of throwing rocks though. Ak's a fun and reliable, deadly at close range as they were designed for full auto close range mass fire.
They are fun at the range and cool to have. If you learn anything about making it more accurate please report back.

AK103K
March 8, 2010, 01:32 PM
Until you can eliminate yourself as a component of any inaccuracy, you'll never achieve your goal.

Before you waste a lot of money on needless things, are you capable of shooting up to the rifle?

If not, then the best money spent would be to buy a couple of cases of ammo, and spend some "quality" time at the range in practice.

This really applies even if you are capable, just so you can become acquainted with a new rifle and how it shoots.

sarduy
March 8, 2010, 01:54 PM
Until you can eliminate yourself as a component of any inaccuracy, you'll never achieve your goal.

Before you waste a lot of money on needless things, are you capable of shooting up to the rifle?

If not, then the best money spent would be to buy a couple of cases of ammo, and spend some "quality" time at the range in practice.

This really applies even if you are capable, just so you can become acquainted with a new rifle and how it shoots.

+1

shoot the rifle untill you become one with the rifle... then and only then... you can say if you need more accuracy or not.

sarduy
March 8, 2010, 01:57 PM
i owned the ak first than my ar, and i can shoot the ak very good, but then i firs tried the ar, the sights were a little difficult to get use to, because i have used ak style sights all my life.

Justin
March 8, 2010, 02:09 PM
I've yet to see anyone run an AK-pattern rifle at any regional or national 3Gun match. At local matches, AK's show up sporadically, but don't play regularly.

Bear in mind that these matches are designed to test a shooter's skill under field conditions and do not have the same accuracy requirements of a purely precision-based shooting sport like High Power.

I suspect that if one were to put the effort into it, an AK could be massaged into being a reasonably field-accurate 200 yard rifle, but this would require at least the following changes: upgraded irons or optics (to include mounts), after market trigger, and most importantly, dumping the 3rd world military surplus ammo for American factory ammo or hand loads.

I don't know if those changes would push the cost of running an AK-pattern system up to the point where it would just be better to dump the whole thing and get an AR, but there you have it. Also, none of the above suggestions do anything to improve the AK's ergonomics, which are not very good.

AK103K
March 8, 2010, 03:42 PM
Are the 3 gun matches run with stock, issue grade guns and gear, or are they "tuned" match guns with match type accessories like most of the other events?

One thing that always annoyed me about high power (and most of the others) was, all the "gear" you were supposed to have to be able to compete. Even many of the CMP matches are driven that way.

The only way that would be realistic with any of them would to require you to come to the match empty handed, and then run it with anything you were given at the line, no choice, just what your handed. Thats the only way you'll find out who is a shooter, and whos not.


Most all of the problems with the AK's ergos are just lack of familiarity with them. 99% of the problems go away with just a little practice. They are not AR's, and you cant try to work them like an AR. If you do, I guarantee, it wont work out too well for you. Your best bet either way, would be to buy what you dont have, and actually take the time to learn to work and shoot it, and I think you'll find they really are not all that far apart when you do. They all have their pluses, and they all have their minuses, and we're still usually the biggest minus of all in that respect.

Robert
March 8, 2010, 04:10 PM
The only way that would be realistic with any of them would to require you to come to the match empty handed, and then run it with anything you were given at the line, no choice, just what your handed. Thats the only way you'll find out who is a shooter, and whos not.
Huh? The only way to be a good marksman, or shooter as you put it, is to practice practice practice. And then practice some more with whatever firearm you like best. AR, AK, or sling shot makes no difference. I shoot tactical rifle matches with my spare FAL mags stuck in my back pockets. It sucks. All that gear makes life so much easier, though it is by no means required. Competitions are competitions, the real world is the real world. As hard as match coordinators try, a match will never be real world. But something like a 3 gun or a tactical rifle match gives you the chance to do more than just shoot off the bench at a piece of paper. The few matches I have attended have made me a better shooter overall and shown me some things I need to work on. I'd much rather shoot off of a Cooper Wall than a bench any day of the week.

Justin
March 8, 2010, 04:20 PM
Are the 3 gun matches run with stock, issue grade guns and gear, or are they "tuned" match guns with match type accessories like most of the other events?


I've seen everything from bone-stock rifles up to elaborate Open Class rigs. However, there are different classes, so that the guys who are running iron-sighted rifles aren't competing against the guys with Open Class rifles.

One thing that always annoyed me about high power (and most of the others) was, all the "gear" you were supposed to have to be able to compete. Even many of the CMP matches are driven that way.

When I started shooting competitively, all I showed up with was my rifle and a few magazines. I borrowed everything else until I decided that I really wanted to compete, and then began adding gear, starting with the most useful stuff first.

That said, our local tactical rifle matches are about the most gear-free thing going. Bring a rifle, ammo, three or four magazines, and you're good to go. You don't even have to have mag carriers if you've got ample pockets. No need for a spotting scope, mat, or little wheeled cart.

The only way that would be realistic with any of them would to require you to come to the match empty handed, and then run it with anything you were given at the line, no choice, just what your handed. Thats the only way you'll find out who is a shooter, and whos not.

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even make sense. The point of a shooting match is that it offers a structured and objective way to test both yourself and your equipment. I'm not even sure how you'd go about arranging the logistics of a match that disallows competitors from even using their own rifle.

And even so, how is that in any way a validation (or lack thereof) of the AK's accuracy?

Most all of the problems with the AK's ergos are just lack of familiarity with them. 99% of the problems go away with just a little practice. They are not AR's, and you cant try to work them like an AR. If you do, I guarantee, it wont work out too well for you. Your best bet either way, would be to buy what you dont have, and actually take the time to learn to work and shoot it, and I think you'll find they really are not all that far apart when you do. They all have their pluses, and they all have their minuses, and we're still usually the biggest minus of all in that respect.

Ergonomics are rather beyond the scope of this particular discussion, but even where the Saiga shotguns are making inroads among Open Class shooters, most of them are modifying the guns to have things like push-button drop-free magazines, left-side charging handles, and AR-style fore ends. (FWIW, I run in tactical division, so shoot a more traditional semi-auto shotgun.)

If you enjoyed reading about "AK-47 How to make it more accurate?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!