What should i look for in an ak-47

[maskedman504]

No matter how many times I change the furniture, the metal will never look like I paid $1000.

Before the AWB-panic, anyone somewhat informed would know you didn't pay $1000 if they saw you holding an AK pattern rifle.

I got this Hungarian SA-85 back in '93. I know there are alot of thumbhole-hates, but I like my blond wood furniture and I like the thumbhole. Top quality AK variant also, as far as metal finish and overall build quality, if I don't say so myself.

 

[nalioth]

Are the Galil-pattern guns from Century a solution to this question, or are they not any good?

There are plenty of threads here, on most any AK-centric forum and over at UziTalk that answers your question.

The answer ain't a positive one.

 

[RamboOntario]

i understand that an ak was not designed to be a very accurate gun
but a .223 is a lighter faster round
the 7.62 is a slower heaver round
any body knows that heavier objects fall at a faster rate
and if the round is faster it is in air less time on it way to the target so it falls less...
the video was not about the m16 it was justifying how an 7.62 round shoots.
if not at 200 yards then 300

 

[maskedman504]

the video was not about the m16 it was justifying how an 7.62 round shoots.

I guess if you discount the whole introduction where the guy points out the AK has a heavy, slightly off-center bolt and explain the rotating bolt assembly of the AR and shows in super slow-motion barrel wobble on both guns. BTW they are firing in full auto.

I submit to you:

An AK will be less accurate, as a rule, than an AR.

An AK in 7.62 may or may not be slightly more accurate than an AK in 5.56.

Alot of this is going to be determined how you, as a shooter, do YOUR job.

I will keep my 7.62- I would rather be able to punch through block walls and engine blocks anyhow- you know, when the zombies come~

 

[RamboOntario]

if my zombie you mean the government, then yes

 

[RamboOntario]

it depends on how much more accurate would it be to me
if only 3 or so inches at 100 yards then i would definitely want a 7.62

 

[briansmithwins]

any body knows that heavier objects fall at a faster rate

Rate of acceleration is independent of mass. Everything falls at 9.8m/s/s. Things with large surface areas in proportion to their mass hit terminal velocity faster, but that's a different effect.

BSW

 

[RamboOntario]

Same difference

 

[Mayo]

This might help you:



http://forums.officer.com/showthread.php?t=107080

 

[RamboOntario]

thank you very much

 

[CoRoMo]

there is no comparison at 200 yard with a .223 and a 7.62
this video proves it

Did you watch the video you linked to?
It does not prove an accuracy variance between the two cartridges. It is not a video comparing the accuracy of the two cartridges.

Also, a brick falls at the same rate as a pebble.

 

[SLR]

well, yeah. If you get something wrong then people would like to tell you where you got it wrong. Its the way people are. They all want their chance to give their $.02.

Don't take offense. They are trying to educate. They are not being jerks like other forums relating to this subject.

And zombie means zombie

 

[SLR]

I hope this pic loads.
Anyway its my Slr-106fr, refinished by Chris at ak-usa.

P.S. it can zoom in a lot. so it may be 56k unfriendly

 

[H2O MAN]

I sampled a few ChiCom MAK-90s to get familiar with the platform, decided exactly
what I wanted, sold the MAKs and purchased a pre-ban 7.62 type 56 Norinco.

Here she is after a few upgrades... I call her my T56SHTF.

 

[HB]

But the AK-47 wasn't a rifle designed to be fired accurately from the shoulder like an M16/M4. It was supposed to be fired from the hip, full auto, magazine after magazine, in formation with the other members of your unit, while you advance towards your enemy.

Why does it come with a stock then?

 

[quatin]

Quote:
But the AK-47 wasn't a rifle designed to be fired accurately from the shoulder like an M16/M4. It was supposed to be fired from the hip, full auto, magazine after magazine, in formation with the other members of your unit, while you advance towards your enemy.

Why does it come with a stock then?

This has got to be sarcasm. Sounds like stuff you hear from the guy at the gunshow selling Hitler's Luger.

 

[nalioth]

No. actually it was envisioned that the gun would be slung from the shoulder, and held at waist level, while your whole formation advanced and fired.

No sarcasm or BS about it.

 

[quatin]

Then why put sights on it.

 

[nalioth]

Why does it come with a stock then?

Then why put sights on it.

Because it was designed to be an infantry rifle.

Military rifles have sights and stocks.

 

[noob_shooter]

get a saiga 308 or 223 and convert it. I still gotta convert my saiga 308

 

[lefteyedom]

The ugly truth

Somebody has to wave the BS flag!!

AK47 are not great guns.

They are simple, heavy, inaccurate shoddy made lead sprayers. The KISS principle taken to far. The fact that any simpleton can pick one up and "run it" is not a really saying much about the operater.

AKs worked well in the soviet battle plan because they put no value on human life.

Made by underpaid soviet "workers" for any thug willing to pony up $17.50 or basing rights to CCCP. Does anybody remember Uncle Joe?

These are the same folk that issue one rifle to 3 solders and told the other 2 wait till guy the rifle was killed then pick up his rifle and fight on.:banghead:

Compare the AK47, "the 47 stands for 1947" with our 1930s garand, or 1950s m14 and ask your self which country valued there solders more?

If the Army's first issuing of M16 in Vietnam had not been such a major "Cluster fudge" The lore of AK47 would be seen for what it really was. Radio Moscow BS.

If you want a "real" AK47 get the cheapest stamped one you can find and go shoot watermelons.

Just don't think about the millions of people that have been killed with them and the untold millions that have been oppressed by them.

 

[SLR]

uhhh.... the ak does what it intends to do. THAT MAKES IT A GOOD GUN, doing what it was made to accomplish. And it does just that. If it didn't do what it was made to do then it would be a bad gun. It functions then and it functions now. They still use it with great success.
Remember, the firearm our military is using comes from the lowest bidder, but that doesn't make it a bad gun.
P.S. I think your being sarcastic, but I really can't tell.