AK47 - please help me define / find one

Market forces (and some other things) have moved the prices of AK pattern rifles upward. It seems you can find the "WASR-10" version for just about your budget, maybe, but you'll have to shop around a little.

That doesn't leave a lot of room in the wallet for a good adjustable stock. Possibly you would be happy with a fixed "NATO length" stock set. I see some around for a little over $100. That gets you to a more familiar 14" length of pull.

A lot of the adjustables are designed to cobble on 4- or 6-position adjustable stocks from M4 carbines. They seem to work, but would be a textbook case of "Bubbarizing" or at least looking like the hapless offspring of Rube Goldberg and Bubba's homely spinster aunt.

Mounting optics on an AK is generally pretty tricky to do well. There are some bad ways to go, like any of those mounts that replace the dust cover. And there are some pretty decent ways to go, like using the original Soviet style side-mount, if you can find an optic that you like that works with them. I think all of the WASR-10s do come with that side mount plate, though, so it's a place to start. Choosing from the available Soviet scopes and getting comfortable with using them can be a chore, and they aren't super cheap. You can get adapting mounts that attach to the side rail and hold a picatinny rail up over the dust cover, but they tend to put the optic way too high for the amount of drop in an AK stock. But it's a place to start.

Another good option is the "ULTIMAK" mount which holds an optic very well out over the gas tube. Again, these -- certainly with an optic -- are going to burst your budget.

Unfortunately, the really GOOD AK modification parts are really expensive. And these days the AKs themselves are getting pretty expensive, too. It's a lot easier to get a fun plinker that fits well for $600 in the AR world than the AK world.

I have a Yugo M70 that’s been flawless these last ten years, not a single failure of any kind.

If I were in the AK market I’d get a Vepr, I’ve been very impressed with the Vepr 12 I bought last year.

But I’m glad I’m not in the AK market…

Strike Industries makes an adapter so you can attach an AR buffer tube and stock. The adapter is pretty cheap, $26 at Primary arms. Put an aftermarket pistol grip on as well and it won't even feel like the same rifle.
This is what I did, and it looks pretty good to me. It now feels like a well broken in pair of boots too, handles great.

If you like the AK more for the round than the design, PSA makes an AK/AR variant in the 7.62x39 round that looks interesting. I have several PSA items and they do a great job, overall, in their products.

By next weekend, i'll have put together an AR-15 in 7.62x39. I had an AK for five years up until about 2 weeks ago. i wanted to love it. after awhile, i wfanted to settle for liking it. i finally admitted although i love the round...i have an SKS as well.... i couldn't stand...and couldn't hit anything with....my AK. maybe more practice would have eventually helped me put more shots on target, but i've never struggled getting at least ''practical accuracy'" out any other rifle. my ak was the first gun i've ever traded off, and i was glad to see it go. it never once ''failed'' me mechanically, but thats not much use if you cant hit what you're aiming at. for me, personally, an ar variant is a MUCH easier gun to shoot.

I think an entry level Draco would serve well for truck, and home defense. I am not as steady as in my youth and I don't think that you'd need anyone else but the coroner inside of 75 yards. If an old man who's eyesight isn't even nearly as good as it once was can nail it that far youth and better optics/sights and more range is there.
I've modified my friend and as a pistol bravely rides in my pickup with the only drawback being the 75 round drum rattles when you're on rough roads. He will be lazy too and so will one you get so forced exercise is necessary. For that matter I find all the guns I have to be lazy. They will let all manner of targets of opportunity pass. If you must have a rifle you must but just about 5 hundred dollars will be cheap and as with all entry level firearms you probably will be changing furniture first. I like mine but personal taste is just that. Good shooting and have fun whatever you choose to buy.

I'm not sure exactly how to respond. I too have had AKs and SKSs. To me the ergos were lousy and they were hard to shoot well. Now that I'm in my late 40's any long gun that isn't easy to use with an optic is simply not a viable option for me. IMO the AK is quasi-obsolete for the purposes you name, at least for HD. Am I implying it won't put down an intruder? Not at all! But I think modern doctrine calls for the ability to integrate optics and white light as force multipliers. And nothing about the AK makes it easy to use WMLs and optics; those just weren't factors when the carbine was originally designed. True, something like the Galil ACE is fully modern but it's also $1700 or so.

One of the legitimate downsides to the popularity of the AR platform is that it has become so ubiquitous as to have almost no competition, at least in the lower price tiers. There's the Ruger Mini-14/30 but my experience with that rifle has been negative (although I'll note that I owned mine in the early 90's, and supposedly the newer versions are much improved). To me the Mini shares some of the things I disliked about the AK (eg difficulty in mounting an optic, placement & operation of the safety, lack of ability to use a WML, awkward magazine changes). Still, if you like the control layout a Mini in .300 or 7.62x39 might be an option.

The 5.56 vs 7.62x39 argument has been done to death, and I'm not sure if you are looking to entertain more debate. Overall I think the 5.56 NATO round has been pretty successful with a good track record. There's probably room to debate whether another round might be better for a main battle rifle, but I don't think there's much question that when you're not restricted to FMJ the 5.56 is extremely lethal at CQB ranges. The 7.62x39 is more powerful but I don't think many bad guys will still be a threat after a round or two of, say, 55gr GMX bullets COM.

what good aftermarket accessories to make it more ergonomic and easier to shoot accurately without "Bubbarizing" it ? Two main improvements for me would be an adjustable stock and a red dot sight.

Click to expand...

Of those two, the red dot is by far the more helpful, IMO. I had a Kobra (Russian dot/chevron optic) on my SAR-1 on a siderail mount, and it made the rifle a lot easier to shoot well. Unfortunately, the Kobra is a rather fragile optic, and it sat a bit to high for a good cheek weld. If I had it to do over again, I'd probably go with a Primary Arms dot (or an Aimpoint, finances permitting) on a forward rail like the Ultimak.

To be honest, ruggedness is kind of overrated for a plinker. An average range trip for them probably involves being carried fifty yards from a truck, shot a hundred times inside a building or under a canopy on a sunny day, then getting taken home and cleaned. They're not exactly getting abused. As far as power, a 223 carries about as much energy at the muzzle as a 44 magnum, and I don't think anyone would feel under-gunned for HD with one of those.

I have an AK and don't care for it for all the reason you mentioned. If money wasn't a factor, I would take still take an SKS over an AK, straight up. The SKS is what a lot of people think the AK is in terms of durability, and the more traditional style layout feels a lot better to me. The stock is still really short, but adding a $10 1" rubber buttpad made that a lot better. I liked it enough that I got another one for my AK - it helped but not nearly as much.

I would still take an AR over either of them. It just handles a lot better than either of the Soviet rifles (not as clunky as the AK, much lighter than SKS), and shoots far more accurately as well. My AR is a bottom-end <$500 Del Ton, and it runs circles around my Century AK. A $30 peep sight and Walmart FMJ can get me 2-3 MOA groups, no problem. I don't buy steel-case ammo for it, as the bimetal jacket gets hard on the barrels at 223 velocities, but I did run a few boxes through a friend's DPMS and it cycled fine.

If you've never shot an AR, you owe yourself to at least try it. I bought my AK before I had fired an AR - had I done that first, I'm certain I never would have bought the AK.

One factor that many American shooters overlook regarding the stock length of an AK is that were used to shooting from the traditional American rifleman's stance. (assuming you're right handed,) turned about 30-40 degrees away from the target, left hip pointing down range, so that when you bring up the rifle it's butt nestles in a deep pocket formed by your right shoulder as you reach around to bring your hand forward to the trigger. That position calls for a 14" or so length of pull to push the receiver of the gun forward so you can get your face behind it and to give you a nice long stretch of stock comb to rest your face on.

This is great for target shooting, both informally and in competition. And it's the way most of us were trained to take shots while hunting. It's the most stable way to shoot off-hand. But if you hold an AK that way your face is going to crash onto the back of the receiver's dust cover.

However, if you look at soldiers in dynamic situations, moving around with their guns up, clearing houses, working through active hostile situations, that's not how they shoot. Much more "squared-up." Shoulders face the target. Gun butt is rested on the pectoral muscle, more in your center, rather than deep in the shoulder pocket (because there isn't a deep shoulder pocket when you face the target). Shoulders hunched up, head dropped down/forward, knees bent a little. This is the position that lets you move the gun fast between moving targets, close up. Less stable, but more flexible/dynamic.

If you shoot that way, 14" of stock is a hindrance. Now the gun's way out there. Now an AK fits well. BUT, so does an AR-15/M-4 with it's adjustable stock, which is the primary reason they have those. Accommodating a squared-up dynamic stance (esp. with another inch in there for body armor) means the M-4 is flexible enough to do either job.

So, no Russians aren't hobbits, and no they didn't build 60 million carbines that aren't the right size for adult humans to shoot well. They just aren't set up for shooting the way you probably were taught to do it.

I just don't shoot it well. ... the foregrip is uncomfortable

Click to expand...

What do you find uncomfortable about an AK's foregrip? I've actually not heard that complaint before. It's wood, so it doesn't heat up all that fast, and it's smooth with good contours. By comparison, the AR/M4 foregrip is a very utilitarian round shape and ridged, but the M-4 version is roughly the same length as an AK's. That's the only complaint I've had about both is that my long arms don't really make the short fore-grip sections comfortable. On an AK that's really not easily remediable. On an AR you can always spend more money to get a different arrangement of barrel and tube/handguards to stretch that length out to be more comfortable. Or go with the older M16A2 style barrel and handguards which are longer to begin with.

overall it feels like a dumbbell with a mag

Click to expand...

There's lots of ways you might mean that, but I'll point out that no assault-rifle pattern carbine feels svelte and trim the way that a classic American lever action or bolt action rifle will. If that's what you're used to, all the modern battle carbines will feel blocky and awkward when you pick them up. (SKSs and Mini-14s are a little better in this regard but they're more like hybrids of the two forms.) That said, most shooters find that once they have the AR/M-4 in a firing position, it is actually comfortable and the controls are pretty much where you want them to be. Like one of those weird modern office chairs, it looks awkward and strange until you're in the position and then all of a sudden it starts to make sense.

I never shot an AR. What turns me off from AR is (1) caliber / cost of rounds (2) the apparent/alleged pickiness (is this even a real word ?) in the choice of ammo.

Click to expand...

As other said, the 5.56NATO round is more effective than you'd think, which is a big part of why the Soviet's decided to adopt their own 5.45x39mm round in 1974. There's no great dichotomy between enemy KIA caused by .30 cal rounds vs. .22 cal rounds since then. They work.

And ARs these days tend to be very very reliable. Not picky. Google "Filthy 14" as a well-known example.

Wanderling said:

I've shot AK47 multiple times. I absolutely hate the ergonomics of a "base" variant - the stock is always too short for me and I'm only 5'-10" - but appreciate the relatively powerful round and ruggedness. I want it for plinking and HD, so the accuracy past 300 yards is of no concern. ( Heck I probably can't see things that far..) The only situation where I could even remotely need to use one is home invasion or a Ferguson style riot.. again likely not a long-range affair.

So, that said,

- what should I be looking for ? I'd like to keep it around $600 if possible.

- what good aftermarket accessories to make it more ergonomic and easier to shoot accurately without "Bubbarizing" it ? Two main improvements for me would be an adjustable stock and a red dot sight.

I did look at AR15 but it seems the NATO round is wimpy compared to 7.62, the .308 is 2x the price, it's more picky with regard to ammo, and AK is just bad ass But I am open to suggestions.

Click to expand...

What! Personally, I'd much rather use 5.56 x 45mm (M855) ammo than any of the 7.62 x 39mm (generally underperforming) commercial Combloc ammo that is most often available for feeding classic AK's these days. Neither do I think you should be looking to lengthen the stock on any tactical carbine of either American, or Russian design.

One of the big advantages to using anybody's tactical carbine is that it can be easily carried underneath your arm and well concealed from a casual observer's view. Is this important? Well ...... for many years, now, and throughout various world, 'hot spots' it certainly has been.

The other big advantage to carrying a short tactical carbine is the ability to maneuver around more easily in tight spaces. The stocks on all of these carbines are deliberately cut back in order to allow for the thickness of heavy clothing, and battle gear. I've, also, tried using a high quality (Aimpoint) red dot sight on my AR15 ('M-Forgery'); but I had too many problems that were caused by variations in both natural outdoor, and artificial indoor lighting.

Obviously I'm a proponent of the 223/5.56 (general purpose) military cartridge. In fact I like it so much that my Arsenal SA-5M-S ('SAM-5') AK-74 is chambered in 5.56mm. Why? Because I'm an American; I live in America; and I want to have ready access to commonly made, high quality, and readily available American ammunition — That's, 'Why'.

Phaedrus/69 said:

I'm not sure exactly how to respond. I too have had AKs and SKSs. To me the ergos were lousy and they were hard to shoot well. Now that I'm in my late 40's any long gun that isn't easy to use with an optic is simply not a viable option for me. IMO the AK is quasi-obsolete for the purposes you name, at least for HD. Am I implying it won't put down an intruder? Not at all! But I think modern doctrine calls for the ability to integrate optics and white light as force multipliers. And nothing about the AK makes it easy to use WMLs and optics; those just weren't factors when the carbine was originally designed. True, something like the Galil ACE is fully modern but it's also $1700 or so.

Click to expand...

Ultimak and RS Regulate are two very easy and inexpensive ways to get a light and an optic on an AK.

Wanderling said:

I just don't shoot it well. It may have something to do with the overall awkward feel of it (the stock feels just a bit too short, the foregrip is uncomfortable, the sights are not for my post-Lasik eyes, and overall it feels like a dumbbell with a mag).

Click to expand...

The stock on a standard AK creates approximately the same length of pull as an AR with the stock on the fourth position out. So about an inch shorter than the longest available LOP on an AR. It's not too short for average-sized humans. And if it is, K-Var sells a stock with an added inch for like $60. And like Sam, I don't understand what issue you could have with the foregrip on an AK. It's about the same distance away as a mid-length handguard on an AR if the LOP's are the same, it's probably wood or heat-shielded polymer, and most are a more ergonomic contour than a standard AR handguard. What didn't you like?

Wanderling said:

Ok, you guys persuaded me to re-consider AR.

What off the shelf built, or an easy to put together upper / lower combo should I be considering ? No experience with the platform, so I need something that would require the minimal amount of tweaking out of the box. I can put together almost any mechanical assembly no problem, but I don't trust myself to start adjusting the gas system etc.

I'd still probably prefer a red dot over optics, just because I consider an optical sight to be a hindrance in a home SD situation. Preferably still, being able to easily swap one for another.

Click to expand...

I've got to ask......we've decided you love the X39, you're obviously looking for a semiautomatic, why have you not considered a ruger mini 30? Brand new they're around $800 and used is closer to your $600 target. They're reliable in my experience, ergonomics are comfy enough too. Just curious honestly.

I fired the Colt M16 the first-time in the late spring of 1980. I learned quickly how important it is to have a failure to fire due to any reason, it is never acceptable. Then I learned to take it apart blindfolded quickly. In the field I learned why. You'd best be making sure that it had a light film of oil, and the dust cover closed. At the range things are a lot more comfortable and holding steady is important,they were accurate and deadly at 400 meters. It cycled too fast and burned ammo up. The 3 round burst kit is it. I hear that these ARs available now are more reliable in adverse conditions than their forefather. I favor a 308 over the 223 for the obvious reasons.

Wanderling said:

Just because I want an evil assault rifle as my personal parting gift to Obama.

AKs and ARs are historic firearms, it may be silly but I just like the way they look.

Click to expand...

I understand that, it makes sense in it's own way, I'm really surprised that the m-1a platform is so generously accepted, lol I've have folks not bat an eye at the m-14 but start getting their hackles up when the g3 shows up, for evil assault rifles, since you've decided to accept an ar, the Grendel and spc2 and blackout may be something to consider, that blackout should rival your x39 and in the Grendel, a 123 sst does some spooky damage at 50 yds.

Wanderling said:

Ok, you guys persuaded me to re-consider AR.

What off the shelf built, or an easy to put together upper / lower combo should I be considering ? No experience with the platform, so I need something that would require the minimal amount of tweaking out of the box. I can put together almost any mechanical assembly no problem, but I don't trust myself to start adjusting the gas system etc.

I'd still probably prefer a red dot over optics, just because I consider an optical sight to be a hindrance in a home SD situation. Preferably still, being able to easily swap one for another.

Click to expand...

I would put forth the Colt 6720 and/or 6920 for consideration if you're open to an AR. A complete 6720 can be had around $800

A Colt OEM 6920 can be had around $750 or so.

Regarding pickiness.... I have 2 BCM rifles. Small sample size I know
Not sure the round count between them, but they're shot frequently. No stoppages to date using brass cased 223 or 5.56 and good mags. I clean them appx. 600 to 800 rounds (it varies bc I don't keep a log on round count).

Good luck to you. Hope you are happy with what you settle on.