You guys seen this?

That's the thing with AKs....less is more. An idea that's difficult for people here in the U.S. to wrap their heads around.

So, is the real issue what works well in games and matches, or what is real world use of both, using real world guns and kit, and not tricked out and modified versions of either?

If you ran similarly equipped, stock (issue) versions of both the AK and AR, using issue kit, I think you'll find that they are really not all that far apart if each is used by someone familiar with what they are using.

Its really kind of hard to make an honest comparison of something when the person doing the comparison doesnt have enough real time on both to know the real difference between them. From some of the comments either way in these type discussions, its pretty obvious that the person touting gun "A" has little, if any real experience with gun "B" to make the comparison, but "A" is what they have and like so "B" cant be anywhere near as good, just because.

Other than minor likes and dislikes, when used realistically, both work well, and both are effective. I'm saying this from a standpoint of being familiar with both, and from having shot both since the 60's. I have a number of each, and have shot more than a few examples of both issue versions too to know what "real" is. I like both, and would not be uncomfortable with either if one or the other was all I had, but for me, overall, the AK is just the more usable and handy, all around rifle.

Hey, no matter what, its your gun and your choice. If you think its the way to go for you, then, so it is. Take the time to learn it well and I'm sure it will do you fine. Just dont be surprised or annoyed, if someone else chose just the opposite and can do as well with it, as you can with yours, even if all the internet experts tell you its not possible. They may have just worked a little more diligently at learning theirs than you did at learning yours.

Perhaps it still isnt the gun thats the problem after all.

Well, that's an interesting idea they came up with. It doesn't seem that practical, and I don't want a reciprocating charging handle near my hands, but it's interesting.

Late to the party but heres my opinion:

I'm right handed, right armed, right eyed and support guns with the left arm on the fore-end. If I were going to change mags with one hand keeping the gun raised I would probably hold the gun with the left arm on the fore-end as I stated and use the right arm to work the requisite buttons, knobs, handles or whatever depending on the firearm. Therefore while this appears to be a nice idea, it seems to be one aimed for left handed shooters. Another use would be making it easier to operate offhand.

Second though is that all that looks like is an extension of the charging rod (don't know the proper term) and a milled slot in the gas tube. That in itself is probably the simplest thing possible and I commend them on inventing it.

One potential downside to this arrangement is that it pretty much precludes the use of a light at the 10:00 position.

(The mag release and the ability to keep the right hand on the pistol grip and manage a reload is light years ahead of the AK.)

Click to expand...

A standard-configuration AK can be reloaded and charged without removing the right hand from the grip, with the rifle shouldered, with or without retaining the empty mag, and in fact I do shoot IPSC/USPSA carbine this way.

There's not much of a difference in sight radius between an M4 carbine and a typical AK. The intrinsic accuracy advantage is there, but it's almost entirely irrelevant from a functional perspective.

While it is true that the sight radii are very similar (on my guns the AK is 15" and the Ar only 16.5", the quality of the sight itself and the fact that the AR has a peep makes them much more usable. Add that to an inherent accuracy advantage and there is little valid comparison.
I can give an example of what I mean. Last year after an IDPA event I shot a two stage rifle side match with my AK. For the house clearing stage it was excellent, and I managed fastest time. However, the next stage required 50+ yd shots on very small targets partially obscured by no shoot targets. I missed one target totally and was a few points down and a no shoot shot, needless to say, I lost to a number AR shooters. They had the better equipment for the precision stage, although the AK was fast and furious in the house at across the room distances.

But to get back to the original question, the gizmo doesn't help the real issues that the AK has and even makes it impossible to use one of the better "fixes" for the AK's inaccuracy problems. In my book that makes it a no buy, unless one just wants something new and different to show off at the range.

OK moment of ZEN....
NASA spent million building a pen to work in zero gravity
The Soviets used a Pencil.

Anyone else notice that after the 'torture' test, which any rifle with a closed bolt would survive, the user fails to put the safety on and swings the rifle around for the camera. :banghead:

I agree, this is just another failure point and is one more part to hang up on sling or other, and probably adds a few ounces of weight to a heavy weapon.

Does it lock the bolt open after the last round?

It reciprocates?

No thanks.

I can give an example of what I mean. Last year after an IDPA event I shot a two stage rifle side match with my AK. For the house clearing stage it was excellent, and I managed fastest time. However, the next stage required 50+ yd shots on very small targets partially obscured by no shoot targets. I missed one target totally and was a few points down and a no shoot shot, needless to say, I lost to a number AR shooters. They had the better equipment for the precision stage, although the AK was fast and furious in the house at across the room distances.

Click to expand...

It's funny, because for me I've tended to take slightly more time at extremely close ranges than the AR guys, and yet I've made that up at longer distances using the crappy ladder sights, because I know how to get a solid sight picture with them, and my trigger control is fairly decent. It's purely a question of familiarity with the sight design.

I've always found the AK's sights to be faster and easier to use at close range, and in all lighting conditions. The peep sight tends to be a little lacking in that respect.

At longer distances, theres no question that the the peep is the better choice, but the AK's sight is still very usable.

Personally, I always thought the HK's drum and globe sights were the best all around combat iron sight going, and the best of both worlds and then some.

A good red dot on any of them basically eliminates the personal issues with the iron sights. Still, you should have the basics down with any of them.

Trigger wise, I've always found the stock AK triggers to be a lot nicer than the stock AR/M16 triggers, which are usually heavier and crunchier. Even the crappy US AK compliance triggers are nicer, but some can be painful after awhile.

I wonder how hot the charging handle gets under sustained rapid fire.

I can give an example of what I mean. Last year after an IDPA event I shot a two stage rifle side match with my AK. For the house clearing stage it was excellent, and I managed fastest time. However, the next stage required 50+ yd shots on very small targets partially obscured by no shoot targets. I missed one target totally and was a few points down and a no shoot shot, needless to say, I lost to a number AR shooters. They had the better equipment for the precision stage, although the AK was fast and furious in the house at across the room distances.

Click to expand...

That is a big reason why I like a good unmagnified optic on an AK; I personally run a Kobra, but a lot of people like the Aimpoint Micro on an Ultimak ($$$).

I shoot USPSA carbine matches with my SAR-1/Kobra when I can, and I find that the biggest handicap is split times on the 2-shot targets (hammers with an AR are very fast, especially on a comped gun, but the greater recoil of 7.62x39mm slows down the splits; a 5.45 or 5.56 AK would be at less of a disadvantage there). Reloading speed is not hugely different under most circumstances.

Optics definitely help with fast precise hits at moderate ranges, whether the platform in question is an AK or an AR/M4gery, IMO.

but the greater recoil of 7.62x39mm slows down the splits; a 5.45 or 5.56 AK would be at less of a disadvantage there

Click to expand...

My AKS-74 would say you're right!

Between the lighter cartridge and the really pretty effective original design comp, they're quite zippy!

-Sam

SAm1911
Also, the operator is pretty important in your case. Still smarting from the spanking you gave us all with that Swiss 31?.

At close range, like inside a house close, I don't even see the rear sight, if the front post is center mass whack. As mentioned above the rear sight starts to rear its ugly head out past, lets say about 50-100 yds.

Recoil is a bitch after about 15 yds for me as there is enough movement to take the gun off target during a hammer, and I suspect Sam is right that the 74s shine there.

I may try an optic on my AK, what is best? I suppose LaRue Tactical's base, other less expensive?
Thoughts?

I have the Ultimak/Aimpoint combo on two of my AK's and have had real good results with them. You get to keep the stock sights and still use them through the Aimpoints tube if you wish. It also allows instant verification that the dot is still zeroed should there be question. The Aimpoints are also a rugged, military grade sight and their battery life isnt an issue. I've been through a number of the "hunting" grade dots, and never had very good results. Most did not hold up.

Quote:
but the greater recoil of 7.62x39mm slows down the splits; a 5.45 or 5.56 AK would be at less of a disadvantage there

My AKS-74 would say you're right!

Between the lighter cartridge and the really pretty effective original design comp, they're quite zippy!

-Sam

Click to expand...

I have to agree. I personally prefer 556/223 in the AK platform over 762x39. (haven't shot a 545 AK but I am working on buying one) Nothing against 762x39. I just like the round and the compensator.

When it comes to guns the commies got one thing completely right
Keep it simple stupid

Adding a failure point to one of the most consistently dependable assault riffle on earth is a bad idea, no matter how cool it looks.

That being said, this "ak [strike]rachet[/strike] charging handle" was poorly designed. It should have been non-reciprocating, but they went the cheap route by having it built as simple as possible.
Maybe if it was then they wouldn't pull these shenanigans!