AK-74 & 5.45x39, M16/AR & 5.56x45

[dadman]

The Feb. '03 issue of SWAT has an article titled "Small Bore Avtomat: the AK-74", by David M. Fortier.
An AK-74 from Krebs Custom Inc. is reviewed. Also, the development of the AK-74 and it's 5.45x39 cartridge is told. According to the article, it's a better rifle and cartridge than the AK-47 and 7.62x39.

Anyone have any experience with either the AK-74 or it's cartridge?
How does the performance of the Russian 5.45 compare to the .223/5.56x45?
In Russia or related countries, do they have their own version of "big bore vs. small bore"? Instead of .223 vs .308, is it "5.45 vs 7.62"?

The AK-74 and it's cartridge sound like pretty good performers.

 

[MAKOwner]

Well, I have a Romanian SAR2 in 5.45 as well as a SAR1 in 7.62, and I have to say the 5.45 is a real joy to shoot. It has a flatter trajectory than the 7.62, shoots slightly tighter groups, and has noticeably less recoil/muzzle flip. As I understand it it has slightly less recoil/flip than 5.56 too, but I don't have anything in 5.56 to directly compare myself. You have alot more choices in ammo and stuff with 5.56 though, and even 7.62x39. You are limited to imports on 5.45 as far as I know currently, and that means military surplus/Wolf caliber stuff, not exactly match ammo... It seems to be just a little cheaper than the cheapest 5.56 that I'm aware of. Around $99 for a case of 1000, which is just a little more than the 7.62 stuff... The surplus bakelite 5.45 mags are dirt cheap, and are also 100% solid mags like the standard 7.62 AK mags. You can get the 30rnders for as little as $5 a pop, that is nice...

Can't think of anything else to add, like I said it's a real joy to shoot, I love my little AK-74 variant. I definitely prefer it over 7.62x39.

 

[Drue]

The .223 and the 5.45x39 are very similar in that they are designed to bring lightweight ammo and controllability in FA fire to military rifles. Both are effective in the military role. As far as the rifles go, it is the whole AR vs AK thing that goes around and around from time to time on the boards. This debate condenses down to: the AR is more accurate (but the AK is accurate enough) and the AK is more reliable (but the AR is reliable enough). From the soldier's point of view, he uses what is issued to him and that is that. From the US gun crank's point of view, take your pick, or better yet have both.

The original M193 ball ammo for the .223 shot a 55gr bullet at 3250fps and the current M885 shoots a 62gr bullet at about 3000. The Russian 5.45mm ball shoots a 59gr bullet at 2950. The .223 is more powerful but the 5.45 is close and it works for the Russians. I have read that the Russians consider the 5.45 effective to 400M vs 300 for the 7.62x39.

I have an AK-74 clone built from a K-Var kit on a Saiga receiver. It's a LOT of fun to shoot. The '74 muzzle brake seems to reduce the already light recoil but increases the noise. I don't notice much difference between the 74's recoil and an AR-15.

For us here in the US, the quality, availability, reloadability and variety of ammo are heavily in favor of the .223. The Russian 5.45 ammo available here is cheap and it works but that is about all that can be said about it. .223 is available in military configuration, commercial ammo is available anywhere that ammo is sold, and match ammo is available. Reloading components, including cheap, once fired, USGI brass are widely available. Reloading the steel 5.45 cases is not really practical. Cases can be made from .222 brass but it is an involved process and bullets in the 5.45 diameter are not available. .224 dia bullets can be swaged down but this is another involved process. I like wacky reloading projects as much as anyone else but with Russian ammo at 0.12/round it hardly seems worth it.

From the point of view of the recreational shooter, the .223 is much more flexible and easier to manage. From the survival point of view, the AK-74 (or a clone) is a formidable weapon but don't look for much variety in ammo and don't count on any resupply.


My 0.02

Drue

 

[cheygriz]

I have a SAR2 in 5.45. Also a couple of AR-15s.

I consider them comparable. I would not hestitate to carry either into battle.

Given a choice, I would much rather have either the SAR2 or AR-15 in a battle than the AK-47 or the M-14/FAL/G-3.

Granted, ammo selection is currently limited, but ammo is readily available, cheap and completely acceptable for the purposes the rifle was designed for.

Since these rifles, and this caliber are rapidly gaining popularity, ammo selection will become better. I'll betcha that within a year or two, W-W, Rem. & Fed. will offer the ammo and one of the AR -15 makers will offer an AR-15 in 5.45X39.

That would be a great idea. A regular AR-15, with upper receivers for both of the worlds' premier combat rounds.

 

[SodaPop]

I'll take an AK74 over an AK47 any day. IF you want to compare the 5.45x39 to the 5.56mm you might as well compare the gun design rather than caliber. Too close to bother discussing.

The 5.45x39 fragments less has a better bullet design IMHO.

 

[max popenker]

well, i had a chance to fire both AKM (-47) and AK-74 in its original, Soviet & Russian Army issue, select fire form.

first, recoil of the 5.45 is significantly less than of 7.62, and -74 is much more controllable in bursts and accurate in single shots, esp. when firing off-hands. but, OTOH, the -74 is somewhat louder, especially for those who stand aside of shooter.

as for 5.45 vs 7.62, i can cite one Afghan vet (1986) who clearly preferred the 7.62 over the 5.45 due to faster knock-out. he said tha mujaheddins with multiple cest-area hits by 5.45 continued to fire (though uncontrollablY, but another dushman, hit by multiple 7.62, collapsed at the instant of being hit...

the latest AN-94 Abakan is a hell of a design - way too overcomplicated, and a butt-ugly... but it does print a single hole with 2-round bursts when fired from the rest. in the full-auto and single shots it is more like than AK-74...