I am buying some flavor of AK in August, and no, I really don't want an AR for a few dollars more. The question I have is a perennial one, but with the increased availability of 5.45x39 of late, the old discussions that one can find are a little dated.
The three contenders for the $500-800 AK I intend to pursue include:
7.62x39--The original cartridge. Pros are its ubiquity and the fact that there are domestic loadings of it should imports be cut off. Cons are its weight, the relative recoil, and the indifferent accuracy of most of the Russian steel case ammo. Another con is the retards who decided to make 7.62x39 handguns, thereby getting steel core milsurp banned from importation as armor piercing "handgun" rounds. The fact that the material used to make the larger round is roughly twice as great as the 5mm rounds means that as metal prices fluctuate, the future price sensitivity of this load is greater, even for eventual loading components.
5.56x45--The round of the AR. Pro is mainly that it is likely to be in mass production for at least the rest of my lifetime and probably a lot longer, politics aside. It also comes in loadings from steel cased plinkers to match quality rounds. Biggest con is that it has skyrocketed in price and is not as great a deal as it used to be. I have heard that Clinton wrecked the milsurp market for domestically manufactured 5.56. by requiring it to be de-miled. Is that last bit true?
5.45x39--The "poison bullet." Pros are that this round is currently awash on the market to the point that it is screamingly cheap. The magazines are also remeniscent of the good old days where you could get Bulgarian 7.62 mags for under $10.00 a pop. I could readily have thousands of rounds on hand and a load of magazines for this caliber and have only spent just about a grand including a non-Romanian rifle. Cons are primarily that this round is on the down swing, with the former Warsaw pact countries joining NATO and using the 5.56, making Russia the only major manufacturer in the long run. Of course this makes the ammo subject to ban by a whim. The milsurp for this round is corrosive, but that's no big deal.
But all of these factors create a huge selection headache. The easy answer is to get one of each, but that is not in the cards. First of all, I am not really a fan of intermediate round self loaders, no matter the type. I am more of a C&R and lever rifle fan.
This rifle is not bought for the fun of it. Yes busting caps 30 at a time before reloading has a charm all its own, but that's not where I am at anymore. This rifle is the "just in case" rifle. In my collection, this one will be like the fire extinguishers I own. I'll know how to use it well and discover its limitations. It will always be ready to go, but I will only go to it by preference in a real emergency.
So with an eye on the present and and eye on the future, and your mind's eye on the relative performance merits of each cartridge, what do you guys think?
The three contenders for the $500-800 AK I intend to pursue include:
7.62x39--The original cartridge. Pros are its ubiquity and the fact that there are domestic loadings of it should imports be cut off. Cons are its weight, the relative recoil, and the indifferent accuracy of most of the Russian steel case ammo. Another con is the retards who decided to make 7.62x39 handguns, thereby getting steel core milsurp banned from importation as armor piercing "handgun" rounds. The fact that the material used to make the larger round is roughly twice as great as the 5mm rounds means that as metal prices fluctuate, the future price sensitivity of this load is greater, even for eventual loading components.
5.56x45--The round of the AR. Pro is mainly that it is likely to be in mass production for at least the rest of my lifetime and probably a lot longer, politics aside. It also comes in loadings from steel cased plinkers to match quality rounds. Biggest con is that it has skyrocketed in price and is not as great a deal as it used to be. I have heard that Clinton wrecked the milsurp market for domestically manufactured 5.56. by requiring it to be de-miled. Is that last bit true?
5.45x39--The "poison bullet." Pros are that this round is currently awash on the market to the point that it is screamingly cheap. The magazines are also remeniscent of the good old days where you could get Bulgarian 7.62 mags for under $10.00 a pop. I could readily have thousands of rounds on hand and a load of magazines for this caliber and have only spent just about a grand including a non-Romanian rifle. Cons are primarily that this round is on the down swing, with the former Warsaw pact countries joining NATO and using the 5.56, making Russia the only major manufacturer in the long run. Of course this makes the ammo subject to ban by a whim. The milsurp for this round is corrosive, but that's no big deal.
But all of these factors create a huge selection headache. The easy answer is to get one of each, but that is not in the cards. First of all, I am not really a fan of intermediate round self loaders, no matter the type. I am more of a C&R and lever rifle fan.
This rifle is not bought for the fun of it. Yes busting caps 30 at a time before reloading has a charm all its own, but that's not where I am at anymore. This rifle is the "just in case" rifle. In my collection, this one will be like the fire extinguishers I own. I'll know how to use it well and discover its limitations. It will always be ready to go, but I will only go to it by preference in a real emergency.
So with an eye on the present and and eye on the future, and your mind's eye on the relative performance merits of each cartridge, what do you guys think?
