AK74: Ammo?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
934
Location
Central Kentucky
I've had an itch lately for a new AK. I thought about 7.62 but something light shooting and cheap to shoot would be nice. So the AK74 in 5.45 is at the top of my list. But the biggest 'plus' the to '74 has always been purported to be cheap and readily available ammo. A quick search through some ammo vendors says that it's currently more expensive than 5.56 (for non-corrosive stuff at least). So what's the deal? Am I too late in the game for the cheap stuff? Supplies drying up?
 
Even the stuff that's listed as "corrosive" isn't very bad with the current surplus. Your rifle isn't going to rust up if you don't clean it for a day or two. At under .13/round shipped I don't mind doing a bit of cleaning. For NC stuff, you are going to pay starting around twenty cents per.
http://gun-deals.com/ammo.php?caliber=5.45x39
 
Shoot the corrosive stuff. Flushing an AK with garden hose followed by some time in the sun to dry and a final clean and lube with Hoppe's or whatever you fancy is not big deal.

Besides, its great ammo.
 
Shoot the corrosive stuff. Flushing an AK with garden hose followed by some time in the sun to dry and a final clean and lube with Hoppe's or whatever you fancy is not big deal.

Besides, its great ammo.

What he said. I'm not a fan of the AK design but a friend of mine just bought a 74 and it's MUCH cheaper to shoot than my AR.
 
Corrosive stuff,it may cost a little less than NC Russain ammo but that is offset by what you have to do to clean it. With NC stuff in a AK you dont have too clean it if you dont want to and if you do clean it you dont have to buy windex or get water.
Buy whatever you want.
 
I've seen surplus as low as $120 per 1080, but shipping ups the price. I buy it locally for $156 per can. The surplus Russian stuff has been shooting surprisingly well and I clean after every trip to the range anyway so no big deal.
 
The corrosive Russian stuff is fine to shoot, just clean like other people have said. Corrosive Bulgarian can be scary -- that's what we were issued for fam fire in the .mil with 74s and after a couple mags your face and any other exposed skin would start to burn. God only knows what kinds of carcinogens they spiced that stuff up with . . . :what:
 
The AIM stuff is the same as what I'm shooting. Good price if you buy it two cans at a time, but if you add the $56 shipping it's not much cheaper than buying locally. Make sure you look at the total cost when ordering ammo and don't forget the hazmat fee most charge.
 
Old Scratch

While I have never fired 5.45 corrosive Soviet ammunition, I have always been very satisfied with in other calibers.

Question: where are you finding the rifles? All I have seen lately come with non-chromed bores. I have also read that the groove diameter on these is not correct. Are rifles still available with original barrels?
 
don't forget the hazmat fee most charge.
There should never be a hazmat fee for ammo... it's classed as ORM-D. Primers and bulk power would be hazmat, but not loaded cartridges or primed brass. I have purchased from many vendors and never seen this fee charged for cartridges.
 
If you want cheap ammo get one of those 22LR AR-15 wannabees. If you want a real assult rifle get the 7.62x39. Whats the differnece? 7.62 was designed to kill, right then and right there, larger caliber, much heavier bullet, twice the energy, nasty terminal ballistics NUF SAID. The 5.45mm was origionaly called the "posion bullet" from what I understand it uses a very thin copper jacket so it breaks up inside and slowly kills via lead posioning. Huummmmm Which would I perfer if I ever NEEDED an assult rifle to stop someone quickly? LOL no brainer for me. The AK-74 is a stategic wepon, insted of killing someone right then and there it is much worse for the enemy is you badly wound one of them, it reduces moral, and takes three people out of the fight insted of one. That has no purpose in personal defence. That said if you like the 74 for the purpose of strictly target practice it is a pretty good wepon all around.
 
kachok,

Not totally onboard with you BUT you made a great point that the 7.62 is a little under rated. You know it is faster than the 17 HMR which everybody touted.
 
I work at the most successful gunstore in my state. Its a mom & pop buisness that rakes in millions, has tons of connections and a laundry list of distributors. The owner, had made orders for a lot of ammo at the beginning of 2010... still waiting on about half of it. On top of that, ammo prices are going up another 10% in 2011. To answer your question.... ammo stock isn't drying up.... its dried up (past tense). A good lesson to be learned for anyone out there who voted for a Democrat this time around. Here's a freebie for other shooters out there... you see guns & ammo out there & you have the cash.... BUY IT. That's not me being a salesman either. That's me as a consumer, cause that's what I've been up to. Our days of firearms freedom are numbered. If they can't make it illegal to own a gun, they'll make it unaffordable. Its a sneaky backdoor way of infringing our rights... & its working.
 
Some carriers and sellers are charging a Hazmat feed, whether required or not. Perusing a few places on line, i found over half stating you would be charged a hazmat fee.

To get a chrome bore and chamber, you typically get charged a lot extra. The Arsenal guns have chrome bore. The cheap CAI do not.

As far as barrels being out of spec, the very first Tantals that Century sold had 5.56 barrels and were known for less than stellar accuracy (and that's being kind). The latest AK74 all have 5.45 barrels. My CAI shoots a little over 2 MOA until it gets hot and the groups open up. I dumped an entire can through the non-chromed barrel in a single afternoon (1080 rounds), and then cleaned normally. No problems and the gun still shoots well and the bore looks good.

The 7.62x39 actually doesn't have a very good reputation for 'killing'. The bullet is big and stable. It tends to go in, flip over and exit. This is a common phenomenon with all FMJ spitzer bullets where the center of mass is rearward.

The lead core of the 5.45 has nothing to do with its reputation as the poison bullet. Like the 5.56, the bullet is long and fragile and will distort and fracture as it inverts, unlike the 7.63x39 which tends to stay in one piece. The 5.45 at short range typically produced stellar type exit wound which are nasty, debilitating and prone to infection. Given the state of medical care among the Mujaheddin, it's not surprising the round was considered 'poison'.

This whole 'wound rather than kill' stuff is pure bunk. There is no extend documentation from any military development document that supports this. In fact, in Vietnam, evaluation of enemy casualties showed that at typical combat ranges, the 5.56x45 was 11% more lethal than 7.62x51. That is not a mistype.

The reason has already been cited. The bigger, stable 7.62s tend to hit, flip over and exit whole. The lightly constructed 22 caliber tend to hit, start to flip, fracture and create submissiles.

Now if we are talking about non-ball ammo, it's a very different matter and the larger caliber have a clear edge. But 7.62x39 ball ammo isn't particularly lethal, as attested by the number of people hit with it without suffering debilitating permanent injury.

Ultimately, the adoption of these smaller round has more to do with reducing the soldiers load without any real change in small arms effectiveness at realistic combat ranges. And since the Soviets very much believed in volume of fire, the 5.45x45 made a lot of sense in terms of recoil under full auto.

Now we see former Soviet states turning an eye towards NATO, and looking at 5.56x45. Countries that adopted the AK can no longer count of free AKs and are sticking with the older M43 so they can keep their current rifle and ammunition production.

The reality is the difference between any of the current intermediate cartridges is for the most part indistinguishable.

The main impetus for adoption of the 5.45x45 by us shooters is the availability of cheap surplus ammo. Since the number of people on this board who are buying rifles expecting to use them in combat is effectively near zero, the argument about which is the better combat cartridge is pretty irrelevant. Cost, on the other hand, is a huge factor for those of us who don't happen to have a large trust fund, and 5.45x39 is currently the cheapest assault rifle ammunition available.
 
The 5.45mm was origionaly called the "posion bullet" from what I understand it uses a very thin copper jacket so it breaks up inside and slowly kills via lead posioning.

I found this on the Kalashnikov AK-74 website "The 5.45 mm bullet yaws when striking a soft target such as a human, causing the bullet to tumble. This tumbling creates a larger wound in the target than the bullet's diameter. The Afghans who fought the Soviet Union often referred to the 5.45 mm as "the poison bullet" because of the severity of the wound in proportion to its relative size and energy."
 
Anyone who knows anything about toxicology will tell you that it's very hard to get lead poisoning from elemental lead. You need something that much more bio-available like lead oxides and other compounds. There are more than a few people walking around with lead bullets and pellets in them because it is often safer to leave projectiles in place and let the body encyst them then to try and dig them out.
 
If you want cheap ammo get one of those 22LR AR-15 wannabees. If you want a real assult rifle get the 7.62x39. Whats the differnece? 7.62 was designed to kill, right then and right there, larger caliber, much heavier bullet, twice the energy, nasty terminal ballistics NUF SAID. The 5.45mm was origionaly called the "posion bullet" from what I understand it uses a very thin copper jacket so it breaks up inside and slowly kills via lead posioning. Huummmmm Which would I perfer if I ever NEEDED an assult rifle to stop someone quickly? LOL no brainer for me. The AK-74 is a stategic wepon, insted of killing someone right then and there it is much worse for the enemy is you badly wound one of them, it reduces moral, and takes three people out of the fight insted of one. That has no purpose in personal defence. That said if you like the 74 for the purpose of strictly target practice it is a pretty good wepon all around.

:uhoh:
 
The Afghans called the 5.45 "the poison bullet" or "the devil's bullet" for the bad wounds it caused.

It causes increased wounding because the bullet was specifically designed to tumble inside the body, tearing tissue and organs, and bursting bones.
When the Soviet's decided to design their answer to our 5.56 round, they specified that the new round had to be no less effective then their standard 7.62x39.
They decided that the way to make that happen was to design a bullet that would tumble rapidly in the body.
This was basically a means of cheating on the Hague Conventions on the use of expanding bullets which caused maiming wounds.
The Soviets could claim the 5.45 wasn't covered by Hague because it was a full metal jacket, non-expanding bullet.

The 5.45 works by moving the center of gravity to the rear of the bullet. This makes the bullet more stable in flight, and therefore more accurate.
However, once the bullet hits, it destabilizes very quickly and tumbles sooner and faster than the 7.62x39.
The 7.62x39 starts to tumble after penetrating about 7 3/4" and usually tumbles once.
The 5.45 starts to tumble in 2 1/2" and tumbles at least twice.
If the bullet stays in the body, near the end of travel it makes an almost 90 degree turn off the path of travel. This "hook" in an odd direction makes finding the bullet difficult without an x-ray, which isn't available on the battle field for most countries.

The effectiveness of the 5.45x39 is certainly.y not an issue with the Russians and especially the Russian Spetznaz, who use it in preference over the 7.62x39. The 5.45 built an impressive reputation in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Georgia.
Nothing succeeds like success.

Here's a sectioned 5.45x39 7N6-PS bullet.
Note the copper plated mild steel outer jacket, the blunt mild steel inner core, the lead "cap" on top of the core and surrounding it between the core and outer jacket, and the hollow air cavity in the nose:

PICT0001.jpg
 
I know very well what the stats on these bullets are, and I can also tell you that the 5.56 out doing the 7.62x51 is Army hype, they even tell us as much in boot camp. Ask any soldier on the ground what stops the bad guys faster and they won't even have to think about it. Another factor is that with todays shorter barrels and tighter rifling twist on the 5.56s does not yaw in soft tissue as fast as the old 55gr did with a lighter bullet, longer barrel, and a 1:9 twist. That is streight out of the Army's report so anyone who wants to debate that is more then welcome:) Mean while in the Soviet Union they re-invented a little trick putting a small air pocket in the tip of the 123gr fmj and altered the boat tail and made the 122gr 7.62x39 bullet. This gave it more of a rear weight bias and hence made it destableize (yaw) even quicker. So when you compare the 5.56 and the 7.62 you have several different versions of those bullets, ours have been getting progressivley less damaging to soft tissue while theirs has become more so. Not that the 62gr 5.56 is bad, it has a couple advantages over the old 55gr too, but when it comes to droping bad people quickly the 122 gr 7.62 get my nod for fmj in assult rifles. That said I want a FAL loaded with 125 gr Ballistic tips :) Could you imagine the mess that would make?
 
Blast you beat me to the air pocket thing LOL. Anyway the Spetznas perfer the 5.45 because it is 10X more controlable during full auto fire not because it is more damaging, kinna like the P90. But if you have your full auto license and feel like you want a machine gun you can wright your name with by all means the 74 is for you. (BTW I lived in the former Soviet Union for three years and speak fluent Russian),
 
Mean while in the Soviet Union they re-invented a little trick putting a small air pocket in the tip of the 123gr fmj and altered the boat tail and made the 122gr 7.62x39 bullet.

Some of the most impressive fragmentation and yaw happens with the 7.62x39 Sapsan (ulyanovsk 8M3) HP bullet. You can find that bullet loaded in the wolf military classic line.
 
No argument on the M193 vs. M855 and twist rates.

The reports on 5.56 effectiveness vs 7.62x51 are from Vietnam where engagement ranges were typically short - meeting engagements in jungle can be very close affairs. Statistics were compiled by Johns Hopkins from actual combat after action reports. 7.62x51 had a tendency to travel right through enemy without even tumbling, leaving a trough and through wound with little tissue disruption outside the immediate impact area. M193, at the short ranges, tended to tumble and fragment in tissue created multiple wound path and exhibiting a greater probability of hitting vital organs and blood vessels. Not theory, data gleaned from Army physician reports and autopsies.

It should be noted that the 7.62x51 is capable of producing similar wounds with FMJ. The West German 7.62x51 has a jack about half the thickness of M80 ball and showed the same type of fragmentation as M193. But the US M80 shows almost no deformation when striking tissue or organs.

There are numbers period articles from the Journal of trauma, as well as reports from the BRL that document this phenomenon. Indeed, the performance of M193 on human targets was enough to generate several concerned articles in SIPRI's Anti-personnel Weapons and other publications of the time accusing the United States of violating the Hague conventions, if not in the letter then in the spirit.

It's interesting to note that the M855 is a descendant of the SS109, and one of the original design goals of that round (to satisfy the Nordic countries) was that is be less 'cruel' than the M193.
 
I really like the Ak74 its a nice light handle carbine. The 5.45 is a really underrated round in this country.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top