Very impressive.Everyone is right. The AK is a VERY inaccurate, as this particular gentleman can demonstrate. 0.582" center to center at 100 yards. Might as well stick with a shot-gun with groupings like that!
(http://www.reloadersnest.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11218)
and
(http://www.perfectunion.com/vb/showthread.php?t=72144)
(note: That is NOT me!)
This was done with hand-loaded ammunition tuned to that particular gun. Expect 2-3" with factory stock ammo. As of late, some hand-loaders have had excellent luck with tuning loads to get as good accuracy out of the Saiga platform as can be expected out of an AR-15 with equally well-tuned loads.
The myth of the inaccurate AK is just that, a myth. If your properly load the weapon, and shoot it with an intent and determination to get the utmost accuracy, the Saiga WILL deliver. If you expect the gun to shoot poorly, and shoot it poorly, its no surprise that it will throw up a pattern.
Plus, Saiga's are new guns, with fresh new barrels and built to the same quality standards as Russian main-line AK's are built, with the same QC specification. A WASR or a surplus kit-build might be able to do as well in the accuracy department, but you have to consider that with a WASR, Yugo, AMD-65, etc. you are buying a gun made out of used parts that may have been used and abused in ways previously unknown to man, or out of parts that, while safe to use, failed QC. Sort of the expectation that a car with 200,000+ miles or a lemon will run every bit as well as a new fresh off the assembly line vehicle.
Just some food for thought!
I'm interested in getting a rifle, mostly for learning how to use one, and target shooting at the range
Most people who say the AK is not an accurate rifle either (a) don't own one, or (b) need more marksmanship practice.
For the reasons I mentioned: ergonomics, reliability in less than optimal conditions, value, and what real estate agents refer to as "curb appeal"; ie. I just dig it. I'm sure I'll check out an AR 15 at some point, but you have to start somewhere.If it's for learning, and target shooting, why not AR?
OP does know other things exist, as OP reads quite a bit, goes to various shops and shows, and regularly goes to the range, so I observe what others are shooting as well. I wanted a semi-automatic version of a combat rifle to start with. Why? Just because I think they're cool, and both have lots of users and support. I'm neither a survivalist nor actively preparing for the zombie apocolypse, but lets face it, there are some situtions where either an AK or an AR will help you out more than a bolt action .22 (my signature notwithstanding). I also am not preparing to go hunting in the near future - I may come fall, and of course if I did, I would select from a whole other range of appropriate rifles and calibers.OP says..."I'm interested in getting a rifle, mostly for learning how to use one, and target shooting at the range (I have handguns and a shotgun, and practice regularly)."
in 80 posts, only ONE guy suggests that there any other choices but an AR or an AK
yes, I know OP mentioned those two
he also implied he did not own any rifle, apparently never has, and just maybe never even shot one before
maybe OP doesn't know anything else exists ?
(could happen, "all things considered")
PS
for as much as we complain about "fuddites", me included....
philpost said:I'm interested in getting a rifle, mostly for learning how to use one, and target shooting at the range
Ohio_Gun_Guy said:The vast majority of AK & Ak type rifles will be fed com. block surplus from a tin, it may be a Romainian, Bulgarian, Egyptian, Russian, U.S. or Chinese rifle (Or parts of all of the above). And WILL GET anywhere from 2-6+ Inch patterns at 100 yards. I dont think it is fair to say that ^ (THAT) is normal, or possible with "Most" ak pattern rifles or ammunition.
philpost: said:Well, this afternoon I pulled the trigger (figuratively) on an Arsenal RSL-20. I did a lot of video viewing (yes, all 5 parts of Nuttin Fancy AR vs. AK ), review reading, different gun shop owner asking, and of course, reading the really helpful feedback I got from you folks. I made my desicion based on a few factors:
1) Ergonomics - the AK just felt better and more substantial TO ME. Your feelings may differ. I also play bass, and prefer 50 year-old designs that some people may find thick, clunky, and lack some refinement. That's just me.
2) Usage - probably going to be mostly plinking at 50 yards or less at first. Long distance accuracy won't make a difference at those distances.
3) Resiliance and Reliability- as my old firearm safety instructor put it "if you have to grab one to take out to the Everglades, go with the AK". Since I don't live far from the Everglades, this could be a factor.
4) Price vs. Quality - for the same amount of $, I would have gotten a bottom of the line AR; from what I gather, this is a high-quality AK.
That said, I also know what I've given up - a sophisticated platform that offers many more customization options, as well as something that would help me develop more advanced rifle skills. For now, that's O.K. As many of you have pointed out, you have both, and I wouldn't be surprised if I end up with both as well (+ a .308).
Tommorow, I'm planning on taking it to the range, and truely test it with some firing time. I'll let you know how it goes.
481, thanks for the feedback and the ammo advice. So far, I've only used Wolf 124gr., because the range near me makes you buy their ammo, and that's what they have in 7.62. I did get a box of Remington 123 gr. to use at an outdoor range that's BYOA, but maybe I'll get some of the Winchester to try out on the same trip.
Done and done.If you want a reliable CQB weapon that hits hard get an AK.
My wife loves vintage guns. Maybe something for Mothers Day?M1 Garand...
philpost said:Yesterday I was at the range twice, once on my lunch hour, then after work with my wife, letting her try out the Arsenal for the first time.