Does bolt action make a difference?

[Capt. Obvious]

Everyone knows that the AK-47 is not built with the tight tolerances of rifles such as the AR-15. Because of this, we don't consider the 7.62x39 round to be all that great of a long distance round. I've even heard the x39 being compared to the 30/30 round.

However, what about using the same AK round in a bolt action rifle? Will the x39 round perform worse than one shot from an AK, about the same, or better than when shot from an AK?

Let the discussion begin.

 

[ugaarguy]

Everyone knows that the AK-47 is not built with the tight tolerances of rifles such as the AR-15. Because of this, we don't consider the 7.62x39 round to be all that great of a long distance round.

Who is "we"? You're confusing accuracy and range. Match grade .22LR ammo from a target rifle is extremely accurate inside of 100 yards, but it's not a long distance round.

I've even heard the x39 being compared to the 30/30 round.

They fire similar weight bullets of near identical diameters at comparable velocities. The two rounds are comparable in terminal ballistics with similar construction projectiles.

However, what about using the same AK round in a bolt action rifle? Will the x39 round perform worse than one shot from an AK, about the same, or better than when shot from an AK?

7.62x39 is the parent case of 6mm PPC, which is a highly successful benchrest round. Assuming it's a decent bolt action rifle it will easily outperform an AK. THR member R.W. Dale built a 7.62x39 bolt rifle on a Stevens 200 action with a PPC bolt face and .30 cal bbl blank. He had excellent results:
Part I - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=361106
Part II - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=362501

 

[EchoM70]

I have a CZ 527 carbine in 7.62x39mm. With good ammo its sub-Moa. With wolf it will hold 1.5 MOA. It's a very accurate little carbine and does the 7.62x39mm round some justice!

 

[captain awesome]

it is not considered an "inaccurate round", not by me anyway. there are rounds that are easier to make accurate because of case neck dimensions and such, there are several other factors, but one big reason the 7.62x39 is not considered a long range round, is ballistics, and bullet weights/BCs. the round just wasn't designed with long range in mind and there are several other 30 cal cartridges that can sling a high BC projectile at much higher velocity's. they defeat wind drift better, and they don't drop as fast. It also means they will remain supersonic for longer, which is better for accuracy at extended ranges where the bullet other wise would fall below the sound barrier.

 

[WardenWolf]

A quality hunting round from PRVI Partizan or another manufacturer will be very accurate out of a bolt action. There is nothing inherently inaccurate about the round, and it would be a very capable deer cartridge.

 

[gamestalker]

Well certainly it could.

There are multiple characteristics of the 7.62x39, or AK 47 platform that greatly limit it's over all performance potential.

A bolt action rifle that has been properly set up, will unquestionably out perform the best possible AK47 action in terms of repeatable accuracy. It's far more about the type of action than the cartridge being used.

Another example would be the 9mm, that if you were to chamber a Rem 700 in 9mm, the 700 chambered in 9mm will run circles around a carbine version.

GS

 

[Davek1977]

The comparisons to the 30/30 are valid. Like the 30-30, its not a 300 yard round for most people's abilities, but when used within its limitations, can be just as accurate as most other rounds. Using a bolt action over a smei-auto doesn't change the actual ballistics of the round, but does typically squeeze more accuracy from the round. Nothing will make the 7.62x39 round excel as a long range contender, say in the vein of the .243 or 22-250. Its rainbow trajectory can't really be improved upon regardless of the rifle one chooses.

 

[Tirod]

Tolerances are a production issue - humans, even machines, cannot reproduce parts in a continuous stream of identical sizes. Tools wear, the operating environment gets hotter and colder, the machines themselves have working clearances that produce variations. That is indicated on blueprints with a notation of +/-, such as +/- .015".

So, "tolerance" is a target figure to keep all the parts within so that the total stack of varying dimensions stays inside the amount of variation allowed for a mechanism to work.

Clearances are the needed room to allow things to move - as machines get colder they contract and the space diminishes. This is why some parts are assembled by heating them - to make more room. As they cool they contract to the point they actually exert friction and hold the subordinate part in place. There is no clearance at all. It's metal on metal.

A gun can have tight tolerances and extremely loose clearances - the semi auto actions we see in combat guns demonstrate that. Bolts rattle around and actually clank when loading or cycling. With a good silencer the action makes more of the noise than the round does.

A bolt action? Depends on the maker and how it was designed. A combat bolt action for use in Northern Europe has to endure sub zero temperatures, up to the 90's in summer. It may be the tightest tolerance rifle ever made, but the clearances demand working in crud in freezing temps. A bolt action isn't necessarily accurate because it's manually operated.

The biggest distinction is that the ammunition isn't rapidly chambered - bolt actions tend to slowly feed the round with fewer bends or abuse, which keeps the projectile more coaxial with the brass, and therefore more often it's coaxial with the centerline of the barrel. That means as the bullet is launched it's not tipped off center as much and it can then be ejected from the muzzle spinning on it's axis. That takes less energy that spiraling slightly off axis, like a wobbling football, and means it stays in flight longer more efficiently.

Self loading military actions aren't quite as good at that, and the military tends to also use crimping to prevent the bullet setting back in the case neck. And that's another issue - handloading extremely accurate ammunition is often done without crimps, which introduce an exponential increase in load variations. Nobody goes out testing various crimps to see which is the perfect one - and so we ASSUME manually loaded actions are more accurate than self loading actions because we get those results.

Load a perfectly centered, perfectly optimized round into the perfect chamber with perfect rifling, and how it got into the chamber shouldn't make a bit of difference. But what we do is compare apples and oranges. The result is we more often see a margin of accuracy from handloads in bolt actions because we can control the variables to a higher degree.

On the other hand, who says accuracy is the final determination? Wars are not fought on accuracy any more. The are fought with volume of fire. So, unfortunately for the bolt action shooter, regardless of his ability and the precision of the rifle, he is completely outgunned by one opponent with an AK-47 and a full magazine. That's why snipers work in teams and the spotter has an equivalent high capacity firearm.

That's just part of the public's misconceptions about actions, tolerances, clearances, and the application.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Some generalizations:

The AK generally subordinated accuracy to sight limitations, reliability, handling, ease of manufacture and level of user training.

The round for the AK originally had limited heights to meet.

7.62x39 has relatively recently been given higher quality firearms, is offered in higher quality form and as such is being stretched to the limits of a true "assault rifle's" round. Thanks to this, we get to see that it is quite the performer in the right conditions not to mention a hell of a performer when expectations are realistic.

Anyone who's shot x39 from a factory Colt Sporter 20" knows the round doesn't necessarily need a true bolt gun to shine but does need something better than the average AK.

AK cheer leaders remain calm. I know there are those of you out there making 400 meter sniper grade kill shots with clapped out service grade AKs... Well, actually, I know there are those who say they do.

Todd.

 

[1911 guy]

What they said. The 7.62X39 is closely associated with the AK, but the limits of the rifle are not the limits of the cartridge.

Accuracy of the FAL is average to abysmal, depending on who built it, but the same cartridge is very accurate in a bolt gun.

 

[rbernie]

Many folk on this forum have positive experiences with 7.62x39 chambered in bolt guns or AR-15 pattern rifles. It's plenty enough accurate for most used, when chambered in a reasonably accurate gun. My first AR build was a 7.62x39 carbine that was solidly MOA (but not markedly sub-MOA).

In other words, it's the platform and not the round that largely dictates the perception of accuracy.

 

[Jim Watson]

And you have to give it good ammo.
A tight AR or bolt action is not going to do its best with Imitation Army Surplus. Same deal in .223/5.56, ball ammo is not what you want for target shooting.

 

[1911 guy]

Yup.

My last build, a Mforgery, is 2 MOA with M193. When I feed it a 60gr softpoint loaded for varmints, it comes in at 1 1/4" at 100 yards. Not shabby for a short barrel.

My varmint rifle is also an Ar type, 20" heavy profile. With M193 it will go 1 1/2" at 100 yards, with handloads it's little bug holes.

 

[natman]

Everyone knows that the AK-47 is not built with the tight tolerances of rifles such as the AR-15. Because of this, we don't consider the 7.62x39 round to be all that great of a long distance round. I've even heard the x39 being compared to the 30/30 round.

However, what about using the same AK round in a bolt action rifle? Will the x39 round perform worse than one shot from an AK, about the same, or better than when shot from an AK?

Let the discussion begin.

The 7.62x39 isn't all that great a long distance round, but accuracy isn't the real problem. The case is small for 30 caliber and it doesn't generate much velocity. It also uses a rather light for caliber bullet, which results in a low ballistic coefficient.

So while it would be more accurate fired from a bolt action than an AK, it still wouldn't be very good at long distance because of trajectory limitations.

 

[DPris]

Worked with a CZ in the caliber last Fall.
Decently accurate & much better than any of my AKs.
Denis

 

[Garrobo]

I had a

'95 Chilean Mauser which was chambered for a round similar to the modern .308 Winchester but was not a high intensity cartridge. I never shot a .308 through it. Instead I bought an insert which allowed you to shoot the M-38 round in it. The loading platform and magazine will not work with this small cartridge but it was a fun cartridge to shoot, one at a time. Didn't recoil much more than a .22lr and was pretty accurate.

 

[Capt. Obvious]

Thanks everyone. I don't really have much to add as I don't hunt and my longest range booths are only 100 yards. I've sold my Savage .17hmr and am wanting a replacement with a little heavier bullet and something with a little more thump.

I am between considerations of the CZ 527 in x39, Ruger American in 223, or something in a 204, 243, 270, 22-250, or a 7mm. Any ideas which would be more preferable for someone that has zero experience with long distance shooting?

Thanks.

 

[1911 guy]

How far do you expect to shoot? For paper and varmints, I'm a fan of the .223. 7.62X39 with appropriate bullets will work fine for deer out to about two hundred yards.

.204 is in the same class generally as .223
.22-250 can be considered a hot-rodded .223.
.243 is a decent deer caliber out to 300 or 350 yards
.270 and 7mm are generally comparable, but vary with which 7mm you choose.

Honestly, for 100 yards, I'd stick with your original thoughts of a .223 or 7.62.

 

[bikemutt]

I ran into a fellow at the range I frequent who was putting up some stunningly good groups using an Olympic Arms 7.62x39 upper. He let me shoot the rifle and it made even me look good. And this was using steel bloc ammo. He had painstakingly worked through the various bloc ammo and found what his rifle liked.

Not being one to pass up a good thing, I found an unfired Oly upper online and acquired it. I can only say it is about as accurate, if not as accurate as my CZ 527 7.62x39 carbine. I have managed 100 yard 1" groups with both rifles but only with Hornady 123 gr SST which is not cheap compared to bloc ammo.

That being said, I have noticed both rifles will shoot certain bloc ammo much more accurately than others so it's a trial and error kind of thing so far, kind of fun too.

I like having both bolt and AR15 pattern platforms in the caliber, enough that I've resisted the urge to get an AK47. I did have a Century AK47 for a while but it disappointed me in the accuracy department, not that it was bad for an AK, just that I don't enjoy shooting at paper with less than pedestrian results, regardless of the ammo cost. When I do get the urge to just burn a target I use my PWS Diablo 7.62x39 SBR, but that's another story

 

[d2wing]

The 30-30 and the 7.62x39 have similar velocity and trajectory and are both .30 cal. But they are far from the same. The 30-30 is about 40-50 grains heavier and has much for energy and sectional density. The 30-30 is also short range but is much more powerful.
The range is roughly the same but the 30-30 is more powerful. The range limitations of the 7.62 x39 are more velocity than accuracy. Ak type guns are notably inaccurate but in a good bolt carbine and quality ammo it should be accurate but still close range.
Hope this helps.

 

[redbullitt]

Bolt action 762x39 is an excellent round. Very economical to shoot and load. Good performance with cast bullets, supersonics AND subsonics.

Kills deer and most game here very dead.

Some barrels can be chambered in 7.62x39 with a .308 bore, giving you a much better selection of bullets if you hand load. Just gotta be careful to not use the wrong ammo it it.

 

[Reloadron]

Thanks everyone. I don't really have much to add as I don't hunt and my longest range booths are only 100 yards. I've sold my Savage .17hmr and am wanting a replacement with a little heavier bullet and something with a little more thump.

I am between considerations of the CZ 527 in x39, Ruger American in 223, or something in a 204, 243, 270, 22-250, or a 7mm. Any ideas which would be more preferable for someone that has zero experience with long distance shooting?

Thanks.

Since you have the 243 Win in the mix and started with a 7.62 x 39 you may as well add the 308 Win, 260 Rem and 7mm-08 Rem. While all of these are fine cartridges if you include:

Any ideas which would be more preferable for someone that has zero experience with long distance shooting?

While it depends on how we define "Long Distance" my suggestion would likely be a 308 Winchester for general purpose shooting of a very common cartridge with a wide range of bullet weights and styles available. I should also add my 223 bolt gun is a rifle I really enjoy shooting and the 223 like the 308 offers up a wide range of bullet weights and styles to choose from. If you take the 223 bolt gun road put considerable time and thought into the barrel twist rate. My custom 223 is a heavy barrel 1 :12 twist and while a tack driving rifle with 55 grain bullets and less the accuracy sucks with the heavier bullets. Just something to consider with the 223.

As to the 7.62 x 39 bolt guns? Try a search of the forums as there have been at least 1/2 dozen extensive threads where the subject was beat to death, revived and beat to death again. Many of those threads had some very good information as I recall.

Ron

 

[rbernie]

Thanks everyone. I don't really have much to add as I don't hunt and my longest range booths are only 100 yards. I've sold my Savage .17hmr and am wanting a replacement with a little heavier bullet and something with a little more thump.

I am between considerations of the CZ 527 in x39, Ruger American in 223, or something in a 204, 243, 270, 22-250, or a 7mm. Any ideas which would be more preferable for someone that has zero experience with long distance shooting?

Thanks.

For killing paper from a bench at 100 yards, very few options beat the economy and user friendliness of a 223 bolt gun. Everything else brings more blast and recoil and cost, and the paper is generally not any more impressed.

 

[Slamfire]

I don't see much of a purpose for either the 223 or the 7.62 X 39 in a bolt rifle. My krieger barreled 223 is as accurate as any of my bolt rifles and is easier to shoot rapid fire. I have shot many HM scores with the thing out to 600 yards. As for a 7.62 X39 in a bolt gun, it is such a low powered round I don't see the purpose. If you are going to carry a short action bolt rifle, might as well chamber it in a more powerful round, such as 308 Win, 243 Win. The Soviets decided the 7.62 X 39 was minimum round they needed in a combat rifle, they were not concerned with hitting anything past 300 yards, nor was accuracy at range all that important. And this was for two basic reasons: they were not going to have the time to train Soldiers to be good shooters, and the second is that that with everyone on their side hosing the country side with a fully automatic weapon, the assumption was, something was going to get hit.

 

[Cee Zee]

I don't see much of a purpose for either the 223 or the 7.62 X 39 in a bolt rifle.

The average 7.62 x 39 round made in a Commie country isn't going to be accurate no matter what you put it in. But it could be made accurate by better construction I'm sure. The .223 is an exceptional varmint round in a bolt gun. You might think you can get the same accuracy out of an AR for the same price you can get it from a bolt action but not many would agree with you from what I read. It just isn't likely that a semi-auto with a short barrel is going to shoot equal to a 30" bull barrel rifle with a target type trigger. You can certainly buy really good barrels for an AR but they cost considerably more when we're talking about a whole rifle. That's been the case anyway. Until I see a n AR rifle that equals what I've seen out of a bolt action .223 for the same price I won't be convinced. I've shot what were supposed to be very accurate AR's and they weren't even close to the .223 bolt action I shoot. Again I know it can be done but not for the same price.