rangerruck
Member
mojo peepers are the way to go here, plus if you look at some of the ak types made by other countries, from north Europe or Israel, they do have diff type sites, some of which are very good.
If AK-47 sights are so bad, why don't they change them?
- Thread starter Jordan85
- Start date
- Status
Krebs sells a rail that adds a rear ar15 sight to the ak:
http://www.krebscustom.com/PartsPages/KalashnikovParts.shtml
http://www.krebscustom.com/PartsPages/KalashnikovParts.shtml
LeonCarr
Member
The easiest and cheapest upgrade to the standard AK sights is to take a triangular file and make the standard rear notch into a "V" shaped rear notch, similar to what you see on an African Big Game type rifle. Improves sight acquisition a bunch, is cheap, and makes the front sight much easier to see.
Just my .02,
LeonCarr
Just my .02,
LeonCarr
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
The Mojo peeps dont work like a normal peep, and actually take more work and thought to get a sight picture, or at least for me they do. Its the same for pistols with a ghost ring or peep on them. For the peep to work properly, it has to be near the eye, so there is no thought in its use. You look through it, not at it, and you dont align anything, or at least not consciously.
The sights of different countries do differ, and some offer a better sight picture than others, and some have smaller front posts and larger rear notches. Most all are good enough to make consistent, 300 +/- yards hits COM on a man sized target. If the zero on your gun makes the front post appear off center, you can also use a windage adjustable RPK rear sight to correct this. The slider may or may not be right, but then again, who really uses it anyway. The battle sight on most all of them covers you for 250-300 yards without touching it anyway.
The sights of different countries do differ, and some offer a better sight picture than others, and some have smaller front posts and larger rear notches. Most all are good enough to make consistent, 300 +/- yards hits COM on a man sized target. If the zero on your gun makes the front post appear off center, you can also use a windage adjustable RPK rear sight to correct this. The slider may or may not be right, but then again, who really uses it anyway. The battle sight on most all of them covers you for 250-300 yards without touching it anyway.
Mike U.
Member
I just looked at that LaRue AK sight. HOLY CRAP! 
$289.00?!! 
Why on God's Green Earth would anyone mount a sight that cost nearly as much as the rifle it's being mounted on?
Talk about sticker shock.
I mounted a Famous Maker red dot on my WASR and I'm real happy with the results. Holds it's zero till I'm tired of shooting and that works for me. I am even considering the MOJO sights for a back-up. Not that there is anything wrong with the sights the rifle came with. They hit minute-of-gallon-jug at 100 yards as-is.
I like upgrades, just, upgrades within fiscal reason.
$289.00?!! Why on God's Green Earth would anyone mount a sight that cost nearly as much as the rifle it's being mounted on?
Talk about sticker shock.
I mounted a Famous Maker red dot on my WASR and I'm real happy with the results. Holds it's zero till I'm tired of shooting and that works for me. I am even considering the MOJO sights for a back-up. Not that there is anything wrong with the sights the rifle came with. They hit minute-of-gallon-jug at 100 yards as-is.
I like upgrades, just, upgrades within fiscal reason.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Why not? Its the package that you end up with, not the sight or gun.
My Aimpoint/Ultimak combo on my SAR1 cost about $500. I only paid $350 for the SAR. Together, the whole package is a robust, hard use rifle, thats light and handy, packs a decent punch, and is extremely easy to shoot well with. Can I do without the sight, sure. Do I want to, hell no! I know what the difference is and I would prefer to not be without it. I still practice with my iron sights, and its as easy as turning the switch on the Aimpoint off (its usually on 24/7), nothing more.
I've had Bushnell's, Tasco's, BSA, Hakko, and a couple of others, and none held up to moderate use and abuse, and all had crappy battery life. The Russian stuff is built like a tank, but its bulky and usually limited in its mounting options. Even so, I'd still choose it over the "sporting/copy" sights out there like the ones above.
Dont let the overall cost sway you from something good. Would it matter if the gun cost more and the sight didnt? If so, whats the difference?
jordan1948
Member
Most likely because the manufacturers think the reliability outweighs the need for better sights.
You can spend all that money on a fancy red dot or spend $25 on a BSA red dot and about the same amount on a cover with a weaver rail, or a side mount with a weaver rail if you want even more accuracy. I never did understand why people would waste so much money.
Personally I'd rather take the leftover $400+ and buy 2 cases of ammo.
Personally I'd rather take the leftover $400+ and buy 2 cases of ammo.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
I wasted more money on cheap sights than I'm happy with. Most of those cheap sights werent cheap or no name either. If I had that money back, I could buy a couple more Aimpoints.
Things are generally cheaper for a reason. If you think your cheap sight will work and serve you well, hey, have at it, its your butt if your really counting on it. If all you do is shoot a couple of mags off a bench at the range, dont mind constantly rezeroing the sight or blaming the gun for being inaccurate, and remember to turn the battery off every time, you'll probably be fine.
I learned a while back now, only a rich man can afford cheap stuff. Buy quality stuff made for what your using it for right off, and you usually wont be sorry.
Ethereal
Member
+1. The sights are just fine; apples to oranges.
Yeah, ok...
This is a Bulgarian SLR-95, with original iron sights. YMMV, of course, and it appears that if you can't shoot worth beans to begin with, a scope ain't gonna help, either. Maybe if I shouted "Allahu Akbar" the group here would've been tighter...
This is a Bulgarian SLR-95, with original iron sights. YMMV, of course, and it appears that if you can't shoot worth beans to begin with, a scope ain't gonna help, either. Maybe if I shouted "Allahu Akbar" the group here would've been tighter...
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
This was shot at 200 yards with a SAR1 with the dreaded (slighty) canted iron sights using Wolf 154 grain SP's. The lower group was fired from a rest to confirm zero, the upper from a cross legged sitting position and fired at a stead cadence. Allah Akbar My Friend.
100 yards offhand using a 14" barreled Krebs AK103K and its Aimpoint...
Same rfle, single shot, 2 second snap shots from low ready at 50 yards (R) and 100 yards (L)
I have to assume, and I know, silly me making an assumption, but from what I've observed of others and from what I personally know from shooting them, its usually the shooters that are lacking and not the rifles fault ( and this goes for any of them) if you cant shoot it well, or well enough to be reasonably proficient.
Just about any AK will shoot 3-4" at 100 yards from a field position, if your capable of doing so. The key here is YOU. The shooter is almost always the weakest link in the equation, even if they seem to think they are not, which is usually the case. Its always the guns fault.
100 yards offhand using a 14" barreled Krebs AK103K and its Aimpoint...
Same rfle, single shot, 2 second snap shots from low ready at 50 yards (R) and 100 yards (L)
I have to assume, and I know, silly me making an assumption, but from what I've observed of others and from what I personally know from shooting them, its usually the shooters that are lacking and not the rifles fault ( and this goes for any of them) if you cant shoot it well, or well enough to be reasonably proficient.
Just about any AK will shoot 3-4" at 100 yards from a field position, if your capable of doing so. The key here is YOU. The shooter is almost always the weakest link in the equation, even if they seem to think they are not, which is usually the case. Its always the guns fault.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
The same could be said of any scope on any rifle.
Why put that $500 Leupold on your elk rifle when you can get a scope with the same lens diameter and magnification for $30 at Wal-mart? Yet there are reasons for choosing the Leupold...and a $400 Savage 110 with a $500 Leupold will shoot far better at range, and better under adverse conditions, than a $5000 custom rifle with a $30 Wal-Mart scope, I dare say.
Mike U.
Member
Excellent point.
I'm wondering if the reason why my red dot is holding up as well as it has thus far is because I took it apart and applied blue Loc-Tite to all of the screws holding it together. I'm a believer in preventative measures.
Now, I don't abuse my rifle like tossing it onto the rain soaked mud pit that is the back floorboard of my vehicle, using it as an impromptu baseball bat or butt-stroking them thar pesky mall ninjas, but, the rifle does get dropped and jossled around some nonetheless. And, it does get as many rounds as I can afford run thru it.
Which brings to mind the fact that I'm getting a serious case of rifle/shotgun range cabin-fever here while waiting on the Dr's. all-clear. How long does it FREAKIN' take to recover from triple bypass surgery anyway? Is there a Dr. in the house?
Anyway, I guess I can count myself fortunate judging by the number of people who get crapped on by discount optics. Might also need to start saving up for an optics upgrade of my own.
Last edited:
Same here, I've blown out more of the cheap to midpriced dots that everyone raves about than I should have learning my lesson.
Ever blown up a Hakko Japan reflex sight's *mount* with use? I have. Those springs and small parts fly a long long way.
Where you can really tell is on larger caliber weapons - what might run 100% on a low-recoil AR won't last 200 rounds on a FAL or less than that on a SBR HK-51.
Sunray
Member
"...so what gives?..." The AK was designed to be issued to illiterate conscripts who could be trained to use it in the shortest time possible. It isn't made for great accuracy.
Tight groups at 25, 40 or 50 yards with any ammo means nothing. A decent .22 with good ammo will do that. AK103K's 200 yard groups are what an AK is designed to do. Hitting a man sized target at 200 to 300 yards. AK's are not made to have a scope either.
Why anybody would need or want a scope on an assault rifle or carbine(the AK is one of two assault rifles ever made. The other was the STG44. A semi-auto AK is a carbine) is beyond me. It's a waste of money. A scope will not make any rifle more accurate. A scope only lets you see the target better. Screws up the balance of a carbine too.
Tight groups at 25, 40 or 50 yards with any ammo means nothing. A decent .22 with good ammo will do that. AK103K's 200 yard groups are what an AK is designed to do. Hitting a man sized target at 200 to 300 yards. AK's are not made to have a scope either.
Why anybody would need or want a scope on an assault rifle or carbine(the AK is one of two assault rifles ever made. The other was the STG44. A semi-auto AK is a carbine) is beyond me. It's a waste of money. A scope will not make any rifle more accurate. A scope only lets you see the target better. Screws up the balance of a carbine too.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
The interesting thing is, when you compare a red doted AR's groups to those of a red doted AK at most distances, you get very similar groups. Even the iron sighted groups are not all that much different, when fired from realistic field positions at realistic targets that dont have an aiming point.
I agree for the most part about a scope on either. The AR's are better suited for one, but then again, these are usually a specific purpose gun, and not an all around gun. Red dots on the other hand, I believe are a must, for either. A good red dot will bring an AK right up to speed with an AR so equipped. Both are much easier and faster to shoot and make good hits with, with one mounted properly.
I agree. Other than to confirm zero, groups really mean nothing more than your sights are on and your being consistent. A small, slow fire group, fired at leisure from a rest really means nothing. Put the same shooter in a hasty field position other than prone, or even prone for that matter, have them shoot at a target or partial target with no aiming point and put some stress on them and you'd be lucky to get anything you'd call a group. And who cares if its a group at all, all your looking for is a good hit or two.
AR, AK, SOCOM or anything else, would any of the farthest spread on any of these actually have mattered?
AR (100 yards)
AK (100 yards)
SOCOM vs AK (cant remember which shot which now, CRS ya' know
)(100 yards)
Clipper
Member
My WASR 10 w/3-9 BSA blows my .300 Savage 99 w/3-12 into the weeds, accuracy-wise. Go figure...
Such a funny guy.
10 MOA group, eh?
10 MOA at 100 yards = 10 inches. Do the math, hero.
My 4-round group was on its way to becoming a 5 round group when the wind blew over the target stand. I'm soooo sorry I couldn't lay that 5th round in there for you, but then you'd complain that it wasn't 10 rounds or 50 on paper, wouldn't you? Jeebus.
I have enough rifles to outfit a small army, something like 200 at last count. Many are sub-MOA, if you've been around THR as some of us original plankowners you'd see a sampling of them. Many are in the four-digit price tag. Suffice it to say, I'm neither poor, nor young, nor inexperienced. I bought 3 AKs over the last decade or so because I wanted one, and because the liberals didn't want me to have one. Thanks for casting aspersions, though, and the additional insight into your character is greatly appreciated.
An AK that's 2MOA is entirely suitable for its intended purpose, and I've got venison in my freezer from last fall that probably wished an AK never existed - Fudds, Zumbos, and wise-asses on forums be damned.
10 MOA group, eh?
10 MOA at 100 yards = 10 inches. Do the math, hero.
My 4-round group was on its way to becoming a 5 round group when the wind blew over the target stand. I'm soooo sorry I couldn't lay that 5th round in there for you, but then you'd complain that it wasn't 10 rounds or 50 on paper, wouldn't you? Jeebus.
I have enough rifles to outfit a small army, something like 200 at last count. Many are sub-MOA, if you've been around THR as some of us original plankowners you'd see a sampling of them. Many are in the four-digit price tag. Suffice it to say, I'm neither poor, nor young, nor inexperienced. I bought 3 AKs over the last decade or so because I wanted one, and because the liberals didn't want me to have one. Thanks for casting aspersions, though, and the additional insight into your character is greatly appreciated.
An AK that's 2MOA is entirely suitable for its intended purpose, and I've got venison in my freezer from last fall that probably wished an AK never existed - Fudds, Zumbos, and wise-asses on forums be damned.
- Status
