I have always been a fan of the AKM. I like its lighter weight compared to the AK. (If you remember – AK-47 which was type classified in 1947 and has a milled steel receiver – and weighs approximately 9.46 pounds. The AKM uses a lighter stamped steel receiver – and weighs approximately 6.9 pounds. The way I view the AK-47 is – if I wanted to carry a 9.46 pound rifle – I would carry my 16” FN-FAL!)
It feeds from a very reliable 30 round magazine, and fires a shortened .30 caliber round (7.62x39mm).
The inherent reliability of the AK is legendary – as it was made for conscripts that came mostly from the peasant class – and the Soviet Army knew they would not be as fastidious as their western counterparts when it came small arms maintenance. So – the AK can go for long periods without much maintenance at all.
On the other hand – the “ergonomics” of the AK series (or actually the LACK of ergonomics) has kept it in sort of a “second class” when viewed by most professionals. The MUCH more ergonomic M4 has been and continues to be their “first choice”.
I know some guys prefer to keep thier firearms "stock" - and I can see the logic in that - however - I don't subscribe to that line of thought. However - if you are one of those guys - you can stop reading. I on the other hand - don't mind making some "changes" or "mods" to my fighting firearms - as long as functional reliability is not adversly affected. And in the case I will outline below - not only has the functional reliability not been degraded - the "ergonomics" have been greatly ENHANCED. Which translates to better/easier handling - which IMHO is a GOOD thing.
So what is it that keeps the AKM down??
Well for one – the selector/safety. However – that has been remedied by Randy Sloan of Blackjack fame. ( http://www.blackjackbuffers.com ) His SWIFT lever makes using the selector a BREEZE! (See an article I wrote regarding the SWIFT lever at: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=52909 )
The next thing that keeps the AKM from reaching its full potential is the poor sights. There are some “fixes” for this out there – but to my mind – the very BEST way to fix this problem is go straight for a “red dot” type scope. And – for me – there is only one option. The ULTIMAK is the ONLY way to go. Here’s why: for a “dot” scope to be truly worth its salt – one needs to be able to “co-witness” the iron sights THROUGH the scope. That allows INSTANTANEOUS use of the “Back-Up-Iron-Sights” (BUIS) in the event the scope goes down. The ULTIMAK is the ONLY way I know of to use a “dot scope” and still co-witness the irons. Yeah – you can put a KOBRA or some other “AK” red dot on your AK – but it really screws up the cheek weld. You have to hold you head up off the stock to use these – and most of them won’t allow you to see the iron sights – so they have to be removed to use the iron sights. How bad you want to fiddle with that when on a “two way” range?? ( Randy Sloan has a great price on the ULTIMAK http://www.blackjackbuffers.com )
On top of the ULTIMAK I placed the only red dot there is for this set-up – the Aimpoint (I attached the Aimpoint M2). The EOTech holographic sight is what I run on one of my M4’s – but it sits too high – and won’t allow co-witnessing of the iron sights when used on the AKM. ( I got my Aimpoint from http://www.nmtactical.com )
The next “complaint” I have had is the buttstock length. I know – most Americans want a LONGER stock on the AK – but a lot of those that do more than punch paper want a SHORTER stock. This allows a more “natural” fighting stance with the rifle. The “best” option IMHO is to attach a M4 style stock on the rear receiver. The M4 style stock allows the greatest flexibility when it comes to different lengths of pull (LOP). When I have on winter clothing and a level III vest and a full blown LBV – I have my VLTOR set at a different LOP than if I am in a T-shirt. The very best M4 style stock IMHO for the AK is the VLTOR. There are other attachment methods out there – but they all fall short when compared to the VLTOR. One of the really cool things about the VLTOR is the “tube” is actually a storage compartment! The VLTOR also comes with two attach points for a sling, one on the stock – and one on the mount. (Contact “Tom” at http://www.mooneysfirearms.com and he can hook you up with the VLTOR stock at a great price!)
Then – for those of you that like “fore grips” – the best attach method I have found is to get the TDI lower fore-arm and fore grip. It is very strong – sturdy and “does the job”. I don’t feel that one needs a stronger or more sturdy attachment method on the lower receiver. In other words – I see no need for the aluminum rails instead of the lower handguard. With this TDI unit one can still attach a flashlight – or a laser – and keep the cost down to “acceptable” levels. (BTW – Blackjack buffers has these as well.)
Some may ask about “extended” magazine release mechanisms. I have no use for them. My thoughts are it will just help “Murphy” release your mag when you don't want him to. It is no big deal to operate the mag release with the off-hand. I mean - you gotta grab the mag to pull it out anyway - so your hand is already there. IF you got to do a “speed change” and don’t have time to keep the magazine, all you got to do is use the “fresh” magazine to hit the release – and with the muzzle down – the old mag drops right out! So – I have no use for extended magazine releases.
OK – the cost?? Well, the “conversion” from regular AKM to the “AKM4” as I call it – cost only around $750 bucks – and the INCLUDES the Aimpoint scope! Without the Aimpoint – the cost is around $375.
Now – my “AKM4” is almost the same over all length, the same weight, more reliable and NEARLY as ergonomic as my “regular” M4. I also do like the .30 caliber bore – even though I know that the 5.56 with the right load actually surpasses the Russian round.
All in all – I am quite satisfied with my “AKM4” – it is a HECK of a lot better than it was before these recent mods – and it nearly reaches “M4” performance for less money too!
Here are some pics:
Storage compartment in buttstock.
cheers
tire iron
It feeds from a very reliable 30 round magazine, and fires a shortened .30 caliber round (7.62x39mm).
The inherent reliability of the AK is legendary – as it was made for conscripts that came mostly from the peasant class – and the Soviet Army knew they would not be as fastidious as their western counterparts when it came small arms maintenance. So – the AK can go for long periods without much maintenance at all.
On the other hand – the “ergonomics” of the AK series (or actually the LACK of ergonomics) has kept it in sort of a “second class” when viewed by most professionals. The MUCH more ergonomic M4 has been and continues to be their “first choice”.
I know some guys prefer to keep thier firearms "stock" - and I can see the logic in that - however - I don't subscribe to that line of thought. However - if you are one of those guys - you can stop reading. I on the other hand - don't mind making some "changes" or "mods" to my fighting firearms - as long as functional reliability is not adversly affected. And in the case I will outline below - not only has the functional reliability not been degraded - the "ergonomics" have been greatly ENHANCED. Which translates to better/easier handling - which IMHO is a GOOD thing.
So what is it that keeps the AKM down??
Well for one – the selector/safety. However – that has been remedied by Randy Sloan of Blackjack fame. ( http://www.blackjackbuffers.com ) His SWIFT lever makes using the selector a BREEZE! (See an article I wrote regarding the SWIFT lever at: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=52909 )
The next thing that keeps the AKM from reaching its full potential is the poor sights. There are some “fixes” for this out there – but to my mind – the very BEST way to fix this problem is go straight for a “red dot” type scope. And – for me – there is only one option. The ULTIMAK is the ONLY way to go. Here’s why: for a “dot” scope to be truly worth its salt – one needs to be able to “co-witness” the iron sights THROUGH the scope. That allows INSTANTANEOUS use of the “Back-Up-Iron-Sights” (BUIS) in the event the scope goes down. The ULTIMAK is the ONLY way I know of to use a “dot scope” and still co-witness the irons. Yeah – you can put a KOBRA or some other “AK” red dot on your AK – but it really screws up the cheek weld. You have to hold you head up off the stock to use these – and most of them won’t allow you to see the iron sights – so they have to be removed to use the iron sights. How bad you want to fiddle with that when on a “two way” range?? ( Randy Sloan has a great price on the ULTIMAK http://www.blackjackbuffers.com )
On top of the ULTIMAK I placed the only red dot there is for this set-up – the Aimpoint (I attached the Aimpoint M2). The EOTech holographic sight is what I run on one of my M4’s – but it sits too high – and won’t allow co-witnessing of the iron sights when used on the AKM. ( I got my Aimpoint from http://www.nmtactical.com )
The next “complaint” I have had is the buttstock length. I know – most Americans want a LONGER stock on the AK – but a lot of those that do more than punch paper want a SHORTER stock. This allows a more “natural” fighting stance with the rifle. The “best” option IMHO is to attach a M4 style stock on the rear receiver. The M4 style stock allows the greatest flexibility when it comes to different lengths of pull (LOP). When I have on winter clothing and a level III vest and a full blown LBV – I have my VLTOR set at a different LOP than if I am in a T-shirt. The very best M4 style stock IMHO for the AK is the VLTOR. There are other attachment methods out there – but they all fall short when compared to the VLTOR. One of the really cool things about the VLTOR is the “tube” is actually a storage compartment! The VLTOR also comes with two attach points for a sling, one on the stock – and one on the mount. (Contact “Tom” at http://www.mooneysfirearms.com and he can hook you up with the VLTOR stock at a great price!)
Then – for those of you that like “fore grips” – the best attach method I have found is to get the TDI lower fore-arm and fore grip. It is very strong – sturdy and “does the job”. I don’t feel that one needs a stronger or more sturdy attachment method on the lower receiver. In other words – I see no need for the aluminum rails instead of the lower handguard. With this TDI unit one can still attach a flashlight – or a laser – and keep the cost down to “acceptable” levels. (BTW – Blackjack buffers has these as well.)
Some may ask about “extended” magazine release mechanisms. I have no use for them. My thoughts are it will just help “Murphy” release your mag when you don't want him to. It is no big deal to operate the mag release with the off-hand. I mean - you gotta grab the mag to pull it out anyway - so your hand is already there. IF you got to do a “speed change” and don’t have time to keep the magazine, all you got to do is use the “fresh” magazine to hit the release – and with the muzzle down – the old mag drops right out! So – I have no use for extended magazine releases.
OK – the cost?? Well, the “conversion” from regular AKM to the “AKM4” as I call it – cost only around $750 bucks – and the INCLUDES the Aimpoint scope! Without the Aimpoint – the cost is around $375.
Now – my “AKM4” is almost the same over all length, the same weight, more reliable and NEARLY as ergonomic as my “regular” M4. I also do like the .30 caliber bore – even though I know that the 5.56 with the right load actually surpasses the Russian round.
All in all – I am quite satisfied with my “AKM4” – it is a HECK of a lot better than it was before these recent mods – and it nearly reaches “M4” performance for less money too!
Here are some pics:
Storage compartment in buttstock.
cheers
tire iron
Last edited:
)
