PTR-91 vs AK

[ChronoCube]

Which would you get for defensive situations? Just to make it equal in terms of price and quality, I'm talking about the $1000 PTR-91 vs the $1000 Arsenal AKs.

I know most of the pros and cons but I'd like to hear some opinions.

Pros of PTR-91:

• More accurate
• More power and range
• Reliable
• Cheap mags

Cons of PTR-91:

• More expensive ammo
• Heavier

Pros of AK:

• Cheaper ammo
• Reliable too
• Lighter and smaller

Cons of AK:

• More expensive mags
• Has bad-guy look, might get you shot at during a crisis

 

[Golden Hound]

I wouldn't get either for defensive situations, I'd get a shotgun.

The PTR/HK91/G3 is much more accurate, much more powerful, can be made into a true long-range semi-auto - it is a real battle rifle. However the big downside of it is the cost of .308 ammo. Figure out what your priority is.

 

[SN13]

I'd get an AK shotgun.

 

[-v-]

The PTR-91 is going to have a wider variety of ammo available for it, whereas for the AK you have basically two manufacturers with three different bullets each to choose from.

The AK will have the cheaper ammo for it, so its much more affordable to shoot on a regular basis.

PTR-91s can have a tendency to mangle brass during ejection making it very hard if not impossible to reload.

Wolf/Barnul ammo for the AK is essentially non-reloadable and 7.62x39 brass is not very common.

I second SN13 in get a Saiga-12 and load it up with Hornady rifled slugs to get Rifle-like range with the flexibility of a shotgun.

 

[Golden Hound]

PTR-91s can have a tendency to mangle brass during ejection making it very hard if not impossible to reload.

This problem is easily solved by buying an ejection port buffer for fifty dollars. A lot of people (not accusing you specifically) seem to mention this brass-mangling factoid about the G3 as if it is an unavoidable fact that one is simply forced to live with. Not so - it's a rather cheap fix.

 

[lipadj46]

+1 Saiga 12 just give them a month or so before you buy one. RAA just sent out a bad batch that have problems with the gas ports (too few, clogged, in the wrong place). They call them the vodka specials and unfortunately I got one.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I don't get why people think the shotgun is so flexible. Sure, it can use a lot of different ammunition types, but most don't really expand the shotgun's utility, especially as a civilian defensive weapon. For police use, sure, the ability to use less lethal rounds might be an advantage. For most civilians, this isn't even a consideration. Likewise, birdshot is fine if you're hunting birds, but has no use as a defensive munition. So you got buckshot and rifled slugs. The slug extends the range and usefulness of the shotgun against hard targets over buckshot, but still can't approach that offered by the rifle.

A rifle is and always will be more versatile than a shotgun. This is why rifles are standard issue infantry weapons and shotguns are secondary or tertiary weapons issued only for specialized applications. Shotguns, regardless of ammunition used, are really only good for short range soft targets. Rifles offer more utility due not only to increased range and accuracy, but also the fact that they can successfully engage both hard and soft targets. Add to this a lower recoil impulse and higher magazine capacity, and the fact that some expanding loads for the 7.62x51 offer about 75% of the cavitation and tissue displacement of 12 gauge 00 buck, and the more reasonable question is why would anyone use a shotgun when they can use a rifle?

 

[lipadj46]

Most people agree for home defense a shotgun with buckshot is the way to go for obvious reasons that have been discussed everywhere ad nauseam. Sure a high powered rifle is best for combat situations and can be and is widely be used for HD. I own am M1A but my 12 gauge is what I keep closest to me in my bedroom loaded with 3" 00 buck. That way I don't have to worry so much about my aim and I don't have to worry about my bullet going through a tree, into my neighbor's house or traveling a half mile and killing someone. To each his own though.

To the OP's question I would rather have a PTR-91 because I likey the .308.

 

[ChronoCube]

I am aware of the benefits of a shotgun but that's not what I was asking. Buying a shotgun (<$300) is a small endeavor compared to buying a $1000+ EBR so your question really doesn't help. As lipadj46 suggested by example, I could own both. Let me rephrase it this way for those of you who said shotgun:

PTR-91/shotgun combo or AK/shotgun combo?

 

[MTMilitiaman]

PTR-91

As much as I like the AK, if the ergos of the PTR-91 suit you, it will probably turn out to be the better rifle. A 155 gr TAP or 168 gr or 175 gr OTM is going to be about as quick and final up close as it is possible to get. What little it lacks compared to the 12 gauge in this respect, it makes up for by allowing quicker follow up shots and by offering several times the capacity.

 

[lipadj46]

The PTR-91 is a nicer rifle in my opinion especially at the same price. Don't get me wrong I like AKs but for the $1000 you are getting a better rifle with better potential accuracy wise with the PTR. Now ammo costs is another thing all together. I have an M1A and I know the cost of 7.62 Nato these days. I look at my 900 round cache and start to consider investing in reloading equipment instead of new ammo (we should all actually). With the PTR-91 just realize you need a port buffer if you want to reload as the thing beats on brass.

If you don't have a shotgun I would definitely recommend looking for a used mossberg 500 or remington 870 just to have around.

 

[gunlocators1]

I have owned both several AKs , G3s , H&K91 and PTR91 being a dealer helped but I have recently sold ALL I recommend the PTR91 if we do get a ammo import ban imposed on us the 7.62x39 will turn out to be much more than .308 I think thats just my opinion. I think .308 will be easier to get your hands on if that happens. I decided , shotgun for home defense then my handguns, 9mm AR for short range, .223 AR for mid range use and My .308 700 Police Sniper for long range use....

 

[stubbicatt]

I own am M1A but my 12 gauge is what I keep closest to me in my bedroom loaded with 3" 00 buck. That way I don't have to worry so much about my aim and I don't have to worry about my bullet going through a tree, into my neighbor's house or traveling a half mile and killing someone. To each his own though.

Respectfully, I have a colleague who was a police sergeant for many years. He related a story to me where some fella robbed a bank, and the cops were on him. He started to run across a field, and turned to fire on the cops. One of them dropped him with a shotgun and 00 buck. He was DRT, still clutching the bag 'o money with one hand and his pistol in the other.

One of the pellets from the shotgun traversed the field, penetrated the side of a lady's house, pierced the side of her refrigerator and lodged inside. The cops replaced the fridge and repaired the damage to the walls.

Based on this first hand account, I can tell you that I will not be using 00 buck, if one of my considerations is over penetration.

Too I respectfully disagree with the aiming comment, as one must aim a shotgun at any sort of home defense distances if one expects to hit the target.

Which would you get for defensive situations? Just to make it equal in terms of price and quality, I'm talking about the $1000 PTR-91 vs the $1000 Arsenal AKs.

While the range and accuracy of the PTR will tend to outshine the Kalashnikov, I find it hard to conceive of a situation where I could keep a straight face describing to a jury a "defense" situation where the distances were any more than 20 yards. Perhaps such a situation exists, but it is difficult for me to conceive of.

The real danger of over penetration applies to both of the cartridges fired by the PTR91 and the Kalashnikov. If I were to purchase either of them, I would definitely want to do some penetration testing and water jug testing to see how it performs before putting it into a HD role. I'd hate like hell to shoot a BG, and kill the neighbor kid asleep in her crib as the round went whistling on through walls and such.

Just my $.02

 

[expvideo]

The Kel Tec RFB is supposed to be coming in February. It's in about the same price range. Looks like a better deal to me.

 

[nathan]

PTR is a sweet rifle.

 

[lipadj46]

The Kel Tec RFB is supposed to be coming in February. It's in about the same price range. Looks like a better deal to me.

Until I see firearms up for sale assume they are vaporware. What else about an unproven kel-tec bull pup would make it a better deal than 2 proven rifles like an AK or a PTR-91? If we take the SU-16 as an indicator of what kel-tec can do with a full sized rife I am not sure I would expect too much.

 

[expvideo]

Until I see firearms up for sale assume they are vaporware. What else about an unproven kel-tec bull pup would make it a better deal than 2 proven rifles like an AK or a PTR-91? If we take the SU-16 as an indicator of what kel-tec can do with a full sized rife I am not sure I would expect too much.

I think it looks impressive and like a lot more gun for the money. You don't have to feel that way.

 

[lipadj46]

It does look cool and I hope it is something quality for a good price but it will have to be a pretty special rifle to compete with an AK and a PTR-91 both battle proven rifle designs.

 

[SN13]

Here's the thing about a Shotgun.

A 3" Mag of 00 or 000 Buck is a lot of energy spread out in a BIG surface area. 3" 12 Pellet 00 Buck @ 1325 FPS = 2600 ftlbs of energy. Or approximately that of a .308. BUT given that the lead balls are .33" each, that means that WITHOUT expansion due to deformation, you're looking at almost 4" of surface area to which that energy is bestowed. The penetration is much less than a .308" 150gr bullet, but 4" area covered by 656.25gr of lead, is devastating.

One .308" hole that may expand to .5 or more but penetrate through? or 12 .33" holes that may expand some and even if not, cover almost 4" of area alone but will lodge themselves inside the target or maybe penetrate the soft spots?

You just don't waste as much energy when the shot doesn't penetrate completely as when the rifle slices through the target.

At least, that's how I think about it.

 

[Kentucky]

If it was in-house defense only I would go with the AK. If this were going to be my only rifle, I would choose the PTR as it is more versatile. With a good trigger job and a good scope you can easily be effective out to several hundred yards with the PTR, it is a better hunting round, and very passable as a HD gun. I would much prefer the PTR to a shotgun for HD. You DO have to aim a shotgun, so no real advantage there, and the PTR has less recoil and much larger capacity.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

That fails to take into account that the lead balls deform very little. They have relatively little mass--about 55 gr for the 00 buck IIRC--and the overall effect is like a short burst from a machine pistol. Yes, few can doubt its effectiveness under the right conditions, but the latest expanding defensive rounds for the 7.62x51 offer nearly the same tissue displacement with less recoil and greater accuracy. This is because with nearly twice the velocity, the 7.62 is well above the threshold required to do permanent damage to vital organs beyond the immediate path of the projectile. Anybody who has ever been hunting knows that while the bullet is "only" .30 caliber, the wound channel inside the chest cavity is much larger. I once saw a young muley buck's offside shoulder blown nearly completely off by a 168 gr SMK from a .308. From seeing dozens of animals shot with expanding soft points of various weight and manufacture, I know the permanent wound channels are more often than not soft ball sized.

The newer Hornady TAP rounds or the old standby OTM rounds are devastatingly effective and maintain this effectiveness for a greater range. While this may not be important in most home defense scenarios, no one can say that a Katrina-like event won't require a greater effective range than offered by either slugs or buckshot. These expanding projectiles demonstrate nearly ideal penetration for their purpose. They will penetrate several interior walls, but so will everything else worthy of being used for self-defense. And with the rifle, you only have to account for a single projectile. With the shotgun, you have to account for eight to twelve randomly placed projectiles, any one of which if deformed during manufacture or firing could easily become errant and strike an innocent third party.

I imagine shotguns will not be totally eclipsed for inside the house fighting until we have phasers and light sabers. But there is a reason that even among people who fight in houses for a living, the shotgun takes a back seat the a carbine rifle. Rifles just give you more bang for the buck.

 

[OOOXOOO]

I have yet to see an AK worth $1000, I'm not disparaging the AK but I think they are worth about $250. The PTR is a fine rifle but too much for me in a defensive roll. Light off a .308 indoors at night with no hearing protection just for fun. I live in the city so over penetration is a major issue with either round. If it has to be one of the two you listed I would go with the PTR but then again I suck and they hate me. At least I would feel I got my $1000 worth.

 

[lipadj46]

I would go with the PTR but then again I suck and they hate me.

PTR's are not made by HK. Rest assured PTR thinks you are great and loves you. I agree on the price of an AK though $1000 seems a bit steep unless we are talking some nice custom build with a milled receiver.

 

[Golden Hound]

Correct. Please discount all the HK hate that you hear on this forum, whether or not it is in fact justified, when considering the purchase of a PTR because these rifles are in no way connected with Heckler and Koch. They are clones of the HK91 rifle, which is a semi-automatic version of the G3 rifle. The basic design of the G3 is OLDER THAN THE HECKLER AND KOCH COMPANY.

 

[ChronoCube]

What's the deal with Heckler & Koch? What'd they do?