Romak 3 outshot my M1A

[telewinz]

Not suppose to happen but at 120 yards from a rest using Russian '46 ball ammo, I shot 1.75 inch 5 shot group with the Romak 3. Using handloads with 147 fmj bullets the M1A shot around 2" groups at the same distance. I find the Romak3 to be much more difficult to fire from a rest than the M1A, its very hard to hold steady and a little uncomfortable, sandbags instead of a padded tripod would be a big improvement. I was using a 10X Redfield on the M1A and a Russian issue 8X. The barrel on the Romak heats-up much quicker than the M1A's ergo the barrel was always much warmer on the Romak while the M1A's was only slightly warm to the touch before firing. Quess its time to make some custom reloads for the Romak and see what it will do although I'm happy with the 1.75" with service ammo. Maybe I ought to try service ammo on the M1A.

BTW: I shot a 2.5 inch 9 shot group with the Romak 3 at 120 yards. One of the ten Russian '46 cartridges failed to fire, they are over 55 years old

 

[B27]

Put a RSA trigger in it and strap a big thick cheekpiece on it so you can get a decent cheek weld and you may be even more impressed.
www.redstararms.com

 

[Gewehr98]

Hey, sometimes it happens!

I have a Bulgarian SLR-95 that has shot confirmed groups of 2" at 100 yards. Many gun "experts" say that's not supposed to happen. It's one reason I tried handloading for the AK-pattern rifles.

Having said that, a well-tuned M1A should be able to put them inside 1" at 100 yards, too, given enough money and time.

 

[Coronach]

Hmmm.

How many groups have you shot with each? Regression to the mean will give you a real picture of the accuracy of each rifle, one against the other.

Mike

 

[Gewehr98]

Hee-hee!

It even got Coronach upset enough to challenge it!

I can just hear him now, "By Gawd, there's no way a Commie autoshucker would ever do better than a copy of a 'Merkin battle rifle!"

If one reads the actual military acceptance criteria for such rifles as the M1 Garand, M14, and M16, it gets real interesting. 3 MOA out of a Garand was good enough for Uncle Sam.

 

[telewinz]

Coronach.........

Groups mentioned are fairly typical, I just never compared the groups of each rifle. I just ASSUMED that all things being equal the M1A would win hands down. Both rifles are firing service grade ammo (handloads for M1A). Its shocking how well the Romak3 did since the M1A had all the advantages; better trigger, much better cheek weld, heavier barrel, and 10X Redfield scope.

Again, equally impressive was the 9 shot (1 misfire, 55 year old ammo) the Romak 3 did with the hot barrel 3.25 inches and take away one flyer I get 2.75 ".

IIRC isn't the service accuracy of the Garand 4 inches at 100 yards and not 3 inches? At least during WW2 it was.

 

[Gewehr98]

Telewinz, you could be right.

But don't tell folks who expect 1-MOA Garands straight from the CMP!

 

[telewinz]

To get that 1 MOA from an M1A is not uncommon but the "target rifle" M1A has little in common with the service grade M14 any more than the M16 has with the "match grade" AR15. Even then you have to use expensive match grade ammo to obtain those results. I bet that if the same efforts were applied to other battle rifles, you would often gain the same result. A good rifle design is common as dirt these days, as I see it the M14 is good but not the best.

Too bad Camp Perry won't allow "outside" competition. If they did I suspect the FAL would have been chosen 50 years ago and the AR15 might have been "an interesting idea" that never caught on. Can you count how many wars the M14 fought as a main battle rifle? I can, one and even then it didn't last the distance. Must be politics, out of all the nations in the World we were the only people to appreciate the M14 as THE superior main battle rifle.

Also bear in mind the crosshairs on the Redfield are a BIG advantage over the inverted V of the 8X Russian scope.

 

[Edward429451]

Nah, you musta been jerking the M1A. (kidding)

Pardon my lack of coffee, but what in the heck does this mean?

Regression to the mean will give you a real picture of the accuracy of each rifle, one against the other.

 

[Nightcrawler]

Is the Romak 3 the same as those "Romanian Dragunovs" you see for sale in the Shotgun News once in awhile?

Thought about picking one up someday, but the mags are almost impossible to find. Probably get a VEPR .308 instead, but I would surely love to have an AK in 7.62x54mmR.

 

[Sarge111]

AK accuracy..

I just picked up a 2003 SAR-1 a couple of weeks ago that has already done repeatable 3-shot groups of just under 3" @ 100 yards, with Wolf hardball. Usually, 2 of those 3 are about an inch apart. That tells me that the gun is mechanically capable of better accuracy than I am wringing from it. It does NOT like Wolf HP, with groups running about twice the above, and notably higher POI. Your rifle may be just the opposite, each one being a law unto itself.

Funny thing- I sighted it in and shot decent groups on a cloudy day; shot it yesterday in bright, directly overhead sunlight and fought the glare-mosters all over the front & rear sights. 100 yard groups on paper were not nearly so good as those mentioned above under these conditions, but I was still able to break 5 clay birds (or pieces thereof) from the bench in 6 shots.

I read a lot of 'internet wisdom' about how it is unreasonable to expect an AK to shoot any better than 'minute of torso' at 150 yards. I don't buy it. Most of these rifles seem to have decent mechanical accuracy, comparable to their NATO counterparts.

Wringing good accuracy from the AK family is no small feat. It would hard to imagine a rifle design with sights, stocks and triggers that SUCK worse than they usually do on an AK. Those three little items are 3 of the 4 cornerstones of good rifle accuracy (4th being a good barrel) and a gross deficiency in any one of them can result in a major accuracy problem. Kalishnikov managed to bat .750 and screwed up 3 of them.

Usually about now come the lectures me on what the intended use and accuracy parameters of the AK are. If we were talking military issue full-auto guns that had been used hard, I might buy into that. Here in the good old USA we civilians are limited to the semi version of the gun, so I expect it to SHOOT. Any rifle (US or foreign) that won't do 2 MOA from the bench is a boat anchor in my book; heck, I've got a .44 Redhawk that will do 4, and it's a darn sight easier to carry.

The SAR-1 will do it with good ammo, but it's not gonna do it as easy as an AR will. It's going to require some tweaking and sight work.

Congrats on your ROMAK. Most of the Romanian guns I have seen had good, tight barrels and decent crowns, which means the potential is there.

 

[Steve Smith]

I believe it. The standard M1A is certainly no champion of accuracy, but of course an AK variant isn't either. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.

 

[444]

"To get that 1 MOA from an M1A is not uncommon but the "target rifle" M1A has little in common with the service grade M14 any more than the M16 has with the "match grade" AR15. "

I think you would be very surprised at just how close a "match grade" AR15 is to any other off the shelf AR15.


"Too bad Camp Perry won't allow "outside" competition. If they did I suspect the FAL would have been chosen 50 years ago and the AR15 might have been "an interesting idea" that never caught on. "

"Service rifle means a US military service rifle or its civilian equivalent. This means the M1 Garand in 30-06 or 7.62mm NATO/308 Win, the M14/M1A in 7.62/308 or the M16/AR-15 in 5.56mmNATO/223 Rem. Military rifles from other countries or an earlier era are regarded as match rifles. "
Taken from an article entitled; Equipment Notes For the Beginning Highpower Rifle Competitor by Stewart A. Leach.

 

[Coronach]

Regression to the mean



Sorry. its the once-statistician in me coming out.

What it means, basically, is this...the larger the number of examples, the better your "statistics" will be. For instance, lets say I have two rifles, Rifle A and Rifle B.

Rifle A is a real tack driver. It IS accurate. It will do sub-moa groups all day long, assuming the ammo is right, the weather conditions are right and I'm doing my part.

Rifle B is mediocre, at best. It is a 3 MOA rifle on a good day.

Now, lets say I go out and shoot a group with each rifle. It is perfectly possible to get a smaller group with Rifle B than with Rifle A, due to the fact that there are a truckload of variables that go into group size, and only one of them is the inherent accuracy of the rifles.

However, if I shoot 2 groups, its is less likely that Rifle B will outshoot rifle A both times. 3 groups....4 groups....5 groups....and so on and so on. The more you shoot, the more likely it is that both rifles will perform as they do on average...and the average for rifle A is far better than the average for rifle B. The tendency of samples over time to more and more closely resemble the average for the given population is called 'regression to the mean.'

Stats jocks out there: yes, I know...thats just a quick and dirty explanaition. Statistics makes my brain hurt. And sometimes my eyes bleed, too.

Anyway, what I was asking is this...how many groups had he shot with each and compared? If he went out and shot one group each and was like "well, gawwwww-lllleeeeeee!" thats not a good comparison. however, if he's shot a bunch, thats a different story. Looks like he's shot a bunch.

So, is it just a nice Romak, or is it a bad M1A, or both?

Mike

 

[telewinz]

NightCrawler

Yes, The Romak 3 is the Romanian version of the Dragunov SVD except it has a great deal in common with th AK47 design. You can buy a target trigger for it and it comes with a chromed bore. I drove all the way to AIM south of Dayton Ohio last summer (8 hrs. round trip) to get the whole package deal for $775 plus tax. The cheap 7.62X54mm ammo is a great motivator also, <.07 a round!

Its one of those rifles that sooner or later I will buy another if and when the price ever drops to $650 or so (if ever). $775 is still the best price around WITH scope and extra mag. Look for the Russian '46 ammo, I do not believe it is corrosive and if it is, it is so mild that a squirt of WD40 and a patch takes care of it. The Silver and Yellow tip ammo is suppose to be the most accurate ammo available but the <2" service accuracy makes me happy using the cheap '46. I'll load-up some boxer handloads just for kicks but I doubt I'll get much better groups at 120 yards, but I've been suprized before, haven't I?

 

[B27]

Nightcrawler-
telewinz beat me to it ...

 

[Nightcrawler]

Two questions:

Is there a stock for it that is compatible for a left-handed shooter?

And can you get extra mags? How much?

 

[B27]

I got my spare mags from K-Var but they are currently shown as sold out. They cost me $99 for four and came with a pouch. They are nicer than the ones that came with the gun!
The stock can be replaced with a commercial plastic one and a rifle that has been done to is shown here www.dragunov.net

 

[telewinz]

Most Romak 3's come with a 10 and 5 round magazine. The mags are built pretty well so they should last. I see them for sale every once in awhile for about $70 but since they are still being made it shouldn't be too hard to find extra mags IF needed. Even without the scope the Romak3 would made a deadly MBR, a decent Garand is going for $600 and up and the Romak3 will out shoot a Garand for just a $100+ dollars and will equal or beat a service grade M14 (M1A) for several hundred less dollars. I'm not saying that the Romak3 would be God's personal choice as a weapon (that would be the FAL ) but it is underated by non-owners.

 

[Nightcrawler]

SWEET! I want one. I'll have to find extra mags, though, expensive or no. I like to have at least 10 mags for my rifles. (I've got about 15 for the FAL, going to get more.)

Hmm...maybe I'll end up buying this AND a VEPR this summer, since I don't think I could choose.

 

[Edward429451]

The remedial math section thanks you Mike. I knew what regression was, but to the means triggered that high school math headache. It was my worst subject.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

out of all the nations in the World we were the only people to appreciate the M14 as THE superior main battle rifle.

that's because we're better riflemen.

 

[Sir Galahad]

One of the best things the Kalashnikov design has done is put a formidable weapon into the hands of the average American who can't lay out the cash for an AR. (And also for us who don't like the AR. )

 

[Nightcrawler]

Impact Guns in Utah has mags for seventy bucks apiece. Expensive, sure, but the mags only hold 10 rounds, and aren't banned (I'm assuming the price is high becasue very few of the magazines are imported for whatever reason.) I think 5 mags would be a good spread for this rifle, and I could always pick up one here or there as I find them.

Are the mags for this rifle the same ones as regular Dragunovs?

I know that this rifle isn't really a Drag. Will a Red Star Arms drop-in trigger group fit?

The second picture features what looks like an ATI stock. I'm assuming then that this rifle will accept the same buttstocks/pistol grips as regular AKs? (I know I'd have to keep the thumbhole stock, I just don't want to go hunting for one specially made for the Romanian Drag.) Are there any synthetic handguards available by any chance?

How's the fit and finish? Better than a typical Romanian AK, I hope? If not, can the rifle be cleaned up by places like Azex Arms that work over the Romanian AKs?

 

[B27]

Nightcrawler-
No, it uses it's own mags, not Dragunov ones.
I installed an RSA trigger in mine and it was fairly easy. I did have to Dremel away a small amount of metal but the instructions told me exactly where to remove it.
The trigger pull is now very good. Not good "for an RPK", just plain good.
(The receiver used on these is actually an RPK receiver that has been reinforced.)