You guys seen this?

[Evil Monkey]

Let's get one thing straight. If you are a right handed shooter, and are using optics ontop your rifles receiver, the charging handle should ALWAYS be on the left side. You can't reach over, because the optic is in the way, and underhanded isn't natural. These techniques for running an AK rifle were developed because they were faster than the way a conscript was "supposed" to handle the AK rifle (ie: using your strong hand to reload, operate charging handle, and all other non sense...). The only way you can run an AK faster than with these "advanced techniques" like slapping the mags out or preforming an underhanded chambering is to rearrange certain features of the AK rifle. For example, incorporate an extended mag release, an index finger reachable selector switch, and a LEFT side charging handle.

That being said, this "ak rachet charging handle" was poorly designed. It should have been non-reciprocating, but they went the cheap route by having it built as simple as possible.

People keep coming up with ways to fix a near flawless system.

Flawless? The AK is full o' holes.

 

[Reid73]

I don't really see the point.

No, the AK is not flawless, but it is simple and reliable. This "upgrade" detracts from those advantages.

If the fellow in the movie was really interested in faster reloads, he'd be well advised to remove the sling or at least lengthen it: it kept getting in the way of his mag changes.

 

[AK103K]

Let's get one thing straight. If you are a right handed shooter, and are using optics ontop your rifles receiver, the charging handle should ALWAYS be on the left side. You can't reach over, because the optic is in the way, and underhanded isn't natural.

Straight for who, someone who hasnt taken the time to work it out? There are a couple of ways to do what you suggest isnt "natural", and they all work well.

Then there are those of us who dont use an optic mounted over the top cover at all.

Any of it is just you learning how to work the gun the way that is the best for you. Most of the complaints I've heard about the AK's, are made from people who have little or no real, practical experience with one to know what it is, or how it really works and shoots.

Most of the AK upgrades are shoddy and useless. They are made for people who wont take the time to learn how to work the gun as it comes, and often, they cause problems of their own that didnt exist before they were installed. Then there are a few, like the Ultimak, that actually increase the rifles usefulness, and bring it into the 21'st century with the other weapons of their type.

The only accessories any stock AK really needs, is a good Russian web sling, and the Ultimak/Aimpoint combo mounted low, up front, and a good lot of ammo the rifle likes.

 

[EdLaver]

It's flawless to me, the only thing I changed on mine have been the sights and adding a cheek piece/weld. Functionality-wise, it works for what I need use it for, good out to 150-200 yards. There is a reason its one of the top five battle rifles in the world and not just due to availability.

 

[Evil Monkey]

There is a reason its one of the top five battle rifles in the world and not just due to availability.

Yeah right, you just train wrecked your credibility and can't be taken seriously from here on out.

No, the AK is not flawless, but it is simple and reliable. This "upgrade" detracts from those advantages.

Simplicity means nothing. If a new product is to have better features than an older design, it's going to have to use more components. As long as the design is durable and reliable, simplicity is just a word and has no value.

Would you praise the bolt action as a viable modern front line weapon because it's simpler than a semi auto? I hope not.....

There are a couple of ways to do what you suggest isnt "natural", and they all work well.

Apparently not "well enough" by what the market has brought in terms of AK accessories and new firearms.

 

[eatont9999]

Evil Monkey,
The true answer to your last response is: It depends on what the enemy is using.

If your enemy is using a rolling block, you have an advantage with a K98. If your enemy is using a K98, you have the advantage with an SKS. If your enemy uses an SKS, you have the advantage with a G3, AK or M16. Everything is relative. I love my AK and I wish I could afford an M16/AR-15 platform. I am set back due to my most recent purchase and my hopeful move to TX. After all that is said and done, I WILL be making the leap toward precision!

I have never had a problem with my 1911 that was not my fault and I have never had a problem with my AK-47. I guess it all depends on the conditions and the user.

 

[John Parker]

I love how this geeky-looking dude (but who knows, he could be the real thing) gets all dressed up with the low-pro cap and the Blackhawk vest and tries to look all hardcore while showing off his new charging handle.

 

[AK103K]

Apparently not "well enough" by what the market has brought in terms of AK accessories and new firearms.

As I said earlier, most of those "accessories" are geared towards those who dont and/or wont, take the time to learn the rifle, and feel that one or more of these gizmos will make up for their lack of training, knowledge, and understanding. Its really no different than that of the AR crowd too.

If you cant work a stock AK, or AR, or whatever, as it comes, its not the fault of the gun, and all the gizmos in the world really wont help you if your not willing to make the effort to learn the basic gun and its basics in the first place.

The AKs charging handle can be manipulated from above, below, or on its side, optic on the gun or not. Mags can be released and dumped with your hand on the grip, using the stock mag release, and the mag will drop free without assistance, if you so choose. The stock selector can also be manipulated using the hand on the grip, with no trouble what so ever. The stock is not to short, nor are the sights lacking. A good red dot does for it, exactly what it does for an M4, and guns so equipped are comparable in their use and shootability. Some of us who have and use both actually find the AK to be better in the last respect.

 

[jpwilly]

In all fairness the ergos of the AK work well for me as is...I'm a lefty!

 

[sarduy]

someone want to load he's AK like a Mp5

 

[Evil Monkey]

If you cant work a stock AK, or AR, or whatever, as it comes, its not the fault of the gun, and all the gizmos in the world really wont help you if your not willing to make the effort to learn the basic gun and its basics in the first place.

If you learn the basics of the AK, then you'll never complain, until you mess around with a more superior rifle.

Everything about the AK's manipulative controls are wrong from the start (except for the mag catch lever). The techniques that were developed to operate an AK quickly and efficiently without fine motor function under stress can be made much easier by the introduction of certain features and/or rearrangement/redesign of existing features. There's no backing away from this. There's no flipping it around, no spinning it, no ignoring it, this is just the way it is. Otherwise, we would say that the AK has controls that are just as easy to use as say......the XCR. Is that true? Hell no.

 

[AK103K]

If you learn the basics of the AK, then you'll never complain, until you mess around with a more superior rifle.

The only thing that makes a rifle superior, is its shooter. You can have the "bestest" rifle in the world, but if your cant work it, what do you have?

Everything about the AK's manipulative controls are wrong from the start (except for the mag catch lever).

According to who? I know quite a few people who have a different opinion of that, including myself.

I have to assume from your replies, you havent taken the time or effort to actually learn the AK, or you'd know better and wouldnt be making the statements you are. An AK is an AK, an AR an AR, G3, G3, and on down the road. They all work, and work pretty much the same in the end result, if you take the time to learn them. The rub here is, you have to actually do that, with all of them to know the difference to be able to make comparative statements.

The only way to know what YOU can do with what, is spend quality time with them, using them as they were meant to be used. The short time at a weapons familiarization class or a couple of mags out of your buddies rifle at a bench at the range doesnt qualify. You need to get intimate with the rifle to learn it. Once you do, I think you'll find they are really not all that far apart in real world use. Then again, if you've already convinced yourself otherwise, you probably wont, but hey, thats your loss.

Oh, and the XCR thing is making my point about spending the money for something that isnt necessary. An AR type rifle is an AR, no matter how many bells and whistles you put on it or no matter how much money you throw at it. In fact, changing around the basic controls is actually detrimental. Same goes for any of them. If you cant work the base models as they come, the fancy stuff isnt going to be of any help to you.

 

[EdLaver]

Yeah right, you just train wrecked your credibility and can't be taken seriously from here on out.

Evil Monkey,

Sorry friend, but I could care less about what you think of my credibility or being taken serious. I stated my opinion of this product and the reasons I believe the AK is flawless to me. If you feel other-wise then you are totally entitled to your opinion as well.

 

[nwilliams]

While I can see some advantages to the system it doesn't do anything for me.

Personally i think the AK is good enough the way Kalashnikov designed it.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Sorry friend, but I could care less about what you think of my credibility or being taken serious. I stated my opinion of this product and the reasons I believe the AK is flawless to me.

That's fine, but I had a problem with what you said in bold here...

There is a reason its one of the top five battle rifles in the world and not just due to availability.

The AK's "success" is very much due to its wide spread manufacture and distribution by the USSR and Warsaw Pact countries, but that's not what this thread is about so I won't go further.

AK103K, there's no point in going any further. I value rifles that require minimal effort to operate and you don't.

 

[AK103K]

I value rifles that require minimal effort to operate and you don't.

Whatever. I havent really found any of them that required effort to operate, and I've owned and shot most of them.

Like I said earlier, its usually not the guns fault if you cant work it, and nothing has changed there.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Yeah I don't see anything good about opening up the gas tube like that. Locking the bolt open is nice, but there are several safeties that allow you to do that too.

The 'slap' looks neat I guess, but I don't see it being functionally faster than a standard rifle. (None of them lock open on the last shot.)

 

[Justin]

That is a ridiculous product.

The only thing that makes a rifle superior, is its shooter. You can have the "bestest" rifle in the world, but if your cant work it, what do you have?

I suppose we'll find out at next month's annual AK vs. AR match...

 

[Wes Janson]

It's quite telling to see what people use in 3-Gun competitions...

(Hey AK lovers, don't look!)



Seems to me this product would be much more interesting if they'd gone further. Lengthen the gas block, and reduce the outer diameter of the very end of the piston. Place the cocking sleeve over the piston, and then mount the whole thing into the new gas tube (except make the gas tube in two sections-the slotted tube for the handle, and the rear base for the tube which mounts into the trunnion). Thus you'd have a non-reciprocating handle that could also be uninstalled and reversed over, without tools, in a matter of a minute or so. And it would do a better job at keeping debris out, I suspect. The downside would be a higher initial cost in parts and labor (gas block, piston, charging handle, piston tube, piston tube mount) but a considerably superior product. The only issue I could see would be heat transfer onto the charging handle.

 

[krazykelley]

But remember, they were trying to market it as a no gunsmithing required, drop in kit. Considering that the AK, even in its "tacticool" varients attracts a more casual following than a lot of other firearms, I imagine that would be an important point.

 

[PandaBearBG]

AK is simple, mean, and damn tuff, the ratchet is a nice idea and nice simple execution but unnecessary. Thats the beauty of AK's lock load always a bang, you want to reconfig a rifle and trick it out, stick with an AR.

 

[Justin]

It's quite telling to see what people use in 3-Gun competitions...

At Rocky Mountain 3 Gun this year, my AR-pattern rifle ran with no problems over the course of a 2-1/2 day match in arid and often windy conditions.

On the other hand, the full-auto AK I rented jammed up on a double feed in the first magazine. It actually required the use of pliars to clear the jam.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Meh thats a magazine failure--hardly worth a mention. But pliers? Really?

 

[Rundownfid]

This product seems to be addressing the wrong problems. As I see them the AK has two groups of problems. One is accuracy, both inherent and that exacerbated by their atrocious sights. The second is their ergonomics, largely around charging and magazine release. The gizmo doesn't address the sighting problem, in fact it makes the ultimak impossible to fit, so lets jump to handling ergonomics. Here there might be a small advantage, however it appears that the handle doesn't lock back automatically on an empty chamber? If that is the case where is the advantage? One still has the magazine release from hell and a charging handle that has to be manipulated with a left hand. It is probably easier to learn to reach forward with the left to charge and the hand will be very close to firing position at the end. However, a bit of practice working the charger from under the rifle can make big improvements, so there is very little to be gained. As to being able to lock the charging handle back that is a convenient feature and a welcome one by range officers I'll bet. I have modified my safety lever so I can lock the charging handle open, it took 10 minutes with a dremel.

As mentioned above the real problem with an AK is that they just don't shoot accurately enough. With the Ultimak or a side mount scope they are at least adequate. The ergonomic problems seem insoluable, live with them and practice around them, save your money on this gizmo.

It seems that we have two different groups of shooters looking for very different things from their guns. One is the AK shooter who is very impressed by their utter reliability, I have to say their pride is not misplaced. However, there is another group of shooters, many probably competitive, who love the AR for it's accuracy and its excellent ergonomics. (The mag release and the ability to keep the right hand on the pistol grip and manage a reload is light years ahead of the AK.) However, if one doesn't compete in matches this isn't an important issue. After all one has 30 rounds and short of re-fighting the Battle of the Bulge who is going to need that 31st round 2 seconds earlier? A three gun shooter for sure, but who else? The US has a very sophisticated rifle that with care and training is a battlefield and competition marvel. The Ak isn't either, but it is battle axe tough and simple to operate with very little training and can be a very creditable weapon when used by a well trained (I almost said operator, but refuse)...

 

[Wes Janson]

As I see them the AK has two groups of problems. One is accuracy, both inherent and that exacerbated by their atrocious sights.

This is a claim most often repeated by those who've simply never tried.

Any normal AK should be entirely capable of 3-4 MOA off of the bench, using run-of-the-mill steel-cased plinking ammo.

Most normal ARs may do half that, from the bench, using good ammo.

Most normal shooters will do two or three times that size group, minimum, when shooting offhand, or in typical combat scenarios. Unless you plan on engaging targets past 300 yards from a supported position, the difference in accuracy is almost completely irrelevant. The AR's sights are more efficient to use, when it comes to speed, but that's about it. There's not much of a difference in sight radius between an M4 carbine and a typical AK. The intrinsic accuracy advantage is there, but it's almost entirely irrelevant from a functional perspective.