AK-47 & AK-74?

This pic shows the accuracy I get from my Yugo UF assembled from a serb surplus parts kit...two 5 shot groups fired at 100yds through heavy rain...
DSC01611.jpg
 
Well, you're in for a big surprise I think. I'm not making it up, Wolf has said they are in the process of bringing 6.5 Grendel steel cased ammo in by the end of the year for $189 (suggested retail) a case. If you don't want to believe Wolf, that's your choice I suppose. I don't know why they would be telling people in the industry this if they weren't doing it.

By the way, call up Marc Krebs and ask him about Wolf 6.5. He'll be the first to tell you Wolf is bringing the stuff in by the end of the year for $189 a case.

Hey I would love to be wrong. But those are only promises until wolf actually delivers. Remember they have been promising cheap 6.5 for years. I have a friend who had red jacket build him a custom 6.5 AK (the one you usually see floating around on the web) under the auspices of wolf 6.5 coming soon...turns out after a few years of waiting and paying a $1 a pop he decided to get rid of it.

One thing is for sure, cheap 6.5 would certainly provide a major boon for the cartridge to establish itself as something other than a wildcat. It would take AKs to a "whole notha level".
 
I once saw a video on TV about the differences between the M16 and the AK. The M16 was fired in an indoor range at about 50 yd with predictable accuracy. The AK was fired at the same range and was obviously defective. High speed photography showed the barrel and the receiver flexing in relation to each other. The AK was either worn beyond use, or assembled out of worn out parts.
That was a horribly produced Discovery Channel show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

The "expert" claimed the AK was so inaccurate because the bolt was a "huge hunk of metal" and a "relatively high cyclic rate". First, cyclic rate has nothing to do with single shot accuracy. Secondly, the AK's bolt and carrier is only a couple of ounces heavier than the M16's. The "expert" pretends the M16's carrier doesn't move or has virtually no weight.

The two clowns they have firing the rifles are horrible marksman, especially the guy using the AK. Watch him yank the trigger, they show a close-up of his firing the rifle. It's horrific. You can tell by looking at the guy with the AK he's probably never fired one before this show.

Even the other "expert" that claims the AK is primarily a machine gun because the first notch on the selector is full-auto has obviously never used an AK either. Hitting the full-auto notch is no easy task compared to knocking the safety off in a hurry at which time it naturally falls to its furthest most position - semi-auto. Had he ever actually used one, he would have realized this.

Over all, it's a poorly done episode chalk full of dingbat statements and misinformation.
 
My feeling is that most people expect poor accuracy frm the AK, since that is all they have heard about them...they don't apply the fundamentals to their shooting...breathing, sight picture, trigger squeeze, hold.
The first time I shot my Yugo UF AK, there was a guy practicing with his Garand for a match...he was all decked out in shooting jacket and glove, had the spotting scope set next to his shooting mat...made some condescending comments about the AK when I showed up. He shot sitting, tightly slung...I shot standing.
When we walked down to the 100 yard line to change targets, I had shot a group half the size of his...he made some muttered excuse about the ammo he was using, and shut up then.
 
The Yugo is nothing more than an AK-47 version made in Yugoslavia.

With a few exceptions, almost all AK's are simply an AK rifle made by various countries with minor changes to meet their idea of what they needed in a rifle.
Most AK rifle parts will interchange, and the basic rifle is the same AK design as all the others, no matter where it was made.
 
The Yugo has a thicker trunnion, and a slightly thicker receiver. May contribute to a little better accuracy.
 
I have two, both came from Izmash, paid about $450 for the first, about $600 for the second. The second gun was modified with wood stocks replacing the plastic stuff and a pistol grip added with the trigger moved forwards where it "belongs". They are both excellent rifles. The only reason I bought them was because of the cheap ammo. Less than .20 a shot, cheaper to shoot than most of my handguns.

Want even cheaper fun? Get a WW2 classic, a Mosin Nagant that uses 7.62 x 54 ammo which can be bought for .15 a round. Try that with an AR.......... I bought 1600+ rounds of that ammo and will get the rifle ($125) next week to go with it.:D
 
Would a new Saiga AK in .223 or 308 have the same reliability in bad environmental conditions as a traditional and older AK?
 
The rifle was built so that ill trained and illiterate peasants could have a weapon that gave them power of massed fire over lightly armed troops.

Why do so many people repeatedly peddle this nonsense? The USSR had a very high literacy rate, at times even exceeding that of the USA, particularly from the 1960's on. Where they were finding so many illiterate peasants is anyone's guess. Any time anyone goes with that line, it simply goes to show they've no clue what they're talking about.

America, with its heritage of riflery demands more accuracy than the soviets did.

The heavy utilization of snipers in WW2 would suggest the Soviets did see the value to individual marksmanship had no lesser a "heritage."
 
Last edited:
The AK 47 is only really accurate on human sized targets to about 300yrds, which is exactly what it was designed for.
Thats what the STG 44 was designed for as the Germans realized this was what the average solider encountered in battle.
Its also funny that most Armies train there soldiers to be accurate to 300yrds,
and from then on they have DMs or machine guns, thats why the Russians invented the SVD Dragunov.

So the AK 47 achieves exactly what it was designed for.
You don't buy a unicycle to win the Tour De France, and if you want a sub MOA gun then buy something that was designed to be.
 
I think the price is high? So, what would a realistic price be on this?

1200-1400 for a used gun. That one you listed is priced high because it is an "unfired" NIB Norinco. You will always pay a premium for pre-ban guns that are limited in quality with a high demand, especially when they are NIB.
 
I have learned a lot from this post, but I still find it hard to choose my first AK. I'm simply looking for the reliability of an AK in a compact design....not into collecting. I'm interested in a reasonable price, not a collectors price as I will be firing the gun regularly in crappy environmental conditions. I'm considering getting a Saiga hunting rifle and converting it, but would like to hear input from others?
 
Sturmgewehre:

I've enjoyed your informative videos (seen more than once), and twice read your comments about Century Arms' huge contract for AK-74s with bores which were probably 5.56 (?) instead of 5.45.
The amazingly sleazy situation for such a large number of their products painted a much clearer picture about Century, than even the many dozens of reports about their earlier assemblies of CETME "G-3s".

It is difficult to imagine that US Consumer Protection Laws permit a corporation such as Century to begin the warranty period When a Gun is Shipped, even though it might wait months in a gun store until a customer buys it-and who assumes that the warranty period starts with their purchase.
 
Last edited:
I'm considering getting a Saiga hunting rifle and converting it, but would like to hear input from others?

Again, the Saiga Sporting rifle is nothing less than the Russian AK-47 set up in a sporting format.
The action and barrel are the same as the military AK, minus the full-auto capability.
It's just as tough, reliable, and durable as the military rifles.

Converting the Saiga to military configuration can be done, BUT...... you have to buy some parts that are sometimes hard to find and expensive, and you have to have some tools, usually starting with a big shop press.
You have to move the trigger group forward and if you want the AK muzzle brake, you have to press off the Saiga front sight and press on an AK-74 front sight assembly. There's more to it, so do a Google search for converting the Saiga. There's some instructions online on how to do it and what's needed.

Or, you can just spend the extra money and buy an Arsenal, Inc SGL rifle which is the Saiga already converted by Arsenal.
The SGL is a fine military format AK right out of the box.
Again, minus the full-auto capability, the Arsenal SGL is probably the same quality as a Russian military AK rifle.
 
Why do so many people repeatedly peddle this nonsense? The USSR had a very high literacy rate, at times even exceeding that of the USA, particularly from the 1960's on. Where they were finding so many illiterate peasants is anyone's guess. Any time anyone goes with that line, it simply goes to show they've no clue what they're talking about.

Like most of these, there is some truth and legend to it.

Soviet Union did mass attacks in WWII. Not subtle, they had more manpower than skill. A lot of sub-machine gun use. Not well trained as heavy peasantry.

Hard telling if it was the STG 44 (?) or the Garand or combo of both, but the reality was that for what they needed at the time, the AK made sense, and has proven true in third world countries sadly enough.

Lot of the AK myth is pure BS. However, the basics are true, they wanted a dead nuts simple reliable weapon that worked in Russia. They got it, though accuracy was always recognized as an issue and they decided they could live with it.

Yes the literacy rate went way up, but the AK was WWII initial start and very close to post WWII into service.

Oddly, it never saw service in a full blown war like it was desinged for, and the reality is that they would probably have run themselves out of ammo. Ooops
 
Boxjeff here you go.

http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/storeproduct984.aspx

You seemed to like underfolders, and he is a very well made one by a reputable company.


As far as AK accuracy is has to do with a few things.

1) 7.62x39 is very much the same as the .30-30. Great punch but it sinks like a rock after 200 yards. Not the best cartridge if you want accuracy, and a 7.62x39 should never be compared to a 5.56x45. If you want to compare AK accuracy compare a AK-100 in 5.56 to an M4 carbine, and you will see that their difference narrows quite a bit.

2) poor sights, simple put the AK has a shorter sight radius due to the position of the dust cover.

3) ammunition quality- most of us do not shoot match grade ammo, and the russians never did either.

The AK is a fine rifle that is combat accurate. The design itself is more accurate then it is often given credit for if you do an honest comparison. comparing a WASR-10 in 7.62x39 with a 16 inch barrel using wolf steel cased ammunition to a Noveske Ar-15 with a 20 inch barrel shooting match grade SS109....that is not a fair comparison because the variables are not even close.
 
Last edited:
Boxjeff,

Red Jacket has been building custom AK's for a long time and are well known in the AK community. They're also the same people from the television show "Sons of Guns".

I posted a review of that same rifle not long ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtaxw9LWPEs

You probably won't find Atlantic Firearms with any in stock. They get them in batches of 30 or so and they usually sell within a few days. The price is great for the quality of the rifle you get.
 
Back
Top