Ak47 or Ak74? Which do you prefer? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Ak47 or Ak74? Which do you prefer?


rtl
02-13-2010, 17:05
I choose the 74. i love it's light weight, low recoil, and quickness. the 47 is too heavy by comparison and follow up shots are too slow. that's too much of a trade off for the advantages of the heavier caliber, IMO.

Jon_R
02-13-2010, 17:19
I just made that decision and went with one in 7.62x39 (47 Clone). I have not shot it yet its weight empty is very light maybe that will change when I get a chance to shoot it and put a loaded mag in it. Then again I also take my M1 Garand out for some shooting so weight is all relative. In the end I went with ak-47 since it is more traditional same reason my Garand is not shooting .308. I also already have an SKS so it would not add a new caliber to my collection.

It does mean I won't get a ak-74 soon. I like the idea / concept of the 74 rifle. You can always have more. :) A 74 with all polymer furniture to go with the 47 with traditional wood.

mikeyU
02-13-2010, 20:12
I like my 74, polish tantal, but would like to get an arsenal 74 and try owning a 47 as well.

MisterPX
02-13-2010, 21:51
I went 74 strickly due to ammo costs. For what I've shot, my first two 74's are free.

PlasticGuy
02-14-2010, 19:27
There's certainly nothing wrong with the 5.45 cartridge, and ammo savings are significant. I do prefer the extra power and penetration of the 7.62x39 though. It's worth a little extra money and a little extra recoil to me.

andyffer
02-14-2010, 19:49
nobody thinks youre a psycho if you own an AK74
I chose the 47.

No I just chose it cause its more of a classic than the 74 and has more kick

my762buzz
02-14-2010, 20:13
I choose the 74. i love it's light weight, low recoil, and quickness. the 47 is too heavy by comparison and follow up shots are too slow. that's too much of a trade off for the advantages of the heavier caliber, IMO.

Neither. I choose the AK103 7.62x39 punches through steel thickness that 5.45 nor 5.56 can not pass through. I don't even feel the recoil pulse. 7.62x39 is also far more terminally effective against people or animals once you get past the FMJ BS that military conventions requires of governments. See shots 3 and 4 Try blowing water juggs at this magniture with 5.56 or 5.45
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzCnST-HQbc&feature=player_embedded

toshbar
02-14-2010, 22:46
I bought a WASR first with wood furniture for the classic AK look, then Friday I did a 5.45 Saiga conversion, which basically is a 74 without a muzzle attachment. I kept the front plastic front hand guard, put a wire folder and modern scope on it. It is super cheap to shoot.

I put both of them on a scale, without magazines and the WASR was only 0.1 lb heavier than my Saiga conversion with a scope and mount. I guess i could take off a 3/4 of a pound for the scope and mount on the Saiga.

9mm +p+
02-14-2010, 23:38
I'm a .30 guy, I have no use for the SCHV rounds. I feel they are inferior stoppers, recoil from a 7.62x39 isn't an issue at least for me, mags are aplenty and ammo thankfully abounds gain. 5.45 is kind of an oddball for me, it may be effective but I'll stick with my 7.62.

toshbar
02-14-2010, 23:45
I'm a .30 guy, I have no use for the SCHV rounds. I feel they are inferior stoppers, recoil from a 7.62x39 isn't an issue at least for me, mags are aplenty and ammo thankfully abounds gain. 5.45 is kind of an oddball for me, it may be effective but I'll stick with my 7.62.
the 7.62 may penetrate armor and concrete better, but the 5.45 will make a bigger hole in tissue. It tumbles after about 2 inches of hitting something soft like paper/wood/flesh whereas the 7.62 stays straight until 8 or 10 inches and by that time it's already gone through a body. Lots of the afghans were surviving 7.62 wounds cause the bullet came out just like it went in. a 5.45 coming out sideways is a different story and was nicknamed 'the poison bullet' for that reason.

Asmodeus6
02-15-2010, 02:13
I only own 7.62 AK's so I have to say 47. But I would really like to move into a 5.45 AK soon. Mainly due to cost and the fact I don't have one.

I like the extra punching power of the traditional AK47 which is what drew me to them years ago. If I had to start from scratch 'today' I would probably buy a Bulgarian 5.45 AK.

In plum.
:)

my762buzz
02-15-2010, 02:35
the 7.62 may penetrate armor and concrete better, but the 5.45 will make a bigger hole in tissue. It tumbles after about 2 inches of hitting something soft like paper/wood/flesh whereas the 7.62 stays straight until 8 or 10 inches and by that time it's already gone through a body. Lots of the afghans were surviving 7.62 wounds cause the bullet came out just like it went in. a 5.45 coming out sideways is a different story and was nicknamed 'the poison bullet' for that reason.

That only holds with FMJ versus soft tissue. Hollow points/softpoints that fragment or violently expand change the that entirely. In the video link I posted above only the first jugg is hit with 7.62x39 FMJ and is virtually uneffected. The 3rd is hit with a 7.62x39 8m3 bullet that fragments very effectively and the 4th with a 7.62x39 vmax.

Asmodeus6
02-15-2010, 02:43
That only holds with FMJ versus soft tissue. Hollow points/softpoints that fragment or violently expand change the that entirely. In the video link I posted above only the first jugg is hit with 7.62x39 FMJ and is virtually uneffected. The 3rd is hit with a 7.62x39 8m3 bullet that fragments very effectively and the 4th with a 7.62x39 vmax.

Exactly. 8m3 does insane damage to soft materials. Sometimes it will even fragment and the pieces will continue hauling through the target to go find some trouble of their own.

This is the beauty of using a round that is nearly 3x the weight of 5.45 or 5.56. Mass. Even the pieces usually come out large enough to wound or kill whatever is behind the first target.

I hang onto a little FMJ, but the majority of my stock pile is 8m3. It's not as good as the Vmax, but cost vs benefit it holds the highest ratio.



The largest draw of the 5.45 is that it can still be had for $.13c a round. 7.62 is nearly twice the cost or more. It's still fairly accurate, and effective. But I can shoot more of it if I was just 'starting' today, for less.

JBJ16
02-15-2010, 05:16
I'm a .30 guy, I have no use for the SCHV rounds. I feel they are inferior stoppers, recoil from a 7.62x39 isn't an issue at least for me, mags are aplenty and ammo thankfully abounds gain. 5.45 is kind of an oddball for me, it may be effective but I'll stick with my 7.62.

the 7.62 may penetrate armor and concrete better, but the 5.45 will make a bigger hole in tissue. It tumbles after about 2 inches of hitting something soft like paper/wood/flesh whereas the 7.62 stays straight until 8 or 10 inches and by that time it's already gone through a body. Lots of the afghans were surviving 7.62 wounds cause the bullet came out just like it went in. a 5.45 coming out sideways is a different story and was nicknamed 'the poison bullet' for that reason.

Not to hijack the thread but this could be interesting reading. Link.
http://forums.second-amendment.org/index.php?topic=636.0

Aceman
02-15-2010, 06:06
47 - it's just the ideal combat round. Perfect balance of power and size. More umph than the 5.45/5.56, less kaboom than the long range 7.62x51/54.

9mm +p+
02-15-2010, 12:54
the 7.62 may penetrate armor and concrete better, but the 5.45 will make a bigger hole in tissue. It tumbles after about 2 inches of hitting something soft like paper/wood/flesh whereas the 7.62 stays straight until 8 or 10 inches and by that time it's already gone through a body. Lots of the afghans were surviving 7.62 wounds cause the bullet came out just like it went in. a 5.45 coming out sideways is a different story and was nicknamed 'the poison bullet' for that reason.

So you rely on a wounding mechanism that may/may not actually work when you need it? Tumbling/fragmentation may or may not happen, with the 7.62 at least I'm punching an almost 1/3" hole through my target. Sorry but SCHV is total joke to me, the 5.45 seems to work better than the 556. I've personally seen the 223/556 fail on stuff as small as groundhogs, so I'd have ZERO faith in it to protect myh loved ones. Just my opinion.

toshbar
02-15-2010, 14:11
So you rely on a wounding mechanism that may/may not actually work when you need it? Tumbling/fragmentation may or may not happen, with the 7.62 at least I'm punching an almost 1/3" hole through my target. Sorry but SCHV is total joke to me, the 5.45 seems to work better than the 556. I've personally seen the 223/556 fail on stuff as small as groundhogs, so I'd have ZERO faith in it to protect myh loved ones. Just my opinion.

I've never had to rely on any gun to protect myself or my family but I'm sure the 5.45 would work. I've performed my own experiments testing the tumbling nature of the 5.45 and observed exactly what I've read. Within an inch of penetrating soft tissue, the 5.45 bullet has begun to yaw, and after 3 inches it has almost gone completely sideways. I did the same experiment with my WASR and it took almost 10" for the bullet to turn. You might be leaving a 1/3" hole in something, but a 5.45 going sideways is definitely going to do more damage. I have both calibers FTW, along with my Garand which will surely take down the most durable zombie.

The 7.62 and 5.45 are within 200 fps of each other although the 7.62 has about 500 ft*lbs more energy.

my762buzz
02-15-2010, 15:35
I'm just not as impressed as true expanding/fragmenting bullets.

5.45 versus water juggs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKU1Iehlv8

toshbar
02-15-2010, 15:54
I'm just not as impressed as true expanding/fragmenting bullets.

5.45 versus water juggs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKU1Iehlv8
Those water jugs don't prove anything other than big splashes capture people's attn like shiny objects. there's nothing to look at and examine afterward.

Go get about a foot worth of paper and shoot both into it. the 7.62 will penetrate deeper, but the 5.45 will spin in the first few inches and start shredding sooner.

mikeyU
02-15-2010, 16:05
both are good, just putting aimed bullets on a target faster with the 5.45 is what you prefer over a barrier buster like the 7.62 than get what you like.

toshbar
02-15-2010, 16:14
both are good, just putting aimed bullets on a target faster with the 5.45 is what you prefer over a barrier buster like the 7.62 than get what you like.
FACT! 7.62 can cut a concrete slab in half and target shooting with 16 cent 5.45 bullets = win.

mikeyU
02-15-2010, 16:20
7.62 can cut a concrete slab in half

The reason I don't have just one caliber.

9mm +p+
02-15-2010, 16:28
Those water jugs don't prove anything other than big splashes capture people's attn like shiny objects. there's nothing to look at and examine afterward.

Go get about a foot worth of paper and shoot both into it. the 7.62 will penetrate deeper, but the 5.45 will spin in the first few inches and start shredding sooner.
Water jugs aren't flesh and bone and neither is paper, the 5.45/5.56 may or may not perform as advertised but the x39 will always make a hole in and a hole out. 2 holes bleed better than one, there are no absolutes in ballistics or stopping power, period. You carry what you want...

my762buzz
02-15-2010, 16:50
Energy that does not work to disrupt tissue in the first 12 inches is really waisted. If the bullet exits a torso, it carries the spare energy it could have used to tear up tissue. The tumbling bullet concept was used as an alternative to a real expanding bullet which is more favorable but not politically acceptable in warefare because of the brutality seen by its use.
When given the choice to drop an animal like a deer, the hunting tradition in America has always favored an expanding bullet because it works better than
FMJ or a tumbling FMJ. If a tumbling FMJ were better, it would have caught on as more efficient and accepted, but it has not. You just don't see major ammunition makers even trying to market the new and improved 360 degree spin bullet because its not going to produce the most tissue disruption within
the critical zone. If the afgans would have been hit at close range with real hollow point 7.62x39 they would have been raving about the exploding head and chest bullets and would have cared little about the 5.45 die three days later from infection bullets. I look at it like this. If I am going to hunt deer, I am going to respect the deer by minimizing its agonizing death and this calls for a quick/efficient merciful clean kill and using a good expanding rifle bullet
increases the likely hood of a swift kill. By using a tumbling FMJ, I am not using the most efficient design to end the deer's life ethically. Why would you want to use a less efficient design on an enemy combatant that is far more determined than a deer could ever be to kill you in combat? If the Russians could get by politically with using an expanding hollowpoint for combat they would have. The whole idea of 5.45 was to try and keep up with 5.56 knowing
the few advantages it offers like less weight, lower recoil, and more likely to tumble than a 30 caliber FMJ.




Cartridge : 5.45x39mm Bulgarian 53gr boattail steel core FMJ

Firearm : Romanian AK74 with 16.5" barrel length

Single shot fired to the center of the block from 10 feet distance. Bullet impacted at 3014 ft/sec, penetrated to 2.5" and turned on its side. This sideways penetration continued until 8.8" depth, at which time the bullet apparently righted itself. This orientation continued until ~ 9.0" penetration depth, at which time the bullet again turned on its side and continued on in the sideways orientation until bullet exit at 16.0" depth.

At this point, the bullet impacted the test stand upon which the block was sitting, and traveled an unknown distance into the polyester bullet arresting box. Bullet was recovered undeformed at 52.9gr.
http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/545x39mmBlk1.JPG



Cartridge : D&S Manufacturing 123gr Hornady V-Max

Firearm : 7.62x39mm AR15 with 20" barrel length
Single shot fired to the center/top of the 10x10x16" gelatin block. Impacted at unrecorded velocity (chronograph malfunctioned). Penetrated to 11.9", with severe fragmentation along the entire penetration track. Bullet core recovered at 0.609" average diameter.


http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/762x39mm123grVMaxblk.JPG


I am willing to bet that if you could place a 7.62x39 real hollow point or vmax into any given deer into the same spot
as a 5.45 steel core the deer will drop and die faster/sooner with the expanding ammo. I have not seen this tested
yet but it would make one heck of an interesting experiment provided you could get two nearly identical deer to try this with
and literally strike the same spot at the same angle. As a disclaimer, head shots would obviously invalidate the whole experiment.
Heart shots only.

mikeyU
02-15-2010, 18:05
That vmax ammo is suppose to be great, I would like to se the performance of the 5.45 in vmax compared to 7.62 vmax, also the difference between vmax 7.62 and a regular commie hp, would be interesting. Just to know if it is all what its suppose to be.

CTfam
02-15-2010, 20:20
So the biggest factor here is ammo cost? I would like an AK-74 one day but will that surplus ammo ever dry up? That's my only concern. The Wolf 5.45 is the same price as the .223.

toshbar
02-15-2010, 20:35
So the biggest factor here is ammo cost? I would like an AK-74 one day but will that surplus ammo ever dry up? That's my only concern. The Wolf 5.45 is the same price as the .223.
doubtful because I'm pretty sure the russian army's current rifle is 5.45.

my762buzz
02-15-2010, 20:48
doubtful because I'm pretty sure the russian army's current rifle is 5.45.

Surplus being steel core may continue to be imported or it may become
reclassified and banned. Why isn't steel core 7.62x39 surplus importable? Because
Partly because of Olympic arms making a 7.62x39 pistol which caused reclassification of 7.62x39 steel core as armor piercing because of the
1968 GCA law. If the ATF ever decides to crack down on steel core 5.45,
there is not much preventing this because of idiot builders that have made a few 5.45 pistols. I'm not kidding. There was even one on gunbroker not long ago. Wanna bet it was spotted by the Feds? I am going to guess there is a few hundred of these made and its now just a matter of time before 5.45
is reclassified and no more surplus steel core. Wolf, Bear, etc sure but not
the actual steel core corrosive surplus. Buy your surplus now and stack it deep before the cheaper 5.45 ammo party is over.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=147338473

CTfam
02-15-2010, 22:31
doubtful because I'm pretty sure the russian army's current rifle is 5.45.

True. Damn I've been stacking .223 all this time and now I'm thinking I want to go another way. 5.45. There is a lot of "what ifs" about ammo being around for it... But for $1,000 you can get a quality AK-74 and 2,000 rounds of surplus ammo.

That's a smokin deal if you ask me. What's the deal with this ammo? Is it corrosive? What does that even mean? Will it destroy the rifle over time?

my762buzz
02-15-2010, 22:36
True. Damn I've been stacking .223 all this time and now I'm thinking I want to go another way. 5.45. There is a lot of "what ifs" about ammo being around for it... But for $1,000 you can get a quality AK-74 and 4,000 rounds of surplus ammo.

That's a smokin deal if you ask me. What's the deal with this ammo? Is it corrosive? What does that even mean? Will it destroy the rifle over time?

Surplus 5.45 is corrosive which means it leaves salt in the barrel and gas system. Flush with lots of hot water and the salt dissolves right out.
The commercial 5.45 should not be corrosive. Its definitely a good deal.

Trigger Finger
02-15-2010, 23:29
I like the 47 better! The 74 was an afterthought to compete with the 5.56 mm round! As a result IMHO the 47 is slightly more reliable. The entire platform was designed to fire the 7.62 x 39 mm round and I like this round very much, very close to as much as I like the 5.56. I wish they made cheaper ammo in 6.8 mm SPC.

Asmodeus6
02-16-2010, 00:30
The cost of 5.45 is such that you can stack it VERY deep and not really worry about them banning it.

Cases of 2160 are $259. That's 4320 rounds for $520. :shocked: Or about the cost of one 900 round case of DOD equivalent brass 5.56. Don't believe me? Go look. Want some M855 from Lake City? $500+.

Do that with any other center fire rifle caliber that you could genuinely use as a combat weapon. You can't do it.

So for $2k you could get a GOOD rifle, a nice stack of mags, and probably almost 10k rounds of ammo.

Plus... 5.45 is not as dependent on velocity as 5.56 is to be terminally effective. Not too bad for an "afterthought" round. :upeyes: Not to mention it is more controllable during automatic fire... lighter weight, more accurate at greater distances... etc.

As for being completely "banned" hogwash. At least one American manufacturer is already starting to load for it... it might not be $.13c a round. But you'll be able to get some either way WCS. So even if they cut importation completely you will still be able to get it.

my762buzz
02-16-2010, 00:56
As for being completely "banned" hogwash. At least one American manufacturer is already starting to load for it... it might not be $.13c a round. But you'll be able to get some either way WCS. So even if they cut importation completely you will still be able to get it.


The top tier of banned 5.45 is the steel core surplus from just reclassification.

The 2nd tier would fall along being banned with all imported 7.62x39,5.56,7.62x51,etc.. Which means all imported ammo is screwed.


Domestic made 5.45 should always be available but more expensive than
any imported option today. More competition among ammo makers is going to
drive the price down. Like 9mm ammo which wasn't always a domestic staple in America, its going to take demand from consumers and willing competition from producers to make 5.45 cheap and plentiful in Uncle Sam Land and thats not a pun on Walmart either. Considering how long it has taken 7.62x39 to get where it has today, its going to be a while before 5.45 has the same market size and mass production benefits. Several million 7.62x39 (sks and AK varients over 30 plus years) guns is going to be hard to match right away by the 5.45 market.

Nestor
02-16-2010, 11:49
I choose the 74. i love it's light weight, low recoil, and quickness. the 47 is too heavy by comparison and follow up shots are too slow. that's too much of a trade off for the advantages of the heavier caliber, IMO.

Neither.
I prefer the heavier caliber in the lighter (6.80 lbs), more refined package.
I mean CZ vz.58

Trigger Finger
02-16-2010, 23:07
Asmodeus6
"Plus... 5.45 is not as dependent on velocity as 5.56 is to be terminally effective. Not too bad for an "afterthought" round. :upeyes: Not to mention it is more controllable during automatic fire... lighter weight, more accurate at greater distances... etc."

Don't get upset!! It is an afterthought by Kalashnikov in 1974 and if there were no M-16, 5.56mm round there would be no 5.45. I never said it was bad, in fact I think it is a pretty good round but having shot both IMHO the 5.56 out of a good AR or M-16 is definitely more accurate!! :cool:

toshbar
02-17-2010, 09:21
IMHO the 5.56 out of a good AR or M-16 is definitely more accurate!! :cool:
anything out of a good AR is going to be more accurate.

The question is: 'Will it fire and cycle when needed?' :wiggle:

haha. That's the only argument I have against the AR.

JBJ16
02-17-2010, 09:26
anything out of a good AR is going to be more accurate.

The question is: 'Will it fire and cycle when needed?' :wiggle:

haha. That's the only argument I have against the AR.

Yes of course! The AR will, unlike the AK in this video which "needed" to fire while in front of the camera. . . .:tongueout:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqRwx4wtmms

Trigger Finger
02-17-2010, 16:06
The AK is trying to shoot, it's just that nothing is coming out! :rofl:

Aceman
02-17-2010, 19:41
A bunch of interesting points.

Ammo availability; At the end of the day, it is wayyyyyy cheaper than 5.56, the gun + 4k rounds argument just can't be beat, even if a short term win or for long term storage.

Ultimately, if there is a market, the domestic makers will make it. Most of the big guys have had 7.62x39 for a while. You won't be without - it just won't be cheaper than 5.56.

5.56 vs 5.45; Bad ideas IMO either way. It's a varmint round. As I have always said, if pappy said "Hey boy - there's a big wolf in the field, get me a rifle..." and i brought a .223, he would have slapped me. Mind you - he could drop the bad doggy with anything you handed him. But he'd expect the .223 for maybe a fox. I learned to pick caliber's based on range & weight. 5.56/5.45 are not the rounds I would choose for medium range engagement of 200lb prey. Just saying - if you could find someone who had never heard of the aR/M4, and let them choose a round for combat...it would NEVER be 5.56.

That said - I realize they can both be very effective. But again...so can a .22 or a sharp pencil. I wouldn't pick either of them.

But - I'm about urban/suburban environment bad guy high probability stoppage with fast fire and decent control. Nothing beats 7.62x39 for that. 5.45/5.56 - toooo small, 7.62x51/54 toooooo big. 7.62x39 - just right!

If I'm going to get about engagement past 100 yards - big gun time. I still will want the best terminal ballistics available and 5.45/5.56 ain't it. Personally - I'm about avoiding.

As for ammo weight...if I had full auto and had to provide cover for four other moving squad members, and had a whole logistics section backing me up...ok, more little bullets is cool. But I don't. Semi auto bigger bullets is what I want.

We have spent to much time in America doing the "Bigger is Better" thing, and drank too much of the "I can carry more rounds and they are accurate to 800 yards" crap to think straight about this stuff IMO.

And honestly, for the cost/reliability of the guns - I say get a 5.56 AK, a 5.45 (Tantal would be my choice), AND a 7.62. Then, work the ammo that's cheapest.

my762buzz
02-17-2010, 20:05
The AK is trying to shoot, it's just that nothing is coming out! :rofl:

I know. Aren't you impressed? It takes a a heck of alot more earth inside the action to make an AK choke than that an AR15. That is a testiment to a better internal design. There wouldn't be hundreds of millions of them built world wide if it didn't work well in combat. The other video those same guys did showed an AR15 run over by jeep and it was toast. It wasn't even trying.
Oh well, when you absolutely can't drag your gun through hell and back its probably because its an AR15. Those poodle shooters make fine guns until they get a little dirt under their painted nails or its that time of the month. If its got to be maintained that often, its not a real combat gun its a prom queen in need of some baby wipes. An AK is more like a marathon runner unlike the prom queen it does not need to stop every 5 minutes to check and see if it broke a nail.

CTfam
02-17-2010, 20:17
A bunch of interesting points.

Ammo availability; At the end of the day, it is wayyyyyy cheaper than 5.56, the gun + 4k rounds argument just can't be beat, even if a short term win or for long term storage.

Ultimately, if there is a market, the domestic makers will make it. Most of the big guys have had 7.62x39 for a while. You won't be without - it just won't be cheaper than 5.56.

5.56 vs 5.45; Bad ideas IMO either way. It's a varmint round. As I have always said, if pappy said "Hey boy - there's a big wolf in the field, get me a rifle..." and i brought a .223, he would have slapped me. Mind you - he could drop the bad doggy with anything you handed him. But he'd expect the .223 for maybe a fox. I learned to pick caliber's based on range & weight. 5.56/5.45 are not the rounds I would choose for medium range engagement of 200lb prey. Just saying - if you could find someone who had never heard of the aR/M4, and let them choose a round for combat...it would NEVER be 5.56.

That said - I realize they can both be very effective. But again...so can a .22 or a sharp pencil. I wouldn't pick either of them.

But - I'm about urban/suburban environment bad guy high probability stoppage with fast fire and decent control. Nothing beats 7.62x39 for that. 5.45/5.56 - toooo small, 7.62x51/54 toooooo big. 7.62x39 - just right!

If I'm going to get about engagement past 100 yards - big gun time. I still will want the best terminal ballistics available and 5.45/5.56 ain't it. Personally - I'm about avoiding.

As for ammo weight...if I had full auto and had to provide cover for four other moving squad members, and had a whole logistics section backing me up...ok, more little bullets is cool. But I don't. Semi auto bigger bullets is what I want.

We have spent to much time in America doing the "Bigger is Better" thing, and drank too much of the "I can carry more rounds and they are accurate to 800 yards" crap to think straight about this stuff IMO.

And honestly, for the cost/reliability of the guns - I say get a 5.56 AK, a 5.45 (Tantal would be my choice), AND a 7.62. Then, work the ammo that's cheapest.

I agree. 7.62x39mm is the perfect round for any SHTF situation you may find yourself in. It's a power house without being overkill IMO. Plus who can afford to shoot .308? Not me, the way I blast through 30 rounders at the range.

That said. I do have a Saiga .223, can't have a 7.62 AK in CT :upeyes: so I will be getting a VZ.58. And that 5.45 ammo is such a good deal I MUST get an AK-74 asap.

Sooooo in conclusion..... GET THEM ALL!!!:cool:

toshbar
02-17-2010, 20:34
That said. I do have a Saiga .223, can't have a 7.62 AK in CT :upeyes: so I will be getting a VZ.58. And that 5.45 ammo is such a good deal I MUST get an AK-74 asap.

Sooooo in conclusion..... GET THEM ALL!!!:cool:
Why get 5.56 and 5.45? They're pretty much the same.

CTfam
02-17-2010, 21:02
Why get 5.56 and 5.45? They're pretty much the same.

Great question. In CT I'm not allowed to get an AK-47 chambered in 7.62x39mm. :upeyes: Totally ridiculous I know but that left me looking for other options in the AK platform. Saigas are all over the place and the price looked good so I picked up one in .223. Then did the conversion myself. At the time I didn't even know Saiga made a 5.45 and I didn't even know much about that round at all.

But now all this surplus ammo is making this a more attractive option. I can get the same ballistics for $100 less per case. Also, all the AK-74s I see online have flash suppressors and bayonet lugs which are also too evil for CT. :faint: Another reason why I went with the Saiga. BUT I just spoke to a dealer who said that since they are also a manufacturer they can order what I want and just take that crap off.

And that's my story of fun in liberal land.

toshbar
02-17-2010, 21:06
Great question. In CT I'm not allowed to get an AK-47 chambered in 7.62x39mm. :upeyes: Totally ridiculous I know but that left me looking for other options in the AK platform. Saigas are all over the place and the price looked good so I picked up one in .223. Then did the conversion myself. At the time I didn't even know Saiga made a 5.45 and I didn't even know much about that round at all.

But now all this surplus ammo is making this a more attractive option. I can get the same ballistics for $100 less per case. Also, all the AK-74s I see online have flash suppressors and bayonet lugs which are also too evil for CT. :faint: Another reason why I went with the Saiga. BUT I just spoke to a dealer who said that since they are also a manufacturer they can order what I want and just take that crap off.

And that's my story of fun in liberal land.
What's the logic in no 7.62 AKs?

I just did my first Saiga conversion last Friday night. It was a 5.45 and went really well. only took about an hour and a half.

CTfam
02-17-2010, 21:40
What's the logic in no 7.62 AKs?

I just did my first Saiga conversion last Friday night. It was a 5.45 and went really well. only took about an hour and a half.

What's the logic??! I'm still trying to figure that out myself! :steamed: We still have an assault weapons ban in place in CT. AK-47s in the original caliber are on the "evil" list. But I can have a VZ.58, AK-74, SKS, AR-15 with 100 round mag, etc...

The VZ.58 is next on my list for sure.

I've done two conversions. One is up for sale here. http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1186173


OH here's another CT fun fact. I can't have a pistol grip on a semi-auto shotgun. :steamed:

my762buzz
02-17-2010, 22:47
What's the logic??! I'm still trying to figure that out myself! :steamed: We still have an assault weapons ban in place in CT. AK-47s in the original caliber are on the "evil" list. But I can have a VZ.58, AK-74, SKS, AR-15 with 100 round mag, etc...


LOL So if I manufacture an AK in a new cartridge design lets say I call it the
7.62x39 improved which has a case length 0.1mm longer and a case head 0.1mm wider I can legally market the new caliber AK rifles in CT even though they can still shoot 7.62x39. Is 7.62x39 ammo legal in CT?

Aceman
02-18-2010, 06:58
Why get 5.56 and 5.45? They're pretty much the same.

5.56 - major domestic round, awesome match quality stuff

5.45 - mostly cheapy low quality, extremely cheap!

Similar shooting characteristics....

An awesome deal. Get an S&W .223 and 5.45 barrel. Practice cheap, and convert anytime you want to the local brand.

great idea!

CTfam
02-18-2010, 08:41
LOL So if I manufacture an AK in a new cartridge design lets say I call it the
7.62x39 improved which has a case length 0.1mm longer and a case head 0.1mm wider I can legally market the new caliber AK rifles in CT even though they can still shoot 7.62x39. Is 7.62x39 ammo legal in CT?

No the ammo is not illegal. It's just the original AK is lumped in with UZIs, Mac 10s and other guns on the Evil list. I can have a Saiga .308. It's obvious who ever wrote these laws knows nothing about guns.

jamesavery22
02-18-2010, 12:05
effectiveness after passing through barriers: 7.62x39
effectiveness at 200 yards+: 5.45x39
plethora of bullets including very effective and environment friendly(I.E.,preventing ricochets and over penetration): 5.56x39
Price: 5.45 < 7.62 < 5.56

Everything's a trade-off.

For me, why would I ever grab a rifle? SHTF. In that case all my family and close friends are in the same densely populated urban area. That means <100 yards and lots of "barriers." 7.62x39
If I lived a 100 miles west where its farms and mountains as far as the eye can see then it would change to 5.45x39.

For anyone that has to carry a rifle for a living in the US then 5.56...

Aceman
02-18-2010, 19:37
I think you are confusing "effective" with accuracy.

There are bullets that will hit the target at 300 yards, but not do much to it.
There are bullets that will do a lot IF they hit the target at 300 yards
Then there are bullets that will hit it AND tear it up at 300 yards - and further.

But generally, I agree with you james.

Trigger Finger
02-18-2010, 20:51
my762buzz
"I know. Aren't you impressed? It takes a a heck of alot more earth inside the action to make an AK choke than that an AR15."

It looked like the same amount of "earth" or dirt was shoveled on top of each gun from the video! But if it makes you feel better. :supergrin:

toshbar
02-18-2010, 20:54
LOL So if I manufacture an AK in a new cartridge design lets say I call it the
7.62x39 improved which has a case length 0.1mm longer and a case head 0.1mm wider I can legally market the new caliber AK rifles in CT even though they can still shoot 7.62x39. Is 7.62x39 ammo legal in CT?
We could have a monopoly on AKs in CT. Take WASRs, take a mildly abrasive rotary tool to the chamber for about 1/15 of a second and call it Seven Point Six Two Four by Thirty-Nine. Make a statement in our 'refined' owners manual that it is safe to shoot 7.62 out of it.

Collect Revenue.

my762buzz
02-18-2010, 21:05
my762buzz
"I know. Aren't you impressed? It takes a a heck of alot more earth inside the action to make an AK choke than that an AR15."

It looked like the same amount of "earth" or dirt was shoveled on top of each gun from the video! But if it makes you feel better. :supergrin:

They actually did not introduce any earth into the AR during the test.
They sort of knew keeping the dust cover open on the AK specimen used
would allow plenty of dry sand and pebbles to slide in. My point was it would take 1000 times less sand to cause the AR to malfunction. Thats why if you depend on an AR15 to save your rear a small amount of sand working its way into the action will likely choke like a prom queen on prom night. I probably need to borrow a friend's AR and demonstrate this in a nice video in a side by side comparison. Maybe I can start with equal amounts of dry sand
starting at a teaspoon at a time and working equal amounts up from there until one platform fails. Using fine silt might be the most realistic material because it does seep into actions in a desert. Thanks trigger finger you just inspired a nice project.

toshbar
02-18-2010, 21:30
They actually did not introduce any earth into the AR during the test.
They sort of knew keeping the dust cover open on the AK specimen used
would allow plenty of dry sand and pebbles to slide in. My point was it would take 1000 times less sand to cause the AR to malfunction. Thats why if you depend on an AR15 to save your rear a small amount of sand working its way into the action will likely choke like a prom queen on prom night. I probably need to borrow a friend's AR and demonstrate this in a nice video in a side by side comparison. Maybe I can start with equal amounts of dry sand
starting at a teaspoon at a time and working equal amounts up from there until one platform fails. Using fine silt might be the most realistic material because it does seep into actions in a desert. Thanks trigger finger you just inspired a nice project.
I wanted them to dump sand into the magwells.

If they had the selector switch up on the AK no sand would have gotten in the action. and if they had the cover plate all the way off, the pebbles and rocks would have been shaken out easier. I know which one I'd rather have in the sandbox.

JBJ16
02-19-2010, 03:18
They actually did not introduce any earth into the AR during the test.
They sort of knew keeping the dust cover open on the AK specimen used
would allow plenty of dry sand and pebbles to slide in. My point was it would take 1000 times less sand to cause the AR to malfunction. Thats why if you depend on an AR15 to save your rear a small amount of sand working its way into the action will likely choke like a prom queen on prom night. I probably need to borrow a friend's AR and demonstrate this in a nice video in a side by side comparison. Maybe I can start with equal amounts of dry sand
starting at a teaspoon at a time and working equal amounts up from there until one platform fails. Using fine silt might be the most realistic material because it does seep into actions in a desert. Thanks trigger finger you just inspired a nice project.

I wanted them to dump sand into the magwells.

If they had the selector switch up on the AK no sand would have gotten in the action. and if they had the cover plate all the way off, the pebbles and rocks would have been shaken out easier. I know which one I'd rather have in the sandbox.

The video shows just what it showed. When dirt/sand is shoveled on top of both AR and AK, right-side up, in a ready to fire state, chambered and off-safe, the AK will fail to fire reliably afterwards.

It does not show or simulate anything else in reality, combat, or any other assumed situation. :wow:

CTfam
02-19-2010, 10:15
We could have a monopoly on AKs in CT. Take WASRs, take a mildly abrasive rotary tool to the chamber for about 1/15 of a second and call it Seven Point Six Two Four by Thirty-Nine. Make a statement in our 'refined' owners manual that it is safe to shoot 7.62 out of it.

Collect Revenue.

I'll take one. :wavey:

Trigger Finger
02-19-2010, 12:46
The video shows just what it showed. When dirt/sand is shoveled on top of both AR and AK, right-side up, in a ready to fire state, chambered and off-safe, the AK will fail to fire reliably afterwards.

It does not show or simulate anything else in reality, combat, or any other assumed situation. :wow:

That's exactly what I was trying to say but some people's minds are made up and they don't care about the truth!:dunno:

Glockdude1
02-19-2010, 12:50
I prefer the AK-47, because I have fired them far more than the AK-74's.

:cool:

CTfam
02-19-2010, 13:55
I think some of you guys are in the wrong thread. Here you go.

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1151103&highlight=ak-47+ar-15

rtl
02-20-2010, 05:24
regarding that video, no one has yet mentioned the caliber choice of the AK.........223? is that really an apples to apples test?

you have a gun system designed around a tapered commie round, rebarrelled for the essentially straight walled .223. plus, 223 ak's have magazines that are converted from 5.45x39, or were intended for some other weapon, but fit and 'make do' in the ak. that's cool and fun, but not the most reliable choice you could make.

i would like to see that same test run with a standard 7.62x39 or 5.45x39 chambering. i bet the results would be different.

Novocaine
02-20-2010, 13:18
IIRC, most of malfs were caused by the trigger group. Has nothing to do with a caliber. AK with a chrome plated chamber will handle any taper just fine.

BTW, even though 5.45 has less taper than 7.62, AK-74 is considered a bit more reliable because of the increased carrier-to-bolt weight ratio (6:1 vs. 5:1 in AKM). So you could say as far as action reliability goes .223 AK has something over 7.62 X 39

my762buzz
02-20-2010, 17:15
IIRC, most of malfs were caused by the trigger group. Has nothing to do with a caliber. AK with a chrome plated chamber will handle any taper just fine.

BTW, even though 5.45 has less taper than 7.62, AK-74 is considered a bit more reliable because of the increased carrier-to-bolt weight ratio (6:1 vs. 5:1 in AKM). So you could say as far as action reliability goes .223 AK has something over 7.62 X 39

The higher ratio should be the same with all the 100 series.
So, a 7.62x39 103/104 should have the same higher ratio as a 5.45 equivalent.
But, your right that from a strictly AKM versus AK74 the ratio is a factor.


The OP avoided the design differences and went to the caliber itself and this ignores many things.
A chinese AKM .223 varient versus a AK 74 in .223 caliber is one example of the differences not taken into consideration
with directly relating to the caliber and ignoring the mechanical upgrades.

Looking at the 74 style extractor I think it has even less things that could clog it versus a AK47/AKM style extractor.
No front facing wedge like the AK47/AKM and it pivots into the bolt body providing almost no area to wedge material into.

table
02-20-2010, 22:40
Cartridge : 5.45x39mm Bulgarian 53gr boattail steel core FMJ

Firearm : Romanian AK74 with 16.5" barrel length

Single shot fired to the center of the block from 10 feet distance. Bullet impacted at 3014 ft/sec, penetrated to 2.5" and turned on its side. This sideways penetration continued until 8.8" depth, at which time the bullet apparently righted itself. This orientation continued until ~ 9.0" penetration depth, at which time the bullet again turned on its side and continued on in the sideways orientation until bullet exit at 16.0" depth.

At this point, the bullet impacted the test stand upon which the block was sitting, and traveled an unknown distance into the polyester bullet arresting box. Bullet was recovered undeformed at 52.9gr.
http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/545x39mmBlk1.JPG



Cartridge : D&S Manufacturing 123gr Hornady V-Max

Firearm : 7.62x39mm AR15 with 20" barrel length
Single shot fired to the center/top of the 10x10x16" gelatin block. Impacted at unrecorded velocity (chronograph malfunctioned). Penetrated to 11.9", with severe fragmentation along the entire penetration track. Bullet core recovered at 0.609" average diameter.


http://www.brassfetcher.com/images/762x39mm123grVMaxblk.JPG


I am willing to bet that if you could place a 7.62x39 real hollow point or vmax into any given deer into the same spot
as a 5.45 steel core the deer will drop and die faster/sooner with the expanding ammo. I have not seen this tested
yet but it would make one heck of an interesting experiment provided you could get two nearly identical deer to try this with
and literally strike the same spot at the same angle. As a disclaimer, head shots would obviously invalidate the whole experiment.
Heart shots only.

your comparing 2 totally different bullet designs

mikeyU
02-20-2010, 23:19
your comparing 2 totally different bullet designs

I concur, as before I would like to see vmax vs vmax or fmj vs fmj. It would be interesting

my762buzz
02-21-2010, 03:49
your comparing 2 totally different bullet designs

And the reason I did is because some people seem to think that the 5.45x39 has some incredibly more effective mechanism for disrupting tissue than any other alternative like expanding bullets. My point is that a steel core surplus air gap ready to tumble 5.45 does not trump all the possible alternatives of 7.62x39. Clearly it does not. Even so, if you want a direct comparison between a .223 or 5.45 in the same design (vmax) the 7.62x39 still trumps the other two. Go study the brass fetcher site pictures and all other available ballistic gel testing already posted on various sites.

my762buzz
02-21-2010, 03:51
sorry triple tap

my762buzz
02-21-2010, 04:09
sorry triple tap

Mike5560
02-21-2010, 07:06
I think the 5.45 has better ballistics against flesh than the original m43 russian round, but I've seen gel comparisons with 7.62x39 wolf 8m3 hollowpoints and they are devistating compared to the m43.
Plus Im still partial to the 47. Ive shot both, and like the 47 more. Recoil isnt really more than the 74, just different. Its like a harder but slower push

toshbar
02-21-2010, 10:06
Recoil isnt really more than the 74, just different. Its like a harder but slower push
That's one thing I noticed between my wasr and saiga 5.45. The saiga cycles so much faster.

Aceman
02-21-2010, 10:13
Unless you are in the mil - direct bullet comparison is a scientific exercise. 5.45 fmj vs 7.62 hp - not even close!

The real issue is "bring the most devastating ammo for your gun" then let's see what the guy with the 5.45 does and what the 7.62 does over say 100 shots.

And as always - any given shot may vary wildly in the real world. There are no guarantees - or at least very few.