GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-13-2010, 17:05   #1
rtl
Robby The Guy
 
rtl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Wichita
Posts: 1,545
Ak47 or Ak74? Which do you prefer?

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.
__________________
All the riches of the kings end up in wills
rtl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 17:19   #2
Jon_R
Silver Membership
Senior Member
 
Jon_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 4,456
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.
Jon_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 20:12   #3
mikeyU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,389
I like my 74, polish tantal, but would like to get an arsenal 74 and try owning a 47 as well.
mikeyU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 21:51   #4
MisterPX
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I went 74 strickly due to ammo costs. For what I've shot, my first two 74's are free.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 19:27   #5
PlasticGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,255
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.
__________________
I'd be a better listener if you stopped talking about stupid crap that doesn't matter.
PlasticGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 19:49   #6
andyffer
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 91
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
__________________
Lancaster 3060 - 7.62x39
Kalashnikov Klub #0420
andyffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 20:13   #7
my762buzz
Senior Member
 
my762buzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtl View Post
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=IzCnS...layer_embedded

Last edited by my762buzz; 02-14-2010 at 21:50..
my762buzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 22:46   #8
toshbar
Timber Baron
 
toshbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,979
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.
__________________
1 3 5
├┼┤
Save the Manuals!
2 4 R

toshbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 23:38   #9
9mm +p+
Senior Member
 
9mm +p+'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KS
Posts: 2,419
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.
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum
9mm +p+ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2010, 23:45   #10
toshbar
Timber Baron
 
toshbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mm +p+ View Post
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.
__________________
1 3 5
├┼┤
Save the Manuals!
2 4 R

toshbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 02:13   #11
Asmodeus6
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 93
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.
__________________
Kalashnikov Klub #4663
Asmodeus6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 02:35   #12
my762buzz
Senior Member
 
my762buzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshbar View Post
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.
my762buzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 02:43   #13
Asmodeus6
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by my762buzz View Post
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.
__________________
Kalashnikov Klub #4663
Asmodeus6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 05:16   #14
JBJ16
Senior Member
 
JBJ16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: YOUR BLINDSIDE
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mm +p+ View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshbar View Post
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/i...hp?topic=636.0
__________________
"No problem on earth can't be solved by the judicious application of high explosives" - from Valkyrie
JBJ16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 06:06   #15
Aceman
Senior Member
 
Aceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,377
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.
Aceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 12:54   #16
9mm +p+
Senior Member
 
9mm +p+'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KS
Posts: 2,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshbar View Post
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.
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum
9mm +p+ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 14:11   #17
toshbar
Timber Baron
 
toshbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9mm +p+ View Post
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.
__________________
1 3 5
├┼┤
Save the Manuals!
2 4 R


Last edited by toshbar; 02-15-2010 at 14:22..
toshbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 15:35   #18
my762buzz
Senior Member
 
my762buzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,673
I'm just not as impressed as true expanding/fragmenting bullets.

5.45 versus water juggs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xKU1Iehlv8
my762buzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 15:54   #19
toshbar
Timber Baron
 
toshbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by my762buzz View Post
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.
__________________
1 3 5
├┼┤
Save the Manuals!
2 4 R

toshbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 16:05   #20
mikeyU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,389
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.
mikeyU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 16:14   #21
toshbar
Timber Baron
 
toshbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyU View Post
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.
__________________
1 3 5
├┼┤
Save the Manuals!
2 4 R

toshbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 16:20   #22
mikeyU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshbar View Post
7.62 can cut a concrete slab in half
The reason I don't have just one caliber.
mikeyU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 16:28   #23
9mm +p+
Senior Member
 
9mm +p+'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: KS
Posts: 2,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by toshbar View Post
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...
__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum
9mm +p+ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 16:50   #24
my762buzz
Senior Member
 
my762buzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,673
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.
The Kalashnikov Klub



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.


The Kalashnikov Klub


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.

Last edited by my762buzz; 02-15-2010 at 17:00..
my762buzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2010, 18:05   #25
mikeyU
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Montana
Posts: 1,389
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.
mikeyU is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:06.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 746
214 Members
532 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42