I have an AK-47 back in the US. It is a pretty sweet gun. The lack of accuracy complaint is pretty mis-understood. If you are talking precision marksmanship at long ranges then it is not the best gun. But if you are just trying to shoot at relatively large targets at combat range, it will kill somebody dead very well. On a USMC marksman course I can always qualify sharpshooter or expert with it as long as I am careful.
I am surprised no one mentioned the legend yet which states that the AK47 was a copy / rip off of the German WW2 Sturmgewehr 44. Typically this pops up pretty fast in such kinds of discussion:
(StG44 on top, AK on bottom)
[quote=“Taiwan Luthiers”]So much for wounding vs. killing…
Why not just make an upper receiver assembly chambered in 7.62x39? that way the soldiers can use the same round the enemies are using. I mean the 5.56 is essentially a .22 with a bit more powder behind it. While assassins love .22’s they just don’t have the penetrating ability of larger calibers, not to mention most standard issue rounds will shatter once it passes through things such as wood making it less effective at taking out enemies behind barriers. Or maybe they should go back to the 30-06 M1’s.
Or instead of spending millions of dollars on developing new weapon systems just spend less money to make or buy AK-47’s.
And on the subject of Taiwanese made guns… I just wish they had a clause in the constitution here about letting people own guns… not sure what effect it would have on society.[/quote]
Forgive my ignorance by why do the assassins love the .22. In UK they use them for hunting and can even take down deer with them. A Pakistani sharp shooter I know swears by the .22. He prefers it over all other calibers for hunting in Pakistan. He says the bullets are cheap and easy to come by and if you are taught properly how to use it a .22 hunting rifle is hard to beat for hunting or even sniping humans (He was in the Pakistani special police). That is what he claimed anyways. I thought maybe that was a load of bull but I have just seen you mention it as well. So is the actual lenght of the cartridge as an important factor for a sniper as the size of the bullet? Can you explain this mystique around the .22 that is prevalent in some countries? What’s so good about it ? Isn’t it a little small? Does such a small bullet get affected by the wind a lot?
I once mentioned to an American gentleman that in the UK they use .22 for hunting and one of my relatives even uses if for taking down deer. He was very offended and claimed it was cruel to use such a small calibre on deer. Is this the general consensus in the USA?
[quote=“fenlander”]
Forgive my ignorance by why do the assassins love the .22. [/quote]
Very quiet. Just a teeny pop instead of a loud bang. Virtually no recoil, so deadly accurate. A sniper just needs to put a bullet through his/her prey’s eye at distance, not blow their head off.
[quote=“jimipresley”][quote=“fenlander”]
Forgive my ignorance by why do the assassins love the .22. [/quote]
Very quiet. Just a teeny pop instead of a loud band. Virtually no recoil, so deadly accurate. A sniper just needs to put a bullet through his/her prey’s eye at distance, not blow their head off.[/quote]
Thank you Mr Presley you answered that with an assassin’s efficiency!
Like said above. .22 requires an accurate marksmen to hunt with properly. When you are hunting your goal is to end the deer as soon as possible. If you arent 100% sure your .22 will do the job, you should use a larger caliber.
Anyone else find it peculiar that this thread is in tech?
well, it’s not going to be welcome in IP.
and it is a remarkable piece of kit, just like the B52.
Do you have the 74 model? I’ve shot both and the newer 74 was a way better weapon. Just curious.
IMO, perfectly appropriate forum choice.
It is Technology under discussion.
Despite the supercilious rant about knives on page 1. A feeble attempt to inject some blithering comparison known only to the person making the fool of themselves by posting it.
B2G -
The AK74 is a nicely developed upgrade to the AK47 design. Uses a different cartridge also - 5.45x39 I believe. Some of which may be corrosive so the need for chromed barrels and soapy water (Windex works also removing the salts) are required for clean-up.
I’ve not fired one, but spoken with many who have and they all spoke well of it. Improved accuracy with the new round.
Do you have the 74 model? I’ve shot both and the newer 74 was a way better weapon. Just curious.[/quote]
No I have an old 47. My dealer got an assortment of old soviet weapons but many of them did not work. I cannibalized mine from about 3 guns. It is same place I bought my mosin nagant. Never shot the 74, but the 47 is pretty fucking sweet to begin with so any improvement is a plus.
IMO, perfectly appropriate forum choice.
It is Technology under discussion.[/quote]
Seems fair enough to my mind as well.
[quote]Despite the supercilious rant about knives on page 1. A feeble attempt to inject some blithering comparison known only to the person making the fool of themselves by posting it.
[/quote]
And from a mod, no less. Who’s supposed to know better?! :eh:
[quote="djlowballer"]I have an AK-47 back in the US. It is a pretty sweet gun. The lack of accuracy complaint is pretty mis-understood. If you are talking precision marksmanship at long ranges then it is not the best gun. But if you are just trying to shoot at relatively large targets at combat range, it will kill somebody dead very well. On a USMC marksman course I can always qualify sharpshooter or expert with it as long as I am careful.[/quote]
Ah yes, the great accuracy debate. So where do you think the complaint about accuracy originates? Perhaps because the massive proliferation of the AK-47 amongst under-trained 3rd World cadres and others not intimately familiar with the weapon? Or is it because of a combination of factors?I think it originated in military fact, but propagated through the internet and lots of armchair soldiers. It is definitely not a precision firearm. It is big, heavy, and has a pretty harsh kick when firing. As a standard infantry rifle for short to medium range engagements, it more than fits the bill.
Accuracy is hard to judge, because in the hands of the untrained any gun in inaccurate. As a test I loaded my 9mm up and tried to shoot it “gangsta style” at a watermelon 3 feet in front of me. All of my bullets missed. In the movies where the guy is holding that big .45 up one handed at you? Odds are straight in front is the safest place to be. Likewise, an individual who has received training as a marksmen can adjust to any weapon handed to them quickly and produce good results. Spec-ops use AK variants all the time so they can’t be too horrible.
[quote=“djlowballer”]I think it originated in military fact, but propagated through the internet and lots of armchair soldiers. It is definitely not a precision firearm. It is big, heavy, and has a pretty harsh kick when firing. As a standard infantry rifle for short to medium range engagements, it more than fits the bill.
Accuracy is hard to judge, because in the hands of the untrained any gun in inaccurate. As a test I loaded my 9mm up and tried to shoot it “gangsta style” at a watermelon 3 feet in front of me. All of my bullets missed. In the movies where the guy is holding that big .45 up one handed at you? Odds are straight in front is the safest place to be. Likewise, an individual who has received training as a marksmen can adjust to any weapon handed to them quickly and produce good results. Spec-ops use AK variants all the time so they can’t be too horrible.[/quote]
From what I understand, the accuracy issue is mainly due to muzzle climb, velocity, and the recoil. Which apparently takes some getting used to. I’ve only fired one once, and it was not in the most comfortable or controlled of surroundings. 
I do remember the weight and the impact of the recoil. But then, I was never in the infantry, so rifles are not really my bag.
Why do you think that the accuracy angle has been propagated on the internet by the wannabee warriors? As you, say it’s used by the special forces of many nations, so it can’t be of paramount importance.
Also, hasn’t the 74 version addressed some of the accuracy issues?
I say it as a myth because people discussing firearms can get very strange online. If you go to many communities where guns are being discussed, very few people in the thread will actually own the firearm and even fewer have been trained to shoot the firearm properly. You also get folks who play “realistic” video games who will use that logic in discussion. I have had somebody debate me that it would be better to carry a .50 pistol vs a 9mm because of stopping power, when the reality is that the 16 9mm bullets will kill more people than 7 .50 cal rounds when put in the hands of a trained shooter. I have also heard that a Barret .50 can be used as a frontline assault weapon (despite it weighing damn near 20 KG fully loaded).
I am not a soldier, but I trained since childhood with dozens of firearms. If I needed a rifle for sharpshooting or a DM role, I would take something like an M4 or in a rare case my M1 carbine, for long range shooting I have my Springfield M1903, and for personal defense I would carry my sig-sauer 9mm with custom grip and trigger. But if there was ever a serious combat situation near my home and I had to actually kill people to survive, I would grab my AK-47 every time. It is durable, reliable, packs a punch, and if used correctly is quite accurate enough for hitting people at ranges up to 500 yards.
that and discussion of gangsta style shooting reminds me of ice cube’s line in check yo’ self from back in the day. um… weeessstiside, or something.
if the guys in Afghanistan are having a hard time with the AK47s, couldn’t there be different fight tactics devised to accentuate whatever advantage the M4 has? or coudn’t the states just hop up AK47s and fight with those? i dunno anything about his, just asking.
[quote]
Ah yes, the great accuracy debate. So where do you think the complaint about accuracy originates? Perhaps because the massive proliferation of the AK-47 amongst under-trained 3rd World cadres and others not intimately familiar with the weapon? Or is it because of a combination of factors?[/quote]
I was going my own personal experience. They weren’t my weapons, believe me I would take one if you gave me one. 
Personally, for home defense I’d go with a shotgun. As far as assault rifles I think reliability is more important than accuracy, which is why AK’s are the weapon of choice. But then again I never used a gun other than shooting targets so I wouldn’t know that much about what kind of gun is the best for a given situation. Pistols are good if you need a sidearm but it seems rather difficult to hit anything past 7 yards (and that’s aiming carefully) so I don’t see how anyone’s gonna hit anything gangsta style.
I hear you about the so called experts, especially the video gamers. They are the absolute worst! Playing at soldier from a comfy chair, they think they know everything from some programmers coding! That some mouse and screen, can actually even compare to the real-life handling of a weapon, especially manoeuvre. Or something so basic, yet vital, as cleaning and maintenance. And when they try to discuss things in a forum, most of them can’t even form a coherent utterance, let alone a paragraph.
Its why I usually don’t frequent such places unless I am looking for a part or something. To me guns are a tool. I know how to use them, I know how to modify them, and I know how to maintain them. I am not interested in killing power or asinine debates based off gamer kids. I had to pull a gun on somebody once in my life. I kept my cool, but after the police came and the danger was over I nearly collapsed from the nerves. Using a weapon is not something all that glamorous.