AK-47/AR-15 groups

[vtstang66]

My other thread (http://www.dfwstangs.net/forums/showthread.php?t=385349) got me curious: how much difference is there really in accuracy between these guns? There are stories all over the internet of people shooting 12" groups at 100 yards, and 5" groups at 300 yards with an AK. What has your personal experience been? Post your groups, range, ammo, sights, and any other relevant info for AKs, and ARs too for comparison. I am thinking I want an AK, but to hear some people's opinions they can't hit the broad side of a barn.

[92Notch]

depends on more than just the gun......a 10.5 barrel ar15 probably wont be as accurate as a long barrel ak47 and the same goes the other way

[Yale]

Seriously, there are stamped receiver AK's that couldn't hit the air in front of them, and thene there's the M76, a dedicated tac rifle. AR15 accuracy seems to be a little better overall, but I'm prejudiced. Go shoot a lot, and buy what you like.

[Topwater]

I shot my AK a few times this weekend. No bench shooting, just plinking more or less. I shot a 1 1/2" piece of PVC at approx. 100yds. several times, till there wasn't anything left. I wouldn't call it dead eye dick, but I'm sure I could kill several zombies, men, pigs, or whatever at 100yds. I just picked up my brand spankin' new, 16" Bushmaster yesterday. I have no idea how it shoots, but it sure does look good!

[03trubluGT]

At anything under 100 yards, I can make my AK hit whatever I want. I've never bench rested it, but I'm sure it's not as accurate as my ARs. But, if were talking man sized targets in an urban environment, the AK would do just fine.

[JESmith]

Accuracy depends a lot on ammo and the rifle in question. There are a lot more "high performance" parts for the AR platform. Very little for the AK. The same goes for ammo. Match grade .223 is not hard to come by but almost non-existant for 7.62x39. Because of this, the AR is going to win in the accuracy department.

I have read about only one head-to-test between the two calibers. It was a guy that took identical bolt action rifles with indentical scopes. (CZ americans, don't rember which model). He handloaded the best round for each rifle and then shot them head-to-head at 300yds. The .223 edged out the 7.62x39 by a small margin.

[Dacotua]

My Wasr-10/63 has about a 4-5" pattern at 100 yards, however its fun to shoot. (open sights)

My Bushmaster AR-15 has about a 2-3" pattern at 100 yards, again its fun to shoot. (Eotech)

My M-14 has less than a 1" pattern at 100 yards, again its fun to shoot. (4x-12 Scope)

Moral of the comparison, they are all fun to shoot.

[5.0_CJ]

this should answer some of your questions...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXdhtUe4G_c

AR-15 vs. AK-47

[vtstang66]

this should answer some of your questions...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXdhtUe4G_c

AR-15 vs. AK-47

If 3:36 is representative of that guy's typical trigger pull, I'm not surprised he didn't hit the 200 yard target at all.

That's a problem I think when comparing accuracy, you can't account for the shooter. It's got a harder kick than an AR for one thing, so you're more likely to flinch. Plus the sights are worse, and it is inherently at least slightly less accurate. I'd like to see someone put an AK in a vice and lay down some 3-shot groups at 100 and 200 yards, and do the same with an AR, with a couple different ammo types.

I'm not disputing that an AK isn't a tack driver, but if I can consistently hit a man-size target at 100-200 yards, that is good enough for me. Some people say you can, others say you can't.:hitwithrock:

[5.0_CJ]

If 3:36 is representative of that guy's typical trigger pull, I'm not surprised he didn't hit the 200 yard target at all.

That's a problem I think when comparing accuracy, you can't account for the shooter. It's got a harder kick than an AR for one thing, so you're more likely to flinch. Plus the sights are worse, and it is inherently at least slightly less accurate. I'd like to see someone put an AK in a vice and lay down some 3-shot groups at 100 and 200 yards, and do the same with an AR, with a couple different ammo types.

I'm not disputing that an AK isn't a tack driver, but if I can consistently hit a man-size target at 100-200 yards, that is good enough for me. Some people say you can, others say you can't.:hitwithrock:

You had a question, I supplied a video... an AK's kick is chump change. I can hardly tell a difference between a 7.62x39 and a 5.56 in comparison to a 7.62x51 which is much more bang.

the real meat of that video is the slow motion portion - showing the AK's gelatinous barrel. AK's are sloppy - plain and simple. At 100 yards, you should be able to hit a man sized target, sure - but for the scrilla - I'd suggest an AR. Not only are they tighter and more accurate, but you can switch to many other calibers with different uppers. If you really want an AK, go ahead and get one - but my personal experience is I had a lot more fun with my AR's, and that was when AK's were 300-350. I think that's what an AK is really worth, opportunity cost. When they were that much, I'd say just get one, this thread probably wouldn't even exist if that were the case, but now that AK's are starting to get near the value of AR's, my opinion is greatly different.

[92Notch]

sks > ak 47

[5.0_CJ]

sks > ak 47

That's another point worth making - they have(had) SKS's in a bin for $200 at MGS a few weeks ago. They shoot the same rounds, have about the same accuracy, and are 1/3 the price of an AK... really the only difference is the cool factor - which I think is a factor in this discussion.

[92Notch]

That's another point worth making - they have(had) SKS's in a bin for $200 at MGS a few weeks ago. They shoot the same rounds, have about the same accuracy, and are 1/3 the price of an AK... really the only difference is the cool factor - which I think is a factor in this discussion.

I like shooting my sks more than a friends galilei

[Hass]

You had a question, I supplied a video... an AK's kick is chump change. I can hardly tell a difference between a 7.62x39 and a 5.56 in comparison to a 7.62x51 which is much more bang.

the real meat of that video is the slow motion portion - showing the AK's gelatinous barrel. AK's are sloppy - plain and simple. At 100 yards, you should be able to hit a man sized target, sure - but for the scrilla - I'd suggest an AR. Not only are they tighter and more accurate, but you can switch to many other calibers with different uppers. If you really want an AK, go ahead and get one - but my personal experience is I had a lot more fun with my AR's, and that was when AK's were 300-350. I think that's what an AK is really worth, opportunity cost. When they were that much, I'd say just get one, this thread probably wouldn't even exist if that were the case, but now that AK's are starting to get near the value of AR's, my opinion is greatly different.

Gelatinous barrel? LOL! The AK in that video is misleading because the cleaning rod is flexing more than anything.

Why are you not telling him about constant cleaning/maintenance that AR15's require?

AK's on the other hand are extremely reliable and rugged. I took a friends AK apart for cleaning once and noticed that there were a few leaves and some dirt under the receiver cover. We had been shooting 100 yard shots just fine with that gun the day before. Try firing an AR15 with leaves and dirt inside of it.

I own both an AR and AK, so I'm not totally biased. But when the zombies attack, my hand goes for the AK.

[Hass]

That's another point worth making - they have(had) SKS's in a bin for $200 at MGS a few weeks ago. They shoot the same rounds, have about the same accuracy, and are 1/3 the price of an AK... really the only difference is the cool factor - which I think is a factor in this discussion.

SKS's won't take too well to large magazines. SKS's are also longer and heavier than an AK.

[5.0_CJ]

Gelatinous barrel? LOL! The AK in that video is misleading because the cleaning rod is flexing more than anything.

Why are you not telling him about constant cleaning/maintenance that AR15's require?

AK's on the other hand are extremely reliable and rugged. I took a friends AK apart for cleaning once and noticed that there were a few leaves and some dirt under the receiver cover. We had been shooting 100 yard shots just fine with that gun the day before. Try firing an AR15 with leaves and dirt inside of it.

I own both an AR and AK, so I'm not totally biased. But when the zombies attack, my hand goes for the AK.

I guess you're implying I'm totally biased, as I said I've owned AK's and AR's and I came to a conclusion based on my experience. The OP asked "how much of a difference is there in accuracy between an AK and an AR" the answer is a lot.

Sure they are rugged, I never even argued that, who would? Constant cleaning and maintenance of an AR-15 is absurd - I've shot a days worth of nasty dirty wolf ammo through my cheap ass rock river and it's hasn't jammed - and just to mention that the last time I was on a shoot, a friends AK was the one jamming and stove piping - but who knows the quality of the gun.

and I'm talking about the barrel, not the cleaning rod - the barrel itself is flexing substantially.

[Hass]

I guess you're implying I'm totally biased - I came to a conclusion.

Sure they are rugged, I never even argued that, who would? Constant cleaning and maintenance of an AR-15 is absurd - I've shot a days worth of nasty dirty wolf ammo through my cheap ass rock river and it's never jammed.

and I'm talking about the barrel, not the cleaning rod - the barrel itself is flexing substantially.

What the fuck does Wolf ammo have to do with dirt buildup in a gun?! Do you think your AR is jam proof when dirt gets inside?

[5.0_CJ]

What the fuck does Wolf ammo have to do with dirt buildup in a gun?! Do you think your AR is jam proof when dirt gets inside?

I'm not quite sure how to answer this. Wolf ammo is the dirtiest shit I'm aware of, it shoots all kinds of nasty crap throughout your gun. Since we don't shoot guns in foxholes and keep them laying on the ground - dirt buildup in a gun - as it seems you're intending to take this discussion to, is inconsequential - you take your gun to a range, or some friends land - this isn't combat - most guns arrive clean, and leave clean. What i said was I've shot nasty dirty wolf ammo all day, and haven't had a jam - meaning in all general circumstances of use - it's perfectly fine. You seemed to have made the case that an AR-15 requires constant and non-stop cleaning - that's an exaggeration. I don't know about you, but I don't find leaves and mud in my guns - that's ridiculous. And lastly, no need to get bent out of shape - he asked our opinions and experiences.

[5.0_CJ]

SKS's won't take too well to large magazines. SKS's are also longer and heavier than an AK.

Your right - SKS's bitch about mags, but the 20 round Tapco ones do work. Aftermarket stocks are $50 bucks you can make it as short as you want. The SKS is lighter than an AK.

edit: these are the mags: http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/MAG634-36.html

[Hass]

I'm not quite sure how to answer this. Wolf ammo is the dirtiest shit I'm aware of, it shoots all kinds of nasty crap throughout your gun. Since we don't shoot guns in foxholes and keep them laying on the ground - dirt buildup in a gun - as it seems you're intending to take this discussion to, is inconsequential - you take your gun to a range, or some friends land - this isn't combat - most guns arrive clean, and leave clean. What i said was I've shot nasty dirty wolf ammo all day, and haven't had a jam - meaning in all general circumstances of use - it's perfectly fine. You seemed to have made the case that an AR-15 requires constant and non-stop cleaning - that's an exaggeration. I don't know about you, but I don't find leaves and mud in my guns - that's ridiculous. And lastly, no need to get bent out of shape - he asked our opinions and experiences.

The only thing ridiculous was your posts regarding the AK.

It's interesting that you think getting a gun dirty is inconsequential. What you consider "general circumstances of use" is not the same as everyone else's. Most people are not using their AR or AK for combat, but that doesn't mean that they never will. And not everyone treats their guns like safe-queens either.

When the military and law enforcement spend so much time focused on keeping your M16 or AR15 clean, they do it for a reason. Most cops don't leave AR's lying on the ground either, but guns do end up on the ground and have dust kicked up around them a lot.

So you have never had a gun on the ground or gotten dirt in one? Wow.

Do you really think the AR needs minimal cleaning?

[Hass]

Your right - SKS's bitch about mags, but the 20 round Tapco ones do work. Aftermarket stocks are $50 bucks you can make it as short as you want. The SKS is lighter than an AK.

edit: these are the mags: http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/MAG634-36.html

Are you saying that an SKS with an aftermarket stock is lighter than an AK?

[5.0_CJ]

Are you saying that an SKS with an aftermarket stock is lighter than an AK?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
8lbs 8oz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
9.5lbs

[5.0_CJ]

The only thing ridiculous was your posts regarding the AK.

It's interesting that you think getting a gun dirty is inconsequential. What you consider "general circumstances of use" is not the same as everyone else's. Most people are not using their AR or AK for combat, but that doesn't mean that they never will. And not everyone treats their guns like safe-queens either.

When the military and law enforcement spend so much time focused on keeping your M16 or AR15 clean, they do it for a reason. Most cops don't leave AR's lying on the ground either, but guns do end up on the ground and have dust kicked up around them a lot.

So you have never had a gun on the ground or gotten dirt in one? Wow.

Do you really think the AR needs minimal cleaning?

The AR needs just as much cleaning as the rest of my guns. I don't clean it any more frequently than my other guns.

[The2kcvert]

History channel did i nice grudge match between the 2 guns. google or you tube it.

[5.0_CJ]

History channel did i nice grudge match between the 2 guns. google or you tube it.

wikipedia has a 8 page article about the comparison, they are just about everywhere.

The ultimate results are always the same. The AR is more accurate, lighter, and modular. The AK is more reliable and powerful.

[Hass]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
8lbs 8oz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
9.5lbs

The M59/66 SKS's you were referring to at Military Gun Supply are made from solid milled metal not stampings. That makes them as heavy as that AK in your Wikipedia reference. The Yugo AK rifles weigh as little as 7 lbs.

That's why I don't believe everything I read on Wikipedia or the internet. ;)

[5.0_CJ]

The M59/66 SKS's you were referring to at Military Gun Supply are made from solid milled metal not stampings. That makes them as heavy as that AK in your Wikipedia reference. The Yugo AK rifles weigh as little as 7 lbs.


All SKS's are milled. Stamped SKS's are like diamonds - they are EXTREMELY rare. An SKS is actually the lighter of the two guns.

[Hass]

All SKS's are milled. Stamped SKS's are like diamonds - they are EXTREMELY rare. An SKS is actually the lighter of the two guns.

Negative. The Yugo M59/66 you were referring to at Military Gun Supply weigh over 9 lbs and any Russian AK47 made after the 1950's weighs under 8lbs.

[5.0 beast]

im hoping to pick up a bushmaster ar here pretty soon. so i'll be watching this thread just for sh!ts and giggles

[5.0_CJ]

Negative. The Yugo M59/66 you were referring to at Military Gun Supply weigh over 9 lbs and any Russian AK47 made after the 1950's weighs under 8lbs.

You said that because they were milled they were heavier, All SKS's are milled. There were some prototypes that were stamped - I've never even seen one, only read about them in books. You cherry picked the heaviest SKS to compare, but even then the Yugo M59/66 weighs less than an AK47 - it weighs 9lbs 4oz - the AK47 weighs 9lbs 8 ounces - it's actually a heavier gun. From my experience it's heavier, and every thing I can find says that. And loaded (which is the point) the AK will be a full pound heavier. No matter how you slice it the damn AK is heavier - it just is - theres a bigger bolt, larger receiver, etc.

http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting/lastgreatsks/index.asp
heres a reference to the weight.

http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/ka50.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47info.php
http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/89089/ak-47.html
all showing 9.5lbs

But it's all completely pointless! I was making a case for the AR being more accurate, and it is. Not only that, the AR is lighter than an AK is - that's the real comparison. And since 92 notch brought up an SKS, it as a matter of fact (in my opinion) is a better alternative since it's 1/3 the cost does the exact damn thing as an AK - just doesn't have the "cool" factor. It just further (in my opinion) makes that $800 AK purchase less appealing.

[MireFire 2.0]

You said that because they were milled they were heavier, All SKS's are milled. There were some prototypes that were stamped - I've never even seen one, only read about them in books. You cherry picked the heaviest SKS to compare, but even then the Yugo M59/66 weighs less than an AK47 - it weighs 9lbs 4oz - the AK47 weighs 9lbs 8 ounces - it's actually a heavier gun. From my experience it's heavier, and every thing I can find says that. And loaded (which is the point) the AK will be a full pound heavier. No matter how you slice it the damn AK is heavier - it just is - theres a bigger bolt, larger receiver, etc.

http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting/lastgreatsks/index.asp
heres a reference to the weight.

But it's all completely pointless! I was making a case for the AR being more accurate, and it is. Not only that, the AR is lighter than an AK is - that's the real comparison. And since 92 notch brought up an SKS, it as a matter of fact (in my opinion) is a better alternative since it's 1/3 the cost does the exact damn thing as an AK - just doesn't have the "cool" factor. It just further (in my opinion) makes that $800 AK purchase less appealing.
Fuck that...mine has the cool factor... if the cool factor is a parade gun. :)

[5.0_CJ]

Fuck that...mine has the cool factor... if the cool factor is a parade gun. :)

yeah dude your gun has a cool factor due to a fucking shitload of work, haha. :)

[MireFire 2.0]

yeah dude your gun has a cool factor due to a fucking shitload of work, haha. :)


Hahah I think I am gonna throw it in the gutter and go get another! I'm gonna gold plate this bitch!!! HAHAH

[5.0_CJ]

Hahah I think I am gonna throw it in the gutter and go get another! I'm gonna gold plate this bitch!!! HAHAH

http://texasguntrader.com/index.php?a=2&b=12389

like this?

[MireFire 2.0]

http://texasguntrader.com/index.php?a=2&b=12389

like this?


Fuck that is gross... I am not a Kenyan....nevermind

[Trip McNeely]

I love my AK. I chose to buy one over an AR, and am not sorry I did. When I bought my AK, accuracy for being a sniper type rifle was the last thing on my mind. Basically short range hellfire, and reliable as shit.

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z112/CStang06/Refinish1.jpg

[5.0_CJ]

I love my AK. I chose to buy one over an AR, and am not sorry I did. When I bought my AK, accuracy for being a sniper type rifle was the last thing on my mind. Basically short range hellfire, and reliable as shit.

nigga changed his name.

[Hass]

You said that because they were milled they were heavier, All SKS's are milled. There were some prototypes that were stamped - I've never even seen one, only read about them in books. You cherry picked the heaviest SKS to compare, but even then the Yugo M59/66 weighs less than an AK47 - it weighs 9lbs 4oz - the AK47 weighs 9lbs 8 ounces - it's actually a heavier gun. From my experience it's heavier, and every thing I can find says that. And loaded (which is the point) the AK will be a full pound heavier. No matter how you slice it the damn AK is heavier - it just is - theres a bigger bolt, larger receiver, etc.

http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting/lastgreatsks/index.asp
heres a reference to the weight.

http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/ka50.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47info.php
http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/89089/ak-47.html
all showing 9.5lbs

But it's all completely pointless! I was making a case for the AR being more accurate, and it is. Not only that, the AR is lighter than an AK is - that's the real comparison. And since 92 notch brought up an SKS, it as a matter of fact (in my opinion) is a better alternative since it's 1/3 the cost does the exact damn thing as an AK - just doesn't have the "cool" factor. It just further (in my opinion) makes that $800 AK purchase less appealing.


You've been posting some BS opinions rather than facts regarding AK's. I am just pointing out some stuff that you have been leaving out.

The Yugo SKS is the one you were referring to at Military Gun Supply. I didn't cherry pick shit.

I just sold an M59/66 and even with the aftermarket stock I put on it, it still weighed more than my most solid AK.

You sound like a damn liberal by letting websites tell you what to believe. I am using my own knowledge and experience.

"Cool" factor? It has nothing to do with cool. It's because the AK47 is the greatest battle rifle ever made. Don't get your panties in a twist because there are millions upon millions more people who own AK's than own AR's.

Maybe you need to come over sometime and I'll educate you on just how lightweight an AK can be. Maybe afterwards you will redact your false claims. Then again, I am chatting with a guy who won't admit that his beloved AR has higher percentage of reliability issues when dirty. :ugh:

[Hass]

I love my AK. I chose to buy one over an AR, and am not sorry I did. When I bought my AK, accuracy for being a sniper type rifle was the last thing on my mind. Basically short range hellfire, and reliable as shit.

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z112/CStang06/Refinish1.jpg

I like the pattern on the buttstock. It kinda looks like flames.

[5.0_CJ]

You've been posting some BS opinions rather than facts regarding AK's. I am just pointing out some stuff that you have been leaving out.

The Yugo SKS is the one you were referring to at Military Gun Supply. I didn't cherry pick shit.

I just sold an M59/66 and even with the aftermarket stock I put on it, it still weighed more than my most solid AK.

You sound like a damn liberal by letting websites tell you what to believe. I am using my own knowledge and experience.

"Cool" factor? It has nothing to do with cool. It's because the AK47 is the greatest battle rifle ever made. Don't get your panties in a twist because there are millions upon millions more people who own AK's than own AR's.

Maybe you need to come over sometime and I'll educate you on just how lightweight an AK can be. Maybe afterwards you will redact your false claims. Then again, I am chatting with a guy who won't admit that his beloved AR has higher percentage of reliability issues when dirty. :ugh:

I'm throwing evidence at your ass (lol at opinions - russian AK47 build sheets) and you're becoming a child screaming and whining about it? You obviously don't know much about SKS's claming they are stamped (that's just an example of your lack of knowledge on this subject). I shot down just about every one of your statements and you're pissed - I'm sorry dude but you're just flat out wrong here. I'm sorry but the facts are the facts - I'm forcing you into a situation where you're wrong - and I did it because you tried to steer this discussion into areas to avoid things - each time I shot something down, suddenly the argument changes. And calling me a liberal - now we're name calling - this is childish. I *never* said my AR has less issues when dirty than an AK - I even said "who would argue that?" I merely made the statement that you claming an AR is this massive undertaking of tedious and constant cleaning is complete and utter bullshit. That is you again changing the topic to benefit your argument.

[Hass]

I'm throwing evidence at your ass (lol at opinions - russian AK47 build sheets) and you're becoming a child screaming and whining about it? You obviously don't know much about SKS's claming they are stamped (that's just an example of your lack of knowledge on this subject). I shot down just about every one of your statements and you're pissed - I'm sorry dude but you're just flat out wrong here. I'm sorry but the facts are the facts - I'm forcing you into a situation where you're wrong - and I did it because you tried to steer this discussion into areas to avoid things - each time I shot something down, suddenly the argument changes. And calling me a liberal - now we're name calling - this is childish. I *never* said my AR has less issues when dirty than an AK - I even said "who would argue that?" I merely made the statement that you claming an AR is this massive undertaking of tedious and constant cleaning is complete and utter bullshit. That is you again changing the topic to benefit your argument.

Evidence? You posted up some websites. I'll make a website that says otherwise and make it top out on Google so you will have new evidence. How does that sound?

You act like I said the AR has to be cleaned after every round. LOL! All I did was point out that the AR has to be maintained to perform well while the AK can go on longer without maintenance. You need to lay off the pharmaceuticals son.

[5.0_CJ]

Evidence? You posted up some websites. I'll make a website that says otherwise and make it top out on Google so you will have new evidence. How does that sound?

You act like I said the AR has to be cleaned after every round. LOL! All I did was point out that the AR has to be maintained to perform well while the AK can go on longer without maintenance. You need to lay off the pharmaceuticals son.

6 websites quoting build data - vs. your personal experience. I'd say 6 independent sources is a pretty damn wide conclusion of the weapon's weight - I made my case and it's pretty clear - I was certain the SKS was lighter from my own experience (I have 2 yugos here, and if I go to my shop I can get an AK and we can weigh them on a video for you to watch). The AK certainly is the more rugged dependable gun - I would never argue that. My only disagreement is the AR-15's need for cleaning is nothing more than your average gun, the AK is just abnormally devoid of cleaning necessity - it would be the exception.

[Hass]

6 websites quoting build data - vs. your personal experience. I'd say 6 independent sources is a pretty damn wide conclusion of the weapon's weight - I made my case and it's pretty clear - I was certain the SKS was lighter from my own experience (I have 2 yugos here, and if I go to my shop I can get an AK and we can weigh them on a video for you to watch). The AK certainly is the more rugged dependable gun - I would never argue that. My only disagreement is the AR-15's need for cleaning is nothing more than your average gun, the AK is just abnormally devoid of cleaning necessity - it would be the exception.

Of the FOUR websites you posted with AK info above, one of them (http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/89089/ak-47.html) seems to have a different weight figure than the others. Also, it appears that all of those seem to be referring to the old Russian AK-47's. How many times do I have to tell you that AK's (or akm's) made after the 1950's weigh less? Are the people inquiring about AK's on here interested in pre-1950's AKs? Why are you being so misleading to people including yourself?

Your usage of obscure website data reminds me of those that believe the Box O' Truth website is gospel when it comes to gun and ammunition testing. It's fucking laughable.

[Yale]

Your usage of obscure website data reminds me of those that believe the Box O' Truth website is gospel when it comes to gun and ammunition testing. It's fucking laughable.

Dude, you're changing the argument to suit yourself. The AR is the most accurate all around. The AR wins the weight battle, with a betamag no less. The ONLY advantage to an AK is its gas piston system, vs. the AR's direct gas impingement system. I can add that to an AR for $400 in parts and have a gun that's equally reliable. The gas system on an AR is a major contributing reason to the urban myth about them being unreliable. Further, I know it's opinion, but I actually really like this writeup on SniperCentral.com:

Now listen up and pay attention. I am about to share some extremely important imformation with you. This information is absolutely vital if you have an AR-15. Now pay close attention and don't ask me any stupid questions otherwise I may bite your ankles.

First of all the AR-15 was a fantastic rifle when originally designed by Mr. Stoner. All the problems along the way were cause by slack-jawed, dopey schmoes who monkeyed around with a great design. So listen to me and let me tell you how to deschmoe your AR-15.

The AR-15 was originally desgned around IMR-3031 powder. This was the propellant originally used by Bob Hutton, the guy who invented the .223. Mr. Hutton was a friend of Eugene Stoner and that's how Hutton got involved designing the round. Mr. Hutton was also the Handloading Editor of Guns & Ammo magazine.

Automatic weapons are resonant mechanisms and the AR-15 was tuned for IMR-3031. The IMR-3031 burn rate was used to calculate the mass of the bolt and carrier together with the mass of the buffer.

Original .223 ammo was loaed with IMR-4475 which was a mass-production version of IMR-3031. And when used with IMR-4475, the AR-15 was superbly reliable. In July 1962, the AR-15 was tested in Vietnam and 80,000 rounds were fired. Over the course of firing 80,000 rounds there were no parts breakeages. A report titled "Test of ArmaLite Rifle, AR-15" was published. The report concluded that the AR-15 was "the best all-round shoulder weapon in existence"

The rifle was perfect until a change was made in the AR-15's propellant. The powder was changed from IMR-4475 to a ball powder, WC-846. Now this ball powder ruined the rifle. WC-846 contained calcium carbonate which caused fouling in the AR-15's gas-tube. Even worse, this ball powder burned at a slower rate.

Using a slower burning powder in the AR-15 created the following serious problems:

1. A higher residual chamber pressure. This created a tendency for the fired cartridge to stick in the chamber;

2. The higher residual pressure causes higher bolt velocity. The bolt wants to unlock right NOW and when combined with a sticky case, the extractor can yank the rim right off the cartridge case. This can lead to the most disasterous jam possible. Higher bolt velocity also leads to increased wear and parts started to break. As a result, Mr. Stoner's wonder-weapon became a rotten piece of Clinton.

To solve the ball powder fiasco, the Army decided to treat the symptoms and not the desease. The army tried to slow down the bolt carrier by using a new, heavier buffer. The sticky chamber problem was solved by the use of chrome plating. But the Army continued to use slower-burning ball powders.

Now if you want to deschmoe your AR-15 and to enjoy original 1962 reliability, USE THE RIGHT POWDER. USE IMR-3031 OR BENCHMARK! Don't use ball powder and don't be a schmoe!!

Read the tacked thread about loading .223 ammunition and follow all the advice contained therein. If you use this information and load your ammo with the right powder, your rifle will perk nicely.

If you use a carbine version of the AR-15, make sure that you use the right buffer. If you are using a telestock, use a 9mm buffer. The 9mm buffer is slightly heavier than a rifle buffer. Use the 9mm buffer to slow down your bolt velocity. Or you can use a fixed rifle stock and buffer.


If you have an AR-15 carbine, install a Defender D-ring around your extractor. The AR-15 carbine has a higher gas-port pressure than Stoner originally intended. And the bolt velocity is higher too. With the higher bolt velocity, the extractor is stressed and you need stronger extractor tension in order to maintain reliability. AND USE THE RIGHT POWDER!!

The Defender D-Ring offers cheap insurance for AR-15 rifles too. And as you tune your load, check the extraction pattern of your rifle. Make sure that the rounds are extracted and ejected about 8 to 10 feet from your rifle. If you use Benchmark or IMR-3031 you will find that you can achieve a remarkeable uniform ejection pattern and all of your fired cases will land in one pile. This is a very good thing. Now go to the tacked "Loading .223 ammo" thread and read it carefully.

The Defender D-ring is available from Brownells. It costs $12.95

Check out http://www.brownells.com. The Defender D-Ring can be found as part no. 741-015-003.

(The Defender D-Ring was designed by Mack Gwinn and L. James Sullivan. Take note that Mr. Sullivan was the engineer who assisted Mr. Stoner in the original AR-15 design)

So don't be a schmoe. Just listen to me.

Fluffy.

[5.0_CJ]

Of the FOUR websites you posted with AK info above, one of them (http://tech.military.com/equipment/view/89089/ak-47.html) seems to have a different weight figure than the others. Also, it appears that all of those seem to be referring to the old Russian AK-47's. How many times do I have to tell you that AK's (or akm's) made after the 1950's weigh less? Are the people inquiring about AK's on here interested in pre-1950's AKs? Why are you being so misleading to people including yourself?

Your usage of obscure website data reminds me of those that believe the Box O' Truth website is gospel when it comes to gun and ammunition testing. It's fucking laughable.

You dumbass 4.2KG is 9lbs 4 ounces - you just proved that the SKS isn't heavier. the other 4 sources say it's 9.5lbs - you're arguing against a gigantic consensus on the weight of the gun - NOT TO MENTION your convenient forgetfulness that when the damn thing is loaded it's a fucking pound heavier. You don't think 5 sources are enough? You want 10? How many does it take? - let me guess - you'll never believe anything on the internet or build sheets - because despite reality, you're right. What you're trying to do is make the case that the original milled AK receivers weigh more - and you assume every bit of data on the 5 websites is mistaken - and you're obviously incorrect - want to call me out again on my knowledge of receivers machining processes and weights? The only thing that's misleading here is your embarrassing failure at supply any evidence that the 5 websites I've supplied are incorrect. Enough with this "I said so" shit. You fucked up and you should have realized that 15 posts ago - but the fact that you keep going is only letting me know you won't admit shit when you're wrong. There is so much evidence stacked against you it's absolutely ludicrous - you're just slinging insults now. This is all your fault, you backed yourself into a corner by running this fucking argument all over the goddamn place where it should have never gone. I really have tried to be nice to you, and allow this conversation to end amicably and in a proper polite fashion - you just don't seem to want to do that. So, I've decided to sit here, and hammer facts and evidence at you and see what you do. It's so difficult to follow where you've taken this discussion on the accuracy of the AK-47 I'm going to summarize:


SKS's do not have stamped receivers - that was your inexperience with SKS's talking and you know it.
SKS's do have high capacity mags that work.
SKS's are in fact lighter than an AK47.
The AR-15 is more accurate than an AK-47.
The AR-15 does not require any more maintenance and cleaning than your average gun.
I did not ever say an AR was more reliable than an AK.
4 independent sources stating the same damn weight is pretty substantial evidence that you're seat of the pants experience is incorrect.


I'll give you a 4th opportunity to just say "I fucked up, who cares" and you don't need to feel animosity towards a growing number of people when you post.

[Yale]

Don't worry, he'll dig up a stat on the weight of stamped SKS's, and point out how much less his AK pistol weighs.

[5.0_CJ]

Don't worry, he'll dig up a stat on the weight of stamped SKS's, and point out how much less his AK pistol weighs.
http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/img/facepalm.jpeg

Don't fucking tell me this guy has an AK pistol and this whole fucking thread he's using that as his reference to tell me it's lighter.

[Yale]

http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/img/facepalm.jpeg

Don't fucking tell me this guy has an AK pistol and this whole fucking thread he's using that as his reference to tell me it's lighter.

I just laughed so hard I woke the dog up. He's looking at me with that, "WTF, Dad?" look.

[Hass]

You dumbass 4.2KG is 9lbs 4 ounces - you just proved that the SKS isn't heavier. the other 4 sources say it's 9.5lbs - you're arguing against a gigantic consensus on the weight of the gun - NOT TO MENTION your convenient forgetfulness that when the damn thing is loaded it's a fucking pound heavier. You don't think 5 sources are enough? You want 10? How many does it take? - let me guess - you'll never believe anything on the internet or build sheets - because despite reality, you're right. What you're trying to do is make the case that the original milled AK receivers weigh more - and you assume every bit of data on the 5 websites is mistaken - and you're obviously incorrect - want to call me out again on my knowledge of receivers machining processes and weights? The only thing that's misleading here is your embarrassing failure at supply any evidence that the 5 websites I've supplied are incorrect. Enough with this "I said so" shit. You fucked up and you should have realized that 15 posts ago - but the fact that you keep going is only letting me know you won't admit shit when you're wrong. There is so much evidence stacked against you it's absolutely ludicrous - you're just slinging insults now. This is all your fault, you backed yourself into a corner by running this fucking argument all over the goddamn place where it should have never gone. I really have tried to be nice to you, and allow this conversation to end amicably and in a proper polite fashion - you just don't seem to want to do that. So, I've decided to sit here, and hammer facts and evidence at you and see what you do. It's so difficult to follow where you've taken this discussion on the accuracy of the AK-47 I'm going to summarize:


SKS's do not have stamped receivers - that was your inexperience with SKS's talking and you know it.
SKS's do have high capacity mags that work.
SKS's are in fact lighter than an AK47.
The AR-15 is more accurate than an AK-47.
The AR-15 does not require any more maintenance and cleaning than your average gun.
I did not ever say an AR was more reliable than an AK.
4 independent sources stating the same damn weight is pretty substantial evidence that you're seat of the pants experience is incorrect.


I'll give you a 4th opportunity to just say "I fucked up, who cares" and you don't need to feel animosity towards a growing number of people when you post.


How about you try to peel your blinders off and go back and actually read what I posted without distorting it in your head as you read it?


First - I point out the fact that the AR needs more cleaning/maintenance when compared to an AK and you try to twist my words to make it sound like I implied an AR needs to be cleaned after every round.

Second - I point out the fact that high capacity mags don't play very nice with the SKS. You agree with this at first, then change your mind later and imply I said they don't work.

Third, after you mention the M59/66 SKS's at Military Gun Supply and relate the SKS to the AK, - I point out that the SKS is heavier than the AK. While I never said which AK it was heavier than, I figure you were talking about the late model Russian that the OP was asking about. I point out that more current model Russian AK's are lighter than the older ones and you post websites with general stats on AK's like all AK's weigh the same or something. Meanwhile you also accuse me of "cherry-picking" the model SKS that YOU mentioned at Military Gun Supply.

Fourth - I make the true statement that the Yugo SKS is made from solid milled metal not stampings and you say that all SKS's are milled but then in the same post state that there are stamped SKS's????? WTF????

Fifth - you claim that you posted 6 sources for AK weight and there were only 4.

Sixth - out of the 4 websites with general and old AK data that you posted, one of the four has a different weight number listed (4.2 vs the 4.3 listed on the others). Did you even read the websites before you posted them!!????

Seventh - every time I post a fact, you have to twist it around in a different way to try to make a point.

Does it make you angry that the AK47 is the most influential battle rifle ever made? Are you resentful that the AR is not even close to the world-wide popularity that the AK has? What's the real reason you keep twisting my words and can't even get your posts straight?

Unfortunately, I don't have a late model Russian AK with me or I would go weigh it on my bathroom scale. I do have a Yugo m70ab2 though. Would you like me to weigh that?

[Hass]

Dude, you're changing the argument to suit yourself. The AR is the most accurate all around. The AR wins the weight battle, with a betamag no less. The ONLY advantage to an AK is its gas piston system, vs. the AR's direct gas impingement system. I can add that to an AR for $400 in parts and have a gun that's equally reliable. The gas system on an AR is a major contributing reason to the urban myth about them being unreliable. Further, I know it's opinion, but I actually really like this writeup on SniperCentral.com:

I'm not saying that the AR isn't a good gun. Did you think that I was implying that the AR sucks?

I read the opinion you posted and would ask this. If the AR was such a great gun to start with, why does the poster then proceed to admit you have to use a certain kind of powder???? Why does he recommend you to use a specific kind of buffer???? Why does he advise you to use a Defender D-Ring????

These are not issues on an AK47. You can pick one up and just fire it as is without worrying about using the right "this" or the right "that". I know because I have.

[5.0_CJ]

How about you try to peel your blinders off and go back and actually read what I posted without distorting it in your head as you read it?


First - I point out the fact that the AR needs more cleaning/maintenance when compared to an AK and you try to twist my words to make it sound like I implied an AR needs to be cleaned after every round.

this is backtracking. Suddenly you're stepping away from what you said - and making me look like I'm twisting words, lol.

Second - I point out the fact that high capacity mags don't play very nice with the SKS. You agree with this at first, then change your mind later and imply I said they don't work.
I supplied 45 reviews averaging 4.5 of 5 stars. I told you I've used them, I know first hand they work. I explained it bitches about mags, but to say high cap mags don't work is flat out wrong.


Third, after you mention the M59/66 SKS's at Military Gun Supply and relate the SKS to the AK, - I point out that the SKS is heavier than the AK. While I never said which AK it was heavier than, I figure you were talking about the late model Russian that the OP was asking about. I point out that more current model Russian AK's are lighter than the older ones and you post websites with general stats on AK's like all AK's weigh the same or something. Meanwhile you also accuse me of "cherry-picking" the model SKS that YOU mentioned at Military Gun Supply.
You simply pointed out the M59's because they are the heaviest - whilst simultanously getting schooled on how they are made, their weight, and every single one of your 3 statements regarding SKS's - wrong on all counts.


Fourth - I make the true statement that the Yugo SKS is made from solid milled metal not stampings and you say that all SKS's are milled but then in the same post state that there are stamped SKS's????? WTF????
Sorry, what you said was "the reason the yugos are lighter is because they are stamped, not solid metal milled" - that is wrong as fuck and it shows your inexperience with these guns. Stamped SKS's are PROTOTYPES - ALL SKS's are milled. I just tossed that in there so you could take your fucking ego and walk away with it - since you fucked up so bad already I figured you needed a way out.


Fifth - you claim that you posted 6 sources for AK weight and there were only 4.
http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/ka50.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47info.php
http://tech.military.com/equipment/v...089/ak-47.html
http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/ahb_replicaMachineGuns.htm
http://www.armorvenue.com/world-war-2-weapons/ak-47-assault-rifle/
http://www.answers.com/topic/ak-47
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_rifle_ak47.php3
http://www.vodkakalashnikov.com/history.htm
http://metalgear.wikia.com/wiki/AK-47
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=124246419
http://www.experiencefestival.com/comparison_of_the_ak-47_and_m16_-_reliability
http://www.policelink.com/products/products/4172-ak---47
http://www.ak47rifles.net/
http://www.gun-guides.com/ak_47_disassembly_guide.htm

There's 15 fucking independent sources, you ready to shut the fuck up? Or are you really going to take this argument into "You said 5, I counted 4 - look I win"? Or is it time to go "Well that one is from this website, and that one is some guys opinion, blah blah blah. Just shut the fuck up already and take your well deserved medicine - you were wrong, and you gambled and lost that I'd let you get away with it.


Sixth - out of the 4 websites with general and old AK data that you posted, one of the four has a different weight number listed (4.2 vs the 4.3 listed on the others). Did you even read the websites before you posted them!!????

This is an example of how fucking terrible you argue - "Waaa only 3 of the 4 websites have the same weight, one of them is different - even though it still makes me wrong"


Seventh - every time I post a fact, you have to twist it around in a different way to try to make a point.

Does it make you angry that the AK47 is the most influential battle rifle ever made? Are you resentful that the AR is not even close to the world-wide popularity that the AK has? What's the real reason you keep twisting my words and can't even get your posts straight?

Unfortunately, I don't have a late model Russian AK with me or I would go weigh it on my bathroom scale. I do have a Yugo m70ab2 though. Would you like me to weigh that?

You have flat out failed at making a single point in this thread. You need to shut the fuck up and stop posting now, or continue and make yourself look like a fucking idiot. I did this because you're a fucking prick, a smart ass, and generally no where near as smart about guns as you thought you were - lol at you having me come over and educate you, looks like I was able to give you a few lessons from my chair - don't run your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about, be respectful to others in an argument, and know when you've lost an argument.

Oh, Now that you've been caught you suddenly don't have a late model AK - even though this entire fucking thread you said you have first hand knowledge of the weight - was it your friends? What it one you happen to have sold? Get the fuck out of here - hopefully I've humbled your ass and you'll let that mouth stay a little more courteous.

[David]

They both suck, I win

[Hass]

this is backtracking. Suddenly you're stepping away from what you said - and making me look like I'm twisting words, lol.


I supplied 45 reviews averaging 4.5 of 5 stars. I told you I've used them, I know first hand they work. I explained it bitches about mags, but to say high cap mags don't work is flat out wrong.


You simply pointed out the M59's because they are the heaviest - whilst simultanously getting schooled on how they are made, their weight, and every single one of your 3 statements regarding SKS's - wrong on all counts.


Sorry, what you said was "the reason the yugos are lighter is because they are stamped, not solid metal milled" - that is wrong as fuck and it shows your inexperience with these guns. Stamped SKS's are PROTOTYPES - ALL SKS's are milled. I just tossed that in there so you could take your fucking ego and walk away with it - since you fucked up so bad already I figured you needed a way out.


http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/ka50.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47info.php
http://tech.military.com/equipment/v...089/ak-47.html
http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/ahb_replicaMachineGuns.htm
http://www.armorvenue.com/world-war-2-weapons/ak-47-assault-rifle/
http://www.answers.com/topic/ak-47
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_rifle_ak47.php3
http://www.vodkakalashnikov.com/history.htm
http://metalgear.wikia.com/wiki/AK-47
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=124246419
http://www.experiencefestival.com/comparison_of_the_ak-47_and_m16_-_reliability
http://www.policelink.com/products/products/4172-ak---47
http://www.ak47rifles.net/
http://www.gun-guides.com/ak_47_disassembly_guide.htm

There's 15 fucking independent sources, you ready to shut the fuck up? Or are you really going to take this argument into "You said 5, I counted 4 - look I win"? Or is it time to go "Well that one is from this website, and that one is some guys opinion, blah blah blah. Just shut the fuck up already and take your well deserved medicine - you were wrong, and you gambled and lost that I'd let you get away with it.


This is an example of how fucking terrible you argue - "Waaa only 3 of the 4 websites have the same weight, one of them is different - even though it still makes me wrong"



You have flat out failed at making a single point in this thread. You need to shut the fuck up and stop posting now, or continue and make yourself look like a fucking idiot. I did this because you're a fucking prick, a smart ass, and generally no where near as smart about guns as you thought you were - lol at you having me come over and educate you, looks like I was able to give you a few lessons from my chair - don't run your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about, be respectful to others in an argument, and know when you've lost an argument.

Oh, Now that you've been caught you suddenly don't have a late model AK - even though this entire fucking thread you said you have first hand knowledge of the weight - was it your friends? What it one you happen to have sold? Get the fuck out of here - hopefully I've humbled your ass and you'll let that mouth stay a little more courteous.

Is there something wrong with you? I did a Yahoo search for Russian AK47 weight and the first result that came up is a website proving what I have been saying all along.

http://www.ak-47.us/Russia.php

The Post 50's AK's weigh less than the old original versions.

From your beloved internet....

"AKM 7.62 × 39 mm
a revised, lower-cost version of the AK-47; receiver is made from several pieces of stamped sheet-metal riveted together and a revized muzzle flash suppressor. Rifle weight 3.61 kg. "

3.61 kg = 7.95 lbs.

How about you go back to school and learn how to get your facts straight before you have a talk with mom and dad okay son?

[MireFire 2.0]

DAMN ladies... whats a going on in here?

:confused:

[Hass]

DAMN ladies... whats a going on in here?

:confused:

Oh nothing much.

Just waiting for CJ to get his estrogen under control.

:)

[MireFire 2.0]

Oh nothing much.

Just waiting for CJ to get his estrogen under control.

:)


Ahh I see ....well darn you Ceej... submit already! :deal:

[Hass]

I don't know about Cj, but I don't consider it an argument because I'm not taking it personally. It's just a debate about some guns. No hard feelings on my end. Of course I am 100% correct though and he knows it. LOL!

[exlude]

Wow, Hass argues like a gd woman, lmfao. Comes into a thread about accuracy and none of his posts have really anything to do on the topic. Jumps topics enough to ensure he has something to argue about.

CJ, I'm reminded of the old saying, "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Oh yeah, FWIW, the AKM is considered an AK-47 variant.

[Falcongunner]

Well, well, well................this has been interesting.:yuck: And they say "an armed society is a polite society".:hmmm:

So, does anyone want to tell me which is best? A 9mm or 45acp or a .308 or 7.62 nato? Or a 292 Ford or 289 Studebaker?


Wayne in FW

[5.0_CJ]

Is there something wrong with you? I did a Yahoo search for Russian AK47 weight and the first result that came up is a website proving what I have been saying all along.

http://www.ak-47.us/Russia.php

The Post 50's AK's weigh less than the old original versions.

From your beloved internet....

"AKM 7.62 × 39 mm
a revised, lower-cost version of the AK-47; receiver is made from several pieces of stamped sheet-metal riveted together and a revized muzzle flash suppressor. Rifle weight 3.61 kg. "

3.61 kg = 7.95 lbs.

How about you go back to school and learn how to get your facts straight before you have a talk with mom and dad okay son?

LOL @ using an AKM now for weight - you're fucking pathetic. I can't believe you're trying to use that as evidence - that isn't an AK-47 dumbass - it's a lightweight variant which is why they call it an AKM. I think your public flogging has just about wrapped up.

[5.0_CJ]

CJ, I'm reminded of the old saying, "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

It has gotten laughably ridiculous.

[vtstang66]

So nobody has any groups then?

[5.0_CJ]

So nobody has any groups then?

I searched high and low for them. I will go ahead and shoot some at 200 yards for you and post them up.

[Dacotua]

Blah blah blah..

Jesus H. Christ this is getting old, I didn't read half that shit.

JUST MY OPINION:

My AR-15 doesn't need any more cleaning than my AK. Of course everyone is going to tell you to clean your gun. A clean and well maintained gun will fire more reliably than a dirty gun. Thats a fact. Another fact is that more US Forces kill enemy combatants with a M16 than they kill US forces with a AK. This has to do with accuracy, training, and upkeep of their weapons.

My AR-15 has never jammed on me, yet my AK has Jammed on me. Apparently when I bought the gun, I didn't get enough of the cosmoline off of it and it gummed up the bolt. Shot the gun like 50 times and then the bolt was jammed shut tight. Took me some effort and a good boot kick to the bolt to finally get it open. Cleaned it up good (With paint thinner of all things), then oiled it and put it back together and it has functioned great ever since.

My AK vs my SKS is no comparison. My SKS shoots a lot tigher groups. My AR shoots tighter groups than both of the AK and SKS.

I've only seen 2-3 stamped SKS's in my life. This was back in the late 80's when Norinco sent some chinese SKS's over with stamped parts. I recall one of my buddies going out and buying the milled trigger groups and other things for the gun. Since that time I've yet to see one.

My whole point is, all the semi-auto guns are fun to shoot.

[Hass]

Oh yeah, FWIW, the AKM is considered an AK-47 variant.

It's a post 50's Russian AK just like I said.

[Hass]

LOL @ using an AKM now for weight - you're fucking pathetic. I can't believe you're trying to use that as evidence - that isn't an AK-47 dumbass - it's a lightweight variant which is why they call it an AKM. I think your public flogging has just about wrapped up.

It's a post 50's Russian AK.

Even in your world of word twisting, inaccurate website postings, and psychological delusions, you cannot argue that that is not a Russian AK. What's funny is you probably will loose sleep tonight trying to convince yourself over and over that you are right.

[5.0_CJ]

It's a post 50's Russian AK.

Even in your world of word twisting, inaccurate website postings, and psychological delusions, you cannot argue that that is not a Russian AK. What's funny is you probably will loose sleep tonight trying to convince yourself over and over that you are right.

buddy, you're the only that that thinks you're right. You've just massively failed and now you're using specialty lightweight variants. Post 1950 AK's are not all AKM's, that makes you fucking retarded (but we all know that now). The best part is I know no matter how stupid you are, you've learned a lesson - and I know you're aware you fucked up. I don't waste sleep at night, I've got reality on my side.

[exlude]

It's a post 50's Russian AK just like I said.

Lol, then so are the 74, SVD, and RPK. But I'm not alone in seeing that you're stretching after the fact.

[cobra93teal]

I have 5 ARs... and I have more fun shooting them then a AK.. the AK was better when it could be had for 300 dollars. My 223 has been dirty as hell(over 1000 rounds through it) no problems... but I would rather keep it clean.