I've been shooting my AK for a while now (Romanian AKMS, typically shoot with Wolf or Tula) and just can't seem to be consistent with it. I shot three shots under one marker from sitting at 200 yards and put up a 3 MOA group at 500 yards so I've seen it be way more accurate than the internet says is possible.
But then, I'll go to the range and it'll shoot a round way off to the right, another on target and then two or three will be in a group way too high. It throws rounds. It sends 'em low. It sends 'em high. Then it'll drill three or four dead center. Then they're off again. The zero never seems to be in the same place. It just doesn't seem to want to put every single round where I aim.
Is that just an AK being an AK? Is that just what happens when I use "match grade Tula" from Walmart?
I thought maybe my cheekweld was inconsistent so I put a kisser button on there (in true Soviet fashion I duct taped a rock to the stock) and shot some good groups... that would have a flyer here and there. One group would be too high. One too low. One with a shot to the right.
Just weird.
Have I reached the accuracy capacity of a stock AK? I'd really like to keep any fixes simple (and cheap!). From what I can gather, some type of longer sight radius and/or optic is the most simple way and then a brake/compensator on the muzzle. American (expensive) ammo is a "fix" I've heard of as well.
Thoughts? Suggestions? I know we have a couple AK gurus on here. Anyone have a consistent shooter and if so, what did you do?
Get some reloadable brass, the dies, and develop an accurate load. The problems that I have seen have always been related to ammo. While Wolf is better than the old surplus, it likely won't compete with a well developed load.
I have a friend who had a rifle that would consistently shoot .75 moa with Gold Metal Match. His handloads in that same rifle would shoot .175 inches (in a .308) at 100 yards. If you want the AK to be an accurate (and consistent) gun you need to control the variables better than you can with commercial or surplus ammo.
http://www.midwayusa.com/find?newcategorydimensionid=20220
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/740806/lee-pacesetter-3-die-set-762x39mm?cm_vc=ProductFinding
I agree with jmdavis.
My first SKS could barely hold a 4-5 moa group with Wolf or Brown Bear. Silver Bear 154gr soft point ammo was GREAT, but you can't find it anywhere.
I tried every ammo I could find, and never could consistently keep a good group.
The I started reloading.
Sub-2moa groups were easy.
Why the problems with factory ammo?
Consistency. Most commercial ammo that I tested ran extreme spreads of over 200 fps out of the same box of ammo. Bullet weights varied by as much as 7 grains, powder charges varied by 2-3 full grains. This includes Winchester and Remington 7.62x39.
Nobody (aside from Riflemen) expects accuracy and consistency from 7.62x39, so the manufacturers don't concern themselves with it.
Find some Yugoslavian surplus ammo. That was the most accurate loading I'd found on the market. Followed closely by Golden Tiger. GL!
If you don't want to reload (which isn't gonna save you any money over Tula or silver bear) weigh your ammo, grouping by grain weight (253 grains in one pile, 252 grains in another). I think I saw variations in weight in one box of tweny of as much as six or eight grains between the lightest to heaviest. I just tested it out this weekend in my sks. The groups were about the same 6ish MOA, but the weighed ammo did not have the wild flyers. It's not an "accuracy" upgrade as much as a consistency one. I still want to reload for my sks for shiggles, but weighing is the cheap answer.
Quote from: 509gman on June 17, 2014, 05:22:01 AM
If you don't want to reload (which isn't gonna save you any money over Tula or silver bear) weigh your ammo, grouping by grain weight (253 grains in one pile, 252 grains in another). I think I saw variations in weight in one box of tweny of as much as six or eight grains between the lightest to heaviest. I just tested it out this weekend in my sks. The groups were about the same 6ish MOA, but the weighed ammo did not have the wild flyers. It's not an "accuracy" upgrade as much as a consistency one. I still want to reload for my sks for shiggles, but weighing is the cheap answer.
This will make a huge improvement in group size.
Quote from: slim on June 17, 2014, 12:32:21 AM(in true Soviet fashion I duct taped a rock to the stock)
Comrade, Russian would never use duct tape on rifle like this. You use duct tape, this mean you think like imperialist. Kalashnikov will not make small group for you.
I went through same thing with one of my AKs. I did a batch of reloads using 125 Gr Sierra. The groups tightened up significantly; however, I still had flyers and wandering zeroes
I ruled out software issues and my conclusion is the wandering zeroes are due to the rifle heating up. It has a thin barrel and on top it has that sheet metal gas tube that heats up even faster than the barrel. Think about what an elongating gas tube on top will do to a barrel.
I also came to the conclusion that the flyers were a result of the AKs gas system being inconsistent. I have no evidence for this. It's just a guess.
Of course it may be that your rifle was made on a Monday or Friday.
Is this the under folder we shot at atterbury slim? If so I bet that is a big part of it. They are horrible on the cheek weld even with your high speed kisser button.
The weighting your factory rounds is the next best option to rolling your own. It takes a a lot less time but will definitely make a huge difference. I have all mine separated in bags with it marked on them.
It is the same rifle.
Thanks for the tips, guys. I'll try weighing first and see how that does. Report back here in a few weeks.
I'm with Grunt on this one. The under-folding stock is no good for maintaining a cheek weld. That would explain tight groups with inconsistent placement. Flyers appear as the ammo itself isn't consistent enough to be able to maintain the accuracy you want.
On the other hand, it's Romanian, which could also be the problem. Upgrading to a Pole or a 74 is a simple fix, but I wouldn't call it a cheap one. ;)
My couple cents.
Check out the rifle for anything that fits poorly or loosely and can have variance. Like
suggested, a fixed stock will help, both for cheek weld but also flexing around.
Check out your front sling mount too to make sure it can't vary. If there's any
burrs on the rails or carrier or rough spots on the bolt lugs, it may do to polish them.
The AK is a loose rifle. A loose rifle can shoot well provided it bangs into battery
the exact same way. Those are fix the rifle for the rifle fixes. Loose handguards too.
I'll assume this is an AK with a pistol grip and doesn't have the Saiga style sporterized
trigger relocation for use without a pistol grip, because those are horrible triggers until
you convert. It's possible to make an AK trigger in the stock "right" location be better,
but I assume it's not your problem here and is good enough.
Get a couple boxes of good western 7.62x39. American Eagle has some, so does Fiocchi.
See if that changes anything.
Lastly, just for checking out the rifle, shoot sandbagged bench, no sling for a couple strings to rule
out variations in prone and sling use. This is just for rifle diagnostics, of course.
The problem with weighing complete rounds is that you don't know which component is causing the problem. A difference of 2gr in powder will have more of an effect than a difference of 2gr in bullet weight or case weight.
For 1-2 moa accuracy in an AR people are satisfied with +-.1gr of powder. For high power most people don't weigh cases or bullets.
perhaps not economically feasible, or ballistically desirable, but consider:
Radom Archer in 5.56x45
http://archerrifle.com/michael-bane-reviews-archer-rifle-io-inc/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djeam0giA2I
I've handled one. Possibly the best AK ever made.
The only reason I don't own one is the cost, right around $1000 . I may try to make a deal w/ the pawn shop and trade in a couple WASRs for an Archer.
There is a youtube review where the factory claims 1 MOA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QflEPjMRIfg
I've seen video of an informal bench session off a sandbag that yielded 1.5 MOA, shooting 5 rounds of US milsurp
Watching the guts of an AK bounce around the way they do in slow motion, I've always been amazed that you can get 4-5 MOA out of them.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D_sNDTdKQNVU&ei=WoOgU532A5akqAaPhIDICw&usg=AFQjCNFOV5I9_s8A5ek7Dn9TQcFsZK4sZA&sig2=WWehPxq7YHcgnGPMkYHVOA
Quote from: DEH on June 17, 2014, 09:20:43 AM
I ruled out software issues and my conclusion is the wandering zeroes are due to the rifle heating up. It has a thin barrel and on top it has that sheet metal gas tube that heats up even faster than the barrel. Think about what an elongating gas tube on top will do to a barrel.
I have heard of ppl grinding the gas tube down enough to prevent this, they said the got more consistent poi. I did notice the vertical stringing after three or four 10 round strings in close succession on the sks as well.
I think you guys are correct with the heating up but even then it's inconsistent. My cold bore zero is never in exactly the same spot it was last time. I've even "water cooled" the barrel a few times (flushed it out and drenched it with cold water immediately after shooting) and it doesn't seem to matter. I would reckon once it's hot it would find it's "warm zero" but it must be fluctuating so quickly it doesn't hold steady.
All in all, I've been pretty happy with the accuracy. I've been shooting with that underfolder stock and no sling. It's easily "minute of man" all the way out there and one of those shots will find it's mark. Just have to be sure to shoot more than once!
I have a RPK (AES-10B) and it's stupid accurate like an AR. I'm thinking for a "Rifleman's AK" that's the way to go. Maybe cut off the bipod and get a good sling mount on there with better stocks. Sidemount scope rail seems to hold a good zero even with my cheap red dot. Pretty cool platform right there.
Thanks for the tips and advice, folks. I truly believe this is one of the platforms we'll start seeing a lot more of in the near future as we get "new shooters" out to our events. (Computer voice) "It says on the internet I need an AK-47 or an AR-15. I cannot afford an AR-15 so I bought this WASR-10. I want to shoot sub-moa groups at 1000 yards. How do I do that with this Tula ammo?"
HUZZAH!!!
Here's a wild thought. Can you take the stock of the RPK and put it on the AK? I don't know if this is mechanically possible. I am not familiar with the AK beyond basic load, aim, and fire. If I was going to have an AK, I would like to have it with an RPK type stock that matches the wood on the foregrip and a western standard LOP.
I actually want to keep the folding stock on this particular rifle.
Undoubtedly cheekweld is part of the overall problem but even in a multiple shot string of fire there are inconsistencies unrelated to cheekweld. I shouldn't get three or four good shots and then a flyer high and right followed by a few more good shots and then a flyer way off to the left.
Seems like my issues are pretty common to the AK platform. Just wanted to confirm that with those of you who were more experienced with them. And for those of you new to the AK, get on it! It's a splendid rifle. :~
Build one out of a shovel! Sadly the pictures and the commentary are no longer one on Northeast Shooter (I think.) That was a fun post to read. If you sent a message to them they may be able to help you out. It seemed to be a ver AK oriented crowd.
I had an Ultimac on mine and had it spaced so as to not hit the gas block or front trunnion so it would not get hot and expand therefore pushing the barrel down. This worked very well with both a 47 and a 74. Weighing and sorting the ammo by weight makes a huge difference, the Yugo brass cased surplus ammo was some of the best I shot or weighed. Having pulled several rounds down and weighing the powder and bullet separately I found that the bullet has the largest variance, powder was surprisingly consistent. Now there are some that will say the stamped receiver if not properly heat treated will expand and react differently that a properly heat treated receiver. I of course have never proven or even tried to prove either way but the ones saying it are some of the better builders out there. They of course say that the cheaper rifles tend to have a higher ratio of improperly heat treated receivers. Who knows but I do notice that a Arsenal or a quality kit built rifle shoots better than my cheap Century built rifles. They tend to shoot tighter groups too and are not as greatly effected by temp. But I would try sorting the ammo by weight and see where that gets you. I believe it will get you where you are wanting to go. Does the rifle in question have a US barrel or....?
I have a Romanian 47 but it doesn't have a folding stock. It also has an Ultimak. It gets good groups out to 200 yards, then at 300 and beyond it gets some in the right spot, but then flyers begin with Tiger ammo. I have another brand of 47 with an under folder. It is much easier to get a good cheekweld if you put some pipe insulation on the folder. You can also do some filing on the sling attachment at the front in order to get a swivel through it so you can use a loop sling.
Guess an rpk will be the next evil empire weapon for me. Is that what the vepr is made out of?
Slim is never going to reload so he might as well weigh the rounds.
^^^That is correct!
Quote from: Kosciusko on June 17, 2014, 01:26:51 PM
perhaps not economically feasible, or ballistically desirable, but consider:
Radom Archer in 5.56x45
Like I said, upgrade to a Pole. ;) The Archer is by far the nicest AK I've seen, and it is the best 'screw your cold war' rifle if you get the mag adapter. Who doesn't want an AK in 5.56 that takes STANAG mags?
Quote from: MandyMonstar on June 18, 2014, 10:44:28 AMWho doesn't want an AK in 5.56 that takes STANAG mags?
Yeah, love my Sig 556. ;D
The easiest way to improve the AK is to get the CMP M1. Costs about $650 but well worth the money and will definitely improve your groups.
2cl
The M1 is not the be all and end all of firearms. Nor is the AK, AR series, or M14. Different people shoot different guns well.
Back in 2009 Boltgun71 ran the first military Appleseed with a group of soldiers who would be tasked with SDM duties in Afghanistan. The were using M4's with Acogs. At the end of a week that combined Appleseed and AMU methods, the soldiers shot out to 700 yards and had a 69% first shot hit rate to that distance. I believe that the total ammo loadout per man was 250 rounds for that week.
Quote from: jmdavis on June 18, 2014, 12:24:53 PM
The M1 is not the be all and end all of firearms. Nor is the AK, AR series, or M14. Different people shoot different guns well.
Back in 2009 Boltgun71 ran the first military Appleseed with a group of soldiers who would be tasked with SDM duties in Afghanistan. The were using M4's with Acogs. At the end of a week that combined Appleseed and AMU methods, the soldiers shot out to 700 yards and had a 69% first shot hit rate to that distance. I believe that the total ammo loadout per man was 250 rounds for that week.
>:D >:D >:D The M1A is not the be all and end all of Rifleman Rifle's? ;) ;) ;) Who knew, but you better not let Boston T. Party or Fred in that secret! ;) ;) ;) (he said with tongue firmly planted in cheek) :slap:
Maybe the AR in 6.5 Grendel? ;D
(Said the Man with CMP M1 Special in .308 Win -- with a handle like fisherdawg, you know it's got to be different, right?) O0
In a serious vein, the info on the Mil Seed taking M4 / ACOG combo out to 700 points to the fact that few of us really take our rifles out to their full potential. Makes me want to get after it, yessir! O0
Quote from: MandyMonstar on June 18, 2014, 10:44:28 AMWho doesn't want an AK in 5.56 that takes STANAG mags?
Me. I use my AK for AK stuff. If I wanted a precision surgical instrument to make tiny holes in things I'd run my AR. What I'm trying to determine here is what is the best accuracy I can expect from "rack grade" AKs and what I need to do, if anything, to get there.
*for the record I'm an AR guy and I've always liked the Galils and even the 74s. But, for this particular application I want to shoot big heavy bullets real, real fast in any environment. Extra points for more accuracy.
I think your average rack grade AK with whatever ammo should be @ a 3MOA rifle.
AS wants us to be 4MOA riflemen, so you need to be a 1MOA shooter with that hypothetical AK to meet standards.
As for the be all, end all rifle, I view the M14 as the spiritual successor and update to the M1. The AK and the SKS lack
the accuracy needed. The G3 has wild ergo issues, not the best sights, and tough trigger. The FAL is a contender.
The M16 is a great rifle, but the .308 has better ballistics. All that being said, the end all, be all rifle is a AR-10 with a
full rifle barrel and furniture, rail on top with detachable carry handle and stock sights, that uses commonly available,
inexpensive mags. I am not sure that AR-10 exists, so the M14 it is for me, until it does.
Quote from: Big John on June 18, 2014, 06:04:04 PM
As for the be all, end all rifle, I view the M14 as the spiritual successor and update to the M1. The AK and the SKS lack
the accuracy needed. The G3 has wild ergo issues, not the best sights, and tough trigger. The FAL is a contender.
The M16 is a great rifle, but the .308 has better ballistics. All that being said, the end all, be all rifle is a AR-10 with a
full rifle barrel and furniture, rail on top with detachable carry handle and stock sights, that uses commonly available,
inexpensive mags. I am not sure that AR-10 exists, so the M14 it is for me, until it does.
Fulton Armory, among others, might build you that AR-10 just the way you want it. For a price $$$$$ Not at all sure on the magazine issue, though.
What would you think of a Ruger SR762, if ever they make with the VT profile barrel? As for stock sights -- you could add Troy or others, carry handle might be after market, don't know about magazines...
FAL is a fine rifle, somewhat more complex than M14. Sling can be an issue with standard furniture. I've seen wonderful shooting with it very accurate even beyond 500 -- that was the max distance at the venue.
Anyway, if you come up with candidates for the AR-10, pass the info along. Need to keep my bucket list in order! ;D
My homies rock the LMT and Larue for AR-10s. They agree they're both about the best you can get in that platform.
Back to the AK family (sort of) anyone want to weigh-in on the Dragunov/PSL?
Itsansks is your man for info on the psl. He's rebarreling his. He's on the slope right now so it might be slow between replies.
Slim, big thing on the AK is what receiver it has. You want a light rifle to go fast with, then a normal stamped AK receiver
is good. You want accuracy, get one with a milled receiver, like the VEPR. The PSL is the same principle, just bigger too.
Quote from: Big John on June 18, 2014, 06:04:04 PM
All that being said, the end all, be all rifle is a AR-10 with a
full rifle barrel and furniture, rail on top with detachable carry handle and stock sights, that uses commonly available,
inexpensive mags. I am not sure that AR-10 exists,
That rifle exists and is the DPMS .308 Classic. I recently bought Magpul mags locally for about $17 each. http://www.dpmsinc.com/308-Classic_ep_100-1.html (http://www.dpmsinc.com/308-Classic_ep_100-1.html)
Why are people offering info on AR-10's? Isn't this a thread about AK rifles?
Being as the PSL is, in essence, an AK chambered for 7.62x54, and Slim specifically asked about it, I'll offer some of my personal experiences with that rifle.
First, the ergonomics suck. Stock is too short to use without a winter parka and body armor, which is as it was designed. Changing out the stock gives the proper length of pull, and can make the rifle a bit better in the looks department too.
A rifle that is numbers matching, imported as a complete rifle, is going to be your best bet for accuracy and reliability. Lots of parts kits were imported, and have subsequently been built into complete rifles, with build quality being very hit and miss.
As with most Russian-designed arms, utility was the name of the game when the PSL was on the drawing board. Sights, manual of arms, and operation of the rifle is exactly the same as the AK platform from which it is derived.
The chief limiting factor of the PSL is the ammunition. Quality control amongst the many different plants tasked with supplying the Soviets with 7.62x54 varies wildly. My suggestion is to try as many different makes and years as you can. My particular rifle shoots best with 1984 Russian, or 1978 Bulgarian ammo. Your rifle may vary.
Having put close to 10,000 round of surplus ammo through my rifle, I have come to know it's limitations with surplus ammo. Namely, that a 2-3 MOA group @ 200 yards opens up to a 5-6 MOA group at 500. I believe this to be a result of the steel core not being perfectly concentric to the centerline of the bullet, and it begins to wobble as the bullet slows down.
My experience with hand loading for this rifle has shown that the surplus ammo is leaving a lot on the table, but I am waiting until my new barrel is installed before really dialing in a load.
That seems consistent with what I've heard or read. Seems the "steel core" is cut from a long wire and then just kind of thrown into the mold with the bullet - no real concentration on having it perfectly aligned or centered.
Thanks again to everyone for the input.
Direct anymore questions, information or opinions about any .308 rifles here please.
http://appleseedinfo.org/smf/index.php?topic=41503.0
Have you considered a tech-sight for it? http://www.tech-sights.com/ak.htm
I have. And I'm not sure I want it to be $110 more accurate.
I used to have a WASR 10/63 that would hold under 4 MOA out to 400 yards using Golden Tiger. That seems to be the most accurate steel cased ammo that can still be found somewhat cheaply (at least it was back when I was shooting that rifle). I never tried weighing and sorting it -- I probably could have got even better results if I did.
I had Tech Sights on that particular rifle, but if I had it to do over again, I would keep the factory open sights. The Tech Sights make the rifle a lot slower and more of a PITA to field strip; they also require a tool to adjust elevation for different distances, whereas the factory tangent adjusts quickly and easily; and while peep sights work great when it is bright daylight and the target contrasts with the background, open sights work better in low light or when the target blends with the background... you're not trying to view the target looking through a tiny aperture that doesn't let all the light in. IMO the factory sights are better for "AK purposes," as Slim calls them.
Has anyone tried recrowning the barrel?
I have not.
I've heard that cutting a target crown could help the accuracy. It's something I've heard, but haven't tried because I've already spent $150 on a $450 sks (and plan on spending a little more for an aftermarket stock for me to butcher) and I don't think I'll see any gains from it until I start rolling my own ammo.
An IL instructor cut off the barrel of his 700 with a hacksaw...and shot a Rifleman score at KD with it. No recrown, no target stuff....just hacked it off "because it was too long."
I was impressed.
Quote from: slim on June 23, 2014, 05:38:59 PM
An IL instructor cut off the barrel of his 700 with a hacksaw...and shot a Rifleman score at KD with it. No recrown, no target stuff....just hacked it off "because it was too long."
I was impressed.
I hope he saved the hacksaw. ;)
Have you considered the 'Ultimak' rail,, or a similar derivitive ?
The rail is supposed to improve harmonics. Whatever opitic you go w/ will improve the view.
As for .308 ARs' that run on common mags, RockRiver makes one that uses FAL mags, which used to be quite cheap. However , as noted above , .308 Magpul mags for $17 is hard to beat.
Quote from: KodyJaret on June 23, 2014, 11:39:04 PM
Have you considered the 'Ultimak' rail,, or a similar derivitive ?
The rail is supposed to improve harmonics. Whatever opitic you go w/ will improve the view.
I have. That seems to be the way to go for cheaply mounting an optic. If I pour some $$$ into this I'll probably end up with a rail and red dot of some type. I have the side mount on my RPK and with a cheap Bushnell TRS-125, it's plenty good for its role.
The deeper I delve the more and more I start to admit there's not a single thing done better with an AK that can't be done with an AR. Ham sandwiches aside...
Also it seemed to help when I started hooking the sling to the handguard instead of to the barrel. I accomplished this with a threaded eye hook and a nut from the hardware store. It seemed to reduce the POI change from slinging up anyway.
Quote from: slim on June 24, 2014, 10:28:26 AM
Quote from: KodyJaret on June 23, 2014, 11:39:04 PM
Have you considered the 'Ultimak' rail,, or a similar derivitive ?
The rail is supposed to improve harmonics. Whatever opitic you go w/ will improve the view.
I have. That seems to be the way to go for cheaply mounting an optic. If I pour some $$$ into this I'll probably end up with a rail and red dot of some type. I have the side mount on my RPK and with a cheap Bushnell TRS-125, it's plenty good for its role.
The deeper I delve the more and more I start to admit there's not a single thing done better with an AK that can't be done with an AR. Ham sandwiches aside...
I think the AK is better than the AR at three things.
1. Ammo is generally cheaper, if you're into running steel ComBloc surplus.
2. Both rifles can take a ton of punishment, I think the AK can take more dirt and mud before failure.
3. AKs wear wood furniture better than ARs, if you're into traditional looks.
Quote from: Big John on June 24, 2014, 11:27:13 AM
I think the AK is better than the AR at three things.
1. Ammo is generally cheaper, if you're into running steel ComBloc surplus.
2. Both rifles can take a ton of punishment, I think the AK can take more dirt and mud before failure.
3. AKs wear wood furniture better than ARs, if you're into traditional looks.
But the AR is:
1. Has readily available reloading components and information.
2. more accurate (talking 20 inch barreled versions with or without float tube). 16 inch with float tube is also quite accurate.
3. Is designed to be used with a sling.
4. Has sights that work pretty darn well.
As for dirt and mud, if you check Youtube you can find some sand tests with AR's and AK's.
Quote from: slim on June 18, 2014, 04:36:14 PM
Quote from: MandyMonstar on June 18, 2014, 10:44:28 AMWho doesn't want an AK in 5.56 that takes STANAG mags?
Me. I use my AK for AK stuff. If I wanted a precision surgical instrument to make tiny holes in things I'd run my AR. What I'm trying to determine here is what is the best accuracy I can expect from "rack grade" AKs and what I need to do, if anything, to get there.
*for the record I'm an AR guy and I've always liked the Galils and even the 74s. But, for this particular application I want to shoot big heavy bullets real, real fast in any environment. Extra points for more accuracy.
I like my AK for AK stuff too, I just also like the fun history involved in having a NATO standard AK. ;)
Poland also built their early 47s with milled receivers instead of stamped ones. They're a little scarce to find, but rock solid and great shooters when you do.
I actually prefer the AK for a fighting rifle, I am a minimalist and don't add the veal or modify my rifles really. Good optic with back up sights a light and no need for anything else.
I gave up ARs for 1 year just to give the SK a fair chance after running the AK for that year I did not miss my AR and realized what most internet gurus say about either are true. The AK is much more accurate than a similar built fighting AR at reasonable distance than most people say. The AR is not as unreliable as some will lead you to believe. I say buy quality with either not the bottom dollar priced stuff , somewhere around $100 will put you into a quality rifle in either platform. Learn the rifle, shoot it a lot, become familiar with it know it's limitations and your limitations with it. Then you will be ahead of the game.
I am not one for having many rifles especially different platforms. But quality lots of ammo get trained, yes I consider KD with your rifle a valuable part of training. There is no wrong answer but Slim trying to figure out his issue is part of the process.
Now where is everyone Appleseeding at this weekend? I am doing a sold out KD shoot here in IN. and could use a little help. Anyone wan to share their knowledge with some fine Americans this weekend? If we had enough help we could rotate instructors through for a KD AQT.
Quote from: jmdavis on June 24, 2014, 11:47:25 AM
Quote from: Big John on June 24, 2014, 11:27:13 AM
I think the AK is better than the AR at three things.
1. Ammo is generally cheaper, if you're into running steel ComBloc surplus.
2. Both rifles can take a ton of punishment, I think the AK can take more dirt and mud before failure.
3. AKs wear wood furniture better than ARs, if you're into traditional looks.
But the AR is:
1. Has readily available reloading components and information.
2. more accurate (talking 20 inch barreled versions with or without float tube). 16 inch with float tube is also quite accurate.
3. Is designed to be used with a sling.
4. Has sights that work pretty darn well.
As for dirt and mud, if you check Youtube you can find some sand tests with AR's and AK's.
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I was responding to Slim's question on the AR doing everything better, so I came up
with some devil's advocate AK perks. I prefer the AR platform myself, so I apologize if I presented myself a different way.
I own AK's and SKS's. When I bought them they were 1/6 to 1/2 the cost of an AR. At those prices they are great rifles. I was also buying ammo in those days at $.06/round (now it is ~$.25/round). So I had plenty to practice. But when you want an AK to shoot like an AR, you quickly find yourself spending as much on the AK as a good AR. That is part of the point, I think. Slim wanted to see how accurate he could make his ak. That is good. But to get standard AR accuracy or even M4 accuracy from an ak you have to really work at it.
I will bring up again the first Military Appleseed. At the end of the 5 days and 300 rounds, the performance of the new SDM's showed a 69% first round hit rate out to 700 yards with M4's and ACOGs. That is an amazing testament to both the training and the hardware. Right now flattop M4 kits (upper, adjustable stock and lower build kit, just add stripped lower) are available for $399 at Palmetto that make the total cost less than $500 for a 16" m4 complete (add your scope and rear sight). If I were scoping it, I would look at the Millet 1-4, the Bushnell 1-4, and the Nikon 3x).
Quote from: fisherdawg on June 23, 2014, 06:08:58 PM
Quote from: slim on June 23, 2014, 05:38:59 PM
An IL instructor cut off the barrel of his 700 with a hacksaw...and shot a Rifleman score at KD with it. No recrown, no target stuff....just hacked it off "because it was too long."
I was impressed.
I hope he saved the hacksaw. ;)
Despite internet lore, with a bit of care it is entirely reasonable to do this and have an acceptably accurate rifle. I speak based on the 597 that I cut back to 16.5". Yes, with a hacksaw and a drill bit to cut a bit of a crown. Is it match grade? No, about 2moa or so, but good enough for a 12yr old to score Rifleman with.