Project Appleseed

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! 

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

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.