Mmm Guns

[M^tster]

Just recently got a few new guns thought you might like a look see. The one on the left is an AK-47 of course made in Yugo, and has a tapco trigger and pistol grip.<-- for those times when you need to go through a few walls and need 30 rounds.
 The one on the right is just a ruger .22 LR which comes with a 25 round clip, semi-auto with a scope. Fun fun.

[|iR|Focalor]

I've heard every argument there is concerning AK versus AR platforms. Personally, I think the 7.62 rounds used by AK47's are just too large for an assault rifle and produce too much recoil to make it the most effective weapon possible. As far as I know, even the Russians no longer use those cartridges and have scaled down to something similar to the AR's 5.56 rounds for increased accuracy in sustained fire.

Nothing against the 7.62. It's not that it isn't accurate, because it definitely is, especially with a bolt action rifle and a scope. But for a gas operated assault rifle that's gonna throw 300 rounds downrange per minute, there's damn near no way possible to control the muzzle and keep it on the target. You're just wasting ammo.

Probably the most attractive thing about the current AR style weapons is their ability to be modified for anything. The rail mounting lets you attach whatever you want, forward grip, tac lights, laser pointer, any type of scope imaginable, etc. In certain makes and models, you can tap a lever on the side of the breach and quickly swap barrels from a long rifle barrel to a medium or short carbine depending on the needs of the operator.

Lets face it though, most people aren't going to be using these weapons a lot. Although... more and more people are getting into the AR platform for hunting as a more versatile alternative to the modern Browning BAR auto rifles that people have used for ages for hunting small game. Like the Browning rifles, they come in various calibers from 223 to 308 and beyond. Personally I like the energy delivery of the 308 that my Browning bolt action rifle has, and honestly it would always be a plus to be able to deliver an extra one or two rounds without having to stop to cycle the bolt if the first shot doesn't do the job.

[ex]

I prefer this weapon.  Good for any purpose, although meant as anti-tank.

[|iR|Focalor]

I don't think so. I was watching something on the Military Channel about those last night actually. They were supposed to be anti-tank rifles in WW2 employed by the Germans. Maybe they would've actually pierced the thinner tank armors of the day, but these days, they'd bounce right the fuck off due to the increased thickness of armor, the updated designs of tanks featuring sloped contours that allow artillery to more easily BOUNCE OFF of the armor plating, as well as the inclusion of explosive reactive armor which features layers of ceramic and harder uranium to resist damage better than plain steel. Also, those guns weighed in excess of 50 pounds, which is in addition to the other 70 or more pounds of gear an infantry soldier would already be carrying. Those types of weapons are still in use today, but mostly as anti-personnel or anti-light-armor (such as lightly armored personnel carrying vehicles, not tanks). The modern HE tipped 50 cal rounds could still be used against tanks, but most people would not be crazy enough to use them when there are better options available.

[|iR|Focalor]

This is my favorite rifle at the moment. Browning X-Bolt Medallion .308 with a Bushnell Elite 9x scope. If the target is stationary and I have time to use my angle and range compensating rangefinder, I can pretty much land one on a target no larger than a dime 100% of the time at 150 yds or less. I love this rifle.

[M^tster]

My brother has an AR-15 and I do like the accuracy and the distance it can get, however with the AK-47 you can penetrate a couple walls and still go out to 300 yrds  (with the right setup). I got it because of that and you can drop it in the mud and kick it and pick it up and fire it. I like both but prefer the AK. The .50 cal is a nice weapon and can reach out to a mile plus, but is not optimal for urban combat. Thanks for the replys I do value the input. 

[BIG DICK RICK]

I've heard every argument there is concerning AK versus AR platforms. Personally, I think the 7.62 rounds used by AK47's are just too large for an assault rifle and produce too much recoil to make it the most effective weapon possible. As far as I know, even the Russians no longer use those cartridges and have scaled down to something similar to the AR's 5.56 rounds for increased accuracy in sustained fire.

Nothing against the 7.62. It's not that it isn't accurate, because it definitely is, especially with a bolt action rifle and a scope. But for a gas operated assault rifle that's gonna throw 300 rounds downrange per minute, there's damn near no way possible to control the muzzle and keep it on the target. You're just wasting ammo.

Agreed.  I fired an AR-15 and I've only seen people off youtube and other sites fire ak-47's but watching the recoil on the ak in the videos is just crazy, and since I shot an AR, I know it's not anywhere near as bad as the recoil I see in the videos heh.  I prefer accuracy over power most of the time, but of course I get in that mood of "I wanna fire the big boy, who cares if I can't shoot a 5 ft spread with it firing constantly, it's still fun . 

This video -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZzoB6xBWOI - was pretty badass and makes me shiver at the thought of the power of an ak-47.  You can almost feel the shots being fired in that video and just seeing the power each time one of those bullets hit the windshield, is just fucking nuts.  Granted, the guy shooting is only 15 ft away or so when he fires, but <333 ak-47.  The guy also squatting behind the windshield in that video is fucking crazy, although I know they prolly tested the living fuck out of this, before putting a person behind it, let alone the CEO of the gd company lol. 

[Barton]

Not sure cuz I never fired an AK before. I think I'd like the AR-15 more because:

-5.56 is a more lethal round
-5.56 is the lighter round so I can carry more ammunition
-has less recoil
-is more accurate
-weighs less I think
-has better default sights

[The Happy Friar]

I don't own any explosive based firearms, but my kids and I have a great time with our paintball guns.

Besides shooting the occasional near-death farm critter, I can't justify buying a gun.  I don't hunt, my kids don't hunt, the only wild animals that happen around our place are racoons, rats, mice, various other rodents & deer.  The airgun can take care of the pigeons.

[|iR|Focalor]

with the AK-47 you can penetrate a couple walls and still go out to 300 yrds

Well you're not in the military, and in all likelihood you will never NEED to penetrate walls. A 5.56 round will penetrate walls too, especially an FMJ round, so that isn't something unique to the 7.62. The most practical "use" you will ever have for one of these military style weapons will be home defense, and in such instances, penetrating several walls is a huge no-no. You want to hit the intruder, but what you absolutely do not want is to have bullets leaving your house or apartment and possibly striking an innocent bystander. This is why shotguns and handguns are best for home defense. They are very effective at closer ranges, and usually will not penetrate several layers of sheetrock. The 7.62 FMJ rounds commonly fired by AK's are really not ideal for instantly stopping someone. They are such a high velocity round that usually you don't get the tumbling action that would create larger wound cavitation until it exits the first thing it hits. Unless you hit someone in the middle of the head or the chest and knock them down, the bullet will pass cleanly through the tissue and they will be able to keep moving.

Sure, they're still fun for target shooting or just playing around with, but for practical home defense, they aren't very useful. Now if you're a NVA soldier in the jungles of Vietnam in the 1960's, it's a GREAT weapon. It has good range and enough energy behind it to pass through 2 or 3 soft targets. And like you mentioned, you can submerge yourself and the weapon in a muddy river, come out of the water, and fire almost immediately usually with no issues. Modern AR formats can do this as well, but it's usually advisable to tape up the muzzle and close the dust cover first. Honestly, Colt M4's are not cheap little toys, they are the Cadillac of the military assault rifle world, so why would you NOT want to take proper care of it?

Agreed.  I fired an AR-15 and I've only seen people off youtube and other sites fire ak-47's but watching the recoil on the ak in the videos is just crazy, and since I shot an AR, I know it's not anywhere near as bad as the recoil I see in the videos heh.

I own an old Mauser 1895. It doesn't look all that old though. Back in the late 60's or the early 70's, my grandfather made a new stock for it and converted it into a traditional deer hunting rifle. It shoots 7x57mm rounds, which is pretty damned close to what an AK47 shoots. I don't like shooting it. When my dad gave it to me, I was all excited as piss. I broke it all down, examined everything, cleaned it up, lubed it up, and got it back in perfect working order. I went out and bought a couple boxes of cheap FMJ rounds to shoot targets with out in the pasture, and only got through about half a box before I called it quits. The damn thing was SO FUCKING LOUD and kicked like a god damn mule on roids. Granted the barrel riflings were pretty intense already which added to the recoil, but the 7mm rounds are just so damned big that it takes a big bang to throw it that far. If you compare the actual bullets side by side without the casings, 7.62 rounds look to be TWICE the size of the 5.56's.

-5.56 is a more lethal round

That entirely depends on bullet composition. Unless I'm mistaken, 556 FMJ rounds are lower velocity than 7+mm rounds. The 556's are more prone to tumbling once they initially enter a soft target than the 762s which usually pass straight through the initial target on a relatively flat trajectory. I suppose that would all depend on the distance of the shot and how much velocity and energy the bullet still had upon reaching the target. But I can tell you from first hand experience than 7x57mm hollow points will probably rip a human being into 2 halves if you hit him in the abdomen and he's standing sideways. In fact I'm scared to attempt to shoot a deer with them. I'm afraid it'd blow too much of the meat out of the other side of it.

[|iR|Focalor]

Might as well re-post the old pic of my Mauser. Doesn't look anything like a Deutsch Waffen rifle, does it? Good job, grandpa! Another one of your genius ideas!

[M^tster]

Ar-15 rounds are higher velocity than the AK-47. They travel around 2900-3000 fps, the AK-47 is around 2200-2350 fps, and the AR round will crack a brick but the AK will go straight through it. The kick from the AK versus the AR is not that much more. Just in case you want to see the math here you go.
http://youtu.be/X9aA67Wi7TM     

BTW I also have a Smith&Wesson 3000 shotgun and a Highpoint 9mm for those up close and personal situations (which I'll post a pic of later).

[|iR|Focalor]

Well you can literally look at the two rounds side by side and see that the size of the casings are relatively similar, but what I've always heard is that the 762 has a little more velocity to it, which is the reason why you don't get the larger wound cavities with it in FMJ varieties. I guess that isn't true, although I wouldn't really trust the data obtained from American Eagle rounds to be anything "standard". I'd buy them as target shooting rounds just because they are cheaper than anything else, but they are definitely not well made bullets. I've shot American Eagle 30-06 rounds for years and years, and I've had more of them turn out to be duds than any other brand. If I'm actually hunting, the only thing I consider carrying is Fiocchi or Hornady. Never EVER had a problem with those rounds.

As for the MOA, or bullet drop, being increased with the 762's, that's just common sense. The 762 is a larger round and will have more wind resistance. Effective range of either round will undoubtedly be determined by the size of the barrel, the type of muzzle, and the intensity of the grooves inside the barrel. Part of the reason why the more modern AK's might not get the same range is in how some of manufacturers utilize a ported muzzle. What this does is displace some of the gas pushing the bullet down the barrel through the ports in the top of the muzzle in order to counteract how bad the muzzle would rise if it were not ported. Modern AK's utilize this, and most of the AR carbine varieties do too. In fact, unless it's just a leaf covering part of the muzzle, it appears as though the one you have pictured is completely cut away on the top half of the muzzle. In all honesty, an AK's kick is not what I could call unbelievably horrible, but it's definitely bad enough that I'd prefer something else if I were sent onto a battlefield in a situation where my LIFE was hinged on being able to hit the other guy first. Unless you're in one of those "OH SHIT, I'M FIXING TO DIE" situations, you probably aren't going to want to lean on it and go full auto. But in the event that you do, it'd be nice to know that you could hold a steady line and make each one count.

[M^tster]

Well you can literally look at the two rounds side by side and see that the size of the casings are relatively similar, but what I've always heard is that the 762 has a little more velocity to it, which is the reason why you don't get the larger wound cavities with it in FMJ varieties. I guess that isn't true, although I wouldn't really trust the data obtained from American Eagle rounds to be anything "standard". I'd buy them as target shooting rounds just because they are cheaper than anything else, but they are definitely not well made bullets. I've shot American Eagle 30-06 rounds for years and years, and I've had more of them turn out to be duds than any other brand. If I'm actually hunting, the only thing I consider carrying is Fiocchi or Hornady. Never EVER had a problem with those rounds.

As for the MOA, or bullet drop, being increased with the 762's, that's just common sense. The 762 is a larger round and will have more wind resistance. Effective range of either round will undoubtedly be determined by the size of the barrel, the type of muzzle, and the intensity of the grooves inside the barrel. Part of the reason why the more modern AK's might not get the same range is in how some of manufacturers utilize a ported muzzle. What this does is displace some of the gas pushing the bullet down the barrel through the ports in the top of the muzzle in order to counteract how bad the muzzle would rise if it were not ported. Modern AK's utilize this, and most of the AR carbine varieties do too. In fact, unless it's just a leaf covering part of the muzzle, it appears as though the one you have pictured is completely cut away on the top half of the muzzle. In all honesty, an AK's kick is not what I could call unbelievably horrible, but it's definitely bad enough that I'd prefer something else if I were sent onto a battlefield in a situation where my LIFE was hinged on being able to hit the other guy first. Unless you're in one of those "OH SHIT, I'M FIXING TO DIE" situations, you probably aren't going to want to lean on it and go full auto. But in the event that you do, it'd be nice to know that you could hold a steady line and make each one count.

I agree with this part, but as far as the "going into combat with an AR or an AK, I prefer the AK cause truly there are not that many situations where your enemy is more than 200 yards away, and aware of you at least in the terrain I'm in. Trees everywhere, hilly..etc. I use mid grade ammo most of the time UMC etc, seems to work fine.

[|iR|Focalor]

Seriously, I've even had American Eagle shotgun shells that refused to fire before. Wasn't the shotgun either. Very rarely do I use a gun and not clean it afterwards.