NOT a AK vs AR thread exactly, but....

[wetdog1911]

More of a 5.56 vs 7.62 discussion.

I have never owned and likely never will any 5.56 rifle. I first fired one, an Armalite 180 in 1971. Rifle ran like crazy and was a blast to shoot, but the cartridge just did not impress me at all. Then also, reports out of VN of GIs dying with jammed M16s and such. I know, much later, the whole bit of no cleaning kits and the wrong powder being used came out, but that was years later and the bias about the M16 was deeply rooted. Besides that, I was still totally unimpressed with the 5.56/.223 performance compared to 7.62/.30 caliber.

I love .22s and own more than a few. They are all just of the rimfire persuasion.

So, first came the M1A in 1990 and later the AK (SLR95), after I swore I'd never have a commie rifle or ammo. Well, the absolute dependability of the AK and the ballistic similarity of the 7.62x39 to the .30-30 won out in the end. Back then, anything under .25 cal wasn't legal to hunt with and that came into consideration as well. Plus, the cost of ammo. The market was flooded with cheap 7.62 ammo (late 90's-early aughts), with x51@~0.15/rnd and x39@~0.08/rnd. I quit buying guns for several years and just bought ammo as I could afford it.

So, after this boring story, is there anyone else that just prefers 7.62 over the 5.56? Or, am I the only one likely to never own the new "America's rifle"? BTW, if I could ever afford one, the AR-10 would likely trip my trigger.

*I* consider the M1 Garand as America's rifle and it earned that title over 75 years ago. I just happen to have it's offspring the way things worked out.

Rob

[BB57]

7.62x39 and 7.62x51 are two entirely different propositions.

I like the idea of the 7.62x39, as it can be fired in a light rifle like the CZ 527 or the Mini Mark X/Rem 799/Zastava M85 Mini-Mauser, or a Mini-30.

But the Mini-30 gets to the heart of the matter - bore diameter. 7.62x39 has traditionally used bullets with a diameter of .311" to .312". Initially, Ruger used a .308 bore in the mini-30 with a long tapered throat to size a .311 or .312 bullet to bore diameter.
This was because at the time there were no available bullets in the 125 gr weight range for handloaders in .311 or .312 diameter.

However, about 1993 they switched to a nominal bore diameter of .311/.312 once suitable bullets were available for hand loaders.

Thus my issue with the 7.62x39 is that you'll find rifles chambered for 7.62x39 with both .308 and .311/.312 bores. .308 bullets are not accurate in a .311 bore, and .311 diameter bullet selection is limited and really intended for AK type weapons, despite the accuracy potential of the cartridge and the bolt action rifles it is chambered in.

Thus, I avoid it.

-----

I had a similar bias to yours against the 5.56x45 and the M16, until I was issued one. I found the M16A1 to be light, well balanced, accurate, and when you got a decent one, quite reliable, provided you ran it wet and kept dirt and sand out of the action.

The M193 shot out of a 1-12 twist 20" barrel at around 3280 fps will fragment out to about 200 meters and tumble after impact out to about 250 meters. Given that most infantry combat occurs at 300 yards of less, it's not a bad performer.

However, when they switched to M855 in 1-7 twist with the M16 A2, they reduced the velocity and the fragmentation and tumbling ranges.

When they switched to the 14.7" barrel M4 with M855 they severely neutered the terminal ballistics and reduced the effective fragmentation range to about 100 yards. That made the M4/M855 combination comparatively anemic in combat.

----

In terms of the 7.62x51 / .308 Win, I love the round for both long range shooting out to about 800 yards with 168 gr SMKs and out to a 1000 yards with 175 gr SMKs or 175 gr RDFs.

It's also my preferred hunting round using 165 gr SGKs.

[Bullet Bob]

Like Hank Jr, in the song Young Country, I don't draw no lines.

I like 'em all.

7.62x39:



I used an M16 in basic training in 1970, so sentiment demands I have an AR, which shoots better than my mini-14. But I like the Ruger better, it just feels like a proper rifle. Because I'm old, most likely. I've shot "real" M-14's, I wouldn't want to carry one.

I used to have a couple of SKS's and one AK, they just didn't do it for me, for whatever reason, so they found happier homes.

[Pisgah]

Frankly, if I had to flip a coin before going in to battle to decide what rifle I'd get to use, I'd be happy with either one. AR and AK -- each gun, and each cartridge, has its advantages and disadvantages, but in the end -- they'll both get the job done.

Folks who run on constantly about how lousy the AR and the .223 are tend to ignore one unassailable fact -- they have been the standard rifle and cartridge of US forces for more than 50 years now. SOMETHING about them works...

[BB57]

Originally Posted by Bullet Bob

I used an M16 in basic training in 1970, so sentiment demands I have an AR, which shoots better than my mini-14. But I like the Ruger better, it just feels like a proper rifle. Because I'm old, most likely. I've shot "real" M-14's, I wouldn't want to carry one.

The Mini-14 needs some work to demonstrate the same accuracy as an M16 / AR-15.

Below is one of my Mini-14s. It is a 187 series Ranch Rifle with a 1-10 twist barrel. It shot 4-5 MOA when I got it, but after getting a SOCOm length Accu Strut, a .045" gas port bushing, a Choate Browning style flash hider and front sight, a shock buffer, and a Tech Sights rear sight, it now shoots the same 5 shot 1.5 MOA 100 yards groups with M193 that my M16 clone does. IMHO, the end result is what the Mini-14 should have been in the first place.

The AR-15 M16 clone below my Ranch Rifle was built with a police department surplused M16A1 upper half (when they switched to M4 uppers) with a Nodak Spud NDS-16A1 retro lower. I have a Colt SP1 from the same era that also shoots solid 5 shot 1.5 MOA groups.



I like both the AR-15 and the Mini-14, but my Mini-14s get shot a lot more often.



In terms of AKs, I had a Hungarian AKM I paid $275 for and sold for $1500 a few months later after the ATF banned further imports. I also had a Polish Tantal in 5.45x39 that I never much liked, but I still own a Golani that is heavy with it's milled receiver, but is very enjoyable to shoot - but it of course is in 5.56x45.

[chiefdave]

I own each caliber. My introduction to the 5.56 was in 1967 with an early M16 w/o the shell deflector. Being both left handed and left eye dominate things did not go well and I literally hated the AR platform. I did finally did acquire one over 40 years later but with LH ejection and my only auto loading rifle.

On the same day I first fired the 7.62 in a M14. I've been a fan of the .308 and .30-06 since but in bolt guns. Not pictured is my only other center fire rifle, a LH Tikka T-3 .30-06 which also sports Leupold glass.

[BigBill]

The most bang for our buck in 7.62 x 39 is the Chinese norinco sks very accurate too. Mine shoots 1.5” groups at 100 yds. I was never interested in the 223 round nor the over priced black rifles that shoot it. But I did buy a Russian izmash saiga in 223 for $259. I got my foot in the door cheap. I was on my way to drop some cash on a m1a when my dealer offered the Russian izmash saiga in 308win for $289. Both are new Russian ak/akm sporting rifles. I saved money and it wasn’t on my car insurance, lol.

[sheppard]

The 5.56 round is so terrible that the Russians copied it with their 5.45 mm chambered AK-74. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

[vipermd]

The 223 for varmints are shot to medium ranges point blank-300 yds. Loaded correctly it is and has been a very effective for more than 50 years. The 7.62 X 39 is a cheap plinking rifle in SKS or AK47, very reliable, and a decent deer rifle out to about 150 yards. The 308, 7.62 X 51 is a mild recoiling round suitable for deer/bear and othe soft skinned game, and very accurate out to 1000 yards. The 300 black out can be very quiet deer round at 100 yards. All of the rounds have their uses from plinking, hunting to self defense, I will keep all of them, I see know reason to limit myself to one or the other, I like them all. Be Safe,

[44wheelman]

Originally Posted by sheppard

The 5.56 round is so terrible that the Russians copied it with their 5.45 mm chambered AK-74. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

And an AR in 7.62 is not that uncommon.

Brother has an AR upper chambered in 5.45x39; thought abought buying it...until I searched for reloading components.

[BigBill]

The Russians at izmash did find are american calibers of 223 and 308 to be a tad more accurate in the saiga rifles than there Russian calibers. They think it’s the design of our brass case. They did focus on making the saiga rifles accurate.

[Dump1567]

I like them all. Own several .223/5.56, 7.62x39's & x51's in different platforms. My last purchase was actually an inexpensive bolt gun in .223. Shoots under and inch with Wolf Gold (but that was at 50 yards).

And I'll be picking up another WASR AK this week.

I'm going to buy, shoot, sell as needed, and enjoy all I can before going home to be with the Lord.

[gregintenn]

I like em both.

[JJEH]

Originally Posted by wetdog1911

...is there anyone else that just prefers 7.62 over the 5.56?

Yes, me. I have my own reasons as to why and some of it makes me angry and I don't want to get banned from the forum. But yes, I do prefer 7.62x51/.308 over 5.56/.223.

[rich5674]

7.62x39 is a great round for shorter distances. Ak’s are for kids that want to blast. SKS is a great rifle, on average more accurate than a Mini 30. If there ever is a assault rifle ban. Rifles like Ak’s and AR’s will go before top loaders like SKS and Garands. A AR15 can be had in 5.56 or 7.62x39. I had a upper. In 7.62x39 by Hardened Arms, shot well and was accurate. With modern bullets a AR in 5.56 will take down any medium game but I’d more go 7.62 for that purpose. A AR15 is a modular rifle that can be changed to many configurations and many calibers. A Mini cannot compare in accuracy or versatility. You mileage may vary. I’ll stick with my AR’s in 5.56 and Garands in 06 and 7.62x51

[Rubone]

I have and like both, or maybe it is all three. Mini 14 Ranch with an Accu-strut, Mini 30 with a few options, a couple AR 15s (one a preban Sporter Target HB), an M&P10, and like the previous post a Ruger Ranch in 7.62x39 as well as a very accurate Norinco Hunter (milled receiver and long barrel). Also a Savage 24 in .223 over 20ga, so various platforms for similar rounds. They all work well and all have their place in my world. The 7.62-39 is a great pig gun and brush gun, the M&P 10 is very accurate at range, the .223s all do their job, so no complaints from me on any of them! I think it is a non argument.

[sheepdawg]

Originally Posted by sheppard

The 5.56 round is so terrible that the Russians copied it with their 5.45 mm chambered AK-74. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Mikhail Kalashnikov hated the AK74 too.

[moralem]

There is room in the safes for all comers.....my 7.62x39s.