Guys I’m hearing some people say the 7.62x39mm (AK and SKS round) has barely more range than a 9mm pistol carbine, something like 200 yards max when fired at a man sized target.

This isn’t really a hunting question, but more a military one of curiosity. Bottom line up front (BLUF), what is the maximum effective range against a man size target for this round? Can one make hits out to 300? Maybe further?

-Jay

Rob Ski of the AK Operators Union 47-74 (YouTube) shoots steel silhouettes from 300-500 yards in most of his videos. The iron sights on various AK’s are marked to 800 or 1,000 meters. Granted, at longer ranges the 7.62x39mm has the trajectory of a mortar. The cartridge gets more bad press than it deserves as many folks consider it the cartridge of evil Commies.

As we used to say when I was in the Marines (69-73), it depends on the angle of the dangle.

You'll find there are a lot of self appointed "experts" who don't actually know what they are talking about. Yeah I know, who'd have thought?

In a more or less standard military loading with a 123 gr FMJ at 2,350 fps in the AK 47 has a 250 meter battle sight zero (270 yards) that lets the soldier set the sights and forget them to engage targets out to about 300 meters with the trajectory being within 5" of the line of sight. At 300 meters it'll still have about 1500 fps and about 600 ft pounds of energy.

The adjustable sliding rear sight elevator is accurate out to 500 meters and at that range velocity is down to about 1100 fps with about 330 ft pounds of energy.

That compares well with a 9mm 124 gr bullet at the muzzle. I have a couple 9mm AR-15s and even when launching a 115 gr bullet at 1500 fps, the 5" point blank zero is 140 yards and the maximum point blank range is only 165 yards - half that of the 7.62x39. At 165 yards the 115 gr 9mm only has 1000 fps and 260 ft pounds.

----

Accuracy wise AK 47 clones vary a bit between 2 MOA and 4 MOA at 100 yards with surplus or very similar Wolf 123 gr ammo.

4 MOA at 300 meters is still inside a 14 inch circle, more than enough to hit a man sized target. And in practice, about 90% of all infantry combat engagements since the start of WWII have occurred at 300 meters or less.

----

For hunting purposes the 7.62x39 has ballistics that are very comparable to the .30-30. The .30-30 launches a 150 gr a bullet at 2,390 fps, giving it almost identical trajectory and terminal ballistics out to 300 yards to the 123 gr 7.62x39. The 123 gr Federal soft point has the same trajectory as the 123 gr FMJ and makes a decent round for deer.

So...for hunting purposes, the choice comes down to a lever action like the Model 94 in .30-30, or to a light and handy bolt action like the Zastava M85 mini mauser or CZ 527.

The lever gun carries very nicely and offers more rapid follow up shots, but less accuracy. I get 1.5 MOA out of my pre-64 Model 94s with a tang sight, but all the post 63's I've owned have been 3-4 MOA guns.

Either of the above mini-mausers are capable of 1 MOA accuracy with high quality ammo, so they have the edge in accuracy, but with slower follow up shots. They also recoil a bit less than the .30-30, which makes the 7.62x39 a good choice for a newer shooter or youth looking for a first medium game rifle.

I see the OP is in Vegas, home of Jim Fuller and Rifle Dynamics. Those are nicely put together rifles, and hard on one’s wallet. Still, those are not MOA rifles.

There used to be a good bit of variation in bore diameter and chamber dimensions for rifles chambered in 7.62x39mm. The Ruger Mini 30 supposedly used a bore that went from .311” to .308” to accommodate mil-surplus ammo; I never checked the one I bought my son in 1995. CZ originally had over-size chambers on the 527 carbines, but changed in 2002. I bought mine in 2003, but it turned out to be three years old. The CZ is more accurate than the Ruger Mini, but not by much.

I have two PSA AK’s, one remains unfired by me. My eyes are old and require optics now. The one I have a scope on shoots cheap ammo into baseball size groups; good Lapua ammo into golf ball size groups off a rest and using bags at an indoor range. By the time our 90°+ days come to an end I should have a mount and optic on the other AK and can try them at longer ranges.

Attached Images

AB8891B4-CA61-469A-A11D-1082188A58CB.jpg (42.9 KB, 42 views)

I bought two new limited run (Davidson's wholesaler) Ruger stainless /synthetic 7.62x39 bolt-actions in 1992. I still have one of these, but fired both guns extensively.

People often compare the cartridge to the .30-30, but I believe the .30-30 is probably at least slightly better as a hunting round. There are better deer cartridges than the 7.62x39, but many today like to hunt with minimal cartridges. They may work, but there are better chamberings available.

I've found the 7.62x39 cartridge to be a better cast bullet cartridge than it is anything else. It's capable of very good accuracy with a 200 grain cast hollowpoint at about 1,700 fps muzzle velocity. For hunting, it's probably at least as efficient and humane as a much lighter bullet at higher velocity.

Back when SKS's were dirt cheap - I used one for a niche I dreamed up - the 'loan out deer rifle'.
Friends that knew I accumulated a lot of hardware and was an avid hunter would often contact me to borrow a deer rifle. I sometimes would get one back with more bumps and bruises than I liked - so had this idea....

Took a SKS, had barrel cut back a few inches. Put an adult sized synthetic stock, shimmed the receiver cover, drilled/tapped, put a fixed 4x scope on it. Installed sling and swivels.
Took it to the range to sight in.
Man was I surprised.
This Third-world junk should not shoot like it did. Steel cased HP ammo kept shooting groups of 2.5" - 3" repeatedly. (100 yds.)
That should not be.

Anyway - it did start filling the need of 'loan out deer rifle'. Our area tends to involve mostly thick woods with shots rarely over 100 yards.
Turns out there must've been a horseshoe in the stock - or something. Everyone that borrowed that rifle took deer with it.
Reports were the Rusky HP's were as effective, if not more so than what one would expect from a .30-30.
Had a friend that, while he had it, did a fair rattle can camo job on it. I didn't care.

So - I'd never underestimate what anything decent in 7.62x39 would do.

__________________
Ret'd LEO
SWCA #2275

Ruger used a .308" bore with a long tapered throat designed to swage a .312 bullet down to bore diameter.

However they stopped doing that in 1992-93 and reverted to a standard .311" bore. A Mini-30 made after about mid 1993 will have a .311 bore. A Mini-30 made prior to 1992 will have a .308" bore. The Mini-30s made in that transition period could have either one as Ruger just used barrels on hand in no particular order.

My shop was on the Eastern Shore of Md. I sold a bunch of those cheap SKS imports back in the day. They were used down in the marsh country to shoot Sika Deer(japanese elk). You could get a cheap scope on the receiver cover mount and those guys loved those rifles. Muck 'em around in the mud etc and they still worked and they dispatched Sikas as well as a 30-30. But a really big sika would weigh 100 pounds. Average about 65. Hell I shot a 6 pointer that field dressed at 47 lb. The rifle would easily dispatch a deer at 200yds if you could hit it. Oh you really had to use real hunting soft point ammo too.

I’ve found the X39 a very good hog gun. Much better than a .223.

Mmmmmm...I'm all for a bacon gun.

I never owned what I would call an "accurate" 7.62x39 (they have been AK's), BUT, a buddy of mine owns one of those mini-Mauser's in 7.62x39, and he gets very good groups at 100 yards - 1 1/2 inches or less. That is using good brass fired in that rifle, neck sized only, and a quality bullet (not sure .311 or .308) So the cartridge itself can be accurate in the right circumstances. I think BB57 is pretty much spot on in his reply.

Larry

"has barely more range than a 9mm pistol carbine, something like 200 yards max when fired at a man sized target."

Anyone who says this is a fool. It is a capable round out to and past 300 yards depending on the shooter and the platform. It will drop more than a 5.56 or a 5.45 at range, yes, but it was designed with shorter range more urban centered combat in mind.

The first Ruger bolt-actions in the early '90s had (according to Ruger Customer Service Manager at the time, Dick Beaulieu) .310" to .311" groove diameters with bore diameters of .3000" to .3015". These bores would shoot many .308" jacketed bullets quite accurately. They were also accurate with cast bullets of .311" or even larger, as I recall.

Lots of folks like to blame their shooting on the gun. Other threads touch on this, somebody who is lacking in natural talent and/or does not shoot much and does not learn much will shoot poorly and it was "that damned gun" or "that cheap factory load". They proceed to buy a better gun and more expensive ammunition in hopes of improving ability. Eventually the excuses make themselves:

"Does that rifle shoot that poorly at 100 yards?"

"Sure does, what a cheapo commie junker, ha ha. Not me at all".

In truth, a good SKS or a new properly built AKM will shoot good enough to hit a man if the shooter does his part out to 400 yards or possibly further if he can use the sights and knows the dope. Even with cheap steel case stuff. A gun that isn't shot out or with a bad barrel or other issue is accurate enough for that. The dope isn't too impressive, in all truth, but it shoots flat enough for a practiced shooter to use practically for combat at those ranges. 200 yards/meters is a gross underestimation. Let us not forget that there are/were plenty of M-16's and M4's with enough rounds through them, loose spec, that would shoot 3.5 MOA eventually and still be judged to be combat effective to 400+ meters.

I'd be more concerned if a skilled marskman, cool under fire and a hardened veteran was taking shots at you at 500 meters with an AKM or SKS, even with irons, then someone who lacks talent AND training with a proper scoped marksman rifle at the same distance. I'd be more afraid of the man than the rifle, and more concerned about a man who can use a less accurate weapon/cartridge than someone who can't utilize a more accurate weapon/cartridge.

Let us not forget line soldiers used to make shots with 45/70 and 455-577 Martini Henrys, ect., at ranges 600+. They didn't always hit their targets, with old fashioned rifled barrels that weren't nearly as good as today's, but with weight of fire they could inflict casualties and make an impact. How many people, the same kind with the big flapping jaws and maws telling OP the 7.62x39 is no good past 200 yards, would tell you a 45/70 can't hit anything past 100 yards because of the dope? Then consider that blackpowder shooters and others can hit targets at long range with cheap home cast bullets.

People have become so obsessed with flat shooting in combat for so many decades people forget that it doesn't neuter a gun to have a rainbow trajectory. Its insane. Is the old spitzer ball better than the old round nose ball? Yep. But if you loaded a 230 grain round nose into a 30-06 or 30-40 Krag, gave it to a decent rifleman, give him some shots to figure out his holdover and sights, you would be a man in severe danger if he wanted to hit you out in the open at 600 yards with a Springfield 03 or Krag.

Awesome, gang.

I actually have a CZ-527 bolt action 7.62x39mm arriving Friday to my gun dealer. I don’t plan on taking it to combat anytime soon, but was just interested what the round was actually capable of as I’ve heard wildly different answers.

I don't know who these "some people" are but they would not say that if they would only read the numbers.

The 7.62x39mm w/125gr has an average velocity of 2350 fps from a 20" barrel. (or there about) I see no reason why it can't be used out to 300 yards with a good scope. (old eyes lol)

Now for the 9x19mm with a 124gr bullet, from a 4" barrel you get about 1100 fps. The velocity from a carbine probably won't top 1250 fps.

Just do the math, the same weight bullet but 1 has a 2350 fps MV and the other only 1100 fps MV. Which will reach out and touch a target further. Add the AK bullet is pointy and you see it hold velocity even better.

The 7.62x39mm will hold 1100 fps out past 900 fps where are that is the 9mm velocity at just over 100 yards. There is no comparison IMO but of course my numbers could be wrong. I hope not.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

This post prompted me to look at the trajectory charts via Google.

Here is the spoiler... the 7.62x39 shoots about the same trajectory as 7.62x51 NATO out to 200 yards. x39 is a lighter bullet generally, but that is still a significant ballistic impact.

Google Image Result for https://www.snipercountry.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Graph-7-.7.62%C3%9739-vs-.308-Win.png

I have had a CZ 527 a couple years now and have been impressed with the accuracy. With handloads and good bullets it will shoot a little over an inch at 100 yds. Does almost as good with the cheap commie stuff. I have shot one deer with it a big doe and she was down right there. I carry this rifle in the truck anytime I head to the woods. The 7.62X39 has impressed me.

JayFramer, the YOM is stamped on the right side of the receiver and barrel at the stock.

In the early years buyers complained of bolt clearance issues and new scope with large adjustment rings. My photo is an older Weaver K2.5 post reticle scope on my Lux .22 Hornet. Twenty years ago CZ and Warne (IIRC) were the only supplier of rings for the 527 series. There are now other companies making the rings and pictany rails are available to fit the receiver dovetails.

CZ is ridiculously proud of their magazines. I found J&G Sales in AZ to have better prices.

A man named Shaun Frame in Ohio designed and made Delrin bore guides for the CZ 527. He graciously gave this to a shooting supply company so it could be reproduced and sold at a reasonable price. Check Brownells and Midway USA.

Of the ten CZ 527’s I have owned, six are still in the family. None of them ever shot to the same POA if they were sighted in using the single set trigger then fired using the trigger in normal mode. Experiment with yours.

Enjoy it.

Attached Images

	4FC0B6A7-2B2E-4ECE-ACA5-611FA38E583C.jpg (31.2 KB, 18 views)
	CB0C83D3-CB55-4CDD-85DA-64C4B233214F.jpg (38.8 KB, 20 views)

Interesting! I'll probably only use the "normal" trigger mode.

OMG! How could anybody spout out such a mouthful of malarkey!

No need to bring out Chronos. Anybody that has seen and shot both doesn't even have to address this.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Thanks, friends.

So it seems the true effective range is somewhere around 300 yards? Should be more than sufficient. The CZ arrives to my dealers today, I’m excited!

THe AK47 could be looked at as the "modern equivalent of a No 1 Mk III SMLE" except for the range. Can be immersed in mud, washed out however you wish, shake it a few times, make certain no mud in the bore and then it will launch 20 rounds down range (up to 300 m) either auto or semi-auto. The SMLE has 10 rounds and is bolt operated but will launch out to 1000 m. Now if in urban combat, I will take the AK even though the SMLE of that vintage had a 17 inch bayonet on the end!! Dave_n

Simplified version :

Take whatever you consider the effective range of 9x19 carbine

Multiply by 2.5 , and you have a conservative estimate of 7.62x39 effective range . ( probably closer to 3x , but being conservative .)

At shorter ranges my Ruger American Ranch in 7.62 is very accurate, the short barrel making it an ideal brush gun and using mini 30 mags is a plus, and my Norinco Hunter with the long barrel is very accurate as well (at least as good as it gets with old eyes and iron sights).

Don’t confuse trajectory with impact. Even if the two have similar trajectories they don’t have the same energy

__________________
“Look life in its iron face”

I've worked with the 7.62x39 cartridge in four rifles, two SKSs and two Ruger bolt-actions since the early '90s. I've used many bullets, jacketed from about 110 grains to 170, and cast from about 150 grains to around 220.

The 7.62 x39 is an accurate cartridge (particularly in a bolt-action gun) that produces minimal recoil and also pretty minimal performance in comparison with many other cartridges. It'll work for deer, hogs, self-defense, etc., but there are better choices. Same for trajectory. I suppose you could even make it into a long-range cartridge as some here seem to have attempted, but that's more of a stunt than something of practical value.

Regardless, we all have different tastes and interests in guns and cartridges and that's good. I still enjoy shooting my lone 7.62 x 39 Ruger bolt-action with 200 grain cast hollow point bullets.

So, did the OP pick up his CZ?

The 7.62x39 is not an inherently inaccurate cartridge. It does have limits on its useful range and those limits are very similar to the .30-30 cartridge. What gives the 7.62x39 a bad reputation is the firearms that are most associated with the cartridge. The SKS and AK were designed as combat weapons. They have loose tolerances so that they will continue to function when very dirty and under extreme conditions. Much of the ammo available is mass produced at minimal cost, again, not conducive to precision accuracy. All those loose tolerances, combined with a thin barrel and cheap ammo, plus crude sights make for a firearm that is less than a precision instrument in terms of accuracy. It's not the cartridge at fault, it's the firearm.

Indeed it's not a bad cartridge at all. It was used as the parent cartridge for the .220 Russian, which was used as the parent cartridge of the .22 PPC, 6mm PPC and 6.5mm Grendel cartridges.

Wander around the firearms internet and you'll find no shortage of experts who should keep their mouths shut. :-)

__________________
I'm with her

You must define the term " range ".
Do you want to know how far the bullet will travel before it hits the ground when the rifle barrel is elevated at the optimal angle, or the max range it will penetrate a one inch thick pine board, or how far it will fairly reliably put down a deer or human being with a decent hit?

I own one 7.62x39 rifle I gave it to my daughter as her deer rifle, lord the things that girl did to that poor H&R handi rifle.

crafty daughters

other than a shorter case, and pointier bullet, in my opinion its basically ballisticly a 30-30 Winchester clone, flight patterns and velocity are almost identical, with the energy nod going to the heavier old west round, that said ive dropped whitetails in their tracts with the old round at 275 yards, at that range the old girl is still delivering more energy than a 230 pill out of a 1911 at the muzzle

being a pretty easy fellow to get along with, I have heard some pretty stupid stuff coming out of the mouth of grown men who swear to seeing things or owning guns that defy Physics

recently had a guy tell me he could and had kill a deer at 1500 yds with his old #4 enfield fake #5 carbine with open sights.

I just asked him was their any powder burns left on the entrance wounds, according to him there was, I lifted my feet to another level higher on the stool I was setting on

I've owned SKS's for years , I have a Paratrooper (16inch barrelled) and a full sized model , both Norinco .. I have taken several whitetails with the paratrooper..
Last year I bought a Ruger American ranch carbine in 7.62x39 ... Sweet little carbine ..

Chinese AK47 to 500yds: Practical Accuracy (Type 56 Assault Rifle)