I got to shoot an AK

I had the opportunity to shoot an AK 47. I've always admired these, but after the novelty wore off I felt like it was rather crude. I'm not sure what made me feel that way but it didn't seem to be ergonomically comfortable. Sort of like holding a plank. I realize that these are cheap to make, very reliable and deadly, but it just wasn't as cool as I thought it would be.

Maybe if I were to try one again, I would know more about what to expect.

I haven't shot an AR yet, so if I get a chance to shoot one, I'll temper my anticipation a bit and maybe come away with a better impression.

ak

which one did you shoot? some of them are rough looking some are not. i have several,one is a polytech national match rifle and it is very nice. i have several ar rifles and ak rifles and i prefer the ak.

It is always a matter of personal preference! I have had AK's and I prefer ridged stocked AR's. Collapsing stocks are different ball game. The neat thing is: This is America! We can own all we want ( except for the few "Stans" on both coasts) and make up our own minds, we are even allowed to argue about the merits of each. But in the end I can go to the range and shoot any rifle I want (except my clubs backstop won't handle 50 BMG!)

Ivan

ETA: I can't handle 50 BMG either!

Up front I'll tell you I'm not much of a rifleman. I had a couple AK's and found them to be fun bullet hoses. I own and prefer a AR. Biggest grip for me with a AK is the rear sight. I don't like the sight that far from my eye. Even my Marlin lever gun and 10/22 have Skinner peep sights. Yes, I know there's aftermarket sights.
Shoot both and see which one talks to you. I think at at today's prices the AR is the better bargain.

The only thing I like about the AK is the round it shoots. I have a Ruger Mini-30 that shoots the 7.62x39 and is a nice shooter.

I'm a .30 caliber fan and have a Sig MCX in 300 BLK as well as a Ruger SR762 when longer shoots are desired.

The AR platform is "America's rifle" and so many variants and accessories are available for it that it is ubiquitous here in the States. I also have a Windom Weaponry AR-15 in .223 but consider it a "plinker"

digiroc

I have never had the itch for an AK or an. AR15 but I want one now. I'm going to name it Hillary. Just to add insult to injury.

Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk

The AK has basically been a piece of trash for many decades now. Back in the late 1970's I came upon one at a gun show that some GI had managed to bring back from Viet Nam. It was a beautiful gun. . .well finished, dark wood stock, nicely balanced. I refused to buy it because I would not have such a low-end weapon in my collection. . .big mistake. I have regretted not buying it for years. Once upon a time the AK was apparently a fine weapon. Have not seen another nice one in 40 years.

I got over the urge to own one when I was in Iraq. Shot a bunch of them and carried a folder for awhile, due to the coolness factor.
Bob

Never shot an AK, but I imagine they would fall into the same category as AR's SKS's and M1 Carbines that I have shot.
They just don't ring my bells........

A lot depends on what you shot. An AK is not an AK. Just like a revolver is not a revolver. You can't say a registered Magnum is the same as a H&R or Rohm 22lr just because they're both revolvers.

They are definitely NOT cheap to build, nor easy. A few US companies have been making cheap versions buy cutting corners and the results are bad. Many don't last 5k rounds but they are built for people who generally won't shoot that much in a lifetime.

I'm not sure about the crude part as they were never intended to be works of art or expensive hunting rifles. Ergonomics are a bit different but I don't see a major difference between that and the AR. Adjustable stock...Sure but even the original AR didn't have one. Most AKs have short stocks but it makes more sense when you actually wear a uniform, chest rig, backpack, radio and whatever else a soldier may carry on his body. I have issues with the thin grips but again they are there for a reason. What kind of gloves would you wear in sub zero temperatures? I have the same issue with the thin AR grips. Neither fill my hand.

The sights are pretty much what you find on most European rifles from the first half of the 20th century. In fact they are borrowed from the German Mauser. And in its original role they work very well. Americans tend to sight them in using American methods which doesn't quite work. The AK has a slight different way of being sighted in .....It takes advantage of the 7.62x39 trajectory. It's a bit hard to explain through typing but there are plenty of YouTube videos that show how it's done. The end result is that by aiming for the belt line the shooter will get consistent and reliable center mass (chest area) hits out to 300 yards without the need for sight adjustment. These are not bench guns that put each bullet in the same hole. However if you want to hit someone in the chest at 300 yards they'll do it all day long. Guys with experience a d good eye sight can stretch that out to 500. Under a 100 yards and especially under 50 you don't aim.....You use the front sight as a red dot. Point and shoot. Once again the mind set isn't that of a bench shooter but a soldier in combat. Only thing that's relevant are good hits.

This kinda brings me to ammo. Guys buy cheap ammo and expect superb results.

Here is an AK using Lapua ammo at just under 100 yards. You can see the holes covered up as it was being sighted in


Here is a target shot off hand at 200 yards using a red dot.






Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

rwsmith said:

I had the opportunity to shoot an AK 47. ..... it didn't seem to be ergonomically comfortable.....
......

Click to expand...

Short answer: I agree with Arik. All AK's are not alike. Like any other gun you want one that fits.

Longer answer: The biggest factor for shooting enjoyment for me from an AK-47 is how well it fits me (i.e. comfortable) which comes down to LOP (length of pull). LOP for Warsaw Pact buttstock AK-47's is about 12.5" and for NATO buttstock is about 14". I am average size and the Warsaw Pact buttstock is too short for me. I set up an AK-47 with an AR-15 buffer tube and Magpul adjustable buttstock which was very comfortable to shoot. The buttstock on a MAK-90, albeit arguably ugly, is very comfortable to me although the thumbhole grip is a little big but overall not bad.

The second biggest factor to enjoyment (for me) is ease of sighting and red dots help here.

Finally, the triggers can be atrocious for some AK-47's. A Maadi I once owned was awful but an inexpensive Tapco trigger replacement made it acceptable. The Chinese double hook triggers in general seem acceptable.

A few years ago I had the chance to try out an AK, M4 and Sten, all with select fire. I am no rifleman at all, and never tried to shoot for accuracy. The poiNt was just to blow up some dead branches (a rare commodity where we were out on the prairie) with the various modes of fire.

All I can say is, 30 rounds doesn't last very long on full auto, or even three at a time. I came away with no desire to own any ones of them.

I guess its all in how you set them up. My milled receiver with my 700. I've since improved the cheek riser.



I've also a stamped Norinco that's not as comfortable but its fairly accurate even out to 100 yards with iron sights.

Owned bot AK & AR. The AK did noting for me. I have a friend who owns 6 of them, all different variants. I have shot all of them and did not care for any of them.
The AR was ok, but noting that tripped my trigger. I own one AR to this day for coyotes and other varmints at the ranch. I have to say the AR is plenty accurate and by using the 10 round mags a very handy weapon. It is surprisingly accurate and reliable as long as it is kept relatively clean. But shooting it does not bring any particular enjoyment. Just another tool.
I much prefer a handy sized bolt action.

I believe the SKS is a better built gun than the AK, but for some odd reason, the AK is a LOT more fun to shoot.

As for the AR, I tried to hate it. I finally bought one, built one, and now have a house full of them. They are still cold and impersonal, but I've yet to run across one that wasn't amazingly accurate and dead reliable.

The AK was conceived and designed to be used by largely uneducated troops. Operation and maintenance for those reasons had to be straightforward and simplistic. In that role it has served its purpose well. When I was maintaining guns we always concurred that if you took the top cover off ,held it under a faucet then shook it out occasionally one would probably shoot indefinitely!
Jim

I have owned 2 Ak's along with an SKS that took AK mags (with ak mag retention system, not modified sks). The Egyptian Maadi was a battlefield pick-up; badly scarred, rusted in spots, black spray paint finish, with a plywood "thumbhole" stock. Spent a lot of time on "improvements" that tripled its' value but did not improve the gun. The Zastava was "artwork" AK in comparison, excellent fit and finish, again utterly reliable. The Norinco "paratrooper" was a light and functional "AK substitute." I got it as an exchange for an earlier version that was modified to accept AK mags. First shot dropped the mag on the ground. I eliminated the caliber some years back but if I could have one back it would be the SKS. A short semi with 30 rd mag capacity that wasn't bad looking and had a length of pull for a human over 5 foot tall. Joe

Well, I like to own both the AK and the AR, and have several versions of each....partly because I can. And because there are people in this country who would like to take that right away from me.

That being said, I do have fun with them. Folks on this forum run the gamut from dedicated collectors who own firearms because they are students of firearms development; or they own them as investments; or they own them for hunting; or they own firearms because they like to shoot as in sport or target shooting; or they own firearms for self defense purposes, or they are Law Enforcement Officers or Military, who have firearms because they are tools that they use in their work......or some combination of the above. I think I am one of those combinations. Some guns I like to own just because I can. How many countries in the world allow ordinary citizens to own more or less whatever kind of firearm they want?

With all of that background, I have two class III firearms, one AK, and one AR. I also have a semi auto AR, and several semi auto AKs. Probably the nicest AK that I own is an original milled receiver Poly-Tech that I bought new in, IIRC the late eighties. Maybe early nineties. It is a very nicely made AK.

I really don't shoot them all that much these days, but will pass them on to my sons and grandchildren as part of their heritage of being free Americans.

Best Regards, Les

This one was nice, but......

ronnie gore said:

which one did you shoot? some of them are rough looking some are not. i have several,one is a polytech national match rifle and it is very nice. i have several ar rifles and ak rifles and i prefer the ak.

Click to expand...

This one was nice, but basic. It wasn't badly made. It had a wooden foregrip kind of like the old 'Tommy gun' style. Again, it just felt like I was holding a flat slab. There nothing wrong with the way it shot. I think I was just underwhelmed by the ergonomics. It had a little kick with the intermediate cartridge. Typical Russian, steel cased stuff. I don't know what the effective range is, but it definitely FELT like a close range weapon, which it is. If I were in a jam, I wouldn't throw one away.

100's of millions made............must have something going for them.