FA+
Shop
935
Views
Views
22
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Photography / Still Life
Species Unspecified / Any
Gender Any
Size 877 x 1280
File Size 404.3 kB
More from C-Rex
Listed in Folders
Oop, looks like another tie!
Just a picture I took as both rifles were cooling off after a few magazines. Finally got the gas tube on my most recent AR-15 to discolor, and managed to discolor the paint a bit.
(yes, safeties are off on both, but both are cleared and pointing downrange)
Just a picture I took as both rifles were cooling off after a few magazines. Finally got the gas tube on my most recent AR-15 to discolor, and managed to discolor the paint a bit.
(yes, safeties are off on both, but both are cleared and pointing downrange)
Category Photography / Still Life
Species Unspecified / Any
Gender Any
Size 877 x 1280px
File Size 404.3 kB
Listed in Folders
Quite nice. Almost looks a bit familiar. I had that same forward grip on mine, since I've never liked normal forward grips that look more like a peg, though after it broke I searched high and low for a sturdy block to mount another AR pistol grip up front, similar to an AMD-65.
Yeah, the A1 length ACE stock with the matching grips make this rifle a really good point-and-shooter, almost as well as the fursuit safe rifle, even. With the laser, it's great, especially once it gets darker(as might be visible in a video I'll see if I can't stick on YouTube in a bit)
But yeah, both rifles have their strong and weak points. This is about my favorite AK, ever, and it's almost a tough call on which I'd rather have if I'd need it, and it comes down to what I'd need it for, a great deal.
But yeah, both rifles have their strong and weak points. This is about my favorite AK, ever, and it's almost a tough call on which I'd rather have if I'd need it, and it comes down to what I'd need it for, a great deal.
If I had an ordnance officer behind me, and a unit to protect me.. Yeah. AR 100%. But alone, with one weapon.. I would say AK.
The AR comes out on top on almost everything.. except for reliability. Americans like tight tolerances, and exacting performance. I know I do. Realistically, if you have an AK fail on the field you are
A. Lucky to witness an AK variant fail
B. Able to repair 90% of the issues you may be having on the field.
The AR is better, but the AK is a good example of "good enough" prevailing. Let me know when a nation puts an M16 on a flag.
The AR comes out on top on almost everything.. except for reliability. Americans like tight tolerances, and exacting performance. I know I do. Realistically, if you have an AK fail on the field you are
A. Lucky to witness an AK variant fail
B. Able to repair 90% of the issues you may be having on the field.
The AR is better, but the AK is a good example of "good enough" prevailing. Let me know when a nation puts an M16 on a flag.
This is my most accurate AK, and even with it's aperture sights, it doesn't come close to keeping up any of my ARs. While feel is pretty subjective, both of these rifles are great, but the AR wins for me by a hair with the vertical foregrip it has, now. Power, yeah, the AK does win that in a short-range match, though at a couple hundred meters, the 7.62(with a BC of .252) is running out of steam while the 5.56(BC of .349) still has more to go. With some of the ammunition for DMRs, it takes the BC even a little higher, with bullets like Sierra's Match King 77gr HPBT Match getting a .372 BC. At ranges like that, though, is where the AR-10s, SR-25/M110s, and M14/M21s are at their best.
Oop, forgot to add one important thing. One of the strongest points for the AK is it's cost. This one was very reasonable, about $400-something a few years ago, and honestly, it's one of the better AKs I have. The ammunition, while the price has risen since mid-'08, after I stocked up on a few thousand rounds, used to cost anywhere from $125 to $160 per 1000 rounds, even less for 5.45. 5.56 has been about twice that, but I reload it to offset costs and control my ammunition (like using a faster powder for carbines; it keeps them cleaner and cooler). While I do have a big 'ol bag of IMI 7.62x39 brass and a nice set of dies for it, it would actually cost me more to reload than it did to purchase the ammo in bulk.
Good steel magazines can be had for $10-12, drums for $100-140, so there's another plus.
Good steel magazines can be had for $10-12, drums for $100-140, so there's another plus.
Heh, I kinda do, though I have a few of both, and it does sort of depend on what mood I'm in. The other upper I built from scratch, I went with a stainless round forward assist.
And I've never had the need to use either.
And I've never had the need to use either.
I like both rifles. Personally I'd favor an AK in a SHTF situation because you can abuse it like nothing else. The accuracy is not great, but having the rear sight mounted towards the rear of the receiver helps improve your accuracy a bit. This was one of the things that the Israelis considered when they designed the Galil.
But I'm sure you already knew that.
But I'm sure you already knew that.
Heh, that's in an altogether different class. While I do like me some .308s, the cost to reload is a bit higher on the FAL, M14, Savage 10, 1919A6, AR-10, and Saiga, so I tend to shoot more .223 and 7.62x39 to balance it out. I almost did buy a CETME at a gunshow last year, it's something I've wanted for a while, but they are notoriously hard on brass.
Heh, ironically enough, the barrel on this AR had a slightly undersized chamber, so I had to get a small base resizing die. But the first day at the range, with a bag full of reloads, I ended up having to pound it on a rock to get the live round out of the chamber. The only plastic on there is the vertical grips, and a little flap on the forward assist, which has gone largely unused. The AK, on the other hand, has the grip, stock, and forend all made of plastic, all of which is Tapco, and isn't as strong as the A2 stock on my other AR. The AK is probably a bit more fragile than the AR, as they both are here, but neither of them really need to be babied at all.
Thanks! I built this one myself. The most complete part I have is the barrel, which had the front sight pinned, and the barrel extension headspaced already. Other than that, I chose each individual part myself. There's also a light on an offset Daniel Defense rail that goes on the right side, and is easily tapped on with your off-hand's thumb. Other than the pistol grips and the little tab for the forward assist, there's not a bit of plastic on here.
Yeah, unless you get an obstruction in the receiver, the FCG, then it won't fire, or in the barrel, then it'll never fire again.
But the same can be said about the AR, though it's harder to get anything in there, but it is generally more sensitive to things getting in there.
But the AR is, generally speaking, more accurate, too. And if you can't hit what you're shooting at, you may as well not be shooting at it at all.
But the same can be said about the AR, though it's harder to get anything in there, but it is generally more sensitive to things getting in there.
But the AR is, generally speaking, more accurate, too. And if you can't hit what you're shooting at, you may as well not be shooting at it at all.
That's more the person shooting it, I'd wager. Or it's bad M1 Sales ARs. And while the 7.62x39 beats the 5.56, the 5.56 still beats the 5.45, and the AR can change calibers easily, and something like a .30 Grendel or .30 Rem AR beats out the 7.62, even if they're not standard rounds, they're certainly an option.
Well, it's still possible, but it's about three feet of drop, another foot in a 10mph crosswind, and 700 ft/lbs, where M855 will do it with two feet of drop, 10" of deflection, and about 600 ft/lbs. After that, though, the 7.62x39 goes rainbow-arched. Short-fat might be a good idea for benchrest cartridges, but certainly isn't an aerodynamic design for bullets.
As for hitting the target, being that it's an AK, just shoot until you hit it. Get hits by mass of fire rather than by precision. But of course, that results in wasting lots of heavier ammo and marking targets for the guys getting shot at, who undoubtedly have an AR-style rifle.
As for hitting the target, being that it's an AK, just shoot until you hit it. Get hits by mass of fire rather than by precision. But of course, that results in wasting lots of heavier ammo and marking targets for the guys getting shot at, who undoubtedly have an AR-style rifle.
hehe, my AK has the grips up front like your AR, ish a AMD 65 if you wanna know what it is.
I also have an AR-15, custom built, mostly stock stuff, minus quad rails, and a 5.56 build. (I dont know the exact words for it, and my computer is going painfully slow, presumely because it is a old-ass mac...
I also have an AR-15, custom built, mostly stock stuff, minus quad rails, and a 5.56 build. (I dont know the exact words for it, and my computer is going painfully slow, presumely because it is a old-ass mac...
That's a pretty good setup so far, then. I've got an AMD-65, myself, and while I don't quite care for the cheek wield, the grips are nice, and it has a pretty surprisingly efficient brake. The AMD-65 was sort of the inspiration for me to find a foregrip like that, well, and my previous foregrip being a plasticy POS, which made me want to use as little plastic on this as possible.
Yep!
The Norinco originally started out looking like this, complete with horrible trigger and a long reach to the forend. The AR, well, I put that together on my own. You can see that, despite the fact that it came to the range pretty well covered in oil, most of that has burned off the barrel and the lower half of the FSB after a few minutes of shooting.
The Norinco originally started out looking like this, complete with horrible trigger and a long reach to the forend. The AR, well, I put that together on my own. You can see that, despite the fact that it came to the range pretty well covered in oil, most of that has burned off the barrel and the lower half of the FSB after a few minutes of shooting.
Personally, i choose the M-16 cause it's more accurate, the AK-47 is less accurate because it shoots hard. The 7.62mm round is heavy, and less ammo can be carried, while the 5.56 mm round is light and much more ammo can be carried. The M-16 also has a very light kick, and therefore would be more accurate. And it won't jam as long as you clean it. :P That's why i like the M-16
Yeah, its VERY reliable, it was desgined to "Sweep the trenches", and so had to withstand the elemnts, so they designed it to be in dirty conditions. The .45 round does certainly pack a punch, espicially when fired from a high caliber machine gun. And it's very accurate, and fires at extremely high rates *With the 50 round drum magazine, up to about 1000 rounds a minute* I'm german, but have a huge love for American guns :P
Well, it'll pack a punch from anything it's fired from. The 1911, for which the .45 ACP was designed for, was intended to stop cavalry charges by taking out the horse. The 10" barrel gave it twice the length to accelerate, giving it more energy. The semi-auto Thompsons use a 16" barrel to comply with the law, and they have a little more power still. Some of the original variants were capable of firing 1,200-1,500 rounds-per-minute, though the later versions, including the M1 Thompson, were reduced to ~650. That wasn't necessarily dependent on the magazine, but the drums had a hard time keeping up with higher rates of fire when they were fully loaded, as the spring had to rotate all 50 cartridges in just the time it took for the bolt to cycle. But because of the size, weight, and noise from the drums, the M1 only was used with stick magazines. But still, it was heavy, and ammunition and magazines are heavy. The gun alone is about twice as much as a light AR.
Yeah, this one is a Chinese model that was made on a milled receiver with some modifications to make it more "sporting" and legal to import, then those features were removed and it was restored. I personally do like the sights better, but I was trained on the M16A2's aperture sights, so that makes sense. I do have another rifle which closely resembles the early AK-47s with a milled receiver, too. And a few from Izhmash, too.
You're going to need a bench grinder to grind off all those annoying, abrasive nubs on that AR.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGi.....A&index=24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGi.....A&index=24
That may point to the wrong video(hard to tell, though, I'm in the basement doing manly things), but I know the one your talking about. The rifle I put together to replace this one actually has had the nubs replaced with a bunch of holes, so it's much more ergonomic, and I can attach accessories all over it. I had put together a 10.5" .300-221 Flapperball Waffle Herp BlackCop several years ago that had a pretty nice handguard, a YHM Smoothie.
Of the top of my head, that'd include the AR, FAL, Sten Mk III, and about anything with a proper steel magazine. Doing it with a cheap AK mag, or with a '74, and you're likely to break your mag. But because of the curvature of the AK-47's magazine, that puts a lot of strain on the rivets and flat plate that holds the mag catch, which could loosen and cause poor mag retention or malfunctions.
accualy, the ak mags r not cheap, as u can do pushups on the ak mag, they r called spetsnaz pushups
click here 2 watch!
click here 2 watch!
The '47, and the AKM, was chambered in 7.62x39, but after the Soviets saw the performance of 5.56x45 they changed a few things and made the '74, which is a 5.45x39 rifle. While they do look quite similar, and many parts are interchangeable, they lightened it up a little bit to make up for the fact that they used the same, therefore heavier, barrel profile, but because the cartridge was skinnier and straighter, it required a totally different magazine, so the '74s magazines are easily identified by their gradual curve, where the '47s have a much greater curvature. And of course, the detail at hand, while most of the '47 mags were made of heavy steel, the '74 primarily had Bakelite and plastic magazines. And of course, now that they're popular in the US, there's likely dozens of companies now making different magazines for them in different materials, but the '74 steel magazines still remain fairly scarce.
Actually, the '74 weighs more; the barrel is the same dimensions externally, but the bore is smaller, so there's more steel to it. They put grooves in the stock, partially to lighten it, and partially so the difference could be felt in the dark. And, of course, the '74 has it's distinctive muzzle brake.
The '74 is pretty much exactly the same, at least for all practical intents and purposes. But you should try an AR; it takes a little more training to use effectively, but I personally think it's a much more precise weapon while not really suffering at close range, particularly with the right optics.
Comments