I am in the market for a AK-47 not the milled receiver but one of the Hi-Cap versions? Preferable with the longer synthetic BUT Stock for full sized AMERICANS. Not the pallet wood or so called laminate shortie made for VC or underfolders or side folders.
Just looking for a good reliable AK with slant muzzle brake adjustable sights for plinking.

I've shot a few AKs. They're fun to blast away with, but I'd never buy one. 6-12" accuracy at 100 yards was my experience with them.

Even when plinking, it's nice to hit something now and then.

See if you can find a Vector arms AK-47. They are built on American made recievers, use new barrels made in the US, and are assembled from either polish or hungarian parts kits. You'll see a huge difference in overall quality and accuracy, and they are priced very reasonably at under $550.00.

I've sworn off AKs but considering what we may be looking at in the near future, they're still tempting. If I were to buy one, I'd go for an underfolder because I like the idea of compact firepower for a gun of that nature. Those Vectors looked nice and have a 5 year warranty but I don't know anyone who's put one through the paces so durability would be a concern. Anyone have a chance to abuse one of these? If so, how'd it fare??

Nebraska, there is a shop that did a 2 year long abuse test on a Vector, follow the link on this post and just scroll down their page past the pistol tests to see the photos and read what they did to it. I bought my First Vector a few years ago, the minute I took it out of the box it was apparent that the overall quality was way better than what I had previously seen in most AK builds, and the first few range trips made a believer out of me. Both of my Vectors are 2 moa @100 yard guns with the cheap Russian steel cased poly coated ammo and standard iron sights, and do much better with handloads. I have 2 of them now, and have put a couple thousand rounds down range between both of them, never had any issues with either of them. Heres the link to the Vector test. Vector test

There are some very accurate AK�s out there. The one�s made by Arsenal and Vepr are as accurate as your run of the mill AR and you still get that legendary AK reliability. If you want the ultimate AK then shop around for a Valmet, but be prepared to part with some cash.

The ones with the milled recievers were early rifles, and had a bad rep, were expensive to make, complicated, and Russian milling machines weren't up to the job. I haven't seen one in a long time.

I don't know when they changed to stamped recievers, but they're supposed to be more reliable. The milled ones are easy to spot because of the "lightening" cuts on the side.

An AK ain't for me. I've owned one, shot a bunch, and been shot at by them. They're a helluva design if putting lead in the air is your primary concern, which they do extremely well, and which they were designed to do...firepower. That's a great and proven military concept, but less applicable to civilian use.

Valmet is an "AK" style rifle, a civilian version. I'd rather have a AR personally over a AK copy, or Chinese AK or whatever.

Im starting to see more and more AK 47's and SKS show up at our local range than AR/15,S. I am currious by human nature, so I ask the AK owners why they like their particular weapon of choice. The most responce I get is the cost of ammo VS the cost of 5.56 for the AR-15, second is availableity of parts, third is the price of the weapon, and fourth home security. Most say that if an intruder ducks behind a wall, most likely that a three round burst through sheet rock & 2X4's or 2X6's you have eliminated the threat. You can own possibly 3 AK's for what it cost for one TOP OF THE LINE AR-15. Iff you look a the SKS than its more than worth the trade off. I have spent more than enough time behind the butstock of a M-16 being a USAF RETIRED NCO. I can tell you that im less, than impressed or inspired to buy a $1000.00 AR-15 when I can probably purchase three AK-47s for the same price. Probbably why the Russian weapon / Chinese made NORTH KOREAN used weapon whooped our AZZ in VIET NAM. Funny that you see more US soldiers in IRAQ and AFGANISTAN carrying AK's when possible. FLAME ON!
HOGBUSTER

Not by my observations but maybe I'm just not looking close enough....

Me neither.

Opening fire with an AK in a combat zone, is a great way to get lit-up by the good-guys though, particularly in a low-light situaton.

I don't recall the battle where the VC kicked our azz either. Must be CRS kickin' in....

You can probably buy four Tarus revolvers for what a Colt Python costs, but what you have is four Taurus revolvers. So what's the point?

I have NEVER seen a US soldier in any films carrying an AK in Afghanistan or Iraq, unless he was Special Forces operating with native troops.

My azz didn't get whupped in Viet Nam.

Gene � The earliest AK�s had a stamped receiver, but they didn�t work. So they went to a milled receiver. I�ve never heard any complaint about milled AK�s other than they�re expensive to build and they�re heavier. There has never been any reliability issues with a milled AK. They finally went back to the stamped version when they worked out the problems associated with the stamped receivers (steel quality, stamping accuracy, welding issues, trunion design).

The Valmet isn�t just a �civilian version.� It�s a semi-auto version of their military rifle. They were made in .223, 7.63x39 and .308. The Finn�s used the 7.62x39 version which IMO is the best general issue military rifle ever built. The Valmet�s are the equal of most AR 15�s in the accuracy department and almost as reliable as a Russian AK. They�re fantastic military rifles.

Hog - The �US Soldiers� you�re seeing in Iraq with AK�s are Iraqi security personnel in US uniforms. While I believe the AK is a better weapon for street fighting, our forces would be unlikely to pick up AK�s over their M4�s for a number of reasons, but a couple that come to mind are:

1. They�ll get their arses chewed if they lose their M4
2. AK�s found in Iraq are generally in fairly poor condition
3. And most importantly, as MontanaMarine pointed out�you don�t want to wander around a combat zone looking and sounding like the enemy.

Where do you find a Valmet??

You have to find them on the used market. Generally go for $1,500-$4,000

The Finn Army rifles are bult by Sako now.

My truck gun and home defense guns are both AK's. The truck has a Romanian WASR 10 with a TAPCO folding stock and my home is guarded by another Romanian SAR 1 with an original military metal folding stock. These are defense guns, not target or hunting rifles. They're cheap so getting scratched up is no big deal. They both can hit plates at 100 yrds offhand, thats all the accuracy I need, reliability is second to none. VEPR's, Vector Arms, Bulgarin SSR-85C-2, Ohio Rapid Fire may all be of higher quality but the cheaper Romanians all work just as well. From what I'm seeing, 7.62x39 sells for about the same price as 5.56, all of which has gone up significantly in the past few years. I'm not against AR's, I'm x army myself, their good rifles, I just think the 5.56 is worthless as a military round. Follow military.com and you'll see alot of criticism on that round over in Iraq and Afghanistan. You may not see our guys carrying AK's, thats against military policy, but they may have them tucked away in case they need them.

There's nothing wrong with owning/using an AK, if that's what you want and like. I point out the accuracy only so HOG' might make an informed decision.

The AKs start about $350, and the ARs about $800. A guy has to make his choices and lay down his money.

My handy little 16" Bushmaster Dissipator loaded up with 77gr Nosler BTHP will keep them easily inside 10" at 500 yards, and is still a handy close-quarters tool. That's easy for me to like.

Well, Kevin, can't cite my sources, so I guess I'm out of luck.

I heard it on the History Channel, the story of the AK. But I can't say there weren't attempts to stamp it before. I know the first ones issued (well, I don't really know, I think I know) that the first miliary ones were milled.

As for the Valmet, it's got an AK style action, but to say it's a civilian version would be iike saying the Mod 70 is a civilian version of the 98 Mauser.

Which isn't a bad comparison, I suppose. Anyway, I can't defend my position, except to say the stamped version, accordign to the somewhat dubious History Channel:" was an improved version.

Great they may be but I'll just have to stay unenlightened for that kind of coin....

Gene �

The first AK�s were adopted in 1947 as the standard infantry weapon of the Soviet Union; however they were mostly a failure. The SKS stayed in frontline service until they abandoned the stamped receiver for the milled version in 1955, and the AK began replacing the SKS as a frontline weapon around 1956.

The stamped version is an improvement, once they worked out the issues involved with stamping. The AKM�s were introduced in 1959 with changes obviously to the receiver but at that time the slanted muzzle nut was added and the rear sight was graduated to 1000 meters instead of the 800 meter sight of the AK47 (or was it the other way around�feeble mind). The stamped AK�s are typically a touch less accurate than the milled receiver rifles. However, the later stamped AK74�s in 5.45x39 are more accurate than either version of the 7.62x39 rifles.

Yeah, me too. I�ve shot a few over the hears and they�re easy to fall in love with�until you see the price tag. They�ve never been cheap, but these days they�re really pricey.

From what I've heard, they are fine rifles. But my question is do you really want to put $1500 in a plain-jane rifle that shoots a round that rivals the 30-30?

That's a lot of bucks for not a lot of bang. Just my opinion, not trying to divert any one who wants to purchase a Valmet.

Hog
I've got a milled Poly tech "NM" stamped AK from years back... prior to the ban. Its far from accurate, but is reliable fwiw, it does keep most rounds in a 12 inch target at 200 yards though, not impressive for a "match" gun.

Ammo costs can be an issue, I agree. But if I were to base my life on that, I'd be shooting a 22...

Availbility of parts..... there will always be more AR parts around, see that our service uses them also... taht should be a MAJOR clue in case folks are a bit dim...

Penetration... a wall won't stop an AR either, I once surprised myself, I needed to foul a barrel before I shot a 600 yard string, so I turned around and we had an old side by side fridge/freezer at 300 yards in the dump.... I lit off 5 rounds of 69s at 300 yards, and later went to look, I found all 5 penetrated side to side... IE first wall, fridge compartment, divider, freezer compartment, other wall and sailed on.... I don't see a wall stopping the AR ammo. In fact in a house I'd rather have an explosive like TAP... shooting through walls in a house can be dangerous to others if no one has thought about that.... and if you have to penetrate the AR has plenty of rounds for it....

Cost wise, the worst AR will outshoot the best AK, so you could possibly get 2 AKs for the cost of an AR. And when we ban cheap imported ammo, SKS stuff wont' be so cheap.... while we'll still be building lots of 223 for us...

I'd rather buy an SKS personally, they have been much more accurate to me. Plus I've ordered more than a few Aks for folks, where they shoot a bit and parts break or fall out. Last time I saw non working ARs was when Armalite was having issues about circa 93 or so.

I'd take a 500 buck AR over a 350 buck AK any day. If I have to proceed back up in power, I'll grab our M14s any day.

I did not realize we got whooped in VN, in fact if you listen to the commanders of VN, had we held out 6 months longer instead of caving to liberal bastards, they'd have surrendered...

And as to AK use by our forces, I'd have assumed you'd know we have lots of SF type forces in country, that they will often use/carry the enemy weapon for report and ammo availability issues... I know we haven't swapped guns here at home yet.

Regards, Jeff

I have sold off all but one AK rifle now. The one I kept was an older Bulgarian SA93, with the milled receiver. This AK will shoot two inch groups all day long with Wolf 124 grain ammo. I keep thinking I will upgrade the furniture, but since I hardly ever take it out of the safe anymore, I will probably just leave it as it is.
I traded a Baikul 9X18 Makarove pistol for this AK. I paid $70 NIB for the little commie pistol, so not including ammo and magazines, I have just $70 tied up in this rifle.

Dang Hogbuster, I said when I got out of the marines in 1970 That I was never going to own an AR or an AK I resisted the AR till a couple years ago but still was adamant about the AK because of the ones I saw/captured and destroyed in SE Asia. After reading the thread you started I find myself considering an AK and a couple cases of ammo for a just in case SHTF seanario but I know myself I am not about to let a firearm and a couple cases of ammo sit around now I have to 1 find a AK I seen a tanker on gunbroker already I am considering putting a bid on.
2. Find a couple cases of mil surp ammo in the can at an afdfordable price. And 3. convince my wife that this is a gun I have always wanted. After thirty years and all the negative stuff I have said over the years about ANY COMMUNIST MADE CRAP never comeing into my house. This is going to get interesting. I had a long talk with my son thre years ago when he bought an SKS about what a hunk of crap any soviet made firearms were. ect ect. Well thanks now I got to eat my words.

Another reason I just thought of to get an AK. Sarah Brady and the Anti American Anti gun coalition says we shouldn't/ can't and they want to make it so we can't. Funny thing about me when any one trys stopping me from doing any thing, I just have to do it any way.

I've owned a few. Most are junk, a few are ok. The two that I really liked were both milled receiver guns. One was an Arsenal brand USA built gun that I paid WAY TO MUCH MONEY FOR. Arsenal dropped of their milled guns and the price skyrocketed, I made out pretty good when I sold it.

The other ( I still own) is a milled Polytech MAK90. I bought this one for a song and went to work hacking and cutting on it to make it the rifle you see in the picture. The gun has never jammed and I can hit a pie plate at 100yds pretty consistanly. I know that doesn't compare to a good AR but that's good for an AK. I think they're a lot of fun to play with.

Terry

Here's mine with all the extra's. I really like the A.C.E. stock (had to make the mounting bracket by hand) and the Galil style handle fits American hands much better. The hand guard and flash hider are just "BLING" I think that's the word for it.

AK's can go bad too


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b9c_1201440552

I have owned both and fired both extensively. Here is Down-lo:

The AK is dead-stock reliable, EVERYTIME. it is legendary for a reason. The mags are so sturdy that I have a steel one I use as a bottle opener, and and I als use it as a primary mag when I head to the range. No AR of any design will ever equaly it's hell-for-stout design. It was also built with MUCH greater tolerances than the AR. The BEST you can ever expect from and AK is 1.5" and that is exceptional.

I right now have a converted Saiga sporter in 223/5.56, and I get 5 into 2.5" @ 100yds, using a williams pep sight mounted in the factory rear sight spot. With optics, I might get better.

AR's are really reat in accuracy and there are so many toys and accessories for them that you will never own enough guns to hang all the stuff on them that is available, and they will shoot rings around an AK any day of the week, with no effort involved, and the mag change is much quicker. Optics for the AK are very expensive when compared to the AR, and frequently you must be careful because I think that much dedicated AK optics are over-priced

The AK's biggest limitation is that much ot it's design, as to sights and ergonomics, were based on pre-ww2 technology, and so you should bear that in mind when looking one over. If you decide to seriosuly look at one, here is what to own and what not to own:

Arsenal and Rapid Fire and Krebs are the best of the best and priced accordingly - $600 - 1000+

The saiga sporters can be converted for about $150 more than the cost of the gun and you will have a real RUSSIAN made gun, but you must do some thing to keep it legal. none tough, but you just need to be aware when you do it. $400 approx

The galil sporters are available at AIM surplus right now for $700 shipped, and that is a great buy.

the STG2000's have a checkcered history. the first ones were crap, but the latest ones seem to be OK. David Fortier and Kokalis liked them, and that is saying something.

The Chinese norinco Milled receiver guns are great but expensive. the stamped guns function great but expect that 4-6" accuracy AK's are known for.

The WASR/Romanian/anything under $400, well, you get what you pay for. they will likely function well, but don't expect them to be accurate, anymore than an M1carbine.

NEVER buy ANY ak with the underfold stock or that Hungarian AMD little wire side-fold. That won't support the gun well and it is little better than a bullet hose


ALOT of people do not understand the basic philosophy of the AK. it was built to be super-rugged and super-simplem and it is. Soviet tactics of the time taught that the SQUAD (unlike the US teaching that the individual) shoots towards the target. Also, thier studies of combat echoed the German and US studies of the 40's & 50's that most combat takes place at less than 200yds, and that holds true thru today. thus, the AK was never at all built to be a snipig or super-accurate tool. it was actually originally called a submachinegun in Soviet terminology and it is the PERFECT example of that, with natural pointing and handling that rivals the AR, and more compact than most AR's

AK's are fun and I like mine alot, but I see it for what it is. If you get and think it is a comparison to an AR, then you are not being fair to the gun or your wallet. Take a look at what you want the gun for, then decide

iambrb,

Very informative post. Thank you.

KS

just the oposite the first AK'S were milled,MK decided they didn't flex enough ,which made then shake loose .

Then MK designed the front and rear trunion blocks and a stamped reciever,which allowed the frames to move!

Bob

Something that's had me thinking about an AK lately, is that you can get 1000 rds of 7.62x39 for about 200 bucks. I love reloading as much as the next guy, but if you just want to blast away, that's a pretty hard deal to beat. 500 bucks +/- a couple and you've got yourself a fun time.

Bob

Check your history, the original design was stamped. You've never seen an early stamped AK because there were so few made, because like I said, they didn't work. Then they went to the machined receiver, which is the early AK's that everyone is familiar with.

It's understandable that you're not informed on this, because the only people who know the original AK's were stamped are full fledged gun-geeks who read gun books 24/7...yeah, I have no life. Check out Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
Look under the section of "Receiver development history"

Iambrb

Excellent assessment. And your Saiga is giving you excellent accuracy. With 2.5 MOA that rifle will do anything you can ask of it in the field. I didn�t realize the Saiga�s were that accurate, I might have to give real consideration to one.

The better AK�s are very capable rifles and even though the AK philosophy is exactly as you say, don�t forget that a decent rifleman turns a quality AK into a formidable combat weapon. You wouldn�t want Russian Spetznaz shooting at you at 600 yards with their AK-74�s because if you kept your head up for long, you would quickly be removed from the gene pool.

With a Chinese (which many don�t realize, are very good quality AK�s � they�re just ugly), I have made 500 yard hits on IPSC targets. No, I didn�t hit them every time I pulled the trigger, but again, if you kept your head up long, you�d regret it.

The problem with American shooters is they read too many gun magazines. Americans think they actually NEED 1 MOA accuracy in their rifles. Few shooters have shot past 300 yards with anything, let alone something like an AK. When you start shooting at distance, you quickly see it�s not all that hard to hit with most anything up to 500 yards. Past that, things begin to get dicey.

If you put an AK in the hands of a relatively unskilled shooter, then it�s really a 100 yard weapon. But if you put it in the hands of an experience rifleman with actual field experience, it performs well beyond what it was intended to be. I think our troops have learned that for street fighting, the AK is an almost ideal weapon. Light,compact, reliable, easy to use and the 7.62 cartridge

Still, I think your assessment is spot on.

I don't know it all by far, but I"m not aware of any AK platform that is head shot accurate at 600 yards.... body shot yes, most SKS are capable of that also, but certainly not head shot accurate??

Hasn't HK built a new rifle that looks like an M4 carbine but has an operating system very similar to the AK-47? That would seem to be the best of both worlds and might offer AR 15 accuracy with AK reliability.

You can have lose tolerances an AK "reliability"
or you can have tight tolerances and accuracy.

It's more than tight tolerances. It is primarily about blowing all that hot sooty gas right back into the chamber in the normal AR setup. AK avoids that. Tolerances matter, but the AR is seemingly setup to have a mess.

Rost - Yes, not head shot at 600, but the last time I checked, body shots hurt too.

Joe & Lewis - The real secret to the AR's accuracy is the gas system. At the time it was invented as the AR 10, the military had established that moving pistons next to the barrel was not a desirable feature because of the effects it has on accuracy, which is why Stoner came up with the system that he did...Just the thinking of the day.

If you consider that, the AR gas system starts to make some sense. Although the AR gas system isn't really ideal for reliability (s#!tting where it lives), the system does work pretty well. But it shold also be noted that the system has been all but universally avoided in subsequent small arms designs around the world.

Kevin

Well you said if you poke your head up... I was thinking, thats not gonna be literal then....

Jeff

Thanks, that is a good explanation and makes a lot of sense.

Hogbuster,
IMO they are all reliable, but none are accurate.
I think it might be the cheap ammo is to blame but I would not waste my money buying expensive ammo to find out.
For a close range ambush they are probably a good choice if you don't have a 12 gauge pump.
They are rough looking crude guns but they do work!
The Romanian Hi-Caps sell pretty well around here.
I have to assume they work pretty well.

Reminds me of a daylight sniper duel I had a front row seat to.

During the early days in Iraq (2003), we were static in Al Kut along the Tigris River. A "sniper" with an AK47 began taking shots at us from across the river. He was somewhere between 500-600 yards away. His fire was inneffective but annoying, a hit could have been fatal of course, but it would have been a lot of luck.

Anyway, there was an SOF team on the rooftop next door to us, and they had a Barrett 50 BMG. They took out the Iraqi with one shot, in dramatic fashion.