# AK47 vs. C7 or M16



## Pugnacious (17 Jun 2004)

Greetings!

It Must have been the show on the discovery channel a few months back...M16 vs Ak47.
They showed a whole bunch of ranges tets etc...pretty interesting, and it got me thinking...

I'm wondering what everyone here thinks about the 2 in comparison.
In this case I guess it would be AK74 vs C7.

Also does the C7 suffer the same 'dust jamming' effects as the M16?
BTW: I'm a civillian (so far) so be gentle on me. ;D

Cheers!
P


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

First of all, the Diemaco C7 rifle is a licenced copy of the M16A2 with a few exceptions in difference. The early problems with the M16 was the propellant in the US M193 ball ammo used in the 1960s. That has long since changed, and the ammo has improved, along with changes and mods to the weapon itself, the most important a new heavier bullet (SS109) and a different rate of twist in the bore (1-7, 1-9 are most common, with the A1 version having a 1/12. C7s are 1/7".

Currently the M16 family of weapons has been in service for almost 40 yrs, and its the most combat proven 5.56 x 45mm rifle in existance, with all the bugs worked out of it pretty much anyways. 

I have extreme confidence in the wpns system, and I would carry it anywhere in any theatre anytime.

Now the AK family. Firstly, the AK74 series of 5.45 x39mm weapons has too been around for many years. The AK-47 in 7.62 x 39mm was a solid rifle with a machined reciever from solid stock. In its original configuration, it still will be encountered anywhere in the world by the bad guys or . It was first introduced back in 1947, based on  'asistance' from captured German engineers (remember the MP44) with some Soviet assistance from 'Mike' Kalashnikov. 

I recently examined  about 15 AK47s,  some Russian, and some Bulgarian which were captured by our (Australian) military forces in Iraq. Also there was a large quantity of Russian, Chi-Com (Type 56, and Type 56-1s), Polish, and Romanian AKMs too. All jealously marked in arabic characters on the wood.  These are deemed for museums in Australia. All were well used, and had mix matched parts, as even com-bloc wpns have the body cover serialised along with the gas tube assembly, etc. Wherer as the C7 and US M16s only has the lower reciever serialised. Australia serialises the upper and the bolt carrier at Army base wksp level.

With hen FN C1A1 rifle. The M16s used in the  VN war were mainly A1 versions made by Colt and GM, along with ealy XM16E1s, which strangely enough may still be encountered (upgraded to A1 specs thru attrition back in the 1970s), as the A1 is still in the system here, along with the A2, and M4. Ordering ammo is a nightmare because the A1s use the older M193 ball, while the A2s and M4, along with the F88 Austeyr use the 5.56 NATO SS 109 ammo. 

In 1959 a lighter modified version of the AK was brought into service by the Soviets, called the AKM. A few simpler design changes, mainly the use of a stamped receiver and ribbed body cover, along with 1000m rear sights, a funky angel cut muzzle break, and the provision for a proper bayonet.

Then in 1974 a new type of AK was first seen by Allied Forces in the November military parades in Moscow. The calibre of this was the new 5.45 x 39mm, which was designed to compete with the US 5.56 for accuracy and lethality. The rifle gained popularity in Afghanistan, and again differs slightly from the AKM. The main differences are of course the calibre, an improvement in the bolt, a new muzzle break, and different stock design. The folding stock version folds sideways, and is more robust than the traditional MP40 style folding butt on the AKM and AK47.

The AK74 and its variants can be quickly identified by either orange or black bakelite/plastic type mags, which are not as curved as its 7.62 x 39 cousin, and of course the extended unique looking muzzle break. The rear wooden butt is also slightly different with a groove down the side of it. Recently a new upgraded spear point bayonet has been brought into service. It still cuts wire, and is either black or plum in colour. Its made in Russian and Bulgaria, and has a new ergonomic style of grip, similar in fashion to the ridges on the US M9 bayonet. It will fit on any AKM and AK74 rifle.

Overall the AK family of weapons are traditionally robust and the use of them is easily taught to inferior less trained troops, so even the village idiot can figure it out.

As for the safety, its located on the right hand side of the weapon, and unique to the AK, the first click down is Automatic, and the second click is semi-automatic. On the downside, try moving the safety with gloves, or worse, with the under folding stock on the AKM and AK47 with the stock folded, try moving the safety with gloves on again. Its difficult. There is also a distinct  'clack' when the catch is moved, and this no doubt can be clearly heard on a quiet night.

The sights are traditional following in the PKM GPMG, SKS carbine and M1891 rifle style sighting pictures. The AK74 rifle has an effective range in par with the 508mm bbl M16A2/C7.

The AK also has a LMG version called an RPK in 7.62 x 39mm, and RPKS74 in 5.45 x 39mm. The receiver is slightly more reinforced, different rear sights, and longer bbl, folding bipod, and different butt. There is also AFV short barreled versions too, one being called an AKSU.

Russia is currently pushing yet a new version of the AK74, with Picatinny rail,and the use of plastics instead of wood. The rifle is evolving too, along with its NATO/western counterparts, the Russians too must keep up with the Jones also.

To sum up, the AK is a very good rifle, but has its limitations (no arctic trigger for example), and I too would feel confident to carry and use this weapon in any theartre.

Hope this info helps ya out, and I am sorry for any spelling mistakes as for a while yet I cant edit.


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

As for stoppages, any rifle no matter what needs to be maintained. This includes the AK and M16. The latest lube used by the ADF is the French product Nycolube. Its almost like a jelly, and its viscosity holds up under the extreme heat and jungle conditions here in our tropics. I had given it out in qty of East Timorse troops along with soldiers Papua New Guinea too. They just loved it.

So if these rifles are kept clean and properly lubed, and maintained (with defects reported, yes all rifles break and wear too) they work relitively fine in any condition, but all wpns systems do not work so great with blanks, which are used for trg purposes. As for stoppages involving the action of the M16 FOW, say the bolt, there is a forward assist on the M16 family of weapons which when tapped (not struck) pushes the bolt carrier into battery.

The upper and lower recievers of the C7/M16FOW are made of an alloy material. The way the action is designed, a light alloy works fine, and makes the overall wpn lighter. The bbls on the C7 are also chrome plated, but so are the ones on the AK74 and AKM.

No, the bbls of the M16 are not made of an alloy, and the rifle is NOT disposable, as there are many rumours which used to say so. Also the Russian 5.45 x39mm and  western 5.56 x 45mm are not in any way shape or form interchangeable. 

Another urban legend was the stocks, pistol grips and handguards of the M16 were made by Mattel. That too is a dirty great big giant crock of warm and fresh BS.

The gas systems on the C7 and AK are entirely different too, with the C7 useing direct gas forced thru a small narrow tube with no piston, whilst the AK uses a piston system to cycle the action. The psiton a op rod/bolt carrier are all in one, similar like that of a Minimi LSW/LMG.

Bayonet wise for the C7, an improved stainless bladed version of the US M7 is used by the CF. The US use the M9 bayonet, as do the ADF. Also encountered in Australia is the US M7 bayonet both in M8 and M10 scabbards. The C7 nella bayonet has a unique Cdn designed scabbard. Its plastic and light. The advantage of plastic scabbard is it never rusts, or loses its colour, and it takes shock (it doesnt dent). The KCB 176 Euro bayonet was also trialed here in Australia, but was not adopted. These are the 4 types of bayonets found for the M16FOW. I have seen all versions in service break too, so I cannot really say which ones the best, but all perform adequatly in their own way. The C7 and M7 bayonet do not have wire cutting capability, but the M9 and KCB do.

AKs have serveral different types of bayonets. The early AKs had a primitve one which attached itself in a non-traditional way. The Chi-Coms use a folding cruiform bayonet (wounds from this take longer to heal than a 3rd degree burn), but for export purposes they produce a design like the Russians. There are 3 differnt types of bayonets which fit on the AKM and AK74 rifles. All cut wire, but different countries, Poland for example have a slightly different blade, and the early Chi-Com export model does not have the provison for cutting wire.

The AK FOW have been made by many countries which include the fol:

Russia
China
North Korea
Egypt
Poland
Hungary
Finland (modified Valmet version)
Romania
Bulgaria
Yugoslavia, and more places too.
Plus, Israel's 5.56mm Galil rifle is based on the AK too. 

The M16 FOW has been made in the USA by Colt, H&R, GM, and in recent yrs, by numerous other US manufacturers. It has also been made in the past in the ROK, The Philippines, Singapore and of course Canada.

Colt even has a LMG version of the M16A2 which fires from an open bolt!

There are millions and millions of both types of rifles in existance.



Anyways, I hope I have not bored you to tears. when my mind goes 'techo' its hard to shut off. Again excuse any spelling mistakes.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Jun 2004)

Excellent post Wes! We appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge with us.


----------



## G3RM (17 Jun 2004)

There was a deal on this on the discovery channel about a week ago. It was the AK-47 VS the M16. I'll try to find if they are going to re-run the program.


----------



## Pugnacious (17 Jun 2004)

Wow!
Wes talk about a jackpot of info!
Even though I'm still a civi I'm a tech freak so yah couldn't bore me on this topic.

I'm also glad to here that the Australians are saving some of the captured Ak's for a musiem.
I've seen some pics of the captured weapons and some look like junk, and others are suprisingly nice looking personal works of art IMHO.

Can troops (Can/US/Aus) bring confiscated weapons (one or two) back home for a personal collection?

I esp' have to cry when I see a Dragonov sniper rifle on its way to getting trashed.
They are very hard to get in North America...Russian ones anyway, and very $$$
If I could have one firearm as a civi it would be a Dragonov.

Yah the show was worth it if it comes back on try to see it.
The range footage was pretty neat.
My overview...
The M16 fired crisp clean shots into the target, and had good groupings on 3 rnd burts.
The AK was like an old tommy gun, and to get good shots the guy had to "double tap" or it was all over the place, but it sure was spectacular.
They even slowed down the film on the barrels and you could see the AK barrel flexing on what I'm assuming was full auto.

Another suprise was they set up wood on the range to test the penetrating power, and the M16 shot didn't go through.
But the AK sure did.  This was in refrence to the going through the tree your hiding behind effect the troops in Vietnam reported about.

I'm glad Canada has added its own what some here call 'polite Canadian touches' on the C7, I'm sure I'll be happy to use it if I join up, but I wouldn't refuse a modern  AK either.  

Thanx again Wes, and if yah think of anything else I'm all ears.
Cheers!
P


----------



## Noyon (17 Jun 2004)

Nice post Wes, quite informative.


----------



## brin11 (17 Jun 2004)

Just wanted to add that we used to serialize the bolt carrier in the C7 when the weapons were first issued but no longer do so.  Not sure when they made the change ( I was out of the loop at that time).


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

Of all the AKs out there, the best quality ones I have seen were the Former East German manufactured ones, and the worst 
the Chi-Coms.

The East German AKM has that German quality and machining we all have come to know. Even compare the East German Makrov 9 x18mm pistol to the Russian made type. Its like black and white in the quality of workmanship.

Now as for accuracy, I have had no problem getting 150mm (6 inch) groups at 100 metres with an AKM, and the bit about the bbl flexing, well it might have looked like it, but I assure you it does not. The rifle is as solid as a rock. An AKM is effective out to about 300m, yet on the rear sights, they are graduated to 1000 metres, and the AK47 to 800 metres. Wierd.

Do western countries hold AKMs etc for trg purposes? Well sure we know the US has the OPFOR even with Soviet tanks, and yes the OPFOR has the AKs. Australia also holds them too, mainly for EN force use, but SASR and other SF units also have them for their specific use too. A while back I seen some East German MPiKMS ( 'S" being the designation for the East German  copy of the rifle in side folding stock form) rifles, which were tagged and deemed for destruction. They appeared in great shape, but the tags attched said 'fails headspace', and were signed off by the armourers from the SASR. 

The Yugoslavian version is also nicely made, and even has a grenade launching sight attached to the gas tube. With every country that made the AK, each as its own identifier, for example the AKM with the wooden pistol grip on the handguard is Romainian (plenty of these in Iraq), while a plastic forward pistol grip in grey-blue is Hungarian. Russian AKMs have grasping rails which is sometimes called a beavertail, while others yet are just plain. Wooden furniture on Russian made rifles is laminated (plywood), while other countries use solid wood.

As for selector (safety catch) markings, each country often uses their own language. For example Russian AKs have AB and OU Romanian ones use S R and A, Finland usues  dots, and Chi-Coms use Chinese characters, but export models of their AK (Type 56 and Type 56-1) have the letters L and D. Also the bayonets appear in different colours of resin for the scabbards and grips too. The common thing is they all fit on any AKM or AK74.

Since the collaspse of the iron curtin, these bayonets have become abumdant on civvy street, and can be found in most surplus shops and at gun shows. They have even made their way into Australia too. Seems the most common are the East German ones with black plastic scabbards and yellow coloured grips. Also the EG ones have etched by hand the serial number on the bayonet, and the last 3 digits on the scabbard. Com-Bloc countries are famous for serialising  their bayonets. I have every country's manufacture of bayonet in my collection less Eqypt.

Bloody hell, I ramble dont I.

Any more questions, just yell.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

As for war trophies, here in Australia bringing rifles and pistols back is a big SIN, but it has been done, as sometimes these turn up in crime, and are surrendered in amnesties too. However its not a sin to bring back bayonets and that sort of thing, but I am told the CF wont let you even do that. Personally souviner hunting can prove to be fatal with everything being booby trapped especially in Iraq, so I would not be rummaging around in a dirty old bunker looking for anything. So I guess the ban has its merrits. I had a freind send me a Yugloslavian AKM bayonet (jet black grip and scabbard) from the FRY back in 1992, and even then it was a no-no.

The M16A2 comes in many versions, for example with or without burst control, and with field sights ( like the original C7) or with the funky type which allow the shooter to adjust for windage and elevation on the rear sight. Also it can come in 1/7, 1/9 or still 1/12 twist on the bbl for countries still using the M193 ammo.

As for the M4, well it too has many versions, and the M4 also is made in 9 x19mm too. This to compete with the HK MP5 FOW. Even the Steyr/AUG has a 9mm version too.

The latest wpn system to hit the ADF in 7.62 x51mm NATO is the SR-25. It follows the footsteps of the original AR10 in which the AR15 design was taken from. In Australia, the SR-25 (SR for Stoner Rifle) is used in the counter sniper role by SF.

From memory the main differences between the M16A1 and A2 are as follows:

improved flash suppresor
thicker bbl from the gas block forward
twist changed from 1/12 to either 1/7 or 1/9 (best performance with SS109 is 1/7" twist, however 1/12 can be orderd also)
improved ergo slip ring
round handguards (eliminates L and R, as one guard fits top and bottom)
upgraded upper receiver with casing deflector for LH shooters
choice of rear sights (new or old type)
re-inforced lower reciever
option of 3rd burst control or full auto
safety catch  is marked on the right side (so you can see what it is set to)
ergo pistol grip
longer butt for N size (5/8" longer) (CF uses various butt lengths)
All furniture is made of an improved material
improved butt plate, and butt trap access

Now you can choose the type of upper too, either with traditional carrying handle or flat top with Picatinny rail. It should be noted too that there has always been a hole in the carry handle to attach a scope and now to attach a Picatinny rail mount has also been designed.




Cheers,

Wes


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

Forgot to mention the fron sight. The A2 us a square type, and the C7 uses a thin round type. Thats uniquely a Canadiin thing, its by far superior as the square type actually blocks out a Fig 11 tgt at 200 metres. Not that we usse the front sight anyways now with the C7A1.

Also the rubber stay in the extractor has been modified witha head on it, the older ones are cylinderical.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Jun 2004)

Sometimes I wish I could edit! (but soon).

As for the penetration you mentioned. Yes the 7.62 will carry thru, not dumping much energy into the target. The 5.56 and 5.45 dump most of their energy into the target, and still pass thru, but many times in fragment, thus causing more blunt trauma and intense shock to a body.  The gelletin effects tests using 7.62, 5.56 and 5.45 are quite fasinating. The permanant cavities left by the smaller calibre ammo are much larger than the 7.62.

So the lethality of the 5.56 and 5.45 bullet is greater than 7.62, but the advantage of 7.62 is it will carry on and is more effective on say concrete and sandbags, etc.

As for bullet deflection, well even a 7.62 will keyhole if it hits a blade of grass or a leaf. I have seen that many times on sneaker ranges (you call em jungle lanes). Thats just plain physics.

Bullet wounds are damaging enough, but the outright trauma from a small calibre bullet travelling at 3000 FPS is much more damaging to tissue than 7.62. BTW for the lay people out there, personal body armour does not defeat rifle ammo unless chicken plat is used. 5.56 and 7.62 will generally pass right thru both sides (ouch).

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Pugnacious (18 Jun 2004)

Wow more good info.

Shame about the no collecting thing, but what you say makes sense about crime getting them, and booby traps.

Collecting bayonets is a good alternative.
If I find any intresting one I'll let you know...are you missing any in your collection?
I used to have the US army m9 bayonet/knife (Circa' 1990), but gave it away to a dear friend.

Sorry to ramble on but while I have your attention...have you seen this Russian 'assault rifle'?
http://www.bellum.nu/armoury/wm/A91.html
Sorry I don't know how to do links yet.

I was drawn by the fact that there seems to be a ton of mods for this weapon...even some sort of 'sniper version'.
I also used to have a mov of one being test fired, and it had a pretty unique sound to it.  They say it is ued by the Russain police.

Any experience/info with this one?

BTW: Good info on the body armour, and I have seen arecent news article about a new Russian handgun that uses ammo that will penetrate any body armour..I'll try to find the link.  What is chicken armour you are talking about?
I hope I'm not bothering you too much.

Cheers!
P


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Jun 2004)

In the old days chicken plate used to be titanium, and now its gone ceramic. Its a plate which either slides into the body armour on the front and rear, or infact a larger piece which fits on and over top of body armour. 

I had a squizz at that Russian A-91 wpn that was on the link. Seems more for close range personal protection type a thing than anything else for longer ranges. I see too its made in a variety of calibres including 7.62 x 39mm, 5.45 x 39mm, and 5.56 x 45mm. Not to confuse you, but the latter designation of 45mm refers to the casing length. 

As you can see with all the modern wpns around, the Russians are trying to get their stuff on the int'l market too. Besides that with the Russian ruble doing so crap, they cannot afford western stuff, and they need to continue a small arms industry within their own borders to keep the whole industry alive there.

Here its ADI, Germany HK, China Norinco, USA Colt, KA, Bushmaster etc, Canada Diemaco, Belgium its FN, and so on. That small list isnt even the tip of the iceberg. As you can see the small arms industry is alive and well worldwide, and there is plenty of customers everywhere, some more desperate than others.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Fruss (18 Jun 2004)

Wes, maybe you should stop writing here before Mike charges you for the bandwith and publish a book or something!!  

Anyway, it IS very informative!!  thanks to share your knowledge with us!


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Jun 2004)

Too right mate! ;D


----------



## CI Dumaran (18 Jun 2004)

Indeed Wes!! Great info!

Well... hey, wes, do you know if HK is making an M16 FOW or just the receiver(U & L)?

Merci, all knowing dude!

Cheers.


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Jun 2004)

Sorry mate, I dont know that one, but HK did the upgrade for the A2 mods on the UK L85 (SA80). I had a look at one last November, and I have many pics I took of it and its LMG/LAR bigger brother. Colour coded firing pins, and springs, etc, plus HK marked too, and you should see the 30rd mag. Its like armour plated compared to what we are used to. All HK marked and totally redesigned. BTW its a standard M16 mag, and would fit in a C7, but being good quality steel, its most likely harder than the alloy reciever on the M16FOW.

As for M4 stuff, I had heard that FN was making some stuff, and ADI might even throw themselves into the ring too, but I cant confirm that. HK may indeed be doing some M4 related project also. All Australian M4s are Colts, and some Bushmaster XM15s in SF configuration with short 1/9" bbls, with an alloy floating tubular handguard.

The bulk of M16A1 rifles held in the sytstem are still all pre 1970 VN vintage 'lend lease' from the USA. M16A2s are not that common, but M4s are everywhere, along of course, with the ADI F88 Austeyr family of IWs.

The ADF buys a lot of stuff from FN (master rip off artists and heartless to no end), mainly spares for the QCB 12.7 x99mm M2, and MAG 58  & Minimi stuff. ADI makes some components for the Minimi. Plus we have purchased 'off the shelf' bulk (many thousand) MkIII 9 x19mm Browning Hi Powers to replace the aging fleet of L9A1s ( some going on 40 ys old) and yes, Cdn Inglis's too (all wartime [pre 1945] made).

But gossip wise, FN has developed a 7.62 x 51mm  (NATO) version of the Minimi. I have seen pics of it, but cant remember what its called. When I get back to the Unit on Monday, I'll find out.

I havent been in all week long do to cracking a rib on Monday (yes it was something foolish :blotto, so I dont go back til this coming Monday.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## CI Dumaran (19 Jun 2004)

yikes... you're ok now right?

LOL...

How'd to manage to break a rib? Well,

Thanks for the info.


----------



## 1feral1 (19 Jun 2004)

Well kinda leaving my outdoor spa (40C) after a few too many Cdn Clubs and Coke, slipped somehow on my way out, with barely spilling a drop of my drink.

The next morning and thru the night a bit, it felt like I had been kicked in the ribs, so after a visit to the quack, and a few xrays etc, it was decided that I had a fracture in one of my ribs, and bruised the surrounding tissue, either way I got out of work for a week, and light duties for 10 days (til 30 Jun). 

But it gets better in less than 2 wks I am on my way back to Saskatchewan for the month of July, and before you know it, after Christmas, I am posted! So, between August and December, time should fly, as I wont be home too much will taskings thru Oct and Nov.

Just a silly injury. End of story.


Cheer,

Wes


----------



## AZA-02 (19 Jun 2004)

Wes you could be the new host for the discovery Chanel show "Military clashes"
 :mg:                                                     :blotto:                                                    :fifty:
 :gunner:                                                       :crybaby:                                        :fifty:


----------



## Limpy (23 Jun 2004)

Wow Wes. You remind me of my uncle, he had the same line of work  in his RCEME days. He was one of the guys that had the thankless task of chopping up the Bren guns. Anyway what can you say about the 5.45mm rounds being frowned apon by the U.N. and NATO. I heard this ammunition likes to tumble allot and causes nasty little wounds, and is the 5.56mm much like it or less prone to tumbling?


----------



## Troopasaurus (2 Jul 2004)

The reason why the 5.45 round has a nasty tendancy to tumble is because they are hollowpoint rounds.

     ""to gain maximum effect from the 5.45mm bullet the designers have adopted a design that is very effective but outlawed by interational convention, for the steel-cored projectile has a hollow tip and the center of gravity far towards the rear to maintain the forward impetus and so tumple the bullet. In this way the small calibre bullet can have an effext on a target far in the excess of its cross sectional area." - straight from"The complete encyclopedia of modern military weapons"

In the M16 round this effect just occurs because of the velocity making the round unstable in flight (which may have been adjusted just for this effect - to cause massive damage while not relying on glaser rounds). The round the Russian designers made is specificly designed to tumble. UN and NATO do not like this because there is a treaty against the use of the glaser rounds and hollow points are considered glaser rounds. glaser rounds are any type of round that expands to cause more damage the ban only apply's to militaries using them against each other and obviously does not apply to terrorists and the like. This is also the reason why cutting notches into rounds is a offense in the military as it causes the round to expand.

kind of garbled but hopefully you get the point    :cam:


----------



## 1feral1 (2 Jul 2004)

The 5.45 rd has a trajectory as straight as an arrow (as does the 5.56 too). Like all projectiles it tumbles when it hits mass, as does the 7.62 projectile also.Upon exiting mass the 7.62 projectile comes out backwords still carrying much of its energy!

Where as the 5.45 and 5.56 SS109 tumbles on impact, it dumps its energy into the mass, causing a large permanant cavity compared to the 7.62. Also frags of the jacket produce further injuries to organs, bone, and tissue. There is much energy dumped, but whats left also comes out reverse, causing a large exit hole too.

Fact, yes there is a small airspace in the 5.45 bullet, but so does the 5.56mm SS109 too. So who's copying who? I have cutaways of both types, and the ever so small airspace exists. I also have all the tabulated data on gelitin tests too. Interesting stuff.

In the long run, the effect of shock and trauma caused is effextive beyond doubt.

Anyways, I am jet lagged out and now gonna hit the farter and crash. Tomorrow is another day.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## KevinB (5 Jul 2004)

AI2003,

Do you have a clue what you are talking about?


All boattail bullets yaw when they hit media, depending upon construction and the impact velocity some bullets (5.56mm in general) will fragment (this is achieved at lower impact velocities in bullets with a cannelure - due to its inherint weakening of the bullet jacket).  Longer bullets (i.e. the US Mk262 Mod0 and Mod1 77gr OTM rounds will have more forces directed upon them and will reliably fragemnet in humna tissue at velocities lower than M855/SS109 rounds.

 If you look at Sov bloc wound track of &.62x39 and 5.45x39 bullets they typically yaw and do not fragement.

Anyway I am to tired to deliver a lesson in terminal ballistics - for a comprehensive open source link please see.  http://www.ammo-oracle.com/


----------



## Pugnacious (5 Jul 2004)

Great link thanx!

Cheers!
P.


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Jul 2004)

When I get back to The Great Southern Land, I'll post the info I have on the permanant cavities and frag data for the 5.56 and 5.45, plus some 7.62 too compare.

Good link too!  ;D

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## KevinB (6 Jul 2004)

Wesley, I look forward to seeing that data
In addition the US Army Virtual Hospital has some excellent wound track data online as well - I don't have a link here, as I am on a borrowed laptop while out east.
 When I get back on my home computer I will dig it up.


----------



## 1feral1 (6 Jul 2004)

No worries Kevin. I dont fly back to Aussie for 3wks, but I will post the info. Good reading. The 1st AK74s I seen were Factory 10s from Bulgaria.  Sloppy but nice. The East German MPiKMS in 7.62 were the best quality ever. Like the BMWs of the AK world. These ones were from the SAS, enroute for smelt because of headspace problems.

Well, just got in with a gut full of northern pike, elk and deer, plus Saskatoon berry pie! Yes and after about 10 shots of CC, I am ready for bed. Lets hopw this dampens my jet lag, which is still haunting me.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Troopasaurus (6 Jul 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> AI2003,
> 
> Do you have a clue what you are talking about?



Well I obviously did not know as much as i thought i did, thanks for the link it was very informative. I stand corrected with my post.

(edt. for spelling)


----------



## CF_Lifer (12 Jul 2004)

Basically, the AK-47 is the Russian's improvement on the German's MP44. If you take a look a the two, they look remarkably similar.....Russian Ingenuity my Arse. The AK was designed to be able to be fixed in any Afghani Mud Hut, or bat cave, and does its task to the Letter. It is a very solid weapon, with a good action. The Bullet used makes alot of sense, a large stopping round, but with a much lower range than the 7.62 NATO. It is also a takeoff of the German "Kurz" round, which had a very short casing for the typical 7.92mm round of the day. Expected to be used at ranged under 400m. German weapon designers were way ahead of any Allied concepts, and we seem to be following what they were doing back before WW2, today. When do you take a pop at someone over 400m? The AK family is NATO's lost chance. Though the AK-47 may be crude, its younger sibling, the AK-74 is a much improved weapon. Firing the Warsaw Pact's version of NATO's 5.56mm round,their 5.45mm, it is again meant for closer ranges, which is what seems to be prevailing conflict ranges of this day. 
So AK-74 vs C7? There is about a 25 year design difference, so you really cant compare the two. Even if you take the latest version of the 74, against the latest verson of the C7, there is still a 30 year difference (The C7A2 being designed shortly after the turn of the Millenium).


----------



## KevinB (13 Jul 2004)

AK 74. This is the Russian contribution to the new generation of smaller caliber assault rifles. The bullet does not deform or fragment in soft tissue but yaws early (after about 7 cm of penetration). As this bullet strikes soft tissue, lead flows forward filling the air space inside the bullet's tip. X-rays of recovered fired bullets show that this "internal deformation" produces an asymmetrical bullet which may explain the unusual curve of close to 90 ° made by the bullet path in the latter part of its penetration. 







AK 47. This was the standard rifle used by the communist forces in Vietnam and is used today very widely throughout the world. The long path through tissue before marked yaw begins (about 25 cm) explains the clinical experience that many wounds from this weapon resemble those caused by much lower velocity handguns.





7.62 NATO cartridge with full-metal-cased military bullet. This was the standard U.S. Army rifle until the adoption of the M-16 in the 1960's. It is still used in snipers' rifles and machine guns. After about 16 cm of penetration, this bullet yaws through 90 ° and travles base-forward. A large temporary cavity is formed and occurs at point of maximum yaw





22 Long Rifle. This solid lead round-nosed bullet yaws through 90 ° and travels base-forward for the last half of its tissue path





22 Caliber full-metal-cased (M-16 rifle firing M-193 bullet). This is the standard weapon of the U.S. Armed Forces, although it is soon to be replaced by a new rifle using the same caliber and cartridge but with a longer and slightly heavier (62 grain) bullet.


From the Virtual Naval Hospital http://www.vnh.org/



They did not have data for any of the new rounds -- I have a bunch of close source terminal effects data from our cousins down south if CF guys want, email me on the DIN.


----------



## CF_Lifer (13 Jul 2004)

As Taken from "Combat Guns" - David Donald and Chris Bishop, of Aerospace Publishing

on the AK-74, and the 5.45mm round (Note this book was written in 1987)

"The Soviet Union was surprisingly slow in following the Western adoption of small-calibre cartridges for its future weapon designs. Perhaps the huge numbers of AK-47s and AKMs already in service made such a change a low priority, so it was not until the early 1970s that any intimation of a new Warsaw Pact cartridge was given. IN time it emerged that the new cartridge had a calibre of 5.45mm X 39 and the first examples of a new weapon to fire it were noted. In time the weapon emerged as the AK-74, which is now in full-scale production to meet the requirements of the Red Army; in time it can be expected that the AK-74 will be issued to other Warsaw Pact armed forces.

The AK-74 is nothing more than an AKM revised to suit the new cartridge. It is almost identical to the AKM in appearance, weight and overall dimensions. Some changes, such as a plastic magazine, have been introduced and there is a prominent muzzle brake. There are versions with the usual wooden stocks and with a folding metal stock. 

One matter relating to the AK-74 that deserves special mention is the bullet used. To gain maximum effect from the 5.45mm calibre bullet the designers have adopted a design that is very effective, but outlawed by international convention, for the steel-cored projectile has a hollow tip and the centre of gravity is far to the rear. This has the effect that when the nose strikes a target the nose deforms, allowing the weight towards the rear to maintain the forward impetus and so tumble the bullet. In this way the small-calibre bullet can have an effect on a target far in excess of its cross-sectional area. Same high-velocity projectiles can display this nasty effect, but some, such at the M193 5.56mm cartridge, it is an unintended by-product. on the Soviet 5.45mm the effect has been deliberately designed into the projectile. International conventions have for many years outlawed such "Dum-Dum" bullets and its various progeny, but to date no corresponding strictures appear to have been forthcoming regarding the 5.45mm bullet.

Calibre: 5.45mm
Length: 930mm
Length of Barrel: 400mm
Weight Unloaded: 3.6kg
Magazine: 30rd Box
Rate of Fire: 650 RPM
Muzzle velocity: 900m per second"


----------



## commando_wolf63 (13 Jul 2004)

the C7 came out after my release I trained with the FNC1  I was surprised that the British version of the same rifle had its own breech block with the serial number ingraved to match it's own rifle where as the Canadian version the breech block was interchangeable.


----------



## CF_Lifer (13 Jul 2004)

Matching Breech Blocks with their proper receiver, from the beginning is the best way to go. There are tiny differences between each different Breech Block, and are made to fit their matched rifle perfectly. Interchanging Breech Blocks with different weapons form different grooves in the receiver, as well as in the breech block. Over time, it engraves so many grooves, that it decreases the performance, and accuracy of the weapon. Halfcock proved this it Vietnam, when he matches a Browning .50 with the match Breech Block, and made shots which were unheard of at the time. Especially when you're talking about using a .50 machinegun on semi-automatic. 
The problem of swapping bolts has been fixed with the Armalite-style Bolt carriers, as they are round and smooth, and do not cause grooves like the old C1, FN FAL, and L1A1 Breech Blocks did.


----------



## KevinB (13 Jul 2004)

I would suggest the "Combat Guns"  : go back and find a new hobby their data is flawed, repetion of urban legend.


----------



## CF_Lifer (14 Jul 2004)

I'm only going by what the book says. Being here in Canada, I haven't had much personal experience with the AK-74.


----------



## bossdog (26 Aug 2004)

Well, I'm not a weapons tech nor am I a weapons freak BUT we do bi-annual training on foreign weapons (as many of you may do) and from that I must say, without actually firing an AK series weapon, I don't fully understand why we haven't adopted the weapon here in Canada. I haven't heard of anyone every suffering a stopage (and even the cleanest C7 will jam for unexplainable reasons). It's interchangeability between models (AK74 aside if I'm not mistaken) is second to none and they are more cost effective.

The only problem I see behind adopting it here would be from a political stand point. I think that the folks on Parliament Hill don't like the stigma attached to the AK series and would sooner spend at least 4 or 5 times as much on a more civilized appearing, western model.

My 2 cents.

How about that SKS! Now there's a rifle...


----------



## Pugnacious (27 Aug 2004)

You have a good point about politics.
If this is a factor then I hope it changes, as the rest of the world is moving on past the cold war (mostly).

BTW The Finish use these slick much better I'm told versions of the AK...
http://www.valmet-weapons.com/Sakoseriespage1.html

I'd love to try one, and I have heard only good things about them.
Prob' work quite nice in our simular weather conditions, and enviroment.

Cheers!
P.


----------



## Danjanou (27 Aug 2004)

IIRC (damn mess tins) when the initial SARP was conducted to replace the FN, one of the contenders, along with the FN CAL, HK & C7/M-16 was a 5.56mm version of the AK, either the Valmet or perhaps the Soth African R4/Isrerali Galil. 

Can't recall for sure though as wasn't part of the testing.


----------



## Fusaki (27 Aug 2004)

> and even the cleanest C7 will jam for unexplainable reasons



I've seen a C7 have a stoppage, but never for inexplicable reasons. If you take care of it, the C7 WILL fire.



> The only problem I see behind adopting it here would be from a political stand point.



There's that, and we'd be the NATO country use 5.45mm ammo and mags among other things. And besides, why fix what isn't broken? The C7 is fine and the C7A2 is better, even if it isn't perfect.


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Aug 2004)

That 'AK' in question was the Dutch MN-1 which did the SARP trails. Its was a Dutch manufactured Galil rifle. Although I have never seen a Dutch made Galil, I have seen the South African version in SA (LM4), shot the Israeli 5.56mm and 7.62mm versions, and the Finnish M62 also.

At the end of the day, the Galil is just a 5.56mm AK with a few mods. Early Galil prototypes were built on Finnish Valmet recievers.

As for the Diemaco C7, the M16 FOW have been in service for almost 40 yrs and been around since the 1950s. Problems in the Viet Nam era were propelleant related. Now all these years later the M16 FOW is the only true combat proven rifle in 5.56mm. Its bugs are worked out, and it can only get better with upgrades and different versions. I am fully confident to carry any version of this weapon anywhere.

M16A1s still in service in Australia are all pre 1970 purchase/lend lease. Sure the finish is worn, some even the serial numbers are hard to read, but after being around with the ADF since the mid 1960s, they are like an old Timex, which keep on ticking.

Many Colt A1's, GM A1's and early marked XM16E1s and AR15s (some 5 number digits and with out the ridge around the mag release) are still around, some still with the pre 1968 butts, 3 pronged flash suppressors, and chrome carriers and bolts. All however have A1 uppers with the fwd assist 'tear drop' type.

However as time draws on, these 4500 rifles will adventually meet the smelter, with some kept for historical/heritage purposes.

The new family of the 7.62mm SR25, M4's of Bushmaster and Colt manufacture are now common in SF units, but the rest of us are stuck with the ADI locally made F88 FOW for now.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Spr.Earl (27 Aug 2004)

In the local paper to day they were showing the latest MP7 at the Police Chiefs Convention.
Any info on the MP7 Wes?


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Aug 2004)

Sorry Nick, I am not too much 'in the know' on that wpn.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Spr.Earl (27 Aug 2004)

It's a H.K's new updated version of the MP5.
They showed it in the Paper.

I'll search and send the details.


----------



## KevinB (27 Aug 2004)

MP-7 is HK's newest PDW -  :  Idiotic calibre (4.6)  like the FN P90.

 Nothing we need.

Sorry guys the AR family has nothing wrong with it - and the AK platform is certainly a trip in the wrong direction.

I feel plenty well armed with my C8A2/SFW over here in Afghanistan...


----------



## bossdog (29 Aug 2004)

> I've seen a C7 have a stoppage, but never for inexplicable reasons. If you take care of it, the C7 WILL fire.



Ghost, even though I'm a Jimmy, I hope you're not suggesting that I don't take care of my weapon!


----------



## Fusaki (29 Aug 2004)

Not at all, my friend!! But it is possible that you didn't really _love_ your weapon, and that could have been the cause of our stoppages. ;D


----------



## Pugnacious (29 Aug 2004)

Months ago I started this thread out of total inoccence, and ignorance about the subject, and now that I have had a chance to peek around the web on this topic, I have to say I'm glad that people here are keeping things way more 'civil' then at the other sites I have found.

All I know is I'll be happy to use what ever our Army issues me. 
Besides I'm more worried about some of our politicans then our weapons. 

Could be worse I hear the British SA80 is a real 'dust jammy' nightmare, but that's another subject.

Also... Wes I want to sign up for your book club. ;D

Cheers!
P.


----------



## bossdog (30 Aug 2004)

> I have to say I'm glad that people here are keeping things way more 'civil' then at the other sites I have found.



I'll drink to that!

Ghost -> My weapons name is Lucy  ;D, how's that for love!


----------



## bossdog (30 Aug 2004)

PS - Here is an example of poor love towards a C7...

I was safety staff on a range not too long ago. A certain individual (rank and gender omitted here) proceeded to raise themselves from the kneeling by using the muzzle of their weapon then proceeded to take aim with a muzzle full of grass and dirt!

That would have been an explainable stopage!

The RSO caught the person in time. 

If you take this scenario with an AK-47, the potential damage (in theory) should have been less severe. Even more so with the AK-74 (larger and open concept muzzle flash).

Like I said before, I'm no weapons tech or expert - just my personal uneducated views.


----------



## MG34 (30 Aug 2004)

The outcome would have been the same regardless of the weapon,a plugged muzzle is never a good thing.I don't understand peoples fascination with the AK series,they are overrated pieces of crap that do not deserve their reputation.


----------



## KevinB (30 Aug 2004)

Ditto to MG34.

 Take it from the Infanteers.

MG34 and I amongst others have a vast weapons collection - strangely neither of us feel unarmed with the C7/C8 series.

One of our guys did 600rds in a few min out of his C8SFW full of Afghan dust....

Result - flawless 20 mags...



Gee I guess the weapon has problems eh?


----------



## Pugnacious (30 Aug 2004)

Kevin wrote:
 "MG34 and I amongst others have a vast weapons collection - strangely neither of us feel unarmed with the C7/C8 series."

Sort of related...in Canada just how does one have a "vast weapons collection", from what I have read on the government firearms site NO body can have an AK, not to mention a long list of  juicy "collectables" here in Canada.  
http://www.cfc-ccaf.gc.ca/en/owners_users/fact_sheets/r&p.asp

If there is a legal way around this please let me know, as I'm currently arguing with them right now over a few I'd like to collect. I'm assuming here that you are in Canada.

Also I have read quite a few reports on the AK, and as one weapon tech' I read mentioned... 10 million AK's can't be wrong.

Cheers!
P.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 Aug 2004)

Its called _grandfathering_. In other words they had them before all these inane laws came into effect and were permitted to retain them.


----------



## bossdog (30 Aug 2004)

I don't think this thread is about feeling unarmed with our issued weapons. Don't get me wrong, I find the C7 an extremely fine piece of kit. I believe that this is a great thread about the pros and cons of both weapons.

I for one have gained a wealth of information and insight into the topic.


----------



## MG34 (30 Aug 2004)

Bang on with the Grandfathering clause,in other words if you did not own a firearm in the class of the AK before 1994 you cannot purchase one now.Thank you Liberal government for that one. I have 2 AKs and an RPK,but hardly shoot them anymore they are basically my "fun guns" in other words they turn live rounds into empty casings but don't hit squat.I shoot my AR s almost weekly,and acually get some good training in with reliable operation and acuraccy all rolled into one package.AK for play,AR for serious work.


----------



## Pugnacious (30 Aug 2004)

Ahhhh Ok grandfather clause.
Now I am beyond jealous.    

I have been saving up for a nice Armalite with an Elcan site for practice, but now I find out that even after the safety courses and such I'll still have a transport problem too and from the range.  As the transport permit takes a very very  long time to be issued where I live (our range has no storage).

Stupid Liberals. 

Also this aft' I just finished reading the test report and or overview on the AK family, and all the diffrent types etc,
and a neat section on the M16 family in Peter G. Kokalis's book 'Weapon Tests and Evaluations' from the best of Soldier Of Fortune. ISBN: 1-58160-122-0.  Pretty interesting stuff.

Cheers!
P.


----------



## Gunnerlove (30 Aug 2004)

My father has the full Vietnam set SKS, AK-47, M-14, and M-16. I like shooting them all and think they all shoot fine. My only real problem with the AR family is the fact that you can not fit them with a folding stock. I belive that the C-7 is a great infantry weapon, but as a universal all trades weapon the straight through layout will always hamper it. 

Personaly I am a fan of the ruger mini-14 as it is lite, reliable and compact enough to stay out of my way. And it just feels like a rifle should feel.

Now I am curios what makes the XM-8 a POS? I keep hearing people bash it but what is "really" wrong with the rifle?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 Aug 2004)

> I belive that the C-7 is a great infantry weapon, but as a universal all trades weapon the straight through layout will always hamper it.



Gunnerlove I am really curious about this statement. Can you explain what you mean? I have had never any problem using the C7/C8 in the army or naval enviroment.


----------



## onecat (30 Aug 2004)

The C7 is a good weapon, designed in the 50's but still a great weapon.  And with the American firearms industry creating more and more products for it, it'll be around for years to come.  Are there better weapons out there, sure.  I'm not an expert on the subject, but I think the G-36 is equal to the C7, and FN FAl is by far a better weapon.  But then that's my choice, one in 5.56 designed for the smaller round would be just as light and just as useful.  Is the AK-74 better, no.  Does it get the job done, yes.  Should Canada switch, no.  It doesn't make teh AK a crappy weapon ( as in the words of MG34) its just not designed for the same type of combat style.  Personally I think there too many people that just won;t give soviet style weapons a chance.. and prefer western designs.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 Aug 2004)

I think from your post you doubt the experience of the previous posters when it comes to their experience and opinions on various weapons. Personally I think you are entitled to your opinion but I think you are wrong to dismiss their observations so candidly. I thought I knew quite a bit about firearms, these gentlemen proved me wrong.


----------



## onecat (30 Aug 2004)

No not at all.  I think there are many people on this site who have a great deal of experience and way more than I'll ever get as an FSC tech.  But I'm just stating my opinion on the C-7 and the AK series of weapons.  Because this an Canadian army forum most of the people here will only hve expereince with the C7 and to a limited degree other weapons, and by nature people like what they use most.  And that's the C7.  For me the main reason why I don't like as much as the FAL is that its a dirty weapon.  And yes I know you can clean it, but its still a dirty system.  I've fired the the old C1 it was never as dirty as a C7.


----------



## Gunnerlove (30 Aug 2004)

Ex-Dragoon, I find that the C-7 is always in my way. It is just to damn long to sling out of the way. It is always digging into the ground or catching on a cam net. I find it awkward in trucks and vehicles like the M109 and under gun nets. I find it to be anything but handy, but that is just my opinion. 
If I was going to buy a weapon for myself to to carry in the field while crewing a C3 howitzer the C-7 would not be it. I would want a shorter barrel with a folding stock and the sling swivels mounted on top of the weapon so the weapon could be slung out of the way without snagging or bashing into everything and everybody. 

I have a ton of tools in my toolbox because each one is better at something than the others. Kind of like how the C-9 is a better at being a light machine gun than the C-7 . I just don't think the C-7 is the best weapon for "myself" to carry in the field.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (30 Aug 2004)

Sorry radiohead I misread your meaning. The C1 is one weapon I was not sad to see go but thats my opinion. 

Gunner maybe you guys would be better off with a C8 or even an MP5.


----------



## Pugnacious (31 Aug 2004)

Right now I have not fired any military rifle...be it AK, C7 or what ever, but I have to say while I sat in the recruters office in Victoria my eye kept going back and studying the old FN C1A1mounted on the wall.  That must have been a real beast to lug around, but Kind'a purdy. ;D

Cheers!
P.


----------



## Gunnerlove (31 Aug 2004)

I think the C8 would be a step in the right direction but only a step and the MP5 would result in a drastic reduction in fire power. I would like to see something like the carbine version of the G36 or the G36K as it still fires the full power rifle cartridge. I know, another weapon system to train on but I already train on a half dozen as it is. 

I have heard of reliability issues with the G36 but nothing specific. Does anyone have any real info?


----------



## Roger (31 Aug 2004)

The biggest difference I found between the C7 and the FNC1 was the weight of the ammo, you could carry twice as much. The C1 with 100 rounds weighed the same as the C7 with 200 rounds.

The new Heckler & Koch G11 with caseless ammunition weighs the same with 400 rounds. And it can hold 3, 45 round mags, the two outer ones feed the center. I am impressed.


----------



## KevinB (31 Aug 2004)

G36 Issues: In talking to some of the German SF (KSK types) around here - two stated they were having a lot of troubles with the frame/body fracturing.

Top mounted sling swivels would likely put your sling up into the LOS of your sights...


HK's G11K2 was scrapped = the Germans could not afford it with unification (hence the el cheapo G36)
 Until someone (like the US) steps up to the plate, the caseless ammo system is dead in the water


----------



## MG34 (31 Aug 2004)

Unreal the whole thread has taken a huge step backwards,do you guys even think before you post this nonsense??


----------



## Gunnerlove (31 Aug 2004)

Yeah I would consider frame cracking to be a problem resulting in reliability issues. Thanks for the info Kevin.  
I do think that top mounted sling swivels could be made to work as they seem to work on the C9. I pulled out my telescopic butt last night and it has a slot for a sling on the top , to bad I can't get away with wrenching on my issue rifle.


----------



## greentips (1 Sep 2004)

;D ;D ;D









			
				KevinB said:
			
		

> G36 Issues: In talking to some of the German SF (KSK types) around here - two stated they were having a lot of troubles with the frame/body fracturing.
> 
> Top mounted sling swivels would likely put your sling up into the LOS of your sights...
> 
> ...


----------



## KevinB (1 Sep 2004)

GT, thanks for the pics.  The dual optic on the G36 is an autrocious system as well.

 We have seen French REP folk with Sig551, G36K, FAMAS, and C8SFW's  -- two (that spoke English) said they liked the C8 system best.  

Gunnerlove - the A2 variants all have telestocks -- I was adding telestocks to A1's for the last few years (only way to shoot in armour).  However I think you will find the sling plate design of the A2 superior to top mounting.


----------



## zak (6 Sep 2004)

Kevin B  - is that a c8 or a c8SFW??


----------



## KevinB (7 Sep 2004)

It is the C8SFW w/o KAC RAS - the CF bought just the uppers.  We got them as replacements to the C7A2 uppers (the Infantry needs and wants the carbine)  The CF is calling it the C8A2 upper.  (which gets confusing as the Dutch have a C8A2 which does not have the SFW barrel)...


----------



## Pugnacious (7 Sep 2004)

Silly question...what makes a rifle a Carbine?

Cheers!
P.


----------



## 48Highlander (7 Sep 2004)

length.  a carbine's a short rifle.


----------



## zak (7 Sep 2004)

KevinB- are you saying that the c8 in your picture is a c7a3 lower reciever with a c8 upper reciever w heavy barrel???   If thats the case, is the rest of the combat arms gonna see those or is a piece of kit like that reserved just for operational deployments?


----------



## MG34 (8 Sep 2004)

C7A2 lower receiver with a C8SFW upper.The grand plan is for the units to receive X amount of SFW uppers to issue out to those who require them.They will most likely wind up in Recce Platoon,or be held in the QM until they are required for a specific mission.Frankly I feel this is  a pretty bad idea,the C8SFW should become the new Infantry weapon,not handed out piecemeal. The days of banging it out at long range on the plains of Europe are long gone,as has been said time and time again here most combat engagements take place within 300m.


----------



## KevinB (9 Sep 2004)

MG34 said:
			
		

> the C8SFW should become the new Infantry weapon,not handed out piecemeal. The days of banging it out at long range on the plains of Europe are long gone,as has been said time and time again here most combat engagements take place within 300m.



EXACTLY.

 The decrease in effectiveness for terminal ballistically and external balliticwise are miniscule (from 20" to 16" bbl).  Compared to the ease of usage in tight confines the C8SFW is a handsdown winner.


----------



## Pugnacious (9 Sep 2004)

Is the cleaning and maint' the same for both versions of the C7 mentioned?

Cheers!
P.


----------



## KevinB (10 Sep 2004)

Yes


----------



## zerhash (16 Dec 2004)

MG34 said:
			
		

> They will most likely wind up in Recce Platoon,or be held in the QM until they are required for a specific mission



i think you are right. C8 is an optimum weapon for the infantry, seeing as the majority of what is being done now is close quarter.

for recce i think a better weapon would be an SMG along the lines of a steyr TMP or FN P90. TMP is good for a mission that just requires a PDW and the P90 for missions that need high firepower and RPM for E & E. But then again when was the last time we ventured into a new weapon system


----------



## 1feral1 (16 Dec 2004)

The C7 family of weapons are M16's ( Licensed copy of M16A2s - however the C7A2s are in a class of their own so far). Your poll should say M16A1, you might get a better ballanced vote this way.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## M16 (16 Dec 2004)

Which would you rather use?  A C7/M16 or an AK47/AK74?


----------



## McG (16 Dec 2004)

You do know that while C7 and M16 are variations of the same, the AK74 and AK47 do not share the same caliber.


----------



## Quiet Riot (16 Dec 2004)

If I had a choice on what weapon to use it would take years.... The one that really impresses me is the Steyr aug(i believe this is the correct name), that the australian army uses. It has some really cool features. Like the dual action trigger so there is no need to switch between semi auto and full auto(5lbs semi auto trigger pull, 9lbs full auto) , also i like the fact that it is a bull pup.  i am sure wes can expand on some of the feautres it has.  another weapon that catches my eye is the P90.  anyone have actual experience with this weapon I'd love to hear what you think about it.


----------



## 1feral1 (16 Dec 2004)

The AUG is way over rated (and over engineered), having carried it for 10 yrs ( and repairing them too) , I would rather have an M4 anyday. The only advantage to the AUG is its overall length. SMG length with assault rilfe calibre and range.

Too much plastic, including the hammer and complete trigger mech shy of springs and pins. Lots goes wrong with it believe me,and you can do water ops with it either!

Stick with the C7 FOW.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Pugnacious (16 Dec 2004)

I'm not sure what I'd pick on the poll, as I have not fired any of them yet. 
But just from what I have read, and seen on Documentaries methinks it would depend on the enviroment..ie the AK47 has proven itself in a jungle setting, and I'm kind'a partial to a weapon that is so durable, and one that you could belt someone with without it breaking.

Mind you It would be nice to hit something when you aimed at it, so the C7 would prob' be my overall pick.

When I finally get to try it I'll let you know what I think.  ;D

After the reading I have done I have to say I'm glad that we don't use SA 80's.  Uhg!

Cheers!
P.


----------



## Quiet Riot (16 Dec 2004)

well that's a shame to hear because the aug does look pretty bitchin.....
From what i have heard and read the AK is over hyped but is a great alternative for armies with cash problems and undertrained troops, they require almost no maintence and have a very simple design.   They really showed thier strenghts in vietnam, when most of the troops using them weren't professinal soldiers.     With that being said we should remeber it's not so much the rifle as the shooter behind it that really determines it's effectivness.
What are the issues with the SA80 I've heard some much about them mostly good, although I've never talked to anyone who actually used it for a prolonged period of time.


----------



## 1feral1 (16 Dec 2004)

The old L85 had some issues,and these have been addressed, with everything from new steel mags (the best ever M16 FOW mags I have ever seen), the gas system, to the cocking handle, and even the firing pin spring, etc, getting a make over by HK. Last year, I spoke to some UK soldiers who were in Basra, and the rifle worked well.

The modified rifle is now known as the L85A2 or A2's for short.


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## M16 (17 Dec 2004)

Which rifle would you prefer to use in combat?  An Ak47 or a C7?


----------



## McG (17 Dec 2004)

M16,
You asked this question on the previous page:


			
				M16 said:
			
		

> Which would you rather use? A C7/M16 or an AK47/AK74?


Both times you posted this, your question was superfluous.   The topic of the thread is "AK47 vs. C7 or M16" so asking for a comparison of the weapons on pages 6 & 7 adds nothing.   Did you read the thread?

Stop wasting bandwidth.   Read this thread.   It is full of observations on the pros & cons of both weapons (observations that are much more insightfull that just stating a blanket preference for one weapon just because).

If, after having read the thread, you have a question on some piece of information then you may ask an intelligent & informed question.


----------



## zerhash (18 Dec 2004)

the C7 and AK are differ significantly.
C7s design is SEF trigger mech. AK is SFE. Basicly the AK was designed for machine gun use before rifle. The caliber is even more support for that. the heavier caliber being less accurate than the 556.

At section level the AK would be a beast in close quarter situations. the C7 is more of a prescission weapon that can handle greater range.

i have fired both the AK-74 and the C7 and AR-15. My preferance is the C7. 

as for the P90 it carries a scaled down from 556, 5.7x28mm SS190 round. The SS190 has increased penetration on armor with its pointed steel core. Its effective range is 200m but penetrates low level armor at 50-100.
Its got a funky magazine that carries 50 rounds perpendicular to the barrel. the magazine rotates the bullet before entering the chamber. as for the ejection port. it is on the bottom of the weapon so the shells propel to the ground as opposed to your face.

http://www.remtek.com/arms/fn/p90/index.htm

that link should help you hutch!
First in Last Out!


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Dec 2004)

zerhash said:
			
		

> .
> C7s design is SEF trigger mech. AK is SFE.   The caliber is even more support for that. the heavier caliber being less accurate than the 556.
> 
> At section level the AK would be a beast in close quarter situations. the C7 is more of a prescission weapon that can handle greater range.



What is SFE and SEF? I've been a qualified armourer since 1977, and and I never heard of that 'abbn' before?

True, the 5.56mm calibre has a straighter trajectory (flat and fast) than the traditional 7.62mm. However the 7.62 x 39mm bullet can still kill 'pack animals' at ranges to 1,500 metres (quoted from Russian technical manual, 1966), and one can get a good group (10cm) at 100 metres (at least I did anyways with a Russian 1977 vintage AKMS from the prone).

What do you mean by a 'more precision' weapon?   

I have a great deal of respect for both of these types of weapons, and both have their place.


Regards,

Wes


----------



## KevinB (18 Dec 2004)

Wes,

It HK lingo...

Safe E(semi - the german name) F (german for rock and roll baby  )

and the other way too...

The "heavy" round has nothing to do with accuracy - it is totally possible to make a tackdriving 7.62x39 (in a bolt gun handloading using brass cartidges but totally possible...)


AK - peasant/terrorist etc...  you can sub in target

C8/C7,M4/M16 - soldier  

    ;D



The SA80 even in the A2 is a POS this summer I shot with a few Brits albiet they were not "rifle" people they did nto think much of the A2 upgrades and had a list of bitches the 'rifle folk' had.


----------



## 1feral1 (19 Dec 2004)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Wes,
> 
> It HK lingo...
> 
> ...



Ya, I have seen the SEF on the older HK MP5's etc over the years, the ones we have are the 'bullets' for the designation on theh newer type plastic lowers. What threw me about the SEF thing was the words 'trigger mech'. Too much sun for me I guess.

Being out of the loop of North American gun 'lingo' for 10 yrs now, and I rely on SGN and SAT for my 'int updates' on the stuff we don't use.


Beers,

Wes


----------



## KevinB (19 Dec 2004)

Wes,

 We dont use it here - the "Navy" trigger groups are in the CF HK's.
I simply gathered that is what he meant - as an aside the US SCAR-L required Safe/Auto/Semi for its fire selector.

Cheers


----------



## canuck#1 (23 Dec 2004)

I saw that people wanted 2 know when the show that puts M16 up against AK47 it     is on, just wanted 2 tell u guys when its on. At 8 Greatest Military Clashs with the British sopwith camel vs the German triplane the 2nd is at 9   between the US sherman tank and the German tiger tank and finally at 10 M16 VS AK47 it is all on discovery channel on thurs dec 23 and by the way i live i Toronto so time zone may differ
 
Adam


----------



## Pugnacious (23 Dec 2004)

Yup that's the show I was talking about, pretty impressive.

esp' the part with the pine 4by4rs stopping the M16 round, while the AK47 round blasted right through.

Neat slow motion vid also, the AK just jumps all over the place, but notice the guy fireing it never looses that smirk.  ;D
LOL!

Over all I think it is a well put together show, abit short on topic coverage IMHO, but overall a good one to watch.
Besdies which the general public prob' wouldn't want to see everything field stripped etc, and prob' loose interest.

Cheers!
P.


----------



## hardtail (26 Feb 2005)

I have seen that show too, I believe it said the M-16 would be a better rifle for long range and the AK-47 would be better for close combat . I was also told that the powder use by the original M-16 was improved to be less dirty then the stuff used from battleship powder.
If it was up to me I would deffinetly pick the AK-47 over the M-16 or C-7.


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Feb 2005)

hardtail said:
			
		

> If it was up to me I would deffinetly pick the AK-47 over the M-16 or C-7.



Why is that Hardtail? I was wondering what you are basing your decision on. Not that it matters, but I have heaps of trigger time on both (+25 yrs), and overall the M16 family has the AK beat hands down.

Do you know the difference between the AK-47 (the AK 47 was superceded in 1959 by a lighter modified version) and the AKM or AKS-74? Have you had the chance not just hold one or read about one, but actually fire it til its so hot even gloves don't help.

A few weaknesses I have observed are as follows:

- no hold open after the last rd is fired (thats a bad feature in itself)
- difficulty on moving the change lever (safety catch) with the stock folded, even nearly impossible with gloves on, plus a distinct 'clack' when moving from safe to the firing positions - noisey at night
- no arctic trigger
- poor sights and difficult to zero without a special tool
- difficult for LH shooters to use

The Russians (and other former Com Bloc states) have indeed tried to advance the AK system with the latest variants, but the AK family of weapons is not the best of them all by far.


----------



## winchable (27 Feb 2005)

In the latest British edition of Maxim they did an interview the inventor of the AK-47.
Interesting read.
General Kalashnikov is still alive and serving at 85 years old.


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Feb 2005)

Just in from PT....

Ole 'MT' himself, although he seems to take credit the design, the resemblance to the German 7.92 x 33mm MP44 is just too close. In my opinion (and others) he most likely had several captured German engineers to 'help' him along over the years.

Its a good weapon system, and is supposed to be the most mass produced assault rifle ever made, followed by the M16 family.

From memory the AK-47 (and variants) have been made in:

Russia
Bulgaria
China
Poland
East Germany
North Korea
Egypt
Romania
Hungary
Yugoslavia
Finland (Valmet)
Israel (Galil)
South Africa (R4)

While again to the best of my memory the M16 (and variants) has been made in:

Canada
South Korea
USA
The Philippines
China (copied without licence)

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## KevinB (27 Feb 2005)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> Why is that Hardtail?



Because it works better in Rainbow Six  :


 ;D


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Feb 2005)

Struth Mate!

 ;D

Wes


----------



## Acorn (28 Feb 2005)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> From memory the AK-47 (and variants) have been made in:
> <snip>
> Israel (Galil)



Wes, I thought the Galil was a copy of the FN 5.56 assault rifle of the early '80s (name currently escapes me).

Acorn


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Feb 2005)

The Galil is a modified AK in 5.56 x 45mm. Early Galil prototypes were made on Finnish Valmet M62 (7.62 x 39mm) recievers.

Sure there are many differences, (calibre, ambo safety and sights for example) but the overall gas system and trigger mech are exact copies of the AK, and some parts even interchange with both the Galil, Valmet M62 and the AK itself. I know this because not only had I read about it, I physically had done it myself. Even the Valmet op rod/carrier fits into the AK and the Galil. They say immitation is the best form of flattery.

During the CF's SARP in the early 80's the Dutch MN-1 (Dutch short barrelled SAR Galil) was trialed with the Colt Product Improved M16A2 and the FN herstal's FNC rifle.

You'd be thinking of the FNC. It's made by FN Herstal and licenced copies are also produced around the world.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## big bad john (1 Mar 2005)

Acorn said:
			
		

> Wes, I thought the Galil was a copy of the FN 5.56 assault rifle of the early '80s (name currently escapes me).
> 
> Acorn


You are thinking of the CAL I believe.  Quite different.


----------



## big bad john (1 Mar 2005)

FN FNC


----------



## KevinB (1 Mar 2005)

BBJ - your last pic is that the Swedich AK5 FNC variant?


----------



## big bad john (1 Mar 2005)

AK5


----------



## KevinB (1 Mar 2005)

thx.

 The Belgian Para's had the FNC when we where in Afghan - not terribly impressed...


----------



## big bad john (1 Mar 2005)

Piece of crud, and that's being nice.  It is prone to stoppages.


----------



## 1feral1 (1 Mar 2005)

The FN CAL was a forerunner to the FNC which is the latest type in production, and the original FN Herstal contender for the CF's SARP has changed very little. 

It was the FNC that was trialed with SARP, not the CAL. As you say two different rifles, and this is correct. The FNC is also made under licence in Indonesia where its called the SS1-V1, and SS1-V2 or even called the SS2 depending on who you see or what you read.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## NATO Boy (7 Mar 2005)

ZM Weapons has a very interesting AR Class weapon; the LR- 300 Rifle (the Military one, not civvy conversion.) It apparently uses a gas system that significantly fixes a majority of the flaws of AR-15 M-16 variants and the like. With the right optical sight, this rifle apparently can be deployed as a DMR-class rifle and even achieve an MOA rating on a standard range. I can;t find any info on the Military or Law Enforcement models; but there's some pics of one of the civvy models at http://www.zmweapons.com/lr-300ml.htm.


----------



## KevinB (7 Mar 2005)

ZM is more hype than function.  I shot one and know a few American "civilian firearms enthusiasts" that had them.

  People that can't work the M16FOW should find a new day job.  FWIW, a NIB C7A1/A2 will do MOA (and so will the C8SFW) with issue ammo.

I saw a C8A1 that KAC had a freefloat rail on it do subMoa when I was at KAC - .85 @ 100m with Federal GoldMedal 69grSMK ammo...  10shots


----------



## NATO Boy (7 Mar 2005)

True, but the C7 can't recover it's point of aim quickly (unless the shooter has a very good firing position.) As for full-auto with said weapon, it's effectiveness is also limited to the stance and trigger pull of the shooter (most guys get 1 of 3-4 shots on paper at 100m Standing with a short burst.) Allan Zitta's concept of mounting the gas and return spring system in front of the upper receiver is supposed to reduce recoil significantly (the nodified AR15 action was originally designed as a pistol for fast target acquisition at varying ranges of 100 - 300m) and thus make a great select-fire weapon.

Perhaps I'm overlooking the fact that I haven't had near as much time on the range as Reg Force Infantry (so my judgement of the C7 can be taken with a grain of salt but what made the ZM rifle appeal to me was the improved gas system that uses a piston system (like an AK) but still uses the rest of the M-16 design's merits (ease of use, customization, take-down, e.t.c.) This design could work quite well if implemented into a more rugged design. While the "Mid-Life Upgrade" might make the C7 an even better rifle, the ZM concept could end up the same way...


----------



## KevinB (7 Mar 2005)

Gas Piston ideas have been aroudn for a while - in the M16 platform - they just have not worked well in a military environment - the US Army test the ZM family and found them lacking.

 HK, Lietner-Wise and others have taken up the M16piston concept and gone further -

However a direct impingment system will be more accuracte for you have less moving parts.  Despite all the naysayers that bemoan the system the most mags I've every carried operational was 16 - the C8SFW will do that with nary a hicup.

 When we first got the C7's I fired near 5k rounds out of mine in one day (we had ammo and wanted to see its gag point) - whiel I added some CLP about 3K and the gun was full of a carbon/CLP slurry it still functioned right to the end.

 Now it took about 5min to clean it to close enough for gov't work firing state...

I started with the FN and still dont like piston systems...


----------



## Necro99 (13 Mar 2005)

Bah! It shouldnt be the Ak-47 vs C7A2! It should be AK-47 vs M-14, for they where of the same period. You need to defend the C7A1-2 against the AK-107.


----------



## 1feral1 (15 Mar 2005)

Necro99 said:
			
		

> Bah! It shouldnt be the Ak-47 vs C7A2! It should be AK-47 vs M-14, for they where of the same period. You need to defend the C7A1-2 against the AK-107.



if ya really wanna get anal about it, then it should be AK 47 vs M1 Garand, AKM vs M14 and M16


----------



## TCBF (15 Mar 2005)

The Nikonov.

Tom


----------



## cpl-laing (26 Jun 2006)

ak 47's are ageing pieces of shit,and they have ball tearing recoil..i much rather have a c7 or an m16 plus the have that american look to them ..ak's just look like sticks...

   pte laing


----------



## Big Red (26 Jun 2006)

PTE-Laing said:
			
		

> ak 47's are ageing pieces of crap,and they have ball tearing recoil..i much rather have a c7 or an m16 plus the have that american look to them ..ak's just look like sticks...
> 
> pte laing



Your whole post is garbage.


----------



## KevinB (26 Jun 2006)

Well he is 16 according to his profile...  :


----------



## 1feral1 (26 Jun 2006)

PTE-Laing said:
			
		

> ak 47's are ageing pieces of crap,and they have ball tearing recoil..i much rather have a c7 or an m16 plus the have that american look to them ..ak's just look like sticks...
> 
> pte laing



 ???

Are you on drugs boy?

Ball tearing recoil? Oops, that must be that new magnum version  ;D.  Phuck, I have heard it all! I think we should get this pre-pubecent wannabee lad to become the site's Small Arms SME DS. He's got my vote!


Wes (again lucky I don't have a full bladder right now)


----------



## KevinB (26 Jun 2006)

Well having to stack with a team using them is disconcerting (safety off) 
- I dont like them much -- but at least I have experience with them to back up my argument... (oh like 20 years more that the Dear Pte (cadet?) Laing


----------



## starlight_cdn (26 Jun 2006)

PTE-Laing said:
			
		

> they have ball tearing recoil..



 :rofl: :rofl:

'nuff said...



			
				Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Well having to stack with a team using them is disconcerting (safety off)
> - I dont like them much --



Ya!! Definitely not an operator's design......more like designed for peasant child conscripts to use....hmmmmm.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Jul 2006)

Well compared to a .22cal rimfire, it has quite the recoil, wait till he trys a M1 Garand!


----------



## starlight (30 Jul 2006)

Ball tearing recoil? try an FN or 20 or so rounds out of a fullbore .303


----------



## Good2Golf (30 Jul 2006)

starlight said:
			
		

> Ball tearing recoil? try an FN or 20 or so rounds out of a fullbore .303



...or a Weatherby .460


----------



## Thompson_JM (30 Jul 2006)

Agreed.... The Closest thing Ive used to an AK-47 is the SKS, and the recoil really isn't anything to speak of... Compared to my 12 Gauge Pump... or my Buddy's Remington 700 in 30-06.... That's a Kick.... 

I think the AK is a perfectly fine weapon for what it was designed for, as is the C7... as other much more knowledgeable poster have stated already, its kind of an apples to oranges comparison... But that is simply my personal opinion as I have very limited (read: zero) operational experience with said weapons...


Cheers


----------



## Danjanou (30 Jul 2006)

PTE-Laing said:
			
		

> they have ball tearing recoil..



I thought your balls actually had to drop before you experienced that? 8)


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (30 Jul 2006)

A lot will depend on the training of the shooter and what support weapons he has firing.  I hate fair fights.

I recently put a bunch of rounds through an AK-47.  I found the recoil to be more than a C7 but less than an FN.  Either way it was manageable.  I was able to hit a 500ml bottle of water at 100m.  That's not saying much, I suppose, but it can hit what it is aimed at.  

I found the safety/ cocking procedure a bit counter-intuitive and I kept burning my hands on exposed metal towards the end.  I was covered in gun oil by the end, but that might be because the guys who use the AK in question clean in tn diesel fuel.  I still had fun.  All in all, the AK fits the Soviet model:  reliable effects without many bells/whistles or comfort/human design features.

I'll stick with the C7 for a variety of reasons, including that I don't have a choice in the matter.


----------



## Good2Golf (30 Jul 2006)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> I thought your balls actually had to drop before you experienced that? 8)



Touché!


----------



## GaelicSoldier (7 Aug 2006)

Ball tearing recoil c'mon,

You've all probably seen pictures of the people firing the AK-47 while holding it over their heads.  I'd love to see someone try that with a 30-06 or a 12 Gauge, mind you that's a good way to break some fingers or a wrist.

Granted I'm only 17, but I've had a fair bit of shooting experience for my age.  Belonged to a gun club where I used to live and did some freelance pest controll for some farmers, so I'm relatively familiar with a range of calibers.

Pte. Liang no worries, the longer you are around firearms, the more you can learn.

Cheers :cheers:


----------



## paracowboy (7 Aug 2006)

GaelicSoldier said:
			
		

> I'd love to see someone try that with a 30-06 or a 12 Gauge, mind you that's a good way to break some fingers or a wrist.


 hi-jack> actually, my Dad and Granpa fire scatterguns and rifles one-handed. Not over their heads, mind you.  Generally, they hit what they want to. 'Course they don't do it for anything but giggles. Kinda cool to watch Dad jack a 30-30 lever action with one hand, then aim it like pistol, though. Like the Duke in True Grit. ;D < hi-jack ends


----------



## GaelicSoldier (7 Aug 2006)

Pretty cool, something I'd seriously pay to see.  They could make some money doing gun slinger shows.  Some of the 'old west' entertainment styles are coming back in some places.

Cheers :cheers:


----------



## paracowboy (7 Aug 2006)

oh, Lordy, *NO!*Never give either of them two ol' busted-up cowboys an audience! You guys think *I'm* bad? Where d'ya think I learned it?


----------



## Burrows (7 Aug 2006)

They say gun-slinging comes from the mothers side....just like male-pattern baldness.

So yeah man, I whipped out my AK and totally pawned them infidels.  I went through like, 500 magazines and man did my balls hurt after.  I THINK ONE ACTUALLY GOT TORN OFF.


----------



## GaelicSoldier (7 Aug 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> oh, Lordy, *NO!*Never give either of them two ol' busted-up cowboys an audience! You guys think *I'm* bad? Where d'ya think I learned it?



Just a thought.  I brought that up because I'm actually learning with six guns right now.  Mind you I suck balls but I've only been doing it for 3 months lol.  I've always like watching it done with long guns, looks way better.

Cheers :cheers:


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

GaelicSoldier said:
			
		

> Just a thought.  I brought that up because I'm actually learning with six guns right now.  *Mind you I suck balls * but I've only been doing it for 3 months lol.  I've always like watching it done with long guns, looks way better.
> 
> Cheers :cheers:



Maybe that's the problem.  That probably gets in the way of proper breathing control and trigger release.


----------



## GaelicSoldier (7 Aug 2006)

Good joke at my expense lol.

I'm glad there are some people out there with a good sense of humor!

Cheers :cheers:


----------



## Shamrock (7 Aug 2006)

Late I know, but ball tearing recoil?!  Seriously, which end of the rifle you pointing at the targets?


----------



## Burrows (7 Aug 2006)

He may have tried to re-enact scarface and had his foreskin caught in the breech?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (7 Aug 2006)

"Meet my little friend"


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

GaelicSoldier said:
			
		

> Good joke at my expense lol.
> 
> I'm glad there are some people out there with a good sense of humor!
> 
> Cheers :cheers:



Sorry, Gaelic...I couldn't resist...  >


----------



## GaelicSoldier (8 Aug 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> Sorry, Gaelic...I couldn't resist...  >



 :rofl: Duey, its people like you that have a sense of humor that make life fun  ;D

I love a good joke even if it's at my expense.

Cheers :cheers: and good one but I'll get ya  >


----------



## wolfpl1947 (2 Feb 2010)

All i can say is you can't compare a 7.62mm weapon and a 5.56mm weapon. Both rounds have their pros and cons. That's what i think.


----------



## Journeyman (2 Feb 2010)

wolfpl1947 said:
			
		

> All i can say is you can't compare a 7.62mm weapon and a 5.56mm weapon. Both rounds have their pros and cons. That's what i think.


And you had to bring a 3 1/2 year old thread back to life for that insightful wisdom?!  :stars:

Hopefully I can stop tossing and turning at night now


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Feb 2010)

wolfpl1947 said:
			
		

> All i can say is you can't compare a 7.62mm weapon and a 5.56mm weapon. Both rounds have their pros and cons. That's what i think.



Seeing how you're 16 and have used neither in combat where it counts I scarely say you are qualified to give an answer.

Locked...usual caveats

Milnet.Ca Staff


----------

