# Kalashnikov still the best?



## Devlin (17 Apr 2006)

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act (http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33409)



> MOSCOW (Reuters) - Mikhail Kalashnikov, designer of the world's most popular assault rifle, says that U.S. soldiers in Iraq are using his invention in preference to their own weapons, proving that his gun is still the best.
> 
> "Even after lying in a swamp you can pick up this rifle, aim it and shoot. That's the best job description there is for a gun. Real soldiers know that and understand it," the 86-year-old gunmaker told a weekend news conference in Moscow.
> 
> ...


I'd be interested to here from the KevinB's of the world on this one, as this debate has raged on for many years now


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Apr 2006)

I also seem to remember pictures from the border wars between China and Vietnam back in the late 70s where the Vietnamese army was using captured M16s vice AK47s


----------



## NL_engineer (17 Apr 2006)

I remember reading some wear (probably Soldier of Fortune) that the reason the US forces are using AK's is because the Iraqi people don't notice the sound of it as being out of place.  In the same article said that the US forces are not using any old AK; but an American made one that has a rail system and sights similar to the M16/M4.


----------



## Baloo (17 Apr 2006)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> In the same article said that the US forces are not using any old AK; but an American made one that has a rail system and sights similar to the M16/M4.



In line with S_Baker...I am quite surprised by this, unless it was misinterpreted during the article. I was (still am) unaware that the United States or any company within its contracts manufactured the Automat Kalashnikov, in any variant.


----------



## Armymedic (17 Apr 2006)

Just because it is popular and readily available doesn't mean it is the best.


----------



## Jungle (17 Apr 2006)

Baloo said:
			
		

> In line with S_Baker...I am quite surprised by this, unless it was misinterpreted during the article. I was (still am) unaware that the United States or any company within its contracts manufactured the Automat Kalashnikov, in any variant.


Look here: http://www.quarterbore.com/kac/sr47.html It is NOT an AK, but a very interesting design...
I don't know the status of the rifle, but they exist.


----------



## Big Red (17 Apr 2006)

After the initial invasion there were some troops using the AK out of neccesity.  Many units were tasked with infantry jobs but did not have the weapons to do the patrolling. For example a vehicle crew may have only been allocated 2 M4s and 2 pistols.  I have only ever seen one US soldier using the AK out of preference but he had it tarted up with a Ultimak rail and Eotech.

I carried a variety of AKs for the first 6 months I was in Iraq. They are good weapons and extremely reliable. A M4 is a better weapon and is also reliable if properly maintained.


----------



## teddy49 (17 Apr 2006)

I have a lot of respect for Mikhail Kalashnikov as a designer.  He's probably the best one to come along since John Moses Browning.  But he's out of his lane on this one.  Most of the US soldiers I see carrying AKs around here, do so because they work intimately with Iraqi forces.  I'm personally issued an East German AK for work here, and it's a fine rifle.  I have complete faith in it.  It's simple, robust, accurate as is practically necessary, and reliable.  That said, the sights, suck, at least until I put on the Ultimak Rail and the EO-Tech.  Ergonomically it's not that great, especially if you're right handed, The ammo and mags weigh a frickin ton, and it doesn't have a bolt hold open.  Which for me is a big thing.  Where the AK excels is it's ability to take neglect and keep on ticking.  The M-4/M-16 series requires, a bit more maintenance, but is as reliable, if taken care of.  The problems of the Viet Nam era are long past.  They simply, are history.  One could go on about other rifles and where they fit into the argument.  A case could probably be made for the FNC, but it would probably lose out due to the fact that it's not nearly as prolific as the other rifles.  But between the AK, M-16 series, and the FAL, you probably have the most significant and best rifles of the post WW2 era.  Pretty much anything designed since, incorporates features of these 3 weapons.

In the end it doesn't matter what you have, as long as it works reliably and can put the bullets where you point them.


----------



## NL_engineer (17 Apr 2006)

S_Baker, and Baloo,
I probably misread read or misinterpreted the article.


----------



## Armymatters (17 Apr 2006)

Don't forget that the Kalashnikov gas system has been heavily copied and modified by many manufacturers, Western and Eastern Bloc alike. Examples of such copies are the FN's FNC, IMI Galil, Valmet M82, SIG 550, and the numerous Chinese knock-offs and designed patterned off the AK-47.

Mikhail Kalashnikov is somewhat right in saying his design is the best, by looking at how many assault rifles are patterned off his gas system, and how prevalant his design has been in global conflicts. But as other have saided, he had the right idea at the right time, now, other have improved on the design.


----------



## Armymedic (17 Apr 2006)

Anyone who has fired a AK-47 knows it is not the best weapon out there. Don't get me wrong...its good, but not the best.


----------



## Britney Spears (17 Apr 2006)

Jeeze guys, don't get caught up in the misty eyed elegends, go out and fire one! and after that take it apart and see how it works! It's a well thought out design but it isn't rocket science. Most rifle designs work in more or less the same way, they all require maintainance, and they can all be less or more accurate depending on the age and maintainance state of the weapon. At the end of the day the rifle is just a tool, you are the weapon.


----------



## Big Red (17 Apr 2006)

Here's a couple that I used to own.

ETA: underfolders suck.


----------



## HItorMiss (17 Apr 2006)

Having just recently (year or less) fired 100-200+ rounds down the the barrel of an AK, I can say that what the AK excels at is the fact that I could almost literally dig my shell scrape with it and then turn around and put rounds down range. Accuracy suffers for the robust design, I think the the best analogy I can remember is that the AK family was design as a machine gun first and a rifle second (note the selector switch positions, Safe, Auto, Repetition) Where as the M16/C7 were designed as Rifles first and a machine gun second.

Were to have a choice I will take my C7/C8 any day of the week over and AK, But I also know that I could still do my job if I had to use an AK.

As for the best, I'll say that the AK was made for illiterate farmers who could be given 3 mags and the AK told how to insert the mag and c.o.c.k it and then run toward the enemy on Auto hoping to suppress rather then kill. Our M16/C7 takes a bit longer to learn to use an maintain, but for that we get a precision (in comparison to the AK) Killing tool.


----------



## Armymatters (17 Apr 2006)

Just did some digging on that quote from Mikhail Kalashnikov. It was in response to a Washington Post news clipping that Venezuela canceled a contract from Kalashnikov’s Izhmash factory for 100,000 AK-103 rifles because they were "outdated". He fully stated, as from the following article:


> Kalashnikov, who in 1947 invented the prototype of the now extensive Kalashnikov range, said: “The article did not surprise me. It was not the first attempt to besmirch the name of Russian weapons.”
> He claimed that even U.S. soldiers preferred the Kalashnikov, which has gone through numerous improvements since the first AK-47 model, to their own M16 rifle.



http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1691735&C=europe


----------



## Centurian1985 (17 Apr 2006)

More stuff:

In terms of a single person having the most influence on modern weapons, Kalashnikov is the hands down winner.  Like an earleir quote said, you can beat a horse to death with the thing and still shoot a pretty good grouping at 200-300 meters.  The things are like the energizer bunny, just going and going...

Ref, posts of US troops using them, yes, that is a common tactic with some 'forward operating forces' so that local experienced (opposition) soldiers would be hearing the familiar AK instead of the tinny M-16 sound of firing if they had to fire a shot or two.    

Ref, a US company producing AK's...hmmm  could be possible, but if its not under official contract, no one will ever admit it.  There are US units armed with Eastern bloc weapons and trained to fight with Eastern bloc weapons...and following that logic who wants an old crappy AK-47, wouldnt you rather fight with a brand new AK? And how will you get it without letting people know you have them? And if you were to insert insurgent forces behind enemy lines would you arm them with M-16s or AK's?  Not so crazy if you think abiut it.... ;D 

However, as far as I know, US soldiers do not prefer the AK - they prefer the MP5! ...Or the long-range .50 cal sniper guns, for their 'look cool' factor (they are completely blinded to the difficulty involved in actually doing sniper work).


----------



## GO!!! (17 Apr 2006)

I've only read/heard about US troops using captured weapons out of necessity, due to a lack of resup or insufficient numbers of weapons, as stated earlier.

I saw a picture somewhere with the picture of a Chinese conscript after his "indestructable" AK had a breech explosion and sent shrapnel into his head/face. 

I've yet to see or hear of that happening with the M16 family.


----------



## Big Red (17 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> However, as far as I know, US soldiers do not prefer the AK - they prefer the MP5! ...Or the long-range .50 cal sniper guns, for their 'look cool' factor (they are completely blinded to the difficulty involved in actually doing sniper work).



 : Ummm...sure.


----------



## Centurian1985 (17 Apr 2006)

You doubt? Top two choices among US marines and rangers I worked with...   8)

(Although, yes, too generalized... not ALL US soldiers are blinded to that...)


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Apr 2006)

FACT: US companies even now are manufacturing AKM recivers (yes they are stamped and will go the 7.62 and 5.45 versions), and these are primarily for the civvy market in semi auto. The assault rifle market is even bigger now than it ever was in the USA, and good on 'em for it too!

As for the AK guru himself, ole M.T. Kalashnikov, himself, take a look at the MP43/44, and you'll see where he got his ideas from, that and from other captured German engineers. I rate him as a 2/10, nothing more than a copycat, and way over rated.

After firing 10s of thousands of rds out of AKs (almost every variant, including the 5.56x45mm Chi Com contract rifles for Nigeria and the 5.45 AKS74, etc) over the past 25 yrs (and writing a few articles too), its not that great of a rifle.

So, you can read all you want on it, buy the video and listen to the stories, but unless you have used it, carried it, and get to know it personally, don't believe everything you hear.



Enough said about him, eh.

Wes

EDIT: I am not bagging the AK, and  I am however confident to use and carry this rifle anywhere in any theatre, as it does have its purpose, and every IW has its limitations, you just gotta know the ones with this rifle.


----------



## chrisf (17 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Ref, a US company producing AK's...hmmm  could be possible, but if its not under official contract, no one will ever admit it.  There are US units armed with Eastern bloc weapons and trained to fight with Eastern bloc weapons...and following that logic who wants an old crappy AK-47, wouldnt you rather fight with a brand new AK? And how will you get it without letting people know you have them? And if you were to insert insurgent forces behind enemy lines would you arm them with M-16s or AK's?  Not so crazy if you think abiut it.... ;D



I know there was a manufacturer producing an M16 varient that fired 7.62Soviet at one point for special forces use, no idea what became of it. I seem to recall that there were some issues with the magazine not coming out of the housing easily.

On the subject of acquiring AKs, I'm certain that any western power (Particularly the united states) has enough captured AKs (And pretty much any other soviet small arms you can imagine) stashed away to fill their needs.


----------



## Praetorian (17 Apr 2006)

The AK-47 vs M16 is an ageless debate that is ageless for a single reason, you cannot say without a doubt which one is superior.
The M16 was designed for Western Proffesional armies who take the time and money to train their troops.
The AK-47 was made for the Peasant army, the ones in the Desert hide-outs and Rice Padddies, and it does its job extremely well.

If your looking for a precision killing tool for trained regulars, the M16/C7 is the way to go.
If there is a need to arm an untrained freedom fighter, the durable and reliable "ole AK" is unbeatable.

To say one is better then the other is like saying the NY Yankees are better then the Montreal Canadiens.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Apr 2006)

Let's not confuse 'best' for 'popular'. Just because everyone has one, doesn't make it the best. Just the cheapest, most poular and most available.


----------



## Five-to-One (17 Apr 2006)

I agree with Recce guy

Also, i'll see if I can find a link but I remember seeing a program on Discovery (thats right, Discovery Channel) about the pros and cons of both those guns and they came to the conclusion that the m-16 was an overall better urban combat weapon due to its accuracy and reliability in a properly maintained enviroment, there was alot more but I forget it and that is all needed said for weapons in Iraq


----------



## HItorMiss (17 Apr 2006)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> FACT: US companies even now are manufacturing AKM receivers (yes they are stamped and will go the 7.62 and 5.45 versions), and these are primarily for the civvy market in semi auto. The assault rifle market is even bigger now than it ever was in the USA, and good on 'em for it too!
> 
> As for the AK guru himself, ole M.T. Kalashnikov, himself, take a look at the MP43/44, and you'll see where he got his ideas from, that and from other captured German engineers. I rate him as a 2/10, nothing more than a copycat, and way over rated.
> 
> ...





And with that People I think we have our concensus, Mr Allen is in my mind an expert on weapons and how they work. He says it's not as good then it's not as good (The man just said he has fired them all and more rounds then I am sure anyone else here has) I think this little debate on which is king in dead.

As for US Forces using, I don't know I'm not in Iraq nor did I see any in Afghanistan using them either.


----------



## Jungle (17 Apr 2006)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> I know there was a manufacturer producing an M16 varient that fired 7.62Soviet at one point for special forces use, no idea what became of it. I seem to recall that there were some issues with the magazine not coming out of the housing easily.


I posted a link in my post on page 1 of this thread...
Anyway, here's the pic of the rifle:


----------



## 3rd Horseman (18 Apr 2006)

Wes Allen appears to hit the nail on the head and I hate to admit it but I also agree with recceguy (first time for everything).

  The true measure of the weapon is a simple question. Would you rather have the guy opposing you in the assult firing at you with an AK or a C7. In my experience I preferred the AK in my ENs hands and a C7 in mine, those poor sods with their crappy AK and poor ammo did not stand a chance, I am here today due to this fact.


----------



## Guest (18 Apr 2006)

AK47 is best because it is the most sexiest of weapons ever.  You dig????  Some of you seem to be too preoccupied with being effective.  This is irrelevant in todays world of being sexy. 8)


----------



## TCBF (18 Apr 2006)

Twenty two years ago, I hunted woodchucks in Ontario with four rifles: A Savage 112 V series J SS bolt in .22/250 with a Tasco 6-18x, and three .223 Rem semis:

1.  Ruger Mini 14.( courtesy John C. Garrand and Bill Ruger).
2.  Colt AR-15. (courtesy Eugene Stoner, Sullivan, Fremont).
3.  Norinco Type 56-2 (AK variant, courtesy Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov and the ChiComs, and I think maybe Allan Lever).

The Ar-15 beat all for accuracy, as does the rest of the M16/C7 family.
The Mini 14 was next, followed by the K gun.  Short sight radius was the K guns disadvantage, otherwise, it may have someday matched the Mini 14. Mine, anyway.

I think Kalashnikov's best gun was the PK series myself.

As for designers - john Moses Browning has yet to be matched.  

I would like to trial the AN-94 Nikonov, and the new Chicom IWs.  But I aint loosing any sleep over it, and I STILL own a FN C1A1.

Of course, if, unlike the 6,000,000 people who live in Switzerland, you think an Army rifle should be just a big club with a bore buttoned through it, you may disagree.

Tom


----------



## 3rd Horseman (18 Apr 2006)

And if that woodchuck had a rifle which one would you give him and which one would you keep...sounds a little like Aylmer Fud stuff.


----------



## Big Red (18 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> However, as far as I know, US soldiers do not prefer the AK - they prefer the MP5! ...Or the long-range .50 cal sniper guns, for their 'look cool' factor (they are completely blinded to the difficulty involved in actually doing sniper work).
> 
> You doubt? Top two choices among US marines and rangers I worked with...



This was what year?  I've yet to see anyone carrying a MP5 outside the wire besides Brit security contractors who missed out on the Iranian Embassy siege.

US soldiers blinded to the difficulty of sniper work? They are the ones out there doing it everyday so I'm not sure how this comment makes any sense.  Compare the amount of trigger time the average US sniper has to anyone else out there right now.

This is the US military not a Choose your Own Adventure book. The vast majority of troops are using what they are issued and it has nothing to do with LCF.



			
				3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> In my experience I preferred the AK in my ENs hands and a C7 in mine, those poor sods with their crappy AK and poor ammo did not stand a chance, I am here today due to this fact.



 :  Please.  The AK kills people just as well as any other rifle.  Maybe the 'poor sods' just lacked training.



			
				TCBF said:
			
		

> I think Kalashnikov's best gun was the PK series myself.
> 
> Of course, if, unlike the 6,000,000 people who live in Switzerland, you think an Army rifle should be just a big club with a bore buttoned through it, you may disagree.



Yeah, I'll carry a PKM over a GPMG any day.

Lately we've had some catastrophic failures with the Sigs so my trust in them is waning...


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Apr 2006)

Guess said:
			
		

> AK47 is best because it is the most sexiest of weapons ever.  You dig????  Some of you seem to be too preoccupied with being effective.  This is irrelevant in todays world of being sexy. 8)



Sexy? You dig? What planet are you from/on/ 

Judging by your profile, with no military expereince, stay EXACTLY where you are. I don't know if you are serious or 'naught', but at 47, you should no better than wasting space not only on this site, but this thread in particular.

 :

Wes


----------



## teddy49 (18 Apr 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I saw a picture somewhere with the picture of a Chinese conscript after his "indestructable" AK had a breech explosion and sent shrapnel into his head/face.
> 
> I've yet to see or hear of that happening with the M16 family.



Really, go to Page 3 of this thread.  A KB can happen to anything.

http://getoffthex.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/182106881/m/523108458/p/3


----------



## 3rd Horseman (18 Apr 2006)

:  Please.  The AK kills people just as well as any other rifle.  Maybe the 'poor sods' just lacked training.

Big Red, 
     They were hardend fighters for over 2 1/2 years, it was the poor weapon and ammo. I beg to differ the AK does not kill as effectively as a C7. all the rest I concure


----------



## 1feral1 (18 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> However, as far as I know, US soldiers do not prefer the AK - they prefer the MP5! ...Or the long-range .50 cal sniper guns, for their 'look cool' factor (they are completely blinded to the difficulty involved in actually doing sniper work).



Hey Centurian, I am now beginning to wonder where you are dreaming some of your posts up. I am not trying to get ignorant here, but in reality, think before you post, as its your credibility which is a stake here, and it is not looking the greatest with this post especially.

Why for the life of me would someone prefer a 9mm rd over 7.62mm, regardless if its the M43 or NATO types. 9mm is simply a SMG or pistol rd for close range personal protection with pisss poor penetration and short effective range.  My first rds down range with an MP5 was in 1980, so I know where I am coming from. I have encountered various version of the weapon here on our shores, and I will not comment on that any further.

The MP5 and its bizarre variants does have its place in todays weapons pecking order, but generic issue to 'soldiers at large' is NOT one of them.

Secondly, whats with the US LCF for .50 sniping and then condemming the US sniping entegrity? Let me assure you their snipers are trained well, exposed to the enemy threat every hour of the day (as you sit back and type out meaningless posts on here) and have more kills to their credit than any other allied force in the MEAO. 

With your rather cheap comment, not taking into consideration the trauma, fear, hard work, long hours, fatigue and risking their own lives these guys expereince, well what you have said has really rubbed me the wrong way, and what you have expressed is entirely unprofessional. With the TI you claim to have in your profile, well in that alone, I am at a loss of words...

I think slagging the Yanks is in bad taste (afterall they are the ones FIGHTING and DYING there, not you). Without the material or references, aside from a biased personal opinion and/or crap armchair wannabee fantasy magazines which seem to bend the truth at the best of times, your claims here are worthless.

I'll stick to reading military reports on the effectivness of Allied combat power on the enemy rahter than rumours or crap rags which rely on shock value to get ratings and sales.

Maybe if you had accesss to such, you'd change your tune. So if you are going to gob off, back it up with a sold reference. Slagging and assumptions are just not on, and do nothing but show contempt and lack of respect for other professional soldiers in their own Defence forces fighting in yet another unpopular war.


Wes


----------



## TCBF (19 Apr 2006)

"Lately we've had some catastrophic failures with the Sigs so my trust in them is waning..."

- I assume you mean pistols, not rifles.  Bizzare.  9mm?  Aluminium, but still had a good reputation for years.  If it was in .40 SW, the slide should say "Made in USA" and be made of steel.  The frame is aluminium and was prob made in Germany.  Hopefully, nobody made a SIG in 10mm...

Tom


----------



## Dissident (19 Apr 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I've yet to see or hear of that happening with the M16 family.



You have now.

I have held in my hands a C7A1 that had a malfunction and "blown up". It did not grenade, but the reciever was deformed and the mag shot out of the bottom. The cause of the malfunction is not yet know, but the rifle had just made it throught the ATI and was properly maintained. It looked liek a round or 2 went off in the reciever without beng chambered.

I was not there when it happened, but the troop is fine, he was wearing his balistic eyeware at the time.


----------



## Big Red (19 Apr 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> "Lately we've had some catastrophic failures with the Sigs so my trust in them is waning..."
> 
> - I assume you mean pistols, not rifles.  Bizzare.  9mm?  Aluminium, but still had a good reputation for years.  If it was in .40 SW, the slide should say "Made in USA" and be made of steel.  The frame is aluminium and was prob made in Germany.  Hopefully, nobody made a SIG in 10mm...



Suprisingly it's the rifles we've had some problems with. Things like a gas tube sheared in half, bolt carrier cracked and siezed inside of a reciever, etc.  Problems you wouldn't expect from a rifle that retails for 3k in Canada.


----------



## TCBF (19 Apr 2006)

"Suprisingly it's the rifles we've had some problems with. Things like a gas tube sheared in half, bolt carrier cracked and siezed inside of a reciever, etc.  Problems you wouldn't expect from a rifle that retails for 3k in Canada."

- M855 Ball should not be that different from the Swiss 5.6mm GP-90, nor Mk 262 for pressure.  What gives?


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (19 Apr 2006)

i do not claim to be a weapons expert here but just because it is the most massed produced and copied item in the world does not make it the best.

the ak is cheaper and more readily found on the used weapons market since the fall of the curtain and since the countries already had the factories and tooling set to make they just turned out more of them. 
massed produced does not always equal the best out there.


----------



## teddy49 (19 Apr 2006)

Yeah Big Red is talking about the SIG rifles.  We work for the same company, and I'm the guy who has to try to build good guns from the bad ones.  We've had some peculiar failures.  We've had the bolt carrier crack.  Broken Op rods.  The gas tube that came apart.  The most frustraiting failure was the broken rivet that held in the cocking handle retaining catch.  We have a $1700US rifle that's useless because a 1/2 cent part broke, and now we can't cock the rifle.  I'm a big SIG rifle fan, I have 2 at home, but these failures tell me that despite how good they shoot, they're not developed enough for serious use.  Which kind of pisses me off cause I personally have 6 grand invested in the things.  Oh well, I new I kept my AR-15 for a reason.


----------



## teddy49 (19 Apr 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> "Surprisingly it's the rifles we've had some problems with. Things like a gas tube sheared in half, bolt carrier cracked and seized inside of a receiver, etc.  Problems you wouldn't expect from a rifle that retails for 3k in Canada."
> 
> - M855 Ball should not be that different from the Swiss 5.6mm GP-90, nor Mk 262 for pressure.  What gives?



Well most of the ammo here is marked as M855, but most of it is pretty dodgy and of indeterminate origin.  I think if we could get some kind of shock buff to go on the spring guide to keep the carrier and op rod from hammering into the spring guide base plate and the back of the receiver, we could solve a lot of the problems.  Keep in mind that we use the 552 version hear with the 8.9 inch barrel, so the pressures we're dealing with are a lot higher than with a Swiss Arms PE-90 or CQB model.  To be honest though it just seems to show a lack of development.


----------



## GINge! (19 Apr 2006)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> As for the AK guru himself, ole M.T. Kalashnikov, himself, take a look at the MP43/44, and you'll see where he got his ideas from, that and from other captured German engineers. I rate him as a 2/10, nothing more than a copycat, and way over rated.



Agreed 100%.


----------



## HItorMiss (19 Apr 2006)

Teddy, Big Red.

You believe this to a be a failure of the rifle to deal with the gas regulations, as in not being dissipated properly and stressing the action beyond what was thought of during development?
I ask because I am no expert and information is power were I to run into the same issue.


----------



## teddy49 (20 Apr 2006)

HitorMiss said:
			
		

> Teddy, Big Red.
> 
> You believe this to a be a failure of the rifle to deal with the gas regulations, as in not being dissipated properly and stressing the action beyond what was thought of during development?
> I ask because I am no expert and information is power were I to run into the same issue.



Short barrel gas operated Semi Auto, or Full Auto rifles typically have more severe pressure curves than their longer counterparts.  This is due to the gas ports being closer to the chamber, and thus the fired cartridge, than on the full length version.  This can be an advantage in rifles with dwell time issues (dwell time is the time between when the bullet passes the gas port, and when it leaves the barrel.  Typically, the longer the dwell time, the more reliable the rifle.  Though this rule, is countered by the law of diminishing returns.  There are exceptions to this rule as well.  The M-1 Garand, which has it's gas port at the muzzle, springs immediately to mind.)  such as the SIG 552/Swiss Arms Commando or 10, 10.5, 11 inch AR-15/M-16 series rifles.  The higher pressure will help get gas down the tube, and cycle the rifle.

But it also means that Short Barreled Rifles put more stress on their working parts because due to that higher pressure, they cycle much more quickly and violently.  This is because not only does the gas have more pressure but also less distance to travel, down the barrel and back down the gas tube as well.  This will effect direct gas rifles more significantly than rifles that use a piston/operating rod mechanism.   Many designers incorporate heavier components in the shorter rifles to counteract this, ie; the shorter AR/M-16 series will typically use a heavier buffer than the full length versions.  This of course, takes more energy to move and slows down the action, reducing cyclic rate on full auto versions, and reducing the stress placed on the moving bits.

Now I don't have a scale, or a comparable 550/551 bolt carrier, but I would be that the 552 bolt carrier, due to the way it's constructed, is actually lighter than the longer version's bolt carriers.  That combined with the higher gas pressures has me betting that the 552s are beating themselves to death.  It's causing a lot consternation among our shooters, that some of them have told me they're contemplating carrying their AKs again, instead of the SIGs.  Incidentally, our company recently stopped buying the SIGs and started purchasing the Zastava M-21.  A Serbian built 5.56 AK.  But I think that was more to do with cost than anything.

HitorMiss, I hope this helps.


----------



## HItorMiss (20 Apr 2006)

Thanks Teddy.

Yup that about covers what I didn't know or what I suspected you might get at. Your reply is very helpful.

Again thank you.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Apr 2006)

Baloo said:
			
		

> In line with S_Baker...I am quite surprised by this, unless it was misinterpreted during the article. I was (still am) unaware that the United States or any company within its contracts manufactured the Automat Kalashnikov, in any variant.



I think Robinson Arms does

http://www.robarm.com/

Keep in mind also that when you compare the M16 or C7 to the AK, the M16/C7 has been well cared for by both a trained soldier and weapons tech. Whereas the AK on the other side might be older than either of the combatants and may not have been completely maintained for years, causing the already generous tolerances to be completely slack. 

The same can be said for the ammunition, although I will give credit to the Russian sardine can style of packing ammo.

I would not want to fight a well trained soldier using a well maintained AK or M16 variant.

If I was running a rag tag army, I know that I would take the AK over the M16 for all of the reason mentioned in this thread.

I am looking forward to a M16 using a 6.8mm or similar round, although the 7.62x39 version also sounds interesting.


----------

