Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #46200
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    A former special-operations doctor explains why he would rather be shot with an AK-47 than an M4

    http://www.businessinsider.com/ak-47-wound-over-an-m4-2015-12

    #46206
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    Either way , you will have a bad day . For us civilian guerillas , who wont have the luxury of support or ideal conditions , the AK is still king for dirt , filth , and neglect , not to mention going through cover easily , that the 223 will not ( as most people hide behind things when they are , or know they are going to be shot at ) . Curious to see the same study made with an AK 74s 5.45 x 39 . Also the study is assuming that the 7.62×39 is FMJ , SPs get ugly fast . But I wouldnt want to get hit by either a 39 or 223 , when all is said and done .

    #46223
    Profile photo of sledjockey
    sledjockey
    Bushcrafter
    member8

    I would much rather be shot at with an AK than an AR….. I know that most AR’s are much more accurate at distance so there is much more “spray and pray” factor with the AK.

    Either way, getting shot sucks. This is why I have two different types of body armor. Soft level II (concealable) and hard level IV (with backers). Even the wife has level IV plates in a sentry carrier.

    Did I mention that getting shot sucks?

    http://ageofdecadence.com

    #46242
    Whirlibird
    Whirlibird
    Survivalist
    member10

    There’s more than one reason it’s called a ‘sucking chest wound’.

    #46269
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    Way back in the cold war era , the Czechs started making their own caliber for a short time , until Moscow poo-pood it for uniformity . It was the 7.62×45 , it was greatly superior to the 7.62×39 . I think that should be resurrected as an option for todays AKMs . SAme old story it was better but was shot down for standardization , Americans are the only people in love with the 223 , a lot of NATO , especially the Brits , have been trying to get us to replace it for years , they would prefer the 8mm .

    #46270
    Profile photo of L Tecolote
    L Tecolote
    Survivalist
    member8

    Wouldn’t 7.62×45 require replacing the receiver, bolt, and mags on an AK?

    Cry, "Treason!"

    #46271
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    Unless you manufacture it that way to begin with , meant for that , really wouldnt take much from a production / factory point of view . Then you have a rifle in a popular platform that has greater velocity and power , And still retain the intermediate cartridge principle . I think it would go over well with the public . Especially when you are talking plastic ( mags ) , its no problem at all .

    #46272
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    There are a few AK variants chambered in 308. (7.62×51) for anyone wanting more bang for their buck.

    #46273
    Whirlibird
    Whirlibird
    Survivalist
    member10

    Wouldn’t 7.62×45 require replacing the receiver, bolt, and mags on an AK?

    Normally a cartridge change would require changing the bolt face, ejector rail possibly, mags maybe, and the barrel.
    Realistically, not a feasible commercial change unless a particular round (that fits) suddenly becomes popular and widely available.

    There’s no real reason to switch, unless the sales are there. And without a glut of ammo cheap, there’s no reason for anyone to change from the x39 cartridge. Some still wouldn’t.

    Unlike the ‘modular’ AR platform, switching the AK barrel requires removing the barrel pin (no small task), then the barrel (you will need a press or other tooling). Assuming an assembled barrel, the barrel is replaced and headspaced then the pin replaced.
    The ejector rails are spot welded in place.

    Actually the x39 cartridge can be highly accurate, just not in an AK or with conventional ammo.
    A friend had a PPC action Sako he had chambered/built for the x39 round, it was a prairie dog machine of the first order. Half inch groups at 100y were the norm assuming good ammo not mil-surp junk.
    Properly handloaded the x39 AR’s are decently accurate also, again with good ammo not junk.

    As an aside, a different friend has a Mini-30 that’s been rebarreled to .25x39mm, it’s a deer and antelope killer extraordinaire. But he’s stuck using high priced brass (PPC) that’s not ‘commonly’ available where he lives.

    The Brits once tested the .280 British, very similar to the modern 6.8mmSPC and 6.5 Grendel, both of which have their fans and detractors.

    In the case of the Czech round, it would require more than just simple changes, it would require redesigning the AK around the round, it being too long for the x39 magazine and associated mag well.
    2.4″ vs 2.2″ roughly. Then we need to look at bolt travel distance, etc. There is more to certain engineering changes than many realize.

    If one were wedded to the Czech cartridge, it would be easier to just start manufacturing the CZ rifles in the old cartridge and be well off.

    Personally, I’m just going to stick with the AR and FAL platforms, the modular designs lend themselves to adaptability and reliability. Todays AR is not your grandfathers AR.

    #46300
    Profile photo of Brulen
    Brulen
    Survivalist
    member9

    I added a tourniquet to my kit. Maybe the quick clot would be a good idea as well. The only thing that counts most for someone shot is the speed of evac. And that depends on good communication and a helipad if it’s not in an urban area. Black hawk down is a terrible situation to be in.

    #46306
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    Just dont get the powder ! ( if they still make it ) because our soldiers had some problems with it , its rare , but some of those grains can travel and do very bad things !

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.