Wonky AK47 barrels

That wood block test was pretty cool... did the 5.56 just lodge a few inches in there? Maybe the ding was just too small to see.

Maybe someone with more experience can shed a light on how different kinds of 5.56 rounds would've done against that wood test?
 
Speaking of wood penitration. I was home the other weekend and my buddy was shooting his new .17 HMR rifle. It punched completely through a railroad tie.
 
Armedsask said:
Speaking of wood penitration. I was home the other weekend and my buddy was shooting his new .17 HMR rifle. It punched completely through a railroad tie.
Click to expand...

We shot right through THREE railroad ties with the .17HMR.....they were special magnum rounds only special forces can get though.....
 
That test was bs...that AK is an old worn right out POS..the carrier should not be hitting the rear trunion that hard if at all.They should have used one in newer or in better operating condition
Early stamped versions of the AK were garbage anyways...milled receivered versions were a big improvement
 
Last edited:
(Ronin) said:
That test was bs
Early stamped versions of the AK were garbage anyways...milled receivered versions were a big improvement
Click to expand...

It was my understanding that 'earlier' AK-47's had receivers of machined steel construction and the later variants had bent sheet metal receivers with machined inserts?:confused:

Yeah, I didn't get their extremely subjective test. I guess it was designed to be shown to the average moron who won't know the difference anyways. I liked the underground(?) range though.
 
Last edited:
(Ronin) said:
That test was bs...that AK is an old worn right out POS..the carrier should not be hitting the rear trunion that hard if at all.They should have used one in newer or in better operating condition
Early stamped versions of the AK were garbage anyways...milled receivered versions were a big improvement
Click to expand...

That one had a milled receiver. The early examples were a combination of milling and stamping, than just milled, and later examples (AKM) were stamped.

No AK is garbage.

That accuracy always seemed quite BS to me (Ive seen this video a while ago).

Gunplumberr is a spammer and an AK whore. I hate him because I'm very jealous.

Cheers,
Alex
 
I agree with the others that thought this test was BS. They tried to make the regular sights of the AK seem stone-age in comparison to the peep on the M16, as well as less accurate. Seems like a toss-up to me. If they said that peeps were faster at shooting targets. . .sure. But more accurate?


Penetration on the cinderblocks and pine 4X4s isn't complete without a wound channel comparison though. Sure the 7.62X39 will penetrate, but the 5.56 will fragment at "just" the right spot without the cover.

The comparison on the switches was absolutely the worst. They tried to make it seem that since the AK switches from safe to auto to single that you would be likely to use it on auto. I would think that in a stressful situation where someone would need to shoot, they'd go from top (safe) to bottom. That'd land them on single shot. The M16 on the other hand, is incomparable since the selector flips a full 180 degrees. There's more thought involved, but there's more precision in selecting the fire mode you want. Pro's and con's to either system.
 
Interesting video.

The slow mo part was pretty neat.

The rest was pretty average. I would like to get the same shooter out doing that test with good ammo, and a guy who actually knows not to jerk on the trigger like that when going for a 200yd target.

The "AK is clearly designed as a machinegun" story was also a joke.

I agree with Gunplummer, AK's are cool, but why did you forget to mention ###y? As punishment you can send me your collection, I will PM you my address.

akmpolish1.6.jpg
 
adriel said:
The comparison on the switches was absolutely the worst. They tried to make it seem that since the AK switches from safe to auto to single that you would be likely to use it on auto. I would think that in a stressful situation where someone would need to shoot, they'd go from top (safe) to bottom. That'd land them on single shot. The M16 on the other hand, is incomparable since the selector flips a full 180 degrees. There's more thought involved, but there's more precision in selecting the fire mode you want. Pro's and con's to either system.
Click to expand...

I've read in a USN SEAL's autobiography how that design flaw saved his life. He was spotted by a VC sentry creeping into a village and the sentry flicked the safety all the way down to semi-auto in the dark, got off one shot that narrowly missed, then froze on the trigger. It was enough of a delay for the SEAL pointman to give him a burst from his Stoner and drop him. He figured if the VC had opened up on him in full-auto it would have been a different ending.

I've never handled a select-fire AK, but I bet it takes a very deliberate movement to go from safe to full-auto without going too far. Especially when you are excited in the pitch darkness.
 
Last edited:
(Ronin) said:
That test was bs...that AK is an old worn right out POS..the carrier should not be hitting the rear trunion that hard if at all.They should have used one in newer or in better operating condition
Early stamped versions of the AK were garbage anyways...milled receivered versions were a big improvement
Click to expand...
It is a milled rifle in the video. the early AR10 had a selector that went safe full semi. and all self loading rifles have a bolt carrier that slams into the trunion. what do you think stops it?
 
that video was BS.

They don't show you the entire length of the M16 barrel, but around 8 seconds in to the video the small portion that they actually do show you is flopping around just as bad as the AK's. Furthermore, the AK has what appears to be one of those fold out bayonets attached to it which is also flopping around like crazy giving the illusion that the whole gun is made out of gummy bears.
 
Last edited:
Matt_P said:
that video was BS.

They don't show you the entire length of the M16 barrel, but around 8 seconds in to the video the small portion that they actually do show you is flopping around just as bad as the AK's. Furthermore, the AK has what appears to be one of those fold out bayonets attached to it which is also flopping around like crazy giving the illusion that the whole gun is made out of gummy bears.
Click to expand...

I think you are talking about the cleaning rod under the barrel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom