Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Modquisition on: Politieness is required. Mistress et al lets leave the personal comment in the "unsent" bin. Thanks.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Now who is going to argue back that the ak is still better?
Uhh, I dunno, the vast majority of firearms experts?
Look, you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sorry, not trying to be a dick, that's just the facts.
Case in point: "I was just saying that it can't hit anything because it didn't have a great spread (7")."
At 100 yards, that means the gun is shooting 7 MOA. Seriously? You think even the crappiest AK is a 7 MOA gun? No. A good AK will go around 3 MOA, and the worst are no worse than 6.
Similarly a good quality Kar98 might even go sub-MOA, certainly under 2.
So these groups you're recording are more a commentary on your shooting than anything else.
There's a lot more to evaluating firearms than giong out to the range and banging off a magazine.
Also the barrel and bolt are off center to it tends to pull to the right.
No? They're not... What sort of AK were you shooting? Did it explode at any point during your "testing" and shower the area with shrapnel?
Everyone... let me introduce you to an old friend of mine..... Meet Ivan:
Ivan is my Romanian Ak47 with a Tapco folding stock.
Ivan can shoot Wolf/BrownBear junk ammo at at 100y targets all day long from the ready position and get under/around 2-3moa. With Quality ammo on a benchrest I have shot MOA with it before at that range.
Ivan has had thousands of rounds put through him, and very rarely jams. When he does jam, 9/10 times its because of something I did or forgot to do. Mainly thanks to my military background im used to holding onto the magwell of an M4 instead of useing the forward grip. On an Ak47, this tends to me pulling on the mag offsetting it and it fails to feed properly.
@ phryxis & jp400- you guys realize google is gonna start getting a buncha hits on 'MOA' ?
It may as well mean 'Moon orbital aperature' , as moa is difficult to explain to actual shooters.
Buy hey, the sectional density of some of the posts here are pretty close to the ballistic coefficient of a cow pie(shovel launched not hand propelled).
Anti-gun retards don't even do that. They just call anything that isn't a revolver an "assault rifle", even bolt actions.
I'm surprised some aren't googling
"which end of the gun do I point away from myself" OR
"what gun is bestest gun based on MW2".
--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
ou must be functionally slowed- the text that went with the videos was clearly about the recoil argument. You seem to be the only one that thinks theyre about weight. Numerous claims were made the AK isnt as controllable during autofire- those videos provide a counterpoint to that misconception( a misconception your statements support).
Ahh, yes, forgive me. I hadn't read your post since you initially posted it and I didn't go back and reread it in making my own post. That said, swap out weight for kick and my statement remains the same. You're so functionally incapable of making a sensical point that you've fallen back to youtube videos to prove something. Guess what. Watch this. This is gonna be cool.
OH MAN DIVING IS SO EASY! AS LONG AS I CAN FIND A YOUTUBE VIDEO OF SOMETHING HAPPENING IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT EVERY SINGLE MILITARY WITH A BUDGET LARGER THAN WALMARTS THINKS!
So, scroll back and read them lil letters & words over the top of the vids, and maybe you can sound a tad less ignorant.
Done and done!
But, this poll, and pretty much everyother poll ever done on the topic, puts the AK on top. The reasons are clear, and you can deny them if you like, but that doesnt change history.
What reasons? The only reasons you've stated was reliability and that it was prevalent through to the 70s while still having good uptake within civilian militias and impoverished nations. The AK was the best assault rifle in the world once. It's not now. This thread isn't about what was the best was thirty years ago and it certainly isn't about what congolese child militias are running around with. I never once said the kick made the gun unhandleable. I never said that the weight made the gun some sort of thors hammer that can only be wielded by giant nordic men with pure hearts. I said in modern times the weapon needlessly fatigues the user which results in sub par accuracy accuracy over time and I stated that the angle of recoil is above the stock which in combination with the round it fires causes a needless amount of muzzle climb. None of these things are insurmountable. The gun is still around, thats a testament to it's quality. That doesn't make it the best and it certainly doesn't make you right.
That said, you have the reading comprehension of a sizable planet and you're going to respond to my point again the way you have been the entire time. By stating that you, youtube, and children handle the gun great, so it's obviously the best assault rifle in history. You will gloss over points that I make, or you will gloss over most of my post entirely and just focus on the youtube diving thing. You argue from a consistently shifting position and you argue via authority, you've done it here, you've done it in that goofy thread about 40s german registration numbers, and you've done it in pretty much every other thread you've taken to disagreeing with someone in. So please. Go on.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fateweaver wrote:Anti-gun retards don't even do that. They just call anything that isn't a revolver an "assault rifle", even bolt actions.
I'm surprised some aren't googling
"which end of the gun do I point away from myself" OR
"what gun is bestest gun based on MW2".
I'm amazed it took you so long to come in here, not read anything, then post something mind numbingly stupid.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jp400 wrote:Everyone... let me introduce you to an old friend of mine..... Meet Ivan:
Ivan is my Romanian Ak47 with a Tapco folding stock.
Ivan can shoot Wolf/BrownBear junk ammo at at 100y targets all day long from the ready position and get under/around 2-3moa. With Quality ammo on a benchrest I have shot MOA with it before at that range.
Ivan has had thousands of rounds put through him, and very rarely jams. When he does jam, 9/10 times its because of something I did or forgot to do. Mainly thanks to my military background im used to holding onto the magwell of an M4 instead of useing the forward grip. On an Ak47, this tends to me pulling on the mag offsetting it and it fails to feed properly.
Thats a WASR-10 which is an AKM.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2010/07/01 02:03:41
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
Fateweaver wrote:Anti-gun retards don't even do that. They just call anything that isn't a revolver an "assault rifle", even bolt actions.
I'm surprised some aren't googling
"which end of the gun do I point away from myself" OR
"what gun is bestest gun based on MW2".
WIN!
Automatically Appended Next Post: A WASR-10? Really? Wow, and here I thought a WASR-10 was an AK-47. Man, I guess all those military equipment identification guides I read in the military lied to me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/01 02:11:04
I already said the FAMAS was the best assault rifle in MW2. Dude doesn't read threads, he had a perfect chance to take a shot at me there.
A WASR-10? Really? Wow, and here I thought a WASR-10 was an AK-47. Man, I guess all those military equipment identification guides I read in the military lied to me.
Why are you handling civilian mods for AKMs in the military? You sure that happened? You sure it's not that that didn't happen and you're just using the anonymity of the internet to make it seem like you have firsthand experience with something? Meh, you probably did see it in a manual somewhere, the visual differences between the ak-47 and the AKM are sleight and entirely dependent on where they were manufactured. You have to really dig into the specifics of the weapon and it's functionality to know or care about the difference. The AKM is the most widespread of all AK varient weapons and most AK-47s you see in the hands of militaries or on markets are actually AKMs. The AK-47 as a catchall name is pretty pervasive in the AK series and even the AK-74 is often misidentified as such. The AKM is slightly more reliable than the AK-47 and just over a pound lighter. It was also easier to fit with accessories when it was first developed, but neither gun has a true stock pattern any more so thats not really relevant fifty years after the AKM was put into service.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2010/07/01 02:22:43
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
Because terrorist use whatever types of weapons they can get their hands on?
A WASR-10 is an AK-47. In fact, an AKM is an AK-47. Both are just different types manufactured to fulfill different roles. Just like an M4 is an M16. They all got the same design characteristics, but were modified to fulfill a specific role.
The AK-47 is the best assault rifle because of it's longevity, ease of manufacture, ease of maintenance, and the ease at which it takes to learn how to fire the weapon accurately.
Because terrorist use whatever types of weapons they can get their hands on?
I don't think they're fishing around ebay for the guns though.
A WASR-10 is an AK-47. In fact, an AKM is an AK-47. Both are just different types manufactured to fulfill different roles. Just like an M4 is an M16. They all got the same design characteristics, but were modified to fulfill a specific role.
In my opinion as well as the opinions of the manufacturers and designers those things do make them different guns. Regardless the AKM is part of the AK series but it not an AK47 just as the M4 is part of the AR-15 based weapons but is not an AR-15. The parts on the AKM and the AK47 are entirely dissimilar, unlike the m16a2 and the M4 and they can not be switched out with ease.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
It might be mind-numbingly stupid according to you but it's true.
Most people I know against guns (and I know a lot) don't know the first thing about guns. Guess it's easy to bitch about something being evil and bad and not knowing anything about what it is you are classifying as "evil".
If you can't take my tongue in cheek jab at anti-gun retards as just that, tongue in cheek, then you have issues my man. If my comment offended you, well, grow a pair and then come back to guns when you can play with the big dogs.
--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
Fateweaver wrote:It might be mind-numbingly stupid according to you but it's true.
Most people I know against guns (and I know a lot) don't know the first thing about guns. Guess it's easy to bitch about something being evil and bad and not knowing anything about what it is you are classifying as "evil".
If you can't take my tongue in cheek jab at anti-gun retards as just that, tongue in cheek, then you have issues my man. If my comment offended you, well, grow a pair and then come back to guns when you can play with the big dogs.
I was more offended because you took the jab in a thread where no one had once even brought up gun control as a topic, let alone questioned the need for the weapons. It's like walking into a forest and then complaining about people that hate trees. Its pretty clear you hadn't read the thread and were just taking a shot at liberals.
Most people I know against guns (and I know a lot) don't know the first thing about guns. Guess it's easy to bitch about something being evil and bad and not knowing anything about what it is you are classifying as "evil".
Im pro gun control but I know a good bit about firearms (and have even had the chance to fire them). Guns aren't evil, they're just hunks of metal wood and plastic. Where do I sit on your scale?
If you can't take my tongue in cheek jab at anti-gun retards as just that, tongue in cheek, then you have issues my man. If my comment offended you, well, grow a pair and then come back to guns when you can play with the big dogs.
I didn't take it as tongue in cheek. That post was pretty in line with what you normally submit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/01 02:54:31
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
Fateweaver wrote:It might be mind-numbingly stupid according to you but it's true.
Most people I know against guns (and I know a lot) don't know the first thing about guns. Guess it's easy to bitch about something being evil and bad and not knowing anything about what it is you are classifying as "evil".
If you can't take my tongue in cheek jab at anti-gun retards as just that, tongue in cheek, then you have issues my man. If my comment offended you, well, grow a pair and then come back to guns when you can play with the big dogs.
I was more offended because you took the jab in a thread where no one had once even brought up gun control as a topic, let alone questioned the need for the weapons. It's like walking into a forest and then complaining about people that hate trees. Its pretty clear you hadn't read the thread and were just taking a shot at liberals.
Most people I know against guns (and I know a lot) don't know the first thing about guns. Guess it's easy to bitch about something being evil and bad and not knowing anything about what it is you are classifying as "evil".
Im pro gun control but I know a good bit about firearms (and have even had the chance to fire them). Guns aren't evil, they're just hunks of metal wood and plastic. Where do I sit on your scale?
If you can't take my tongue in cheek jab at anti-gun retards as just that, tongue in cheek, then you have issues my man. If my comment offended you, well, grow a pair and then come back to guns when you can play with the big dogs.
I didn't take it as tongue in cheek. That post was pretty in line with what you normally submit.
I never mentioned liberals. Not all anti-gun nuts are liberals (most are but not all) so you can't hold that one over me since I didn't mention liberals.
I was commenting on another posters comment about certain peoples knowledge of guns being wikkipedia and google.
Thank goodness I got you on iggy. I don't have to read your posts unless I want to. Life has been so much less stressful.
--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
You know what’s so rugged that it’s near impossible to kill, no matter how rough you treat it?
This fething thread.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Thank goodness I got you on iggy. I don't have to read your posts unless I want to. Life has been so much less stressful.
It must be so much easier not having to learn things.
I never learned from you (well, except the art of trolling).
This thread is immortal.
--The whole concept of government granted and government regulated 'permits' and the accompanying government mandate for government approved firearms 'training' prior to being blessed by government with the privilege to carry arms in a government approved and regulated manner, flies directly in the face of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”
A WASR-10 is an AK-47. In fact, an AKM is an AK-47.
You and Shuma are both wrong.
The family of guns is "AK" just like the family of guns is "AR."
So, a WASR-10 is an "AK." It's not actually an AK-47, nor is it an AKM.
Similarly an AR-15 is an "AR." It's not an M16 nor is it an M4.
There are actually very, very few AK-47s in the world. There are many, many of its descendants, and derived weapons. I've always found the Sig rifles pretty interesting. They're like a Swiss watchmaker decided to make an AK.
Its pretty clear you hadn't read the thread and were just taking a shot at liberals.
And you have a problem with that? Why do you hate freedom?
The family of guns is "AK" just like the family of guns is "AR."
So, a WASR-10 is an "AK." It's not actually an AK-47, nor is it an AKM.
The WASR-10 is a single fire variation of the AKM using a romanian made receiver. It's an AKM with a switched out part. It's a few degrees of separation closer to kevin bacon then the AK-47 and AKM were from each other in my opinion, but indeed they are separate guns as far as function and sales are concerned.
There are actually very, very few AK-47s in the world. There are many, many of its descendants, and derived weapons. I've always found the Sig rifles pretty interesting. They're like a Swiss watchmaker decided to make an AK.
I like your style.
And you have a problem with that? Why do you hate freedom?
It boils my commie blood.
----------------
Do you remember that time that thing happened?
This is a bad thread and you should all feel bad
A WASR-10 is an AK-47. In fact, an AKM is an AK-47.
You and Shuma are both wrong.
The family of guns is "AK" just like the family of guns is "AR."
So, a WASR-10 is an "AK." It's not actually an AK-47, nor is it an AKM.
Similarly an AR-15 is an "AR." It's not an M16 nor is it an M4.
There are actually very, very few AK-47s in the world. There are many, many of its descendants, and derived weapons. I've always found the Sig rifles pretty interesting. They're like a Swiss watchmaker decided to make an AK.
Its pretty clear you hadn't read the thread and were just taking a shot at liberals.
And you have a problem with that? Why do you hate freedom?
Without the AK-47 or the AR-15, the AKM and the M4 would not exist. The AK-47 is the grandfather to the whole AK series and its derivatives, just as the M16 is the grandfather of the M16 and M4 series of rifles.
Very few AK-47s in the world? What planet are you on? ~100 million AK series have been produced, out of that 100 million the AK-47 is the one that was produced the most. They are the most widely used firearm, and are used in over 50 countries.
jp400 wrote:Everyone... let me introduce you to an old friend of mine..... Meet Ivan:
Mainly thanks to my military background im used to holding onto the magwell of an M4 instead of useing the forward grip.
Translation, JP400 likes Ivan, and has been known to grab him inappropriately...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Phryxis wrote:
A WASR-10 is an AK-47. In fact, an AKM is an AK-47.
You and Shuma are both wrong.
The family of guns is "AK" just like the family of guns is "AR."
So, a WASR-10 is an "AK." It's not actually an AK-47, nor is it an AKM.
Similarly an AR-15 is an "AR." It's not an M16 nor is it an M4.
There are actually very, very few AK-47s in the world. There are many, many of its descendants, and derived weapons. I've always found the Sig rifles pretty interesting. They're like a Swiss watchmaker decided to make an AK.
Its pretty clear you hadn't read the thread and were just taking a shot at liberals.
And you have a problem with that? Why do you hate freedom?
yes, I've heard very good things about the new Sig piston driven AR. Tests show chamber temperature really is reduced. of course it costs a mint...but then again it is a Sig.
Sig Sauer! Sig Sauer!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/01 12:08:06
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Very few AK-47s in the world? What planet are you on?
I live on a planet where things make a lot more sense if you actually read them. Let's recap what I said:
"There are actually very, very few AK-47s in the world. There are many, many of its descendants, and derived weapons."
And that's the truth. The Russians made some AK-47s, but then the pretty quickly changed over to the AKM, then the AK-74, etc. etc. etc.
There are not very many ACTUAL AK-47s. There are millions upon millions of guns from the AK family. AKMs, Type 56s, all the ones produced by former Soviet client states, all the ones the Scandanavians made, etc. etc. etc. etc. These are all AK family guns, but they're not AK-47s.
The AK-47 has a milled receiver. Once they changed over to steel stampings, it became the AKM.
The WASR-10 is a single fire variation of the AKM using a romanian made receiver.
I know, I've got one. A lot like jp400s, but with all Tapco furniture. It actually doesn't work all that well for me. I may have gotten a bad batch of Wolf, but it couldn't go into battery. A guy at the gun store had some different ammo, and it shot that flawlessly, so the rifle is probably fine...
But still, yet another failure in an AK, while both my ARs have never had a stoppage that I can recall.
It takes STANAG magazines, which I find work well. I guess another complaint I have with the AK is the magazine system. It's a bit clumsy to operate, and for your trouble you get the sort of feed issues that jp400 described.
In general, the whole "fit a front lip in, then tilt back, then catch" approach is garbage. It's the same crap on the M14, FAL, etc. You can put the magazine in wrong and it binds up, etc. etc. With the STANAG mags, it's effortless. Even the release is a bit difficult to operate, poorly placed, stiff, etc. I've never understood why the AK/M14/FAL are so convoluted. I've always assumed it was for strength, but I don't see how it's any stronger.
Tests show chamber temperature really is reduced. of course it costs a mint...but then again it is a Sig.
That's gonna be the claim on all the piston driven ARs, and at this point, there are a LOT of them.
Fateweaver wrote:
I never mentioned liberals. Not all anti-gun nuts are liberals (most are but not all) so you can't hold that one over me since I didn't mention liberals.
I was commenting on another posters comment about certain peoples knowledge of guns being wikkipedia and google.
Thank goodness I got you on iggy. I don't have to read your posts unless I want to. Life has been so much less stressful.
I'm about as pro-gun as you can get yet I just got finished being called a liberal 10 times in 2 hours by my father in law because of my socialist leanings. True, you did qualify, *most*, but you're probably right, because the traditional left has been dead in this country for 30 years.
Ultimately that is beside the point though I think the problem that Shuma had which I'll express in a more polite manner is that I see no profit in bringing politics into this thread. This wasn't a gun politics argument until you came in with that. I'd love to see it not turn into a politics argument at all.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
For an assault rifle, though, .308 is a bit impractical. It's just too much for full auto fire offhanded. It's very nice for a "battle rifle" though, something to be fired at distance and then make a transition to CQB, but it will not be at its best in close.
To be fair, though, this rifle isn't so much about giving a .308 to the common infantryman, as giving an autoloader to marksmen who are currently shooting bolt guns.
As far as the future assault rifle round, there's a bunch of options out there right now, but the 6.8 SPC seems like a typical offering and probably the leading candidate. It's odd how much of a leap was made from the 7.62x51 down to the 5.56x45. One is a bit of a bear, the other is virtually recoilless. Strange that they didn't make a more gradual move.
In that respect, I've always wondered why the constant games with cartridge. The 7.62x39 strikes me as being a very useful size. Recoil is acceptable, power is good.
In the end, this is the motivation for systems like the SCAR. If you make a gun that's modular enough, you can absorb cartridge changes without too much pain.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/02 00:46:36
THAT IS NOT AN ORIGINAL AK47. I was able to get my hands on 1 (through way to many phone calls even then I hadbasicly pay to borrow it). The ORIGINAL AK can't have a good grouping at all because the 1. the bolt is off center of the rifle 2. Barrel flops around like a fish when you fire it. Also those groups that over 30 rounds. So 30 rounds with a kar 98 and 4 reloads with a 3" group is not bad at all.
Also I am thinking that the way to go is an intermediate round like the 6.8 IN the XM8 "body."
Professionals are predictable, it's the amateurs that are dangerous.
Anything you do can get you shot. Including doing nothing.
And how were you able to identify the one you got as an original?
1. the bolt is off center of the rifle
Ok, not it's not. I don't really even know what you think you're saying, but the AK's bolt is centered along its horizontal axis. It's even pretty well centered vertically, but that depends on what you count the dust cover as, etc.
Honestly though, I don't really know what you even think you're saying. You're just sorta yelling things that don't make a lot of sense.
Barrel flops around like a fish when you fire it.
No, it doesn't. It's fixed very securely to the receiver. If it wasn't the gun would explode and the shooter would die.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/07/02 03:23:28
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
