I'm interested in looking at a new AK in the 5.45x39 family...seems that the mil surplus ammo is cheaper now than I have seen it. Looks like I could stock up a little as well. I'm a little concerned about the wound ballistics I have read about, it would appear that the AK 74 round is not as good( in terms of it's wounding capability) as opposed to the M193 5.56 nato round....I'm I not seeing something here?  What 5.45 x 39 ammo would you guys use?
Thanks,

I take it this won't be a range weapon huh.

There is alot of people that ain't breathing no more because of the 5.45x39.The ballistics are not exactly the same as the 5.56 but the 5.45x39 holds its own.It will get the job done if thats what your worried about.

Somewhere on one of the forums a poster posted some pictures of a Georgia deer he shot with a military 7N6-PS 5.45x39 round.
He and others are using the military round to hunt these smaller Southern deer and are reporting great results.
The pictures he showed of the internals of the deer showed extensive damage caused by the tumbling bullet.

Other posters are claiming that the 5.45 is about as effective on coyotes as commercial hunting ammo.

The Russians made it clear that the new 5.45 round HAD to be NO LESS effective than the standard 7.62x39 and their "real world" experiences in Afghanistan and Chechnya indicate that it is.
The Afghan's were so impressed by the 5.45 that they nicknamed it "The Poison Bullet" and "The Devils' Bullet" for the wounding effects.
The 5.45 is infamous for it extreme wounding effects cause by the wildly tumbling bullet.
The Russian believed that a tumbling bullet would be more effective, so they deliberately designed the 5.45 to tumble as quickly as possible, and to tumble wildly.
As an added "feature", when the bullet slows enough in flesh, it makes an almost 90 degree turn off the main bullet path.
This corkscrew-like tumbling and turn in an odd direction made it impossible for the crude Afghan medics to probe for a bullet still in the body.

You'll hear complaints that the US 5.56 bullet is not as effective as it could be, due to the bullet design.
You hear no complaints from Russian vets of their wars fought with the 5.45.

Quoted: I'm interested in looking at a new AK in the 5.45x39 family...seems that the mil surplus ammo is cheaper now than I have seen it. Looks like I could stock up a little as well. I'm a little concerned about the wound ballistics I have read about, it would appear that the AK 74 round is not as good( in terms of it's wounding capability) as opposed to the M193 5.56 nato round....I'm I not seeing something here?  What 5.45 x 39 ammo would you guys use? Thanks,

shamrock2,

Here's a good read by Dr. Martin Fackler...

Cheers,

Sakic #19

Doesn't look like fun to me....

www.brassfetcher.com/545x39mmBulgarian53grFMJ.html

Quoted: Somewhere on one of the forums a poster posted some pictures of a Georgia deer he shot with a military 7N6-PS 5.45x39 round. He and others are using the military round to hunt these smaller Southern deer and are reporting great results. The pictures he showed of the internals of the deer showed extensive damage caused by the tumbling bullet. Other posters are claiming that the 5.45 is about as effective on coyotes as commercial hunting ammo. The Russians made it clear that the new 5.45 round HAD to be NO LESS effective than the standard 7.62x39 and their "real world" experiences in Afghanistan and Chechnya indicate that it is. The Afghan's were so impressed by the 5.45 that they nicknamed it "The Poison Bullet" and "The Devils' Bullet" for the wounding effects. The 5.45 is infamous for it extreme wounding effects cause by the wildly tumbling bullet. The Russian believed that a tumbling bullet would be more effective, so they deliberately designed the 5.45 to tumble as quickly as possible, and to tumble wildly. As an added "feature", when the bullet slows enough in flesh, it makes an almost 90 degree turn off the main bullet path. This corkscrew-like tumbling and turn in an odd direction made it impossible for the crude Afghan medics to probe for a bullet still in the body. You'll hear complaints that the US 5.56 bullet is not as effective as it could be, due to the bullet design. You hear no complaints from Russian vets of their wars fought with the 5.45.

This is pretty much what I have gathered about the 5.45 also...I'm under the impression it's more effective than 5.56 overall for wound damage because the design is also not fragmentation dependant like it appears the 5.56 is.

Z

Another thing: Since the 5.45 is not dependant on fragmentation (like the 5.56), it doesnt matter what barrel it is shot from. There is no "pre-determined range" that it has to go past before it tumbles. The 5.45 is very rear heavy with it having a steel core in the back and a hollow air pocket in the front. So if you shoot it at someone using an 8.5" AKS74U barrel at 50 yards, it's gonna tumble just as well as from a 23" RPK74 at 150 yards.

Or at least that's what I've gathered from what I've read. That is why I've gone with my AKS74U as my SHTF weapon.

Quoted: Another thing: Since the 5.45 is not dependant on fragmentation (like the 5.56), it doesnt matter what barrel it is shot from. There is no "pre-determined range" that it has to go past before it tumbles. The 5.45 is very rear heavy with it having a steel core in the back and a hollow air pocket in the front. So if you shoot it at someone using an 8.5" AKS74U barrel at 50 yards, it's gonna tumble just as well as from a 23" RPK74 at 150 yards. Or at least that's what I've gathered from what I've read. That is why I've gone with my AKS74U as my SHTF weapon.

Preach it brother !!

Quoted: Another thing: Since the 5.45 is not dependant on fragmentation (like the 5.56), it doesnt matter what barrel it is shot from. There is no "pre-determined range" that it has to go past before it tumbles. The 5.45 is very rear heavy with it having a steel core in the back and a hollow air pocket in the front. So if you shoot it at someone using an 8.5" AKS74U barrel at 50 yards, it's gonna tumble just as well as from a 23" RPK74 at 150 yards. Or at least that's what I've gathered from what I've read. That is why I've gone with my AKS74U as my SHTF weapon.

The 5.56 NATO does not need to fragment to produce the horid wound channels.  It can fragment, tumble, or both.  

I am not skewled enough on the 5.45x39 to debate its effectiveness s the 5.56 NATO, but I can say that it does appear the 5.56 NATO does rely on velocity more so than the 5.45x39 to be effective in bullet performance.      

I can say this with confidence: I dont want to get hit with either one and I would feel more than adequetly armed behind a Tantal or an AR15A4 (notice I mentioned a AR rifle, and not a carbine).

Quoted: Quoted: I'm interested in looking at a new AK in the 5.45x39 family...seems that the mil surplus ammo is cheaper now than I have seen it. Looks like I could stock up a little as well. I'm a little concerned about the wound ballistics I have read about, it would appear that the AK 74 round is not as good( in terms of it's wounding capability) as opposed to the M193 5.56 nato round....I'm I not seeing something here?  What 5.45 x 39 ammo would you guys use? Thanks, shamrock2, Here's a good read by Dr. Martin Fackler... Cheers, Sakic #19

"We conclude that the AK74, despite it's rather high velocity and marked tendency to yaw soon after penetration causes relatively nondramatic wounds due to it's non-fragmenting behavior."

"Knowing the characteristics of the AK74 bullet, (particularly it's non-fragmenting behavior in living soft tissue) and the type of wounds it produces, operating surgeons should be able to asses the wounds expeditiously and approach treatment accurately."

Perhaps owing to its "exotic" Russian heritage, there are a lot of myths surrounding the 5.45 round.  I'm convinced these myths are started by people selling the ammo, and then perpetuated on message boards like this where someone knows a guy who knows this other guy, who read on the Internet about another guy who took down an entire pack of coyotes with one 5.45 bullet!  And wow, with names like "WASP" and "Poison Bullet," it MUST be a devastating round, right?!?

Fact: Ballistics tests do not show the 5.45 to be the devastating round Internet folklore has made it out to be.  In fact, in terminal wound ballistic tests, 5.45 slightly underperforms both good ol' 5.56 and 7.62x39.

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying I'd be willing to get shot by a 5.45 round.  Nor am I saying that the 5.45 is not effective.  I'm just saying that the mystique surrounding the 5.45 round, and claims that it is an especially deadly round, are for the most part unwarranted.  

As other have mentioned, Fackler and other scientific studies of wound ballistics have generally shown 5.45x39 to be somewhat anemic compared to 5.56 NATO or good ol' 7.62x39.  

I watched a recent Russian documentary on AK series weapons, wherein they claimed many Russian special forces units are moving back to 7.62x39 rifles and are putting pressure on the weapons factories to develop a new rifle with a new chambering - I'd imagine something in the 6mm range.  This may well be speculation, though.

Interestingly, the same documentary also had an interview with Kalashnikov, who himself said he was against the 5.45 from the beginning and wanted to stick with the 7.62x39 cartridge for future development, but the Soviet leadership were very insistent developing an analogue to the 5.56 NATO, and he had to go along with the establishment.

Regardless, I wouldn't want to stand in front of any of the three - they're all plenty deadly.  5.45 shoots flatter (much like 5.56 NATO) than the 7.62x39, too.