Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/22/2005 12:36:14 AM EDT
I'm thinking about getting a Krinkov, or another carbine and was wondering what your take was on the 5.45mm round. I have never even fired a 5.45mm and have no idea what to expect. Is the round better suited for carbine use? any help would be appreciated.
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 4:30:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 6:09:14 AM EDT
Expecting my Bulgaria Arsenal AKS74 this week, looking forward to doing some comparing between Barnaul 123grFMJ 7,62x39 and 60 grain Barnaul 5,45x39. Both weapons will have a muzzlebrake on it(currently have my 7,62AK set up as an AK103 clone), think I will lean towards 5,45mm from this week forward....
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 6:10:06 AM EDT
I shot 5.45 (bulgy AK74 on OOW receiver) for the first time 3 weeks ago, and shot it alongside a Yugo SKS. I was just shooting offhand - good old country ditch shooting. I found the 5.45 to have MUCH less recoil, and it appeared more accurate. I will be able to put it on paper in September, so I'll have a better idea what it will do on paper then. I let my 10 year old son shoot it - I hadn't even seen an AK47 up close when I was 10. I hope he still thinks his dad is cool when he gets to be a teenager.
Link Posted: 8/22/2005 6:20:46 AM EDT
The 5.45mm's velocity out of a 16" AK 74 barrel is 2880 fps.
From a Krinkov barrel, it's 2369 fps. This is with a 8 inch difference in barrel length.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 5:12:05 AM EDT
Thanks guys.

Getting a 5.45mm would mean having to stock yet another caliber of rounds for me, which is the ONLY reason holding me back from getting one, but if they are as good as you say they are, it might be worth it.

Thanks again.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 5:33:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 5:38:46 AM EDT
5.45 is an awesome little bullet, if I was going to have a Krink that is the only choice in calber I would consider...With Barnaul 5.45 you cant go wrong IMO...
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 5:39:19 AM EDT
If I do my part, I have no problems hitting our 450 yard chest-sized gong with the 5.45. I can't come close with my 7.62 guns. I'm a horrible shot, too. I shoot my ORF Bulgy '74 better than my Bushmaster 5.56 CAR also.

I also have more faith, leathality wise, in the 5.45 than the 5.56. Of course I have no experiance to back that up, I just have more faith in the idea behind it.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 9:18:13 AM EDT
Agreed, if you want a Krinkov, the 5.45 is the caliber of choice. Good luck finding a kit in that caliber if you're going that route. I missed out, too.

I REALLY like my Bulgarian 5.45 AK's. Very controllable round. I wish they were full auto.

Scott
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 9:36:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bullitt3401:
Agreed, if you want a Krinkov, the 5.45 is the caliber of choice. Good luck finding a kit in that caliber if you're going that route. I missed out, too.

I REALLY like my Bulgarian 5.45 AK's. Very controllable round. I wish they were full auto.

Scott


I've read a few rumors that some may show up again. Just random posts, nothing solid. Time will tell.

As far as 5.45 goes, i think it is far better for getting rounds on target, but probably not as effective as far as wounding goes when compared to 7.62x39. Personally, i like the lighter recoil and nearly nonexistant muzzle climb (when combined with a 74 brake).
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 9:46:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/23/2005 9:51:00 AM EDT by fadedsun]

Originally Posted By clange:

Originally Posted By Bullitt3401:
Agreed, if you want a Krinkov, the 5.45 is the caliber of choice. Good luck finding a kit in that caliber if you're going that route. I missed out, too.

I REALLY like my Bulgarian 5.45 AK's. Very controllable round. I wish they were full auto.

Scott


I've read a few rumors that some may show up again. Just random posts, nothing solid. Time will tell.

As far as 5.45 goes, i think it is far better for getting rounds on target, but probably not as effective as far as wounding goes when compared to 7.62x39. Personally, i like the lighter recoil and nearly nonexistant muzzle climb (when combined with a 74 brake).



Oh you'll see PLENTY of newly imported Bulgarian AK kits.....they'll just be "mexican" AK kits....

If you are looking for a 5.45 kit then go give Greentimber a visit. He had Tantal kits for 199$ and up...I bought a good condition kit for 229$ shipped, FYI.

Link Posted: 8/23/2005 10:04:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fadedsun:

Originally Posted By clange:

Originally Posted By Bullitt3401:
Agreed, if you want a Krinkov, the 5.45 is the caliber of choice. Good luck finding a kit in that caliber if you're going that route. I missed out, too.

I REALLY like my Bulgarian 5.45 AK's. Very controllable round. I wish they were full auto.

Scott


I've read a few rumors that some may show up again. Just random posts, nothing solid. Time will tell.

As far as 5.45 goes, i think it is far better for getting rounds on target, but probably not as effective as far as wounding goes when compared to 7.62x39. Personally, i like the lighter recoil and nearly nonexistant muzzle climb (when combined with a 74 brake).



Oh you'll see PLENTY of newly imported Bulgarian AK kits.....they'll just be "mexican" AK kits....

If you are looking for a 5.45 kit then go give Greentimber a visit. He had Tantal kits for 199$ and up...I bought a good condition kit for 229$ shipped, FYI.



Well, i was specifically talking about 5.45 bulgarian krinks. I already have something in 5.45, but the krink calls to me for some reason. Someone on this board said watch k-var, and someone on gunsnet claimed k-var was sitting on a bunch of kits/barrels. Could be bullshit, could be true, all i know is i'd like a krink kit so i hope its true.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 11:24:39 AM EDT
Yes, the 5.56x45 is superior to the russian 5.45x39. I forget what I article I read this in but, the russians were quoted to say that the american 5.56 is 29% more effective than the russian 5.45.

But hey who cares if you're going to have a krinkov I would rather have it in 5.45 than anything else.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 11:34:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:
Yes, the 5.56x45 is superior to the russian 5.45x39. I forget what I article I read this in but, the russians were quoted to say that the american 5.56 is 29% more effective than the russian 5.45.

But hey who cares if you're going to have a krinkov I would rather have it in 5.45 than anything else.


The Kalashnikovs in 5.56 x 45 mm were created exclusively for export. As a matter of fact, firing the NATO ammunition, AK-101 and AK-102 showed the results noticeably better than 5.45 x 39 mm. First, the case of a 5.56 round is by 6 mm longer and provides propulsion about 20 % greater. Second, quality of cartridge components including propellant, primer and projectile is evidently superior. The geometry of the longer NATO case with least difference between the diameter of the case body and the bullet results in better fire accuracy. Hence, the hit probability as well as the accuracy potential of AK-101 is 22 - 23 % higher than those of the AK74M.

club.guns.ru/eng/ak100.htm
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 11:50:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 12:49:47 PM EDT
I am a 5.45 fan.

It is a great round and I love my AK74 sidefolder.

Max
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 1:40:08 PM EDT
The only reasons I can think of to get a 5.45... mags are cheap, good plinker since there is no recoil, and it's "historically accurate and authentic".

Real 7N6 5.45mm ammunition is not readily available in the US. I wouldn't count on Wolf or Barnaul 5.45 being any better than their 5.56mm offerings. Good for plinking, absolutely. Good for anything else, not so much.

5.45 may be marginally more effective against unarmored 130lb Afghanis than 7.62x39mm. In Chechnya it has not fared so well.

Since I don't care about the Hague Convention my SHTF stash is Georgia Arms 125gr Ballistic Tip 7.62x39.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 2:50:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 6:06:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sigurd:
The only reasons I can think of to get a 5.45... mags are cheap, good plinker since there is no recoil, and it's "historically accurate and authentic".

Real 7N6 5.45mm ammunition is not readily available in the US. I wouldn't count on Wolf or Barnaul 5.45 being any better than their 5.56mm offerings. Good for plinking, absolutely. Good for anything else, not so much.

5.45 may be marginally more effective against unarmored 130lb Afghanis than 7.62x39mm. In Chechnya it has not fared so well.

Since I don't care about the Hague Convention my SHTF stash is Georgia Arms 125gr Ballistic Tip 7.62x39.


True, Russia started to make the 7N10 enhanced peneration and the 7N22 armor piercing 5.45mm for use in Chechnya.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 6:59:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Templar:

Originally Posted By Sigurd:
Since I don't care about the Hague Convention my SHTF stash is Georgia Arms 125gr Ballistic Tip 7.62x39.




You're a bad, bad man.



BWAHAHAHA! Qoute of the day!

Link Posted: 8/23/2005 7:03:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By No1Here:

Originally Posted By Sigurd:
The only reasons I can think of to get a 5.45... mags are cheap, good plinker since there is no recoil, and it's "historically accurate and authentic".

Real 7N6 5.45mm ammunition is not readily available in the US. I wouldn't count on Wolf or Barnaul 5.45 being any better than their 5.56mm offerings. Good for plinking, absolutely. Good for anything else, not so much.

5.45 may be marginally more effective against unarmored 130lb Afghanis than 7.62x39mm. In Chechnya it has not fared so well.

Since I don't care about the Hague Convention my SHTF stash is Georgia Arms 125gr Ballistic Tip 7.62x39.


True, Russia started to make the 7N10 enhanced peneration and the 7N22 armor piercing 5.45mm for use in Chechnya.



The Russians were issuing AKMs in small numbers if I'm correct when they went into chechnya.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 12:11:13 PM EDT
After readiing the problems the US Military has had with the SS192 in the short barreled M4's over penetrating, I assumed that the 5.45 round would suffer the same problems, IE, unable to break apart or tumble when shot out of the shory Krink Barrel.

Therefore, my Krinks and pistols are in 7.62, so if Im just going to make a hole, it may as well be as big, and carry as much power as possible, when it hits.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 1:39:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By frick:
After readiing the problems the US Military has had with the SS192 in the short barreled M4's over penetrating, I assumed that the 5.45 round would suffer the same problems, IE, unable to break apart or tumble when shot out of the shory Krink Barrel.

Therefore, my Krinks and pistols are in 7.62, so if Im just going to make a hole, it may as well be as big, and carry as much power as possible, when it hits.


I dont think the 5.45s tumbling effect is velocity specific. The 5.56 needs velocity only so it can fragment, not tumble. 5.45 does not fragment, which is why people never mention velocity or barrel length when talking about 5.45. If it hits you its going to be sideways in about 10-15cm no matter how fast its going.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 4:16:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By clange:

Originally Posted By frick:
After readiing the problems the US Military has had with the SS192 in the short barreled M4's over penetrating, I assumed that the 5.45 round would suffer the same problems, IE, unable to break apart or tumble when shot out of the shory Krink Barrel.

Therefore, my Krinks and pistols are in 7.62, so if Im just going to make a hole, it may as well be as big, and carry as much power as possible, when it hits.


I dont think the 5.45s tumbling effect is velocity specific. The 5.56 needs velocity only so it can fragment, not tumble. 5.45 does not fragment, which is why people never mention velocity or barrel length when talking about 5.45. If it hits you its going to be sideways in about 10-15cm no matter how fast its going.



Yes, that's correct. All fmj .mil rifle bullets will tumble/yaw. It is a property of gyroscopic stabilization of an ass-heavy round suddenly slowing down.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 4:32:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By frick:
After readiing the problems the US Military has had with the SS192 in the short barreled M4's over penetrating, I assumed that the 5.45 round would suffer the same problems, IE, unable to break apart or tumble when shot out of the shory Krink Barrel.

Therefore, my Krinks and pistols are in 7.62, so if Im just going to make a hole, it may as well be as big, and carry as much power as possible, when it hits.



It doesn't have a tumbling threshold. It'll tumble at 2000fps aswell as at 2900FPS.

I'd go with the 5.45 if it wasn't for ammo logistics...
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 4:54:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 5:09:50 PM EDT by Dawg180]

Originally Posted By fadedsun:

Originally Posted By frick:
After readiing the problems the US Military has had with the SS192 in the short barreled M4's over penetrating, I assumed that the 5.45 round would suffer the same problems, IE, unable to break apart or tumble when shot out of the shory Krink Barrel.

Therefore, my Krinks and pistols are in 7.62, so if Im just going to make a hole, it may as well be as big, and carry as much power as possible, when it hits.



It doesn't have a tumbling threshold. It'll tumble at 2000fps aswell as at 2900FPS.

I'd go with the 5.45 if it wasn't for ammo logistics...



There is no such thing as a 'tumble threshold', all rounds tumble when they strike an object regardless of their velocity. The 'threshold" with 5.56x45mm refers to the minmum velocity at which the round will FRAGMENT, not at which it will tumble.

Homework assignment, to the Ammo Oracle with you!

[ETA] And the problem with 'SS192' is not that it overpenettrated, it was that the round dropped below the velocity necessary to fragment reliably at around 100 meters give or take when fired out of a 14.5" barrel. Of to the Ammo Oracle with you too!

[ETA x2] Heavier, slower rounds tend to perform better out of shorter barrels [as compared to a lighter, faster round out of the same length barrel] due to simple physics. Terminal ballistcs are determined in great part by the amount of Energy delivered to the target [although bullet construction will play a great part in the real world perfomance too], with Energy = Mass x Velocity x Velocity. As you can see, greater velocity gives you a nice gain in Energy. However, it takes time, or more appropriately, barrel length, to impart that additional velocity on the bullet through acceleration by the expansion of the powder burning behind it. Additionally, it is far easier to add mass to a bullet than velocity for obvious reasons. Basically there is a point where you simply can't accelerate a bullet fast enough because the barrel is too short and you can't burn all the powder to impart the necessary Energy to the round- the horrendous muzzle flash and report you experience from a 7.5" barreled AR is actually wasted powder releasing it energy. If you still are confused, ask yourself why pistols use comparatively large and heavy rounds compared to a rifle- the answer is a 120 to 200 grain round is optimal for a 4 to 5 inch barrel, while lighter rounds with lots more powder are more ideal for much longer barrels (plus a lighter, faster round has less ddrop over distance amond other things).

So in a nutshell, barring terminal ballistics via fancy bullet design [i.e. a cannelure that causes the bullet to break in two and multiply its terminal effects, i.e. XM193 5.56x45mm] I would suspect you will get better terminal ballistics from the 7.62x39mm vs. the 5.45 round.



Link Posted: 8/24/2005 5:51:00 PM EDT
I think its time for somebody to produce some gelatin test photos showing the 5.45 vs 5.56 vs 7.62 in a krink length barrel, and solve the dispute.

Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:04:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 6:06:45 PM EDT by clange]
Theres not really much of a dispute i think. Out of a short barrel like a krink (10 inches or less) 5.56 will not fragment unless the target is pretty close, probably what, within 75 yards? AR guys can explain all that, correct me, etc. 5.45 will do its thing (which is not as good as a 5.56 round fragmenting, but better than a 5.56 round that doesnt fragment) regardless of velocity. 7.62 will likely just punch a .30 caliber hole straight through, as they start to tumble much later than 5.45. So at close distances, the 5.56 would probably be the best, followed by the 5.45. If its greater distance the 5.45 would probably be better.

Thats for FMJ though, and if you use soft point 7.62 then you need to know how well it expands, because it could very well perform better than the other two at any range.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:23:19 PM EDT
I think that you'd find none of them doing much yawing at all, and that the most damage would be caused by the amount of hydrostatic shock any of them could do as they punch straight through and out, hence, my belief the larger bullet would deliver more energy, and a larger initial wound channel, much like a pistol round.

Go back and look at the FBI tests they did after the shootout that killed all the agents in Florida, what did they end up finding? That the 9mm didnt cause enough initial lethal damage, so they went up to a forty caliber, thats where we got the 40 S & W, which was a compromise, to fit in a female LE's hand, and just not reaccepting something old and dumb, like a 45ACP.

Granted, toss in expanding projectiles, and its a whole different game, but if we're talking mil spec, well.....short of moving up to an intermediate round like the 6.8, I still fall into the big, dumb, bullet camp.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:31:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 6:47:10 PM EDT by clange]

Originally Posted By frick:
I think that you'd find none of them doing much yawing at all


At normal velocities, 5.45 will be completely sideways after 10cm from contact with gelatin. At lower speeds, it may be less, like 15cm, but that would still be well before it made its way through. 7.62x39 yaws much slower and will likely yaw much less by the time it makes it through.

Edit: thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=141935 Ok, like 11-12cm, but look at 7.62x39, it takes 25cm to even start.

Note also, the 5.56 basically explodes if its going fast enough to fragment. A short barrel like a krink would limit the range at which that will occur, but then again you usually want shorter barrels for close quarters stuff, and close range will be more common then long range i suppose.

Either way, i only kill paper so i like 5.45 and 7.62, and i'll probably get an AR some day as well.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:52:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 7:01:56 PM EDT by frick]
The charts you reference show velocities above 3000 FPS, including the 53 grain AK 74 round, they dont address a slower round, from a barrel half the length the round was designed for.

Taken from the "oracle", and pay attention to the importance of fragmentation.

Q. My department is considering using 10" or 11.5" barrels for our ARs. They are so cool, and everyone knows that all the real go-fast, high-speed, low-drag operators use SBRs. Plus, Robert DeNiro uses one in "Heat." What's the best ammo to use to poke big holes in the bad guys with these?

We dislike this question. We dislike it because of its premise. The premise is that 10" or 11.5" barrels are good choices for law enforcement or defensive use. We strongly disagree with this premise. Some of us actually dislike even 14.5" barrels, in fact.

The primary wounding mechanism for .223 and 5.56 ammunition is fragmentation. The primary factor in fragmentation is velocity. The primary velocity booster is barrel length. 11.5" barrels barely bring milspec (NATO) 55 grain FMJ to 2700 fps (the critical fragmentation threshold for many FMJ .223 rounds). Accordingly, any distance at all drops the rounds below fragmentation velocity. 10" barrels are unlikely to ever get rounds above fragmentation velocity at all.

If you are saddled with a department mandated SBR we recommend the following:

1. A marathon letter writing campaign citing the Ammo Oracle often persuading the powers that be to see reason and potentially save lives by giving you REAL weapons, not toys.

2. Use heavier rounds known to fragment at lower velocities and do more tissue damage such as:

68 grain Hornady Match OTM
69 grain SMK OTM
75 grain Hornady TAP
77 grain Nosler OTM

Obviously, you should probably have a 1:7" twist.

Under no circumstances should you take comfort in the assurances your armorer gives you that the latest soft point or hollow point law enforcement specialty round will solve the problem. Most likely it will not. Soft point and hollow point rounds lack penetration even at high velocity. Because they are not prone to yawing or fragmentation lower velocities will not increase penetration as with many fragmenting rounds.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:57:12 PM EDT
At least we got people reading The Oracle now! Whoo-Hoo!
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 6:58:41 PM EDT
Also from the oracle:

Q. I heard that M855 has had serious stopping problems in Afghanistan, and earlier in Somalia. Is this true?

It's possible, yes.

Though early M855 experiments showed the round fragments well in the lab, more recent testing has been showing inconsistent fragmentation. Partially because of the complex construction of the round, M855 has widely-variable yaw performance, often not yawing at all through 7-8" or even 10" of tissue. Testing has shown large batch-to-batch differences in yaw performance even from the same manufacturer, and given the number of plants manufacturing SS-109-type bullets, fragmentation performance is very difficult to predict. This is complicated by the low velocity implicit in using M855 out of the short barreled M4 platform.

Interesting, few of these reports seem to be coming from troops 20" or SAW platforms. It would seem that the additional velocity from the longer barrel provides adequate usable fragmentation range for M855 in the majority of cases. From shorter barrels, such as the M4's 14.5" barrel, M855's fragmentation range varies from as much as 90m to as little as 10m, which frequently isn't enough range.

From Dr. Roberts:

"Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56x45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite their being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting. This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, malnourished individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants. Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable—with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths. Luke Haag’s papers in the AFTE Journal (33(1):11-28, Winter 2001) describe this problem."
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 7:00:16 PM EDT
Oh, I read the oracle long ago, sorry if what I remember isnt verbatim, but the highlights tend to stick with me, thats why Im keeping my german 308 in battle packs safe and dry.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 7:00:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 7:07:08 PM EDT by clange]

Taken from the "oracle", and pay attention to the importance of fragmentation.

Fragmentation does not matter at all with 5.45 and 7.62, as i said multiple places.

If you're saying 5.56 does not perform well out of a short barrel, i never argued with that either, i said the same thing.

Edit: I also assume that the yawing effect of 5.45 would be similar at lower velocities, since i have never heard otherwise. The part of the article that you bolded suggests that 5.56 does not yaw quickly or well, which would be expected with the bullet shape. Conversely, the 5.45 is a long unstable round which yaws very quickly.

I still think, for FMJ, at close distance 5.56 would be better, and at farther distance 5.45 would be better. If you use 7.62x39 softpoint, it would perform well as long as it expands.

Edit2: Ok, the first one you posted said 10 inch barrels may never get to fragmenting velocity at all, so i guess 5.45 or 7.62 would be a better krink caliber. I did not know 5.56 performance out of a 10 inch barrel was that bad.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 7:10:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/24/2005 7:15:07 PM EDT by frick]
Well, short of just guessing, Id tend to assume that the 5.45, short of having magic bullets, would tend to perform more like a 5.56 than a 7.62 round, the original question was about whats best, for a krinkov or carbine length barrel, chances are he's going to shooting Wolf or Barnaul 5.45, not 7n6, which is specifically designed to unbalance and tumble after entering flesh.

I prayed at the "oracle" and it did not answer all questions.

like I said, lets see the gelatin tests for the particular weapon/caliber(s)/barrel length in question.

Oh, I'd also like some Zombie cadavers to be tested as well.......

And just to note, the oracle does state there just hasnt been the testing of 5.45 that there has been for 5.56 and 7.62, the chart the show for the 5.45 doesnt even describe the round any better than 53 grain.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 7:16:19 PM EDT
I just want to add, there is one surefire way to assure you pick the right caliber, OWN THEM BOTH ! ! !
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 7:29:17 PM EDT

Well, short of just guessing, Id tend to assume that the 5.45, short of having magic bullets, would tend to perform more like a 5.56 than a 7.62 round, the original question was about whats best, for a krinkov or carbine length barrel, chances are he's going to shooting Wolf or Barnaul 5.45, not 7n6, which is specifically designed to unbalance and tumble after entering flesh.

I've read few places that the steel core was supposed to move into the nose when it hits, but that doesnt make much sense since it would move weight forward, making it less rear heavy, and less likely to yaw.

I guess we just need to see some tests out of krinks then.
Link Posted: 8/24/2005 10:14:39 PM EDT
+1 on krinks + gelatin (and throw in a 7.5" barrel AR for good measure just so we can settle what it does too)

Link Posted: 8/25/2005 2:40:32 AM EDT
Thanks for all the interesting reading guys, I appreciate it. Yes, the next gun I get will be a shorty, whether it be a Krink or Carbine.

I don't plan on going around shooting people with my new aquisition...but we never know do we? LOL! My concerns about the 5.45mm round comes from me wondering if it truly is an improvement over the 7.62mm round, not just for ballistics but for handling characteristics, flash, report and all that other good stuff. Like I said, it will be a whole new round for me.

I only recently got into AR15's (little under a year now) and what impressed me the most about them (coming off of shooting mostly AK's & SKS's) was how accurate and smooth the gun was compared, partly due to the smaller round. I was a little thrown off by how much smaller the AR rounds were to what I was used to (7.62mm X 39mm) Heheheh...the 5.56mm rounds almost looked like a joke, but I've since aquired respect for it. I was just wondering if I was in for a similar experience with the 5.45mm round as well.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 6:34:20 AM EDT


That would be more appealing to me than a Krinkov.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 7:34:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Atreides:
My concerns about the 5.45mm round comes from me wondering if it truly is an improvement over the 7.62mm round, not just for ballistics but for handling characteristics, flash, report and all that other good stuff. Like I said, it will be a whole new round for me.


Well, i think you would like it. It has less recoil then 7.62, and muzzle climb is almost nonexistant with a 74 brake. Not sure about flash and report, but with the brake its louder to the sides and front than 7.62.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 7:37:13 AM EDT
Get both.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 10:13:04 AM EDT
All my 5.45 aquisitions are in a long rifle, a SAR 2 which I shoot alot, and a bulgy sidefolder to the left, which, I still have yet to fire, ultimately, I would like to own a 5.45 Krink as well.

I agree, its a more pleasant round to shoot, even though my SAR has a little trigger slap, which has lightened as Ive used it. Accuracy using the Kobra, is great, a much better shooting round than the 7.62, I believe.

That said, the majority of my AK's, 2 pre ban chinese, two Mak 90's, a new pistol, a Romanian RPK build, and a M92 krink underfolder I just added, are all 7.62 caliber. And I feel, all have their own place, collector, and performance wise.

But, ultimately, its the shooter who makes the difference, a bad carpenter with good tools, is still a bad carpenter.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 12:51:59 PM EDT
HTH
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 1:38:01 PM EDT

I've shot coyote and livestock killing dogs with XM193 and 5.45mm.

XM193 was not a quick killer and took multiple shots to make the coyote shut up. Yap yap yap. 5.45mm still took multiple shots, but I was on a run and kept shooting until they were all down like anchors hit them, 8 shots in probably 3 seconds. Nothing stays on target like a 5.45 for fast multiple shots. One of the side body shots looked like a .45-70 exited and it bleed out like it too. It was a massive exit wound.

While I like XM193 for fragmentation, if 5.45mm can consistently produce large exit wounds with blood gushing out, it might just be superior in some situations. Just don't use it where you can't make a mess because it will look like a blood bath took place there. What a mess I made.
Link Posted: 8/25/2005 1:44:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Robert2011:
I've shot coyote and livestock killing dogs with XM193 and 5.45mm.

XM193 was not a quick killer and took multiple shots to make the coyote shut up. Yap yap yap. 5.45mm still took multiple shots, but I was on a run and kept shooting until they were all down like anchors hit them, 8 shots in probably 3 seconds. Nothing stays on target like a 5.45 for fast multiple shots. One of the side body shots looked like a .45-70 exited and it bleed out like it too. It was a massive exit wound.

While I like XM193 for fragmentation, if 5.45mm can consistently produce large exit wounds with blood gushing out, it might just be superior in some situations. Just don't use it where you can't make a mess because it will look like a blood bath took place there. What a mess I made.




+1 on the xm193 being a sucky dog round. Buddy shot a feral dog at his ranch at about 100 yards with his Ar15 and Xm193, one shot in the shoulder and the dog was off running.

Link Posted: 8/25/2005 2:31:57 PM EDT
Ok, not to change the subject, but where can I get one of these??


Originally Posted By No1Here:


That would be more appealing to me than a Krinkov.

Link Posted: 8/25/2005 8:30:37 PM EDT
Give me about three months, and I'll show you pictures of mine.

Link Posted: 8/25/2005 8:38:20 PM EDT

Where can you get folding stocks like that?

That would be the ultimate modern Mother Russia upgrade.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top