AK Sponsor
Posted: 2/5/2012 6:22:19 AM EDT
| zzz |
|
Quoted:
Stock length-of-pull on the Warsaw Pact stock fits many of us 'midgets' just right. Try coming up with a post that actually has a point and that doesn't piss off 90% of the forum. What is it with people that makes them get so butt hurt over simple things? Really people need to lighten up. Nothing the OP said is in anyway offensive. He simply stated some opinions and some facts (no matter how bitter of a pill that may be for some). He also described how he actually USES his rifle as opposed to a good chunk of people that have the latest decked out Arsenal model blah blah safe queen. There's no reason for anyone to take offense or for anyone to have their preconceived notions threatened. |
|
EVR, your pictures are awesome!!! I love seeing people use their rifles. It's a bit different than yet another range picture or a posted target. I live in Vermont and would love to do what you do.
I must admit though I would probably have my AR-15A4gery on my back. Seems like I work too much to participate in stuff like this anymore. Best of luck to you. |
| Though the "average" AK type is relatively innacurate certain models are more accurate than you think. Especially at under 100 meters. My Saiga 7.62 will hold under 2" at a hundred equal to my Winchester 30-30...certain milled reciver AKs or models with 1.5 mm stamped recievers, can be more accurate...nope not a tack driver, but you can maximize accuracy through careful choices. Krebs has done remarkable things with the platform. Good ammo like the Chinese match ammo or the Lapua, can make a big difference. A Galil or a Valmet M76 can shoot 1 1/2 at 100 with good ammo. QC on most surplus or Russian commercial ammo is very poor. Having said this I carry my AK74 in the back country all the time because in the brush, under 50 yds it is more than adequate for plinking and varmints and cheap to shoot. For serious hunting or target work the HBAR, or the bolt gun rules. Nice pix! |
Let them whine... The AK does what it does well but it's a jack of all trades and a master of none. The sight radius on M4's sucks as well but they aren't exactly long range precision rifles either. Great pictures and it looks like a good time! That right there is why I'm considering buying some property in ID.
CMS |
This picture is misleading and actually proves the point of the AKs inferior sights. What is not clearly mentioned or shown in this picture is that while the DISTANCE from the FSB to the rear sight is the same length... the location of the rear sight relative to the shooting eye is NOT. On an M4 your shooting eye is placed as close as possible to the rear apperture. (Nose to the charging handle) Which is about 1-1.5" from the rear apperture. The peep sight by itself is inherently more accurate anyway. The AK on the other hand places the rear sight on the leading edge of the receiver... a full 10.5" from rear and 11.5 inches from the shooting eye. Combine that with a rear sight that is crude to say the least... well the argument on sight radius is not dumb at all. |
|
Genius is the ability to reduce the complicated to the simple.
C. W. Ceran = AK. The electrical tape as a muzzle cover is a good idea. It has been taught with basic hunter's safety classes here for at least 25 years, probably much longer. Its hard to beat something that is effective and costs practically nothing. |
|
Quoted:
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g60/azoutdoorsman/sightradiusARAK.jpg This picture is misleading and actually proves the point of the AKs inferior sights. What is not clearly mentioned or shown in this picture is that while the DISTANCE from the FSB to the rear sight is the same length... the location of the rear sight relative to the shooting eye is NOT. On an M4 your shooting eye is placed as close as possible to the rear apperture. (Nose to the charging handle) Which is about 1-1.5" from the rear apperture. The peep sight by itself is inherently more accurate anyway. The AK on the other hand places the rear sight on the leading edge of the receiver... a full 10.5" from rear and 11.5 inches from the shooting eye. Combine that with a rear sight that is crude to say the least... well the argument on sight radius is not dumb at all. Sight radius is the distance between the front and rear sights. I never said anything about comparing peep and notched sights. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g60/azoutdoorsman/sightradiusARAK.jpg This picture is misleading and actually proves the point of the AKs inferior sights. What is not clearly mentioned or shown in this picture is that while the DISTANCE from the FSB to the rear sight is the same length... the location of the rear sight relative to the shooting eye is NOT. On an M4 your shooting eye is placed as close as possible to the rear apperture. (Nose to the charging handle) Which is about 1-1.5" from the rear apperture. The peep sight by itself is inherently more accurate anyway. The AK on the other hand places the rear sight on the leading edge of the receiver... a full 10.5" from rear and 11.5 inches from the shooting eye. Combine that with a rear sight that is crude to say the least... well the argument on sight radius is not dumb at all. Sight radius is the distance between the front and rear sights. I never said anything about comparing peep and notched sights. Yeah and when you take into consideration where your head and eye are in relation to the sights a set of AK sights leaves something more to be desired when compared to carbine length AR sights. |
|
Sight radius is the distance between the front and rear sights. I never said anything about comparing peep and notched sights.
True enough, but you said "The whole sight radius thing is pretty dumb" which leads to the conclusion that you were saying the sight systems between the two rifles promote equal performance, which we all know they do not, at least as far as most target shooting and precision shooting is concerned. I think that was the other guy's point, with which I concur. Sounds like you may agree also. Again, tho, along the path of the original topic, the sights and their placement are a factor of the LAYOUT of the rifle which is absolutely plucked right off the MKb-series of Sturmgewehre of German design. In conjunction with an intermediate cartridge, the layout was revolutionary for its time {'42-'45} and was understood as a plus by MK. |
|
Quoted:
People get butt-hurt way too easily. It didn't used to be that way 8-10 years ago on the old AK47.net site. Now, as soon as someone has a different view or opinion it's met with attitude and sarcasim. It's okay just to read a post and move on without replying. Maybe we're getting more of the yonger generation on board sorry in advance.
|
| My comparison with the 30-30 Winchester's accuracy was just to show the practicality of an AK type when hunting deer. More than adequate. For a backwoodsman AK types are used all over far northern Europe to hunt reindeer and seals and other game,..slung over the back on a sling or hanging off a dogsled or Skidoo. The comparison with the Remington model 8 is a valid one, and amusing...it was a very good rifle for it's time. What I like here is the "image"...it appeals to the backwoodsman/ survivalist in all of us. The pack and the modern black rifle has become an archtype and you see the images repeated again and again, There is a truth to it, but if you live in the wilderness, reality places limits on the myth. Here we have had a very mild snow-free winter, which allowed us time to cut more firewood. It has been easy on the deer, which translates into many fawns in spring, but portends a dry spring (drought?) The ice is almost too thin to ice fish, many of the trees are dessicating, there is no snow for the grouse to tunnel into and hide from the cold and predators. Nature going on behind the man in the foreground, puts him and his equipment in perspective. |
|
Quoted:
If you look at the AK's mechanism, it looks an awful lot like that of the Garand's (especially the FCG), with an inverted gas system, and a Remington Model 8 safety. Take a look at the Rem 8 and the Garand looks alot like the 8. John G pony'ed the FCG from the 8 to the Garand, and even the * wasn't original to JMB. The trigger group was first implemented in a French rifle of the 1800's but I forget the designer. You are right about the inverted gas system. Layout like Heinie's MKb43/MP44//StG series rilfes. |
AK Sponsor