AK Sponsor
Posted: 5/3/2007 7:48:33 AM EDT
|
Bear with me on this, as I've been a shooter for less than a year. Why isn't an AK more accurate than it is? I'm not knocking the AK, and I know that not all AKs are the same. Perhaps the question should be "What makes a gun accurate and why doesn't the AK have these features?" As a total n00b, I always thought the barrel and the cartridge made up the vast majority of accuracy (assuming the shooter does his part). What makes an AR more accurate than an AK (generally speaking)? Why don't I hear about match-grade barrels, triggers, and ammo for AKs? I know the AK was never intended to be a tack-driver but neither was the 1911. 1911s are the basis for a ton of match guns. Thoughts, flames, and opinions are welcome! |
|
Loose chambers, lack of accurate ammo, and especially the design of the gas block, piston, and carrier combined with a reletively thin barrel are the cause of the bulk of the AK's accuracy problems. When the cartridge is fired and gas is tapped from the barrel and used to drive back the AK's massive bolt carrier and piston assembly, the same force that drives the piston rearward pushes on the gas block as well. This deflects the barrel downward and causes it to (gross exaggeration) flop all over the place. I theorize that if one was to devise a different method of attaching the gas tube in a way that it's slightly tensioned, the barrel would not be defected and accuracy may be improved. |
|
1911s were made to function no matter what, and had a corresponding lack of precision. A 1911 customized for accuracy would not fair well in a dirty environment. The AK is built with the same thinking. It is built to work no matter what. The looser tolerances allow operation at the expense of precision. The AKs "mystique" is its reliability. A very accurate one could be built with custom parts and hand loaded match ammo, but the demand is not there for these parts or ammo to be readily available. |
|
Fair enough question. Here are some reasons. I invite anybody more knowledgeable than myself to correct me if I'm wrong. 1. The AK was designed first and foremost to function reliably. This design allowed for more "play" in the action. Some refer to this as, "loose tolerances," and it can take away from accuracy. 2. The AK47 shoots a 7.62 cartridge that kicks a bit more than 5.56, though it is still an intermediate cartridge. Ceteris paribus, the cartridge with more recoil is going to make rapid follow up shots, or automatic fire, harder to keep on target. 3. Generally speaking, many brands of 7.62x39 ammunition aren't loaded with the same quality standards that you find with 5.56 ammunition. 4. Quality standards in rifle manufacturing. The AK is usually considered a poor man's rifle and it's manufacturing sometimes reflects this mindset. 5. Simple iron sights with a short sight radius. The basic AK47 sight is crude and has a short sight radius compared to the AR. It allows for rapid target acquisition, especially at short ranges, but is less than ideal for precision shooting. Having said that I want to mention that quality-made AK variants tend to have better accuracy on average. AK variants chambered in other cartridges (.308, .223, and 5.45) also frequently see improvements in accuracy. Improvements in the iron sights or the use of optics also tends to show a marked increase in accuracy. There are also quality adjustable triggers available. |
|
I wonder how much site radius affects the perception of AK's not being accurate? I mean, a 20 inch AR has a much greater site radius, and on most 16 inch ARs people use optics. Plus on AKs the rear site is pretty far forward. Just a thought I had the other day. i don't know. I am an AR lover by the way. 
|
| I have an on-going crude experiment. Have a AR BM 16"bbl carbine with Eotech and an Arsenal -106SLR with an 8X Russian scope. With the same ammo, same bench set-up, same shooter (me), same weather, etc., the BM has approximately half of the group size as the AK. The AR has a trigger upgrade, and in that regard is much more user-friendly than the stock -106 trigger which is supposed to be superior to the typical AK trigger, but is hard to get used to. Would like to understand why the difference if there's anything other than operator error, which is sure a possibility. A work in progress. |
|
1. piston driven guns (they say) are less accurate than DI 2. AK receivers seem to have a lot of flex in them, which will open groups up 3. short sight radius 4. looser tolerances on part fit, different manufacturing standards 5. less quality control in ammo 6. Eastern European engineering... |
|
Great responses, thanks guys. So from what I gather, if someone had the time, money, and expertise, an AK-style rifle could be built from a thick, solid, milled receiver with a precision, match-grade barrel along with some fancy-pants MatchKing handloads and a high-$$$ scope and shoot some really nice groups. What is the best accuracy you have seen from an AK? Can Joe Schmoe buy/do anything to improve the accuracy of his $450 Yugo at the (marginal) expense of reliability? How do receiver flex and loose chambers affect accuracy? (I know they make it worse... but how/why?) Is there such a thing as a "match-grade" AK? Has any small-time builder ever made such a beast? In a world of $300 Rock Island 1911s and $3000 Les Baer 1911s, there is obviously a market for all prices and types of guns. On a somewhat related note, is the AK covered by patents? If someone wanted to produce a 100% American-made AK clone (regardless of price), could they do it and sell them without worrying about intellectual property rights? "In Soviet Russia, car drives you!" |
Simple summary: If the gun is wobbling, shaking, flexing, etc, while the bullet is leaving the barrel, it is going to hurt your accuracy. Roll a bowling ball and then shake the lane while the ball is on its way to the pins, and you'll get the idea. |
Not really, unless you want to completely rebuild the gun with different components.
Consistancy produces accuracy and precision. When the receiver flexes, the barrel is in a slightly different orientation with each shot. Loose chambers mean the cartridges are in slightly different orientations with each shot.
The design has been around for six decades. There are no patents. |
Nope, just a WASR I got at the gun show a few weeks ago. I haven't been able to shoot it yet because of work, bachelor party, wedding plans, homework, studying, other peoples' weddings, etc etc etc. There's a small chance I'll have the opportunity this weekend, but it's doubtful. Being that I've only shot a rifle once (one round!) from a bench rest, I'm not counting on stellar groups at first. I'll be happy with "minute-of-55 gallon drum" accuracy at 25 yards. |
Russkies dont think that |
Then the Russians should take it up with the WTO: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/tripfq_e.htm How long do patent rights last in Russia? How long do they last in the US? I don't believe either of them are 60 years. So, even if Soviet Russia had patents and granted one to M.T. Kalashnikov, it probably would have expired already. |
|
Defence and Strategic News Russians see red on copycat Indian assault rifles URL of this article: http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/printer_1294.shtml Feb 6, 2004, 09:16 NEW DELHI: Russian manufacturers of the world-famed Kalashnikov are upset with an assault rifle that India has made for its forces and is hawking at an international arms fair, officials said here Friday. Indian makers of the 7.62-millimetre assault rifle are hotly debating the claims, saying the weapon, which will be mass produced by state-run Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) was not a bastard sibling of the Russian AK-47 rifle. But Russians attending an international defence exhibition being held here disagree and say India has infringed the Kalashnikov patent. "Bulgaria has our permission to manufacture AK-47s for export (but) I don't see any such permission being given to India to manufacture the rifle. "We don't give such permission," said Andrei Vishnyakov of the Russian Izhmash company, the original Kalashnikov manufacturers. Vishnyakov said the company has taken up the issue with OFB, the main sidearms supplier to Indian armed forces, and argued that the timber-butt assault rifle displayed at the Board's pavilion was a poor match of the Russian product. "Until now the government of India has not bought any AK-47s from us although we are hopeful of selling them here," he said. OFB gun designer Mohammad Ali argued the Russians were barking up the wrong tree. "The cocking mechanism is different, the lever has been changed and the barrel is chrome-plated but the basic design of any gun in the world works on similar principles," Ali told AFP. OFB joint general manager M.K. Garg was equally dismissive. "The Russian Kalashnikov was made in 1947 and no patent in the armament industry is valid beyond 30 years... It seems they are threatened by our product," he said. "In any case we have not formally launched our assault rifle and the Russian statements are not correct and finally the prototype is different to that which the Russians are selling." Russia is technology-starved India's largest arms suppliers, accounting for more than 70 percent of the defence needs of its long-time strategic partner and both sides say just an issue of purported patent infringement cannot come in the way of the cosy ties. "We are historic partners. We have great ties and we want to arm India with the best systems to defend itself against terrorism but are open only to legal cooperation with the Indian government," said Vishnyakov. More than 50 armies have adopted the Kalashnikov and 20 countries have built variants, while the half-century-old technology has also been reproduced to varying standards for illegal arms bazaars across the globe. "It is illegal to copy our design," Vishnyakov said. Fair officials said the unsavoury dispute surfaced when Mikhail Timofeevich Kalashnikov, the father of the rifle that bears his name, visited the OFB pavilion and to his dismay found the Indian assault rifle on prominent display. |
|
The Soviets needed a rifle that worked, period. If you look at the Soviet aircraft in early WWII, they were thought a joke. They leaked oil and fuel everywhere. They rattled like a can full of rocks. When the Germans faced their first Soviet winter, their finely engineered aircraft wouldn't start. The metal contracted due to the cold. The Soviet aircraft, on the other hand, ran line a top. All the sudden they didn't leak or rattle... The same mindset built the AK-47. It had to function in the cold and no matter how dirty it was. It had to be functional and maintainable by uneducated farmers turned soldiers. Marksmanship, for the average Soviet soldier, was never a consideration. Mass volume of fire was. One factor which plays a big part in it's "inaccuracy" is all the moving and twisting the parts endure inside the thin receiver. I read an article years ago when the AK Century series was first released. the article was done by Peter Kokalis of Soldier of Fortune. In the end he stated that when using the proper ammunition in the 5.56 versions of the rifles, it was just as accurate as the M-16. In his opinion poor ammunition had most likely been the leading cause of poorer accuracy. |
Thank you! So many people throw around the word "tolerances" when discussing AKs. It's the CLEARANCES that allow reliability. |
|
In the past, I've not had much accuracy with any of the AKs I've owned. But, I recently converted a Saiga 7.62 rifle to AK format. I've shot some <2" groups with it.  With my eyesight, at 100 yards, without optics. I'm pretty proud of that.  The last couple of times I've been at the range have been very windy, and the groups haven't been nearly that good. And, I only shoot Wolf ammo, so I don't expect much consistency. But, it proves to me that some AKs can have decent accuracy. |
|
People that only shoot wolf ammo should not say anything about accuracy. Not to pick on anyone but this is the view of many people. They think aks suck but they have only ever shot bulk ammo. How many people would say ar15s suck if they only shot golden tiger? I have never owned an ak but my brother has owned a mak90 since 92. Its one of the most accurate open sight weapons i have ever shot. I shoot a 3 inch pendoleom at 275 yards repeatedly with my reloaded shots(used to be the only way to get decent priced ammo back in the early 90s). With wolf ammo i only shoot objects not targets at 30 yards. |
| Well guys I got a Arsenal SA M7R a few months ago and I was lucky to get 2 inch groups with Wolf 123 gr HPs at 50 yards. This week I got a Side mount and put a good 3-9 Scope on it just for kicks. 5 shot groups at 100 yards were running about 3 inches with 2 to 3 in each group within an inch. Always had a few flyers. So I put 30 rounds in a mag and fired 30 carefully aimed shots at 100 yds. 23 rounds within 2 inches of each other and the rest opened up to 4 inches. Griffy |
| While the AK doesn't have the accuracy potential of many better designed rifles, most AK's, by military standards, are pretty accurate compared to military rifles. Of course, whether the soldier can use those buckhorn sights to get good groups is another thing. I'd say a quality AKM from Hungary, Russia, or Poland with military ammunition will keep up with an M4 carbine shooting M193 in the accuracy department. |
AK Sponsor