AK-200 rifle: The 21st Century AK
The next generation AK has finally been given a name: AK-200. Last year I posted photos of the prototype. It featured a 60 round magazine, folding stock, plenty of picatinny rails and a bipod/handguard.
The final model retains the rails and 60 round magazine but now uses what appears to be a folding skeleton-style stock and newly designed birdcage-style flash hider.
This video briefly shows the rifle ...
Prime Minister Putin seemed to like it ...
On Tuesday, the AK-200’s advanced characteristics were appreciated by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who visited the Izmash mechanical plant in the Russian Urals city of Izhevsk, where the legendary Kalashnikovs are currently assembled. Alexander Baditsa, an Izhmash spokesman, explains:
"The AK-200 is designed to contribute to a full-blown modernization of the Russian Armed Forces. Significantly, the new model is based on the AK-74, internationally known for its reliability and ease of use , the AK-200’s sophisticated design is fully in tune with new demands for waging modern warfare. The new Kalashnikov differs in weight and the magazine capacity, citing a 60-cartridge magazine the AK-200 is equipped with. It is safe to assume that the new Kalashnikov‘s characteristics are on a par with those of assault rifles currently used by NATO troops."
[ Many thanks to Rolf and jdun1911 who sent this in. ]
HAHA Petar you are so right…. I wish more people knew this stuff so they see that the HK416 isnt really a new thing, they copied and modified a concept that was tought of back in the day, by Mr. Kalashnikov
@Vladimir
If you mean the top photo, the rifle in the guys hands is an AK-74M with scope, bipod and 60 round magazine, the weapon next to him on the table is the AK-9 which is the 9 x 39mm competition for the AS suppressed assault rifle, then it is the PP-19-01 Vityaz with two mags clipped together, a scope and a front pistol grip, and from what I can see of the last weapon on the table it appears to be a Saiga shotgun based on the diameter and length of the barrel I would guess it was a 12 gauge.
what the third gun from the left?
All you guys bagging the ergonomics of AK – You need to learn how to use the thing properly. IO found it very comfortable. Also the lack of hold-open catch – who cares? Every time there is jam you check the chamber anyway. With Steyr I used its standard procedure. The safety selector is nice to hit in a hurry. Loved using it. As a leftie the ergonimics of M-16 are NOT for me at all.
60. ROUND. MAGAZINE.
Correction the 7.62 x 39mm ammo is narrower at the bullet end than at the primer end hense the curve on the AK magazines in 7.62 x 39mm.
They wouldn’t stack properly in a straight mag.
I would suggest you track down an STG-44 and take it to bits before you spout stuff like the AK is a copy of it.
Not that there would be any problem if it was a copy, but as you suggest people who don’t know much about firearms look at an STG-44 and an AK and they see a relatively compact weapon with similar features, but when you examine it properly you will see the similarities are cosmetic while the differences are fundmental.
Both have curved magazines… but magazine shape is determined by bullet design… look at a 7.62 x 39mm AK mag and a 5.56mm AK mag to see that the former needs the curve because the bullets dont stack vertically because they are narrower at the primer end than at the bullet end. The 5.56 on the other hand has almost parallel case sides and uses a nearly straight magazine.
The front Iron sights are similar but then when you put the gas system above the barrel you need something to raise the front sight to line with the rear sight.
When you take both rifles to pieces you find the FN FAL has more in common with the STG44 than the AK does as the latter uses a rotary bolt system which the STG44 does not.
The Germans copied the Tokarev gas system for one of their rifles and no doubt used the mechanism from other Soviet weapons too.
The first select fire weapon to use an intermediate cartridge with a large capacity curved magazine and a front pistol grip for control was the Federov Avtomat of 1916. Every weapon we would call an assault rifle in the west that has been produced in Russia has been named after that weapon… Avtomat.
It doesn’t just mean automatic.
It was the name of a weapon and is used to describe a weapon of that type just like Lux and Hoover are used to describe vacuum cleaners today (from the brand names electrolux and hoover).
The AS, AK, AKM, AK-74, A-91, ADS, all use Avtomats name.
An American said it best… if you were going to an alien planet and could only pack one weapon… it would be an AK.
The AK isn’t perfect and some things could be improved, but keep in mind this is a soldiers tool, not an American enthusiasts toy.
Changing the iron sights will require a complete change in training for instance.
Introducing a balanced recoil mechanism will make burst fire much more effective.
See how that works?
Not “lets make it so left handed people can use it with either hand”.
The configuration actually suits us left handed people already, making it ambidextrous is a waste of money and time… except if it was a sporting weapon… which it isn’t.
I love how people who have no idea about firearms love to talk shit about the AK platform. They spend there time talking about accuracy, the safety lever, sights, all that b.s. The problem is, all those things are not problems at all. With the standard sights and good ammo(NOT WOLF) and with any descent AK(NOT ROMANIAN WASR-10, as most people have in America) you can hit rounds at 1000yds. And as someone was saying it is based on a SMG, that is totally false. Even as an AK lover, I can admit it is based off the Stg.44 of WW2, a rifle designed to be something of the best of both worlds, of an SMG and standard semi-auto rifles of the time, which is known today as an assault rifle. And as for how the AK is used in battle, it would be more single, or two shot bursts, but people’s mindset is that you just roughly aim, and unload mags with it, which is once again false. Not to mention it’s rounds velocity, coupled with accurate semi-auto shots, is one of the best combo’s in any modern rifle(with 7.62×39), or the extremely low recoil, accurate, and devastating 5.45×39. Now the comparison with NATO rifles, the fact is every country in the world has been trying to copy the AK without any success outside of using the actually gun. Here in the US they are even going as far as implementing the short stroke piston system in AR style rifles, when they could more easily have just adopted the AK. If you look at the HK416, it is exactly what im talking about. Or you can even talk about the Sig Saur 552, which is even more of an exact copy of an AK internally, just packaged in a more NATO friendly shell. Those are the facts right there. It’s not the AK who is lagging behind, it’s all the other guns. Look at the HK G3 style guns, who still use delayed blowback!!! You wanna talk about ancient? There it is, but defiantly not an AK. And as for all the bells and whistles people always ride the AK about, is just ridiculous, who really needs to take a 7 pound M4 and turn it into a 11 pound gun with lasers, and flash lights, and scopes, when EVERYBODY praises the AR iron sights. See that is the difference between the AK and AR, one you need to pack more gear than Rambo to feel safe, and the other, all you need is your AK.
@ Low Chop
AFAIK the 9 x 39mm round is a specialist round for custom weapons like the AS and VSS that are used by recon units and have built in suppressors.
I have seen claims that the weight of the projectile and accuracy of the weapons make them effective to 400m, but being a subsonic round they will lack in lethality and power compared to supersonic rounds like the 7.62 x 39mm. The 9 x 39mm is an attempt to make a subsonic weapon as powerful as possible without going to larger calibres like 12.7mm.
Their might be a 9 x 39mm version of the AK-200 to replace the AS and VSS, but the standard version will be 5.45 x 39mm.
@Kazh
I would think they will keep it conventional with a folding stock.
There is the Groza in 9 x 39mm calibre with a 40mm grenade launcher which could perhaps replace the AS and VSS, and the ADS which is a fascinating bullpup rifle being tested by the Russian Naval Infantry forces.
The ADS can use special ammo to fire underwater and it can also use standard 5.45 x 39mm ammo and has a built in 40mm grenade launcher.
It has the same cartridge case forward ejection system as the A-91M so it can be fired left or right handed without needing any adjustment.
With a 60 round mag it would be an awesome weapon.
more info here: http://world.guns.ru/assault/rus/ads-dvuhsredny-e.html
does it come in bullpup???? then it´ll be the rifle of gods.
Well Buzz, first of all the accuracy of the 7.62 x 39mm round has very little to do with the topic of this thread… the standard service calibre of the Russian military is and has been for the last 25 years the 5.45 x 39mm round.
Second talking about accurate rounds is BS. Rounds are not accurate or inaccurate. They are both.
On a 2,000m range there is no accurate 5.56mm round.
Thirdly, because there is no such thing as accurate or inaccurate what you actually want is consistent.
I have a cheap Chinese AKM knockoff and a 303 bolt action Lee Enfield rifle.
The barrel of the AKM is clean and shiny and the barrel of the Lee Enfield is dark and heavily corroded. The Lee Enfield is a lot older than the AKM, but the AKM is in better condition because of the Chrome lining in the barrel.
I took both out the other day and the first three shots for the Lee Enfield, the first hit slightly to the left of the bullseye and scored a ten. The second hit low and scored a one and the third missed the paper completely. The first three shots for the AKM clustered low and to the right and scored a 2 a 2 and a 1.
The scores of 11 vs 5 mean the Lee Enfield was more accurate, while the AKM was clearly more consistent because it actually grouped.
I would never take the Lee Enfield hunting with me, and actually the difference is not great in ballistic terms… both fire .311 calibre bullets, while the Lee Enfield fires 150 grain bullets at about 748m/s, the AKM fires 122 grain bullets at 735m/s… I very much doubt the target will know the difference.
The Russians have been making their weapon barrels chromed to reduce maintainence requirements, not so they can use cheaper steel in the barrels. Chrome is actually much harder than steel which is why it offers a better protective lining, so it would actually make a lot of sense to use chrome and cheaper steel, but they don’t. They do same money on their ammo, they use mild steel shell casings instead of the brass used in western ammo, and that would be a problem if they reloaded their ammo but no military does so it doesn’t matter.
The 30-30 round has been a very successful round in the US but its performance is retarded by the fact that most who use the 30-30 round tend to use tube magazines which means they also have to use round nosed projectiles which greatly reduces their performance at any but very short ranges. No point in blowing a round out a muzzle at supersonic speed with a round nose because you need a pointed nose to go supersonic and stay supersonic for any period of time.
Ahhh, the old claim that is it built to loose tollerances and that is why it is so reliable. Swiss watches are reliable… are they “sloppy”?
Anyone who has held an AK knows it is not sloppy unless it is very old or damaged.
The selector goes from safe to auto to single shot because of the way it works. Take one apart and have a look. In the top position the trigger is blocked. Drop it down one position and the piece that blocked the trigger moves and only blocks the auxiliary sear, which is the hook that holds the hammer back after the first shot is fired. By holding it back it stops it from working so when the auxiliary sear is not stopping the hammer after the first shot you get full auto fire. If you lower the selector one more stop then the blocking bar clears the trigger and auxiliary sear completely and nothing is blocked so the auxiliary sear stops the hammer after the first shot and you have single shot.
Makes sense too… if you are in such a hurry to shoot that you only have time to move the selector one click then you probably need full auto fire.
Also Russian troops are trained to fire in bursts more often than western forces.
I disagree about lack of accuracy requirements. Within the 200m range they intended to use them they were accurate enough. There are plenty of documented cases of western special forces who use AKs on operations because resupply of ammo is easier, and the noise of the weapon doesn’t make them stand out. The Israelis liked AKMs particularly because they were lighter than Galils… do you think they would use them if they were inaccurate?
I very much agree that different makers produce different products especially because very few of the makers made licenced products, they just made copies to their own standards… some of which were not very good.
Regarding the AK-109 how can it have an effective range of 500m if the 7.62 x 39mm round is inaccurate?
AKMs have a battle iron sight setting of 300m. The reason for this is that if you aim in the centre of a standing mans chest at a target anywhere from 0 to 400m with that point of aim you will hit them.
Zeroed to 300m that means the bullets trajectory is lofted up into the air so that after it has travelled 300m it has gone up and then fallen back down to the line of sight. What makes 300m so special is that for a normal standing man the distance from the centre of the chest to a centre of head shot is the height of the trajectory of the round so with a target starting from the muzzle a target will get hit in the centre of the chest at 100m they will get hit in the lower throat area, at 150m will be a brain shot, and and at 200m it will hit them in the upper chest throat area and at 300m it will hit them at the point of aim in the centre chest. A target at 400m will be gut shot.
The point is that as long as you keep aiming for centre of the chest you will hit the target.
In real combat enemy don’t stand out in the open wearing bright clothing standing perfectly still.
Aiming for bullseyes is fun, but not really realistic for real combat against moving targets that are ducking from cover to cover in clothing that disrupts their outline.
I would bet good money that in real combat most soldiers set their sights to a battle setting and simply aim off in different conditions… ie for further away targets you aim a little high, because there is not likely to be a huge amount of time to set the sights and take the shot.
If that is true the sub MOA rifles stop being sub MOA rifles when you don’t know the range to the target and don’t have time to adjust the sights to the correct range anyway.
No one will probably ever read this but guys I dont know where you got your info at but most of you are wrong on a variety of points. One of the biggest is why accuracy of the 7.62×39 is so bad. Its not because of it being a machine gun bullet but is more of a result of mosy AK weapons barrels are made with what we in the west would consider inferior steel and then not chromed so they wear out extremly fast as in as little as 200 rounds. Next balllisticly its the same as a 30-30 round.
Next the AK was built sloppy and the selector switch goes from safe to Auto to single shot in that order for a reason which is related to soviet combat doctrine. Niether the weapon or the ammo had to be particularly accurate when it was meant to hose down and area at close range. Also different manufacturers have widely differing quality standards.
The AK-109 improved the max effective range from about 300 meters to 500 meters.
Dears sirs!
I believe that new Russian automatic rifle Kalaschnikov 200 will be top product im military -police fields of bussines.
With regards,
Goran Sablic
Is it chambered in the 9X39 new soviet round?
i
think
that
the
ak-103
is
better
@Iskander
Don’t get your panties in a bunch. Everyone calls us “Yanks” and fat even though we aren’t all from the Northeast or descendants of the original English settlers(which is what the word means) and there are other countries ahem…UK that have higher obesity rates per capita.
We aren’t running down the Russians and most of us here spend more money than we should on your guns etc…
Funny… Goldeneye was the first movie I can remember that had a big enough budget that allowed the armourer to buy proper AK-74 replicas instead of cheap AKM knockoffs you usually see Russian and Soviet forces issued with in movies and computer games.
The AKS-74U was clearly a favourite of the Bond character… the way he used it you would think he was testing the 60 round mag…
I guess the best way to work out when it will be issued will be to look at Russian optics makers for new products compatible with Picatinny rails.
Ah. The AK has come far since the days of 007 Goldeneye, that’s for sure.
Hi there,
Are there any news in regards to the AK 200 development?
Rgds
Dom
I didn’t realise that AKs had so much recoil as to warrant a special compensator to help control them.
The AKM or the AK-74 muzzle attachments are fine and authentic, but I find the best compensator is a suppressor… eliminates flash and noise and recoil.
Heu, you guys should look at the j-tac 47 recoil compensator for the ak and tell me if it is real, idk if it is, and it would be nice to know.
Ignore the top photo, the AK-200 prototype is the second photo and what you can’t really see in that photo is the entire top of the rifle has rails as have the sides and bottom of the front stock area also have rails which means accessories can be fitted all over the weapon… which I guess is an improvement.
If it becomes a standard rifle then that means that any western rifle with rails should be able to now use new Russian made sights and gadgets without adapters which is also an improvement.
The main change I suspect is the balanced recoil system has probably been finally introduced to make recoil much lower and full auto fire far more controllable.
A balanced recoil mechanism adds complexity and cost, but as the AK-107 and AK-108 are offered with balanced recoil mechanisms then they clearly can mass produce the system.
The main difference between the AK-107 and this rifle seems to be the rail mounts and of course the fact that the iron sights will be mounted in conjunction with the rail so they are fold down units that allow optics to be fitted over them.
Without a balanced recoil mechanism there is really no reason for them to take so long accepting it into service.
I dont really see any differences other than the 60 round magazine and some cosmetic changes to the stock and such. Why change something that always works! Lets start shipping some of those mags and stocks over to the US so that when the ‘hunting’ rifles come out, we can have our ak200′s.
all of you who keep complaining about AK sights, why don’t you just get an Israeli galil-type of rifle. it’s practically an AK with peeps and better ergos, but then again, they replaced the galil for the targa =)
This is supposed to be an update, an improvement of a few things on the AK-74M.
It is not supposed to be a completely different brand new rifle like the ADS that is being tested to replace the AK-74M and the APS underwater rifle with a single bullpup design that can fire as accurately above water as the AK-74M and is as effective as the APS below water.
They have the choice of spending a huge amount on a totally new rifle competitions to find something that is significantly better than the AK, or to spend a little money now on a quick upgrade that will improve performance but not be too expensive and in 10 years time look at something more exotic like caseless ammo or even liquid propellent to get that step up in performance.
You raise a good point patsfanczar and migual. The bolt design has been tried and tested, see teh galil, R5, Sako 95 for example. However i was in Cuba on vacation last year and i got talking to a group of Cuban soldiers who could speak english. Being an ex solider myself and my new found friends having some active service experience, i questioned them about improvements to the AK design. An old sergeant said something very relevant, that “any improvements would only be as the soldier with the human eyeball as issued”.
I suppose there reaches a point when design technology outstripes the ability of the human body to utilise it.
In the same way Magpul said the only real way to fix an AR is to unscrew the front sight and design a whole new gun around it, the only way to really improve on the AK is to take the basic bolt design and create a whole new gun around that. AKs and ARs are both good, but they weren’t designed with all these improvements in mind, and “updating” only destroys it
I read a lot about the M4 being more accurate than AKs.
Volodymyr… can you tell me how accurate is this AK-101 you talk about.
You clearly believe it is significantly less accurate than this REC7 rifle.
How many thousands of rounds have you put through each weapon?
When I talk to people who say the M4 or the M16 is more accurate than AKs it always turns out they are talking about modified M4s and modified M16s used for target shooting, and their comparisons are often 7.62 x 39mm calibre AKs and often cheap Chinese knock offs at that like the Type 56S.
The firearm specialist for Soldier of Fortune magazine did a test of the 5.56mm calibre AK-101 in the mid 1990s and he said it was every bit as accurate as any AR he had ever fired. He was using Belgian ammo in both weapons.
I think that shows clearly that any claim the “loose tollerances in the design that make the AK more reliable also make it less accurate” is BS.
The Soviets had access to the captured hundreds of thousands of M16s in Vietnam and could easily have copied them if they were worth copying.
As shown by the REC 7 it seems to me that it is more a case of the AR being improved by getting a piston based mechanism than the AK being improved by making it more like an AR.
Accuracy on the AK is improved by improving ammo quality… and that has already happened… the problem is that most “experts haven’t noticed yet.
I think part of the problem is that most people see hollywoods portrayal of firearms and forget that there is more to bullets than there seems.
Small light fast bullets have flat trajectories so it makes it easier to get a hit.
Slower heavier bullets have steeper trajectories and make range estimation more important to getting bullets on target.
I have spoken with a person who claimed the 7.62 x 39mm round was inaccurate because its bullet drop between 400m and 500m is 49 inches.
The 7.62 x 51mm rounds bullet drop at 1,000m is about 32 feet yet it is considered accurate to that range.
The crucial thing is that you know the limitations and features of your bullet… a 49 inch bullet drop can be compensated for and you can still hit your targets as long as you know the range.
Very simply it is about shot placement most of the time… a 23mm cannon shell could completely sever your finger tip but not kill you while a .22lr round through the eyeball and into your brain is guaranteed lethal.
The 5.45mm tends to take a random path through flesh and tumbles on impact which maximises wounding potential no matter what range the hit is achieved or the length of barrel of the weapon it came from. The 5.56mm is more effective as long as it fragments, and less effective if it doesn’t and at ranges in afghanistan it tends to be used outside its fragmentation range more often than not.
The Russians currently have the advantage of having several calibres in service including 5.45 x 39mm a flat shooting high velocity round that is easy to use (low recoil) and accurate, while at the same time they have 9 x 39mm rounds that are fired from suppressed weapons (VSS and AS) and also 7.62 x 39mm weapons still in service in some places that offer a heavier bullet let likely to be deflected and able to penetrate significant objects and still kill targets on the other side.
Thanks, you raise some interesting issues there regarding the Eastern block 7.62 round. However giving it some thought, I’d be just as miffed if I were hit with a 5.54 as if I were hit by a 7.62 !
To make a nice gun they have to look at the Barret Rec7 design and the AK-101 design and merge them together so that the gun will be highly customizable, rugged, and much more accurate.
In cold climates light small calibre ammunition can be ineffective, though I would think that 5.45mm armour piercing ammo should penetrate most clothing types.
I have read stories from Soviet tank crews that when they first got their lend lease Sherman tanks that the tanks were fully equipped and had 45 calibre sub machine guns in them. It is reported that they found the 45 calibre lacked penetration… being a large slow round it often had trouble penetrating heavy clothing.
Kinda surprised me but I guess it makes sense that a heavy large calibre slow projectile would not be ideal for penetration, though the 7.62 x 25mm calibre pistols and SMGs probably had plenty of penetration at the expense of less knock down power against a target.
Still the Russians have plenty of AKMs they could draw from stores if they needed to go back to 7.62 x 39mm calibre for an arctic fight.
I have read that in forest or jungle conditions that the smallest leaf or twig will deflect high velocity small calibre rounds like 5.56 and 5.45 and that in such conditions a heavier 7.62mm round performs much better.
While I wouldnt worry too much about accuracy (most combat contcat occur under 300 metres) I am still not convinced the 5.45mm round is that wonderful for very cold climate and lacks penetration when the victim is wearing heavy cold weather clothing. It is for this reason teh Finish Army still uses the 7.62x39mm round in their Sako Assualt rifle
the next generation AK-47 was already produced..
it was called the AK-74.
Short barrel guns need substantial muzzle flash hiders, in fact the muzzle attachment on the AKS-74U is more of a recoil booster to increase the gas pressure in the gas tube to ensure proper functioning with a short tube, it also acts as a flash suppressor. Anyone who has fired an AKS-74U without the muzzle attachment will notice it is less reliable and looks like a flame thrower.
Barrel length is crucial to the 5.56mm for bullet performance on target (ie fragmentation), for the 5.45mm it is not very important at all in terms of terminal effects, though accuracy is found to be impaired in barrels as short as the AKS-74U so the 100 series has a longer barrel carbine.
The only feature adapted from US weapons is the Picatinny rails as far as I can see, and the economics of that decision are clear… it means any Russian soldier can use any toy bought in Russia or elsewhere to fit to his rifle. It also means that Russian makers can now sell to AR nuts as well as AK nuts… greatly increased the market.
If it has a new balanced recoil system it will be a level above all the new generation ARs covered in rails.
The AK9 is simply an attempt by Kalashnikov to make a rifle in the AS and VSS and SR-3 and 9A-91 range as competition for these rifles.
I believe the latest model SR-3 has a 30 round mag so that will likely be a common improvement amongst these rifles too.
that barrel lenght is pretty tricky, the original vietnam issue M16 shorties,
the XM177e1 with a 10″ barrel and the XM177e2 with a 11.5″ barrel
featured a very long flash hider giving the impression of it having a longer
barrel but it was there in reality to hide the extreme muzzle flash.
the ak74 style flash hider design is at least 1.5 to 2 inches long itself,
which when added to a 16.5″ barrel is more like 18.5″ effectiverly.
The ak200 is simply a update of the ak100 series with alot of the
evolutionary features which the russians copied from the US aftermarket
producers . Other countries updated 5.56mm AK like the Polish M96 and the Yugosav M21 also have these updates.
The newest AK which really interests me is the 9×39 AK9, now I’d like to see more detailed information on that one.
I’m sure the AK9 was first to receive alot of the updates.
The hinged action cover is not a new AK innovation, the 5.45mm AKSU
featured a hinged action cover .
Actually the first Russian assault rifle, the Federov Avtomat, was a small calibre weapon using a 6.5 x50.5mm Japanese round.
Much of the Soviet work on lighter rounds just before WWII centred on small calibre rounds but it was considered easier just to keep the .311 calibre so the M1943 was created.
Personally I think the 5.56 is a bad round and the trend in ammo for it seems to be moving from light very fast projectiles to heavier slower ones seems to confirm it was not a great idea.
Very small high velocity projectiles are amazingly effective on soft skinned small animals but you certainly wouldn’t use it on Deer.
The virtues of the 5.56mm which make it desirable is that it is a flat shooting round so errors in range estimation will not result in a miss, and the light projectile leads to light recoil which makes it easier to fire.
The problem is the tiny round is only effective if it tumbles or fragments and to fragment it needs to be traveling at a high velocity.
The 5.45mm round has a very similar velocity to the 5.56 but has a projectile design to ensure that it tumbles on impact at any velocity, so it has the advantages of flat shooting and good lethality at any range… but the light fast projectile is easily deflected by even twigs and leaves let alone any serious cover.
Personally I prefer the 7.62 x 39mm rounds as they will penetrate to a target more reliably, but like anything else there are pros and cons and you have to make a choice in the end.
Another advantage of the 7.62 x 39mm is that if you load it with 193 grain bullets and fit a suppressor to the weapon you have a very quiet weapon… not really practical with smaller calibre weapons unless you don’t mind .22lr performance or a very loud crack every time you fire.
Most complaints regarding accuracy are because the ammo was machine gun standard bullet hose ammo. The 6mm PPC bench rest calibre is based on the 7.62 x 39mm so it certainly has the potential for accuracy.
Very simply a battle sight setting of 300m where any target closer than 300m will be hit because at no point in the trajectory out to 300m does the bullet rise above the target so a centre chest aim point might hit the target in the head at 80m but at no distance will the bullet go over their heads… which means aim for the chest and at any range between 0 and about 400m you will get a hit. Further than 400m aim for the head and you should get a body hit out to about 600m.
Most of the time it isn’t an issue because the target is closer than that.
With the smaller calibres it is just as simple, the only problem is that the 5.56mm has an effect like a .22lr at more than 400m anyway.
one thing we need to remember is the selector was designed there for a reason, we americans are used to thumb safety/selectors, russians are not, they prefer the selector on the right side so that it takes a deliberate action to push the safety to fire and an even more deliberate action to put the selector to full auto, they didnt want a soldier feeling the heat of combat for the first time to drop it to full and waste an entire magazine before they realized it
that having been said its really interesting to look at the differences in plilosophy between us and russia, we have a faster moving, smaller caliber round in a gun designed to hit people at 300 yd ranges, they have a larger slow hard hitting round in a gun designed for the close combat the soviets experienced in ww2, in the 74 they downsized the round which is the single move that truly rocketed the m16 ahead of the ak
personally i would rather have a hard hitting gun that will fire no matter what and cycle everytime even caked in mud than a 0.5moa gun that lacks the stopping power of an ak and is prone to jamming if not kept spotless
so what do i have, i have a ruger sr556 with an 6.8 upper for it, piston driven, uber reliable, hard hitting and accurate
God bless you Mikhail for giving us another great rifle…
NATO calibre AKs are for export only. It gives the customer more choice.
The different calibres can be identified by the curve of the magazine due to the shape of the round. 7.62 x 39mm rounds are wide at their base and get narrower along the case which is why they wouldn’t stack properly in a straight mag. The 5.45mm is less tapered so needs less of a curve while 5.56mm NATO has almost parallel sides so their mags have the least curve.
BTW 7.62mm NATO has straight sides so rifles like the FN FAL have straight mags.
You can see in the pictures above that there is a definite curve of the mag which means it is not 5.56mm NATO. It is not as curved as 7.62 x 39mm so it clearly must be 5.45mm.
WHY USE NATO ROUNDS ITS GONNA RUIN THE AK HISTORY!!!!
Since the AKM the stock angle has been straight and in line with the barrel, I don’t think they would change that now.
Regarding magazine size it is rather less of an issue for a Russian soldier. Lying down in the open is rather too exposed on a real battlefield, you minimise the target area for the enemy but you also become fairly immobile too. It makes rather more sense to either find cover or make your own by digging in (which is why they are still issued with spades).
Finding cover and shooting round it make rather more sense because you are protected and retain mobility.
Needless to say when the first M16 came out its standard mag was a 20 round mag and yet these days they don’t seem very common. There were a few 20 round AK mags made for AKS-74U rifles with a suppresser fitted and subsonic ammo loaded and a suppressed 30mm underbarrel grenade launcher fitted but they are fairly rare. They were generally loaded with subsonic ammo with the operator carrying the supersonic high velocity ammo in 30 round mags.
Another factor is that this rifle will likely be used with scopes fitted with fibre optic cables that can be fired around corners or over cover without the user looking directly down the sights so in a prone position a soldier could sweep the rifle in front of them with his face down in the dirt so mag length will not be important.
It’s hard to say from the pictures, but seems to me like they still haven’t got the stock angle right. Could be I’m not seeing it right, though.
And am I the only AK shooter in the world who wants shorter magazines?!? The standard 30 round magazine alone is too bulky and too tall for prone (especially once you start thinking about the targets shooting back at you…) as is. The solution is a smaller magazine that allows one to hit the dirt, not a huge one that makes prone shooting a yoga exercise.
I agree Tony as is also my name, you make sense them long clips probaly do make it hard prone shooting
What an amaizing piece of military hardware, if i where the prime minister of Russia then id put it in mass production
Hahahahaha… you really have a good sense of humour Greg.
Berating an AK you clearly know little about because it is just another AK and then praising the virtues of this XCR which is clearly just another warmed over Stoner.
The new AK is not for the western public it is for the Russian military and commonality and consistency with existing weapons types is actually a virtue for this weapon… saves all that expensive retraining and retooling of the factories that make it.
I am pretty sure you have not been given the honour of beta testing this new Russian rifle so it is clear you are comparing an old AK to your new plastic toy.
The real funny thing is that this brand new state of the art rifle doesn’t actually seem to add anything new in fact it just looks like the rifle shown at the gun show to be the new AK… similar folding stock, same picatinny rail system, inferior calibre, inferior M16 type cheap mags, in fact the main difference is that the new AK seems to have a balanced recoil mechanism so it should be much more comfortable to fire in both single shots and burst fire.
The new generation AK is actually the Robinson Arms XCR (and you can get it in 7.62×39), not a warmed over AK.
While you cannot argue with effective and improvements, time has moved on, massive improvmetns have been made.
Unless you are illiterate type, there are major egeonoic deficiencies in the old AK.
Those have been corrected in the XCR, basicly bringing all the good parts of the AK (massive bolt and full stroke gas piston) and then putting it into a package that has huge improvements in the halding and use, as well as full length rail sytem and rail on the other 3 sides of the forearm, as well as adjustable gas settings.
Yes I have an AK, and no its not a go to gun, its extremely interesting and a backup, but the XCR is the one that runs intuitively the way a gun should. Better than any gun out there, no compromises, and a terrific trigger.
Very good post Max, to which I would add that an accurate rifle is not enough, you also need consistent ammo produced to fine tolerances and proper training. For much of the cold war the Conscripts in the Soviet Union were trained to fire in controlled bursts rather than firing single shot, and the ammo was designed accordingly.
US experience in Vietnam also showed that when given the option most conscripts will fire in bursts in combat, because unlike computer games often enemy fire isn’t shown on some magical heads up display as red for damage showing you where the incoming fire is coming from and a lot of fire is to suppress enemy fire so you are firing in a direction rather than at a specific target.
I remember a US program to make an M16 upper in 5.45mm calibre for sniper suppression because the longer bullets were aerodynamically superior to the short stubby 5.56mm bullets and retained velocity better. Because of the bullet construction they also maintained their lethal tumble on impact effect no matter what velocity they hit the target at which meant they weren’t super lethal like a fragmenting 5.56mm round at close range but they were superior to .22lr unlike the 5.56mm at long range.
Obviously they retained the problems other small high velocity bullets have like they are deflected easily and don’t always penetrate cover well to hit targets but that requires bullet weight so it is a compromise.
The testing for AK reliability involves sprinkle chamber, dust/sand chamber, high-temperature chamber and very low temperature chamber. All combat grade weapons from IzhMash are guaranteed to operate in all climates with temperature ranges between -50 to +50 degrees Celsius.
When original weapon for Soviet Armed Forces was being made, the AK was the least accurate of the lot but also the most reliable. However the requirement was: Mass-production suitable, simple, reliable. Soviet leadership decided back then that rather then have an accurate weapon that jams a lot, they’d rather have a weapon that is reliable and that accuracy can be sorted out later. Many seem to compare the M-16 to the original AK-47. Its a very incorrect comparison since the designs are more then a decade apart and to different requirements. The more fair comparison is that of M-16 to AK-74: low-impulse rounds employed for both rifles.
Regarding accuracy – If you need to use your assault rifle for marksman-like shooting then something is wrong. With F-88 Steyr the individual fire is accurate to 300 metres and section fire is accurate to 400+ metres with single shots but thats considering the optical sight thats mounted on every F-88 Steyr. The emergency iron battle sights are actually worse then that of AK since they are moulded into the optical sights tube and are not adjustable where AK can be adjusted for wide range of distances.
There are AK-74s that are selected from factory or directly in the army base to become sniper assault rifles. They are the most accurate AK-74s from the base. They are equipped with PSO-1 optical sight and are used with different ammunition.
There is a website
world.guns.ru
Its dual-language with Russian and English versions. Have a read and see many firearms that you might not be familiar with. Especially not-so-famous Russian items.
Saw this site posted @ Ace of Spades HQ. I like this gun. After watching this video all I can say is I’m glad I took 4 years of Russian and speak it fluently. As I like to tell my Ukranian friends…”Pierogi Vodka Kielbasa Gulag Trabant Gasprom”. (A little comedy humor, as we say in Scranton)
Nice site!
Having used an AK in Afghanistan in 1980, I personally can agree with the reliability of the weapon. Fill it with water, sand, mud, etc, it will still function very well. The quality of the sights are debateable, but the AK was never made as a sharpshooting weapon.
Unless we are talking about a relevant purpose for tighter MOAs, it is more than difficult to criticize the accuracy of an AK. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this a combat weapon that is a seriously reliable one. Even the best of other combat rifles will not function reliably when not maintained, ie; cleaned, oiled, or dropped in the mud and sand. But the good old AK will usually function without fail under most any circumstances, due to its simplistic yet genius design that allows for lots of free space tolerance between the FEW moving parts.
Hi Curt, I am well.
I also agree that practise practise practise is a better solution.
The people here suggesting changing to western style iron sights forget this is a Russian service rifle… after training how many million soldiers to use one iron sight why bother trying to change now?
The new design with picatinny rails makes mounting red dot sights as easy as mounting iron sights so why waste time putting out western style iron sights when a red dot reflex sight could be made for very little outlay in Russia and offer superior performance over any iron sight.
BTW The rounds I mentioned are brand new and didn’t exist in the 1980s.
I think you are confusing the great big long knitting needle like rounds fired by the SPP-1M underwater pistol and the APS underwater assault rifle. The problem with those rounds is that they were not effective above water beyond about 30m, so the diver had to carry two rifles, an APS for underwater and an AK-74 for above water. The solution is the ADS which uses a new much shorter type of underwater ammo that looks from the outside like a standard 5.45mm round but the round extends right to the back of the cartridge case to make it effective underwater (though not so good above the water surface in air, where you would change mags and use standard 5.45mm ammo.)
This is info about the ADS
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as100-e.htm
This is the page for the APS
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as69-e.htm
And this is for the rifle that came between the two above that was designed to use the long ammo for the APS and standard ammo called the ASM-DT
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as95-e.htm
@neblogenso
The current production Russian AKs are much more accurate than the older models. The older models were not needed to be accurate as long range targets were supposed to be dealt with via the long range weapons in the unit like the RPK, the SVD, and of course the PKM.
The soldiers were trained to fire in bursts rather than single shot so accuracy wasn’t very important.
Now they have different training.
Improvements in ammo would also help, in the mid 1990s Peter K Kolikas (Spelling) the weapons expert for Soldier of Fortune magazine tested an AK from the AK-100 series in 5.56mm ammo calibre and he stated it was as accurate as any service M16 he had ever used.
…of course I rather doubt the target really cares about 1 MOA or 2 MOA because targets within effective range will likely be killed and those outside it will likely not.
Hi,
I have heard that Ak’s which are made from hight quality materials are quite accurate. Internally Finnish Valmet Rk. 62 is allmost a copy of ak 47, but have th accuracy of less than 1 MOA.
Regards,
A.V.
Yo GarryB,
Long time. How’s things?
I agree that almost noone that says an AK is never as accurate as an M4 or other AR, specify which AK. As I have mentioned before, my NHM-91 and M72 RPK both are as accurate as any off the shelf AR. Open sights. Add a quality scope, maybe even as good as those privately owned and tweeked M4′s.
Practice people! Practice. Practice hitting your target. Practice speed swaps of mags.
I had heard of those rounds you mentioned back in the eighties, but I thought they never got far. Cool if they actually work.
The peep iron sight setup used widely in western rifles is OK for long range targets, but you have poor peripheral vision which could get you killed in shorter range engagements.
Personally I like the AK iron sights… for longer range accuracy there is the obvious solution of a scope.
BTW people who claim an M4 is more accurate than an AK almost never specify which AK they are talking about.
I rather think they also mean a privately owned and tweaked M4 rather than a standard issue rattler.
Regarding the reliability of the mag… they still have lots of 30 round mags, so if the 60 round mag jams they can drop it and load a 30 round mag if that is a problem.
They are currently testing a new rifle called the ADS which is a bullpup rifle based on the A-91A rifle in 5.45mm calibre that has a tube that blows ejected shell cases forward so no need for left and right hand versions. It also has a small switch that allows it to be fired underwater with special new ammunition. The new ammo is externally the same as standard 5.45mm ammo and uses the same mags, but the projectile is much heavier and is the entire internal length of the case, designed to be efficient underwater.
I would guess this AK-200 probably also can fire this ammo, though whether it has a switch to alter the gas system for shooting underwater I don’t know.
60 round mag to a gun legendary for reliability. I think the AK-200 will become the gun that the AK-47 was for it’s time, but there are two issues that annoy me. The feed system usually screws up firing after the 15th or 16th round that is fired, and then one must stop to realign. I really do not think that it is a magazine issue, like the original M-16 had with the box magazines. Second, I do not care what anyone says, the AK series will NEVER beat the M4 in terms of accuracy unless the sight system is totally changed are totally changed. Very simple changes to make, in my opinion.
The ACE looks like someone wants an M16 that is as reliable as an AK but is otherwise an M4.
Considering the barrel length I would anticipate lethality issues because of the round used, but at least it should be reliable.
Ivan and Georgy,
I personally always loved the Galil. It is a fantastic weapon. I have one of the Galil style Golani’s. Even though it does not have the chrome lined barrel, I find it accurate enough for my liking.
I do remember David Fortier wrote on the micro-Galil and was impressed. In all honesty, until you guys posted, I had never heard of the Ace. I watched the videos, and they look like good weapons. Until I have the opportunity to fire one, I cannot give an honest opinon.
What do you think of Galil Ace?In principle the Galil is copy of AK-47 with barrel of caliber of 5.56mm and 7.62mm.The Galil Ace is new version of the Galil.
http://www.israel-weapon.com/