Finland Gives Up New Rifle Program, Will Modernize Rk. 62 to Serve Until 2035

The Finnish Commander of the Army has announced that the Nordic country will not be purchasing 5.56mm replacements for their existing 7.62x39mm caliber Rk. 62 rifles, but instead will seek to upgrade the venerable Kalashnikov-based Valmet. reports (machine translation below):

Finland gives up the purchase of a new automatic rifle cal. 5.56 mm. Old RK 62 for the cartridge 7.62 mm x 39 will be upgraded and will be used until 2035.

The prototype of the modernized 7.62-mm automatic rifle RK 62M presented at the beginning of August.  Until this standard is to be adapted most of the models used by the Finnish army / Photo: MO Finland

The prototype of the modernized 7.62-mm automatic rifle RK 62M presented at the beginning of August. Until this standard is to be adapted most of the models used by the Finnish army / Photo: MO Finland

Commander of the Finnish Army, Lieutenant General Seppo Toivonen said that Finland plans to resign from purchasing until the end of the decade a new, individual arms. Until now, the search for a successor was assumed previously used design, powered cartridge 7.62 mm x 39, through new models of firing ammunition 5.56 mm x 45 NATO standard in countries belonging to NATO and the widespread of the world ( Finnish ARX 160? , 2014 -11-29). Such rifles, in a small number will get only special forces soldiers for which you purchased the Belgian FN SCAR-L ( Weapons for Finnish commandos , 2014-03-13).

The army decided that our old rifle, it is still an effective weapon that meets the requirements of the battlefield, so it will be used for a long time in the future , said gen. Toivonen. Thus confirmed previous reports that the Ministry of Defense in April that is widely used in Finnish armed forces RK 62 automatic rifles remain in service even until 2035.

The army will have to cope with financial constraints and their implications for defense. Over the next few years we will have analyzed how many of the older kinds of weapons will be able to continue to be used and then selected to be the priorities of modernization , said the commander of land forces.

Nevertheless, introduced in 1965. RK 62 automatic rifle with milled castle chamber (and its variants: RK 62 TP with a folding stock; RK 62 VV with a lateral assembly to night vision devices, RK 62 TP VV assembly and folding stock), developed on the basis of the Soviet AK (some sources state that as a reference constructions were used models of contemporary Polish PMK, produced under license in Radom), will be slightly modified. Changes may also include RK 62-76 / TP with the pumped chamber of the castle, produced in 1977-1982.

By the end of the year created 200 prototypes of modernized rifles, which are to receive the name of the RK 62M. Weapons testing, made by the first soldiers from the new collection, to be launched in 2016.

The weapons are equipped with a stock of adjustable length, and also obtain a new, more convenient sling in place of previously used simple strip of leather. In addition, RK 62M will be provided with a supplementary universal mounting rail STANAG 4694 standard (compatible with older STANAG 2324, the US MIL-STD-1913, popularly referred to as Picatinny ) located above the chamber castle.Before bed, on the basis of midges or directly on the barrel, it is to be located optional aluminum mounting with three short pieces of rail, located throughout the sides and bottom. The top rail is used for mounting the optical and optoelectronic sights and thermal imaging equipment and nokto-, side – for mounting flashlights, laser indicators and backlights purpose.

Finnish special forces recently adopted the FN SCAR-L, and it was expected that the Finnish Army would follow suit. The Rk. 62 was adopted by the Finnish Army in 1962 and production began in 1965, replacing both the SVT-40 semi-automatic and aging Mosin-Nagant bolt-action rifles. Production ceased in 1998.

TFBTV included the Rk. 76, a stamped-receiver variant of the Rk. 62, in its list of five great overlooked rifles. As long as the rifles themselves remain serviceable, it’s likely that the Rk. 62 will only be usurped if another technological shift occurs, as the design is extremely sound.

H/T Broń i Amunicja

Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at


  • DIR911911 .

    well I always heard the Finns were smart, this will put another check in that column.

  • Dracon1201

    Finally, an arms program with some sense. Those Valmets are amazing, no need to replace them.

  • ghost

    How many ways can anyone build a rifle and have it still work? They want a 5 lb rifle, light ammo, and then hang 50 lb of junk on it. A well trained infantry, with a good reliable rifle, with good sights, good to go. Then the argument is, what to shoot out of it. Overthinking. Quit trying to over engineer a basic tool. Move on to developing individual carry death ray sticks.

    • Joe Ker

      …and in this case, took an 8lb gun and hung my mother off of it. sheesh.

      • ghost

        Damn!! What did your mother do?

  • DZ

    What ever happened to the RK95?

    • Esh325

      My understanding is that RK95 was issued in small numbers where the vast majority of the Finnish military is still equipped with the RK62.

      • Vitsaus

        I didn’t know that. I thought it was general issue. I’d love to get my hands on even a semi-auto RK95. Best looking AK variant as far as I’m concerned.

      • If I remember correctly, the Finns even resorted to importing a number of foreign AK because they had run short on Rk62.

        • micmac80

          Yes they imported a lot of military hardware(East German) from Germany after German reunification.That was all at rock bottom crap metal prices .

        • HobgoblinTruth

          Finland has tens of thousands Norinco 56’s waiting for the bad day.

  • Esh325

    It makes sense as there probably isn’t a rifle out there that would vastly outperform their current rifles to justify the cost. The Russian military will probably take a similar step upgrading their existing AK-74’s and AKM’s and issuing the AK-12 on a limited basis.

    • Joshua

      Small arms as a whole have plateaued. Until we move beyond brass cased ammunition nothing is significantly better than anything else. Others might have small advantages and disadvantages…in the end they all fire bullets from brass cases.

      Things like optics and NVG take precedence in the current small arms world.

      • Esh325

        Probably true. There’s LSAT and a rifle the Canadian military is working on.

        • Joshua

          That rifle is also a LSAT rifle. While we work on a LMG they are working on a Carbine.

          I do agree LSAT will be what spurs small arm development, until then its the same ol same ol.

          • Esh325

            It’s a collaboration? I wasn’t aware of that.

          • Joshua

            It is. Canada and the US have been working together to make LSAT work.

          • Good luck to them. They are gonna need it.

          • Esh325

            If they do make a working rifle and LMG that’s significantly better than the current generation, they’ll be rich as I don’t think anybody else is working on such a thing, unless in secret.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Nate had an article on July 7th about the Brits and French collaborating on a similar, case-telescoped round for an armored fighting vehicle mounted turret gun.

          • Joshua

            Once we get the 5.56 LSAT running it won’t take long to scale it up and replace every weapon in inventory. It’s the future of small arms.

          • iksnilol

            Since you need new ammo for it why bother with 5.56? I see the LSAT as an opportunity to get something in the 6.5 mm range adopted.

          • Joshua

            It’s possible, but the current goal is a 5.56 LMG and Carbine with a 7.62 LMG in the works.

            Right now its easier to make the weapon work with the current bullet production available. Using M855 and M855A1 bullets is cheaper than sourcing 6.5 bullets. Once the concept is mature anything can happen.

            It’s also cheaper to use current bullets produced on a government scale than going to an individual company to get a different bullet to load.

            I know AAI has been pushing 6.5.

          • nobody

            Because the biggest problem with the soldier hitting what they are shooting at is them not being able to shoot well while being shot at, in which case more follow up shots with lighter 5.56 ammunition would be more beneficial than a slightly better trajectory and slightly better wound ballistics of something in the 6.5mm range.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, but look at it this way. caseless 6.5xsomething ammo would be lighter than casefull 5.56 ammo.

      • Yallan

        I’d say a bullpup is significantly better, and the next step but which Finland can’t afford right now. Bullpups allow much shorter length for superior indoors combat, constant suppressor usage for the night and much better balance when outfitted with tons of doodads. But you need the doodads and suppressors first which I doubt Finland has, unlike Australia whose entire army is outfitted with NVGs and infrared laser aiming devices.

        • Tom

          Finland is not exactly a poor country. I am sure they can afford all the dodads they want but it should be remembered these are weapons for the conscripts so its important they are durable as they will not necessarily be taken care of to the same degree we might expect from professional soldiers. Also since the Finns will be fighting (should a war occur which is very very unlikely) in the great outdoors not in buildings so a short rifle is not a massive advantage.

          • javierjuanmanuel

            They are right next to russia. A a war on any border country of russia is not unlikely.

        • javierjuanmanuel

          They need it to run at -20 farenheight.

  • iksnilol

    AK guys be like: Was it even a question?

  • Ed

    Common since wins in Finland. Nothing wrong with the RK-62 and it still can kick but. At lest the dumb NATO 5.56mm failed. Tried of the Euro lover forcing 5.56mm down every one though. they had the sense to say shove it to tacti coolers.

    • iksnilol

      It is a bit ironic that an American is complaining about NATO forcing 5.56 down the throat of everybody. What do you think is the story behind the 7.62×51 NATO? It was your supernatural belief in .30 caliber or bust that resulted in its adoption.

      • Mike Smith

        How do you know he’s American?

        • iksnilol

          Name’s Ed (so I presume English is the native tongue) and he mentions Euro lovers. Now the latter is a term no European would use and that doesn’t leave too many options. + statistics, he’s most likely an American considering he is on a firearm blog from America.

          I am not Sherlock Holmes but I occasionally try.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Looking at his grammar, he is either very much a non-native speaker or someone off his meds.

          • iksnilol

            Non native speakers have a tendency to write well and usually add a line about how it isn’t their native language and that they are sorry for any errors.

            So if I were a betting man I’d put my money on the latter.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Ha ha! Oh, man, if you’d have seen half the asian-based Internet posts with butchered English as I have, you wouldn’t assert that so confidently. An American would not get worked up about “NATO 5.56mm” be foisted on foreign nations.

        • Zebra Dun

          Cain’t spell fer shat?

        • ghost

          His spelling?

    • 5.56mm is an American round, and 7.62×39 is a European round, though…

      • ostiariusalpha

        I really don’t think “Ed” is a genuine American.

        • DonDrapersAcidTrip

          like americans are never that dumb let alone americans posting on firearm blogs?

          • ostiariusalpha

            Dumb Americans care about dumb ‘Murican stuff, they don’t know Finland from their buttholes and don’t give a rip about the politics surrounding 5.56 adoption in Eastern Europe.

          • Zebra Dun

            I know once Finland produced some dang fine soldiers and shooters and one l’il sniper who kicked ast royally.

      • Zebra Dun

        A good one too. 7.62 x 39 mm

  • Wolfgar

    I know they probably have a lot of 7.62X39 ammo and mags on hand but the RK 62m rifle in the 6.5 Grendel would have been a smart up date. With the Grendel they would have had all the benefits of the 7.62X39 round and a big advantage in range and accuracy. With Finland’s love of marksmanship the Grendel would have seemed a smarter choice.

    • micmac80

      7.62×39 they use is what you would refer to as match grade and military actualy returns brass to be reloaded. Fin AK is a accurate as they get.

      • Wolfgar

        The 7.62X39 is a great cartridge but the Grendel is better in all areas. It will stay super sonic past a 1000 yards, The Grendel is based on the 7.62X39 case so it would be an easy conversion.

        • Well, not if you want to shoot subsonic bullets.

          • ghost

            I don’t care if they hear it coming. “what’s th……….”?

          • Well, if their friends hear it coming you could conceivably have a problem.

          • ostiariusalpha

            How heavy a bullet can you use on a subsonic 7.62×39?

          • 240gr at least.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Waddaminute…are those legit .311 bullets or cast boolits? Not interested in messing with exposed lead.

          • Wolfgar

            If this was a problem for a main rifle cartridge then nobody would field a 5.56 rifle. Silly!

          • Not “better in all areas” though, is it?

          • Wolfgar

            Is this an area that would be a deal breaker when adopting a major combat round? Of course not so it is better in all areas when considering a new combat cartridge. If you can show me any country’s requirement that requires their chosen combat round needs to be an effective subsonic round I’ll agree. Like I said before, silly!

          • Well, that wasn’t my wording, it was yours.

            And anyway, if we’re talking about 16″ barreled military rifles, then the Grendel is subsonic at 850 yards, bro:



          • Wolfgar

            The 123 grain Lapua Scenar in the 6.5 Grendel does 1226 fps at 1000 yards in a 16″ barrel which is still super sonic bro. The Hornady a-max and Sierra 123 match have similar ballistics as the Lapua Scenar. Yes with a longer barrel in the Grendel you will stay super sonic past 1200 yards as most caliber will do better with a longer barrel such as the 5.56 and 7.63X51. Ask your self this, if you had a skilled enemy shooting at you from 500 to 1000 yards would you prefer they were using a 7.62X39 or a 6.5 Grendel. Enough said.

          • At what altitude? 6,000 feet? Sheesh.

            At sea level, to get 1,226 ft/s at 1,000 yards with a 123gr Lapua Scenar (G7 BC .263 according to manufacturer), you need 2,680 ft/s, or 2,660 J of muzzle energy.


            That is over 250 ft/s above the actual performance of the 6.5 Grendel from 16″ barrels, and is roughly comparable to what a .260 Remington will do from a 16″ barrel. In terms of energy, that’s 23% higher than the 6.5 Grendel’s performance with safe pressures, meaning if you are running handloads that hot you are essentially firing proof-level rounds or worse every time.

            I don’t know why Grendel fanboys insist on inflating the numbers for the 6.5×38, it’s a perfectly respectable cartridge as it. It’s just not magic. And it’s not supersonic at 1,000m from short barrels.

            And if I had a skilled enemy shooting at me at 500 to 1,000 yards, I wouldn’t be picking between a 7.62×39 or a 6.5 Grendel, bro.

          • Wolfgar

            I took the ballistics off of Alexanders web sight. If he is exaggerating his published Grendel ballistics I haven’t heard any complaints about it since its inception. You would have to take it up with him if you think he’s fudging. I’m nobody’s fan boy but I have had excellent luck shooting my 16″ Grendel out to 1100 yards that left my 5.56 rifle in the dust. Yes I am shooting around 6500 feet elevation. I wouldn’t even try with my 7.62X39 AK at that range. I didn’t ask what round or method you preferred to use against an enemy I was asking which cartridge you would rather be opposing at that range. I didn’t mean to up set you with my opinion but shooting the Grendel has convinced me of its superior capability in an AR-AK platform especially compared to the 7.62X39 round. Chill bro, were just discussing differing opinions.

          • Yes, manufacturers often exaggerate or fudge the numbers to make their products look better. It’s important to independently verify those numbers before making a determination about a product.

            It doesn’t sound like I’m the one who’s upset, here.

            There’s nothing wrong with the 6.5 Grendel, it’s a fine cartridge and produces better ballistics vs. 7.62×39 (I never said it didn’t). It’s important to recognize, however, that manufacturer’s numbers are one thing, and practical performance is another. Fortunately, JBM’s ballistic calculator is a pretty accurate piece of work, so we can verify the numbers we get from the manufacturer with it.

            At 6500 feet altitude, the 6.5 Grendel should stay supersonic past 1,000 yards, but that is because there is less air resistance.

          • Wolfgar

            Nope, I’m not upset at all. I have seen different ballistic calculators give different results. In my experience they are a good start when out shooting and then I have to tweak my data. I have been shooting for many years yet when I think I have got it whipped something new will come up and put me in my place. This is why I enjoy shooting, it is a never ending learning process.

          • Yes, most ballistic calculators are crap and only give you a percent velocity reduction with range (which isn’t how drag works). JBM’s is the best I’ve found, free or paid.

          • Wolfgar

            Looks like my pet dream gun is a reality. Bill Alexander is getting Russian made AK’s in the 6.5 Grendel and then re-worked by Krebs acording to his post on the Grendel forum. There are 5, 10, and 30 round Russian made AK mags already made for the Grendel. They will come in 16, 20″ and 24 inch barrels.This will be an interesting rifle to compare to my 7.62X39 AK rifles.

          • Hi Wolfgar, could you do me a favor and email me the details? I think that’s very interesting and would like to do a feature on it. 🙂

  • hikerguy

    If it ain’t broke, then don’t fix it. Some good new mods do help if you are keeping it in the long run.

  • roguetechie

    you know, I keep hearing about this mythical plateau…
    Which, frankly only exists for those too stupid, lazy, or willfully ignorant to see what is obviously a pretty glaring gap in basic firearms technology that’s getting worse not better.
    Get angry and disagree all you want, but it doesn’t change the outright fact that western small arms are more expensive, less durable, and heavier than eastern designs (especially in the belt fed department). It’s not that we cannot make cheap, simple, and extremely effective small arms… Just that we never seem to actually buy these lighter, cheaper, better systems.
    Also it’s an extreme fallacy that brass case is what everyone currently uses. However it’s an absolutely AWESOME example of how much of what “everyone knows” about firearms and firearm technology is absolutely pure BS.
    Hell with modern technology we’ve got easily available and pretty extreme leaps in performance, weight reduction, reduced environmental impact, cost reduction, and even a drastic reduction in strategic materials used to produce a given quantity of an item in every major component of a small arms system.
    the above advances are just waiting to be exploited in conventional cases, projectiles, firearm construction, enablers like optics lights lasers, accessories like furniture bipods tripods, and even barrels… I suspect there’s other areas but all of these are a certainty.
    The funny thing is that the majority of this stuff made itself known as distinctly possible 40 or more years ago! We’ve just failed to exploit it over and over.
    Stagnation and an industry that has trained a majority of it’s consumers to hate true innovation doesn’t equal a plateau!

    • Rock or Something

      So…I will place you in the “undecided” column.

    • Zebra Dun

      “It came from the land of the ice and snow, the midnight sun where the hot springs blow” The hammer of Gods and all that Viking jazz” The rifle is a perfect AK.

      • roguetechie

        yup I like the RK series except for the ultra perplexing pistol grip one version used which was just a round post that transitions at the top to a standard AK grip receiver interface. That thing … Hurts my heart lol… Although I’ve wondered if it was actually made that way to make Finnish shooters mitten use easier.
        My biggest question though is where are they going to produce the upgrades? since sako and valmet are both defunct AFAIK.
        South Africa?
        Now personally I’d bet if they outsourced they’d go the South African route…
        However I sincerely hope they are looking at buying some updated production production equipment. I can’t remember what the disposition of the original tooling was, but I seem to remember that a large portion of it was at end of life according to pretty legit sources.
        Also a part of me was at least somewhat hoping to see a Finn 5.45×39 lol.

        • Finpower

          They will be produced in Finland. They didn’t name any companies, but I would guess Patria is probably involved. As well as Millog(Patria owns a portion of that company)

    • nobody

      Spot the Russian in this thread.

    • “western small arms are more expensive, less durable, and heavier than eastern designs”

      AR-15: Less expensive, just as durable, and about a pound lighter than the AK.

      • Esh325

        The AR15 is less expensive to make than the AK?

        • Yes, though it ultimately depends what your industry looks like. If you don’t have any aluminum forging machines, then, well…

          • Esh325

            I’ve never seen any evidence to support that, in fact evidence that supports the opposite. “As of 2014, Kalashnikov Concern [1] sells the AK-103 at a government price of $150 to $160 (USD) per unit” “According to the Department of the Army’s Chief of Legislative Liaison, the Army today executed a delivery order to buy 24,000 M4A1s worth $16,163,252.07. The rifles will be made at Remington’s factory in Ilion, N.Y., from the Colt technical data package and will cost about $673.10 a copy. That’s a significantly lower price than the final order of Colt produced M4A1s the government paid $1221 for in a 2010 contract.”

          • The source for the $150-$160 comes from Wikipedia, and is cited in two articles that do not provide those numbers. Essentially, they are made up.

            The M4 numbers are approximately correct.

          • Esh325

            “A brand new Kalashnikov from a Russian factory costs around $240,
            depending on the derivative and size of the purchase.13”

          • More to the point, comparing Ilion, NY labor and Izhevsk labor is not apples-to-apples.

            What makes more sense is looking at AK production in the US, and if we do that, we consistently find that AKs are more expensive. Now part of that is because so many AR-15 parts can be sourced easily, but part of that is also that the AK is a more labor-intensive item.

            If your labor costs are low and you don’t have aluminum forging machines, then of course an AK will be cheaper. If your labor costs are high and you do have aluminum forging machines, then the AR will be cheaper. This is what I said before.

            Having said that, generally speaking the AR will be cheaper provided the capital outlay is made for the forging machines.

          • Esh325

            I highly doubt those AK factories in the USA put out the volume that you would have seen foreign AK factories put out. I don’t honestly think you can compare the costs of civilian made rifles to what the costs would be for large military contracts. There’s whole different pricing points for the two I imagine. And without numbers to back any of that up what you’re saying, it’s mostly conjecture. All the numbers I’ve seen point to the AK being a cheaper rifle to manufacture.

          • Which numbers have you seen that compare the two weapons with similar labor costs and capital outlay? I would love to see numbers like that, but I strongly suspect you don’t have anything of the sort.

            You’re right that US AK manufacturers don’t put out the volume that Kalashnikov concern does, but that’s not the comparison I was making. If the AK was super cheap to make, you would expect to see even small shops putting them out at reasonable prices, but we don’t. The cheapest American made AK is the Century Arms C39, but that’s a milled gun, it’s not even forged, and it’s still more expensive than a comparable AR-15.

          • Esh325

            I don’t have such numbers, but the numbers for military produced rifles don’t support your argument. Volume does without a doubt factor into price point which is what we are talking about, it can’t be discounted. And your statement about AR15’s being more expensive in the commercial civilian than AK’s is mostly incorrect. If you we look at this page of AR15’s and AK’s you can see that the prices between low end AR15’s to AK’s are mostly comparable.

          • A. Where did I say commercial ARs are more expensive?

            B. You’re misdirecting. The original question wasn’t about the market price of each gun but whether the West could design weapons that were inexpensive to make. Bith the AR and G36 are, if anything, better optimized for this than the AK in this respect.

          • Esh325

            I messed up that sorry, I meant the opposite. AK’s being more expensive than AR15’s.

          • Except it’s patently true.

          • Esh325

            Except it’s not true. As the link I gave you doesn’t show that.

          • That is a WASR, ad it’s still no cheaper than a S&W M&P 15. Or are you suggesting labor costs in Romania are just as high as in the US?

          • Esh325

            The WASR isn’t the only rifle they are selling. The prices are fairly compatible.

          • The WASR and the Yugos are the only ones they’re selling that aren’t kit guns, and even the DPMS ARs (not bad guns by any stretch) are $60 cheaper than them.

            But if your argument boils down to “they’re about the same price”, then you’ve made my point for me. The AR-15 is a perfect example of an inexpensive Western rifle.

          • Esh325

            On the commercial American civilian market with AR’s that aren’t even close to being milspec. But I think I’m done arguing.

          • What, compared to Yugos with wonky receivers and non-chrome-lined barrels?

            Gimme a break, a proper mil-spec AK looks like an $1100 Arsenal, i.e. STILL more expensive than a Colt. Compare bargain bin with bargain bin, the AR is cheaper. Compare mil-spec with mil-spec, the AR is cheaper.

            Unless you’re an impoverished country with no capital and cheap labor, the AR-15 is a cheaper rifle to make. It’s not like the AK is far behind, mind you, but a study of the two designs bears this out, as well.

          • Esh325

            There’s the importation costs and the 922R laws that come into play. Quality AK’s like the Norincos use to be dirt cheap in the USA years ago until importation laws changed. The commercial prices of the rifles don’t really represent what the rifles would cost with a military contract.

          • LABOR COSTS BRO.

          • Esh325

            Relatively speaking I wouldn’t say the AR is an expensive rifle to make, but the AK is cheaper rifle to make. The military prices were cheaper for the AK compared to the M4 which could go from 600-1200$ from the links I showed you.

          • No, you simply can’t make that comparison. The AK is a heavily labor-dependent rifle. If you have cheap labor, you can make them cheaply, but if you don’t then you’ll find the AR is quite a bit cheaper.

          • Here’s the article where the source comes from, BTW:


          • I don’t want to mislead anyone here, so I’ll be a bit clearer: The production techniques and labor requirements to make forged AR-15s and stamped AKs are not directly comparable. That is the simplest statement that is still reasonable correct.

            Provided one has aluminum forging machines, the AR-15 is a cheaper gun to make. If you are a government looking to make for yourself squillions of rifles and you don’t have unusually low labor costs, the AR-15 is probably in the long run the cheaper bet. If you are a government with really low labor costs and low levels of investment capital, the AK is the obvious choice.

            If you’re a government looking to buy, not manufacture, you can turn to the surplus market and pick up truckloads of old AKs for dirt cheap.

            If you’re a US citizen a few years ago and AK parts kits are still like a hundred bucks a pop, you can make an AK for dirt cheap. (It’s more expensive now, but this possibility seems to have stuck in the collective consciousness).

      • iksnilol

        I’ve yet to see ARs that can be gotten for less than AKs. There were rumors about a Ruger AR that was about 500 USD. But I’ve yet to see one (am looking for a cheap one for a friend).

        Also, AKMs are about 7 lbs (unloaded).

        Also, he has a point regarding belt feds. PKM and NSV are way lighter than M240 and M2 Browning. And the PKM could be about a kilogram lighter if you converted it to a rimless cartridge.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Hmm. I can walk into the Grab-a-Gun store and nab a brand new Del-Ton AR-15 weighing 2.6kg for $479 before tax. It’s not even on sale.

          • iksnilol

            Seriously!? Please forgive me since I don’t live in the US. What’s the quality on the Del Ton ARs? Would you recommend it as a cheap HD/SHTF rifle? I’ve checked Gun Broker but I think they were used.

            How cheaply could one assemble an AR-15? could one assemble a fully functioning AR for less than 400?

            Like I said, I am thinking for a friend if I ever visit him in the US.

          • Yeah, you could assemble an AR for $400 or so.

            Thing is, Iks, you’re comparing all-new factory built guns to guns made from imported surplus parts kits. If you look at AKs built in the US from the ground up, there’s no comparison. The AR is much cheaper.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, I see that. I was thinking for a millitary or something an AK would be cheaper since they can set up big factories to churn them out by the truckload. ARs require more machining.

          • Err, I mean in the sense that you need to hog more material out, that is true, but not in the sense that they’re harder to machine. All the machining operations for an AR receiver are really easy and use big, tough, durable bits.

          • iksnilol

            Oh I doubt it is hard to machine an AR but it takes time I presume?

          • Not really. Machining aluminum is easy.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Pragmatically speaking, the rifle would be adequate for either home defense or bug-out use. When it comes to budget ARs (like the Del-Ton), the individual rifle’s quality is going to be on a wider spectrum than a premium, higher end manufacturer’s product. It might be a finicky bastard that shoots Mini-14 sized groups or it might be a real sweet shooter. My brother, for instance, got a heavy barreled DoubleStar MForgery with only plinking as it’s intended use, but it shot such tight groups with factory ammo that it is now his goto rifle for hunting coyotes. You can’t really know which is which until you’ve fired some rounds through the gun with various ammo, though generally you’ll find that budget rifles don’t “feel” as nice as nice as a premium rifle, their lower grade parts won’t have the same lifespan when it comes to wear & tear, and higher end equipment tends to have better warranties & customer service. The best bang for the buck that I’ve seen is Palmetto State Armory on the product line that uses CHF barrels from the nearby FN plant, they have decent parts in those rifles.

          • john huscio

            I assembled an AR from quality parts (Spikes lower, PSA mid length upper Daniel defense BCG, Colt charging handle) for under $700 last year.

        • nobody

          The NSV being lighter than the M2 Browning might have something to do with it being designed more than 50 years later than the M2 Browning (which was designed in 1918, the same year that WWI ended and first went into production in 1921).

        • Can’t say anything about the market there in… You’re from Norway, right?

          Here in the US, you can get a brand new AR for about $600. You can get an AK made from a kit for about the same price.

          The other thing is to look at the processes used to make both. This is going to depend on what your industry looks like, but generally speaking the AR-15 is a cheaper gun to make. Look at the American outfits that have tried to make AKs, they can never meet a “decent” price point. Now, the AK requires a significant amount of handwork, so if your labor costs are rock bottom, this may even out, but again – generally speaking – ARs are cheaper to make.

          • iksnilol

            Yes, a bit hard to look over the big “pond” as one calls it.

            So for an MSR it is about 600 USD that is required? If I am carefull about buying parts on sales and whatnot then I could possibly build an functioning AR for 400? That is interesting info.

            Yeah, ARs are easier to make on a small scale. AKs can be cheap because you can make a factory and churn them out by the truckload. Especially if you’re in a country with lower labor costs like China or Poland.

          • No, see I don’t think that’s true, either. ARs were designed to be as cheap as possible to make on an industrial scale, and they are very cheap. In fact, making them in small shops is difficult, that’s why most builders mostly assemble their guns and don’t actually manufacture them. To make a proper forged receiver AR, you need some pretty expensive equipment.

            Once you have that, though, the guns are very cheap to make.

          • Esh325

            I’m sure it was a dream to make compared to the problematic manufacturing they had with the M14.

          • Hmmm, yes, a gun that’s substantially similar in manufacture to a forged AK. 🙂

          • Rick5555

            No AR manufacture forges their receivers. Companies like FN, Colt, S&W. Ruger, et. al, purchase their receivers from LMT, or CMT who get the forged receiver from Cerro or Brass and Aluminum Forgers or Anchor Harvey. Then CMT, LMT will do the tooling process and possibly the anodizing. Just depends if the manufacture wants that process. Then the smaller manufactures. Usually just assemble and get all their parts outsourced. In fact some companies like Double Star, DS Arms, who made AR parts and sent to other manufactures.
            The forging process of metals is no easy task. There’s a reason why a forged aluminum receiver is thinner than a Billet receiver. And yet the forged receiver is significantly stronger. It’s called UTS and TY…i.e. Ultimate Tensile Strength and Tensile Yield. Essentially anything forged will always be stronger. Commercial ARs use a commercial buffer tube. Whereas a mil-spec tube is going to be 7075 aluminum compared to 6061. 7075 is twice as strong. Also a commercial tube is going to be extruded alum. The 7075 is going to be forged. Due to extruding 7075 series aluminum is extremely difficult. About 50% of the time extruding 7075 will result in failure. Therefore, it’s cost prohibitive to extrude 7075 And cost friendly to forge the 7075 series.

          • Yup. 🙂 AR manufacture in the US is really distributed, from the FCGs to the barrels to the receivers.

          • Phil Hsueh

            It can be done for $400 but you’re not only going to be waiting for good sales you’re also going to be using a lot of basic parts like the stock grip that comes with most lower parts kits, a basic stock, probably an old style M4 handguard, etc. It would be a very no frills AR but it would work and you could always upgrade over time with little to no effort; the only tricky part to change out would the handguard since you’d have to remove the hardware that holds it in place, but that’s if you want to with a free floating one, a Magpul handguard might not require it but don’t quote me on that.

          • Krzysztof Mendera

            Actually Polish AK are pretty expensive – latest version of Beryl for Polish army costs 5285 zł per unit, which is about 1420$.

          • iksnilol

            Does that include spare parts and armorer training? Since those tend to inflate costs.

          • Esh325

            Your example just demonstrates how wrong it is to compare the pricing of civilian rifles to military contracts. You’re saying you can buy a new AR on the civilian market for 600$ Where the US Military can buy a M4 made to the TDP for 673$! Show me where you can buy an equivalent M4 made by TDP standards for 600$ on the USA civilian market.

          • You can’t buy an M4 TDP gun on the civilian market unless you’re an SOT.

            I wasn’t comparing a civilian $599 AR to an Izhmash AK, either, but rather an equivalent bargain bin WASR or Centurion.

          • Esh325

            That’s why I said an equivalent.

          • An Arsenal SLR costs about $100 more than a Colt 6920. What’s your point?

          • Esh325

            The Saigas were cheaper, but sanctions have nixed them.

          • Saigas were cheaper because if Izhmash didn’t sell them at bargain bin prices, they wouldn’t have stayed solvent.

          • Esh325

            And if stamped sheet metal designs are good for manufacturers with cheap labor and no forging machine guns, then how do you explain the Sig 550?

          • It wasn’t the first time the Swiss made a cheap design expensive.

        • An M4 is less than 6lbs unloaded, bro.

          • iksnilol

            I remembered that now, I was thinking M16s.

      • roguetechie

        Nathaniel I must have accidentally deleted my three sentence AR-15 is the exception that proves the rule disclaimer. Because I have a love and respect for the platform for sure…
        I mean as much as I have a penchant for the oddball guns and etc if I had to grab one gun and go there would be zero hesitation as I opened the safe door and grabbed Betsy …. Yes my

        • Which others should I list? The AR-15? The AUG? The G36? The FNC? The SCAR?

          The latter four aren’t terribly cheap by market prices, but they’re also made in European countries with really high labor costs. The designs themselves are all very cheap (especially the G36 and SCAR). Your argument wasn’t “the West has higher labor costs”, so it doesn’t really hold up, does it?

          • roguetechie

            well Nathaniel the G36 is fundamentally flawed so it doesn’t belong on the list.
            As to higher labor costs I acknowledge that this is a factor, but it’s not even close to the only one.
            further it doesn’t disprove my argument in the slightest.
            Can you honestly tell me with a straight face that an SR-2 veresk would cost even CLOSE to what an agency buy bulk price B&T MP9 would cost? Even if you factored in man hour based labor cost corrections? Also can you with good conscience tell me a B&T MP9 Would even come close to the durability of the veresk?
            Now honestly also which stock would you prefer to use of the pair? Oh and would you really want a fixed foregrip over a folding one? And that doesn’t even get into the MUCH hotter rounds it can safely feed.
            what about the Uzi pro versus the pp-2000?
            The gsh-18 versus glock, m9, HK USP? (no one sane can claim that the 66%+

          • 1. SR-2 vs. MP9
            Manufacturing wise, they are probably similar, the MP9 may be slightly less expensive (it’s basically a plastic shell with a bunch of stamped guts). I can only assume, however, that you intentionally picked a Swiss gun for comparison, as you know Swiss labor costs are astronomical.

            2. I’ve never seen a durability test for either the MP9 or SR-2. Have you?

            3. Which stock? I’ve never held an SR-2, but the MP9’s is fine.

            4. Well it’s a good thing the MP9 doesn’t have a fixed VFG anymore. I also don’t see how this is relevant, since we were talking about weight, durability, and cost.

            5. What makes you think the MP9 can’t handle hot ammo? It’s specced for NATO pressure 9mm.

            6. What about the Uzi Pro vs. the PP-2000? I’ve never even seen a PP-2000 in person, but it just so happens I have an Uzi Pro pistol sitting about ten feet away.

            7. What about these guns? The Glock in particular is much cheaper than the GSh-18, exactly the same weight, and one of the most durable pistols on the planet.

            So your logic seems circular. You believe that Russian guns are better, and you seem to be using that to prop up your statement that Russian guns are better. This is absurd!

          • roguetechie

            umm… The glock is not even close to cheaper than a gsh Nathaniel. Where and how exactly would you get the impression that this is the case?
            Also in reference to the MP9 Versus the SR2 Veresk, no I didn’t choose the MP9 due to astronomical Swiss labor costs…Especially since I specifically brought up the whole normalizing labor costs thing specifically lol…
            No the reason I brought up the MP9 & SR2 veresk is they are fundamentally extremely similar, but show quite visibly the differences in the two philosophies. I’m going to break down piece by piece where you went wrong in your last response on the SR2 / MP9.
            1. The SR2 & MP9 are NOT in any way similar in construction or more importantly for the purposes of my point COMPLEXITY. first on this subject you should really stop by weaponsguild and peruse the thread by Barnbwt which has lots of very high quality pictures of the internals of an SPP (Which while earlier steyr built are close enough in construction to have parts commonality) inside it’s gorgeous polymer shell you’ll see a nightmare of complexity close tolerances and disappointing amounts of polymer used for very critical components. What you won’t see is low cost and perfectly adequate stampings! Instead you’ll see unnecessarily intricate machining and tight tolerances everywhere. And yes the MP9 is rated for NATO spec 9×19…
            Now onto the SR2 Veresk. The SR2 is pretty much as different from the MP9 as one could possibly get while comparing two gas operated compact machine pistols. The Veresk is low cost stampings generous tolerances, and an almost militant simplicity! On top of that it’s stock top folds with a cutout sufficient for optics mounting and a mechanism / construction that has a much beefier look to it. Now the forend has a deployable foregrip that can also lock into the forend for a nice sleek smooth holstering profile. Also the SR2 is normally chambered for the more stout 9×21 Russian AP and other rounds that even in 9×19 format would be equivalent to +p+ …
            As an aside I find it pretty offensive that you would lay into me about a comparison which your quite pronounced missing of the mark on pretty much every area of the platform in question, and then choose to accuse me of circular logic meant to justify my own preferences regardless of facts…. And then do exactly that yourself.
            also for the record Nathaniel, one of the foremost reasons I picked the MP9 … is because personally even with it’s faults and etc I’d absolutely LOVE to own one!!!
            Finally … Allow me to suggest that you do your homework on the gsh-18… Because it’s a very neat gun with smart design and implementation baked in at every level, even if it is pretty damn ugly lol…
            (I find it a-10 warthog or sukhoi frogfoot ugly personally. Aka gorgeously ugly.)

          • I’m not reading this novel.

            A few points:

            1. I’ve field-stripped an MP9. I know what they look like on the inside.

            2. You’re still making a lot of statements based on absolutely no data. Do you even have price figures for the GSh-18? Do you just believe it’s cheaper because it’s Russian? Glocks are extremely cheap pistols.

            3. The MP9 isn’t gas-operated, it’s recoil-operated. So you continue to not know what you’re talking about.

            4. Blah, blah, blah, the SR-2 is cheaper because it’s stamped! You have no idea, do you?

            5. So? What evidence do you have that the MP9’s very generous locking surfaces wouldn’t be up to the task?

            I am calling you out for circular logic and spurious unsupported claims. If you’re offended, too bad.

          • roguetechie

            Actually I have done some extremely intensive research on the gsh-18, and it picks up exactly where the glock left off in making a very good pistol at minimal cost. It’s also got quite a bit in common with the same factors that make the AR-15 as beautifully cheap to manufacture. (limiting the critical components under load, and therefore needing to be built to take said loads.) Giving you the ability to build your frame very light with minimal steel reinforcements embedded in the polymer.
            Then you have the majority of the steel parts which are constructed in a way that when I read about it made my jaw nearly hit the floor. Oh and they’ve managed to eliminate parts from a normal design.
            Where you are mistaken is in your continued incorrect insistence that I have any sort of preference for Russian guns.
            What I have is a level of frustration with our seeming inability in the west to exploit the amazing talent and true design genius we’re blessed with! You want an example of why I’m frustrated? In the mid 70’s we could have built a 7.62×51 lmg with an empty weight of 13 POUNDS!! What’s worse is that the way it was constructed would have given us very interesting options in things like coax and RWS applications.
            At the end of the day my post was never about east versus west, but about STAGNATION vs PROGRESS!
            As to the gas operation and MP9 thing … I have an aimpoint patent up as my desktop background that’s very MP9 like in form which is gas operated that for some reason made me mentally tag the MP9 as gas op…. Sue me.
            honestly for someone whose been as off base, personally insulting, and outright aggro from the jump as you have throughout this exchange though Nathaniel…. Glass houses man, glass houses.
            I’ve tried to keep this exchange light and casually goading, because I know better than to take myself seriously. So how about you get off your high horse and realize there are other researchers out there just as dedicated and serious as you. And maybe just maybe they might see something you don’t from time to time!
            Honestly, I’ve lost a massive amount of respect for you in the course of this exchange as it’s become apparent you have no interest in anyone’s views but your own. Conversely up to now I’ve worked to see your point in instances where we’ve disagreed. honestly I feel like I’ve learned much from our interactions….
            however it doesn’t appear the reverse is true

          • If you have anything you think I would learn from, please do share it. You have my email.

            If not, then what am I supposed to make of all this? From my perspective you’ve made a bunch of unsubstantiated and often circular arguments to support your patently silly premise that the West can’t design firearms that are inexpensive or durable or lightweight. If saying this openly makes you think less of me or offends you, oh well, I guess. I have long since learned I can’t please everyone.

            I’m fully ready to change my mind… If you can support your arguments and teach me something. For all the words you’ve typed, there hasn’t been much of substance, just bluster.

            Remember, you made the arguments in the first place. The burden of proof is on you to back them up.

            The way I see it, you’re reacting and projecting at me your own insecurities about your position. You’re characterizing what I’ve said as being overly mean, aggressive, haughty, inconsiderate, dismissive, etc. Except I haven’t been. All I’ve done is challenge your arguments directly. Is it that you can’t handle that? If that’s not what’s going on, then prove it. You’re acting like you have data to back it all up, well let’s see it.

          • roguetechie

            if you’d like me to continue and explain exactly what I’m referring to with the pp2000 etc I can, however I feel like I’ve made my point.
            btw if you’d like great pics of the veresk photoshooter karden or any number of other sources will give you what you need to do a photo comparison.

          • Are you really going to sit here and pretend like you have an actual item cost analysis adjusted for labor cost differences between the MP9 and SR-2 and between the GSh-18 and the Glock 19, and between the Uzi Pro and the PP2000 sitting on your lap?

            Pony up or stop acting like you have it.

    • Dracon1201

      Sorry Brah, I don’t think you are in the same realm as us.

    • borekfk

      “western small arms are more expensive, less durable, and heavier than eastern designs”

      You’ve never met the brick shithouse called the MAS-49, have you?

      • A magnificently pragmatic firearm.

      • iksnilol

        So one counter-example disproves all the others?

        G36 and M16A1 are plenty proof of the expensive and less durable part of his argument.

        • lolno

          • iksnilol

            Well, I’ve never seen a cheap G36. And the late melting issue seems to go under “not so durable after all”.

            M16A1, I keep away from that contraption for personal safety reasons. I’ll admit, the one I tried might have been a lemon or decades of warfare and abuse might have caught up with it.

            It was meant kinda ironically, I mean, if he can cherry pick to base an entire argument on then so should I be able to.

          • The melting issue isn’t one of durability.

            G36s are very cheap, but labor costs in Germany are high. Labor, labor, labor.

            I have no idea why you think the M16 is unsafe, but you’re wrong.

          • iksnilol

            If something melts when it shouldn’t I wouldn’t call it durable.

            Still, even if the design itself is cheap to make, it is made in Germany where the labor cost is high (+ the HK markup).

            The new versions are good, the old one can’t be trusted. Like I said, I might be biased and it might be a lemon.

          • It was a zero shift, bro, not the receiver losing structural integrity.

          • iksnilol

            Bro, I am one of the few persons who can make a couple thousand dollar bolt action jam with match ammo. “just a zero shift” in my hands would probably result in stoppages, explosions, maiming and eventually death.

            Joking aside, it doesn’t inspire confidence if it is soft enough to melt.

          • Phil Hsueh

            From what I understand, the melting issue isn’t something that’s inherent in the design so much as H&K getting cheap and substituting a lower quality polymer (with lower heat tolerances) than what they’re supposed to actually use and is called for by the specs.

          • iksnilol

            That is correct, still, the G36’s reputation is tarnished now. I doubt it will recover.

      • roguetechie

        LOL the French farm girl that can pull the plow if your animal team gets sick and I are actually well acquainted. Frankly I love the MAS-49! when I get discretionary spending money I can allocate to buying fun guns much of it goes into buying MAS parts and donor guns. I just wish they had a wee bit more in COAL space… A GP-11 firing MAS in custom chassis with a pile of hi caps good glass and full precision shooters accessories pack would be about the most frightening modernized ER SDM option I can imagine.

    • Esh325

      The only thing I can say is probably true is that eastern made firearms are usually more cost effective than western ones. But honestly though I don’t think it’s really fair to pigeon hole “east” and “west” as many different countries make up the two of those.

      • roguetechie

        Esh, I spent a half hour trying to come up with a more satisfactory pair of identifiers because I share your ambivalence about the ones I chose.

        • Esh325

          lol sorry.

    • Not_a_Federal_Agent

      You- “Theres new technology, what da fug why aren’t we using it!”
      The Rest of The World- “It is expensive and the cost benfit ratio does not pay out”
      You- “Well fine then, besides eastern guns are better!!!!!!111!one”

      So, tell us then, if it is in fact a “myth” about the mature technology for case less ammunition, energy weapons in a man portable form with efficient power supply units slightly more portable than an aircraft carrier, and just how exactly we can make guns so much cheaper and perhaps people would reconsider their position on the topic. But you’re not going to be able to do that so it doesn’t matter anyway.

      • roguetechie

        Actually NAFA you’ve provided a fine example of building a small towns worth of straw men …
        first off I’ve specifically and frequently reiterated that a primary source of my frustration in all of this is how it’s making firearms a cost prohibitive hobby. Nearly all of the stuff I mentioned would reduce MSRP’s assuming the companies didn’t decide to triple their profit taking off each item, Drastically reduce barriers to entry for new players, (most of it would be within reach of a DIY / sweat equity basement maker honestly) and quite frankly would really only kill the most egregiously stupid large players because even people who have just bought new machines that are only semi compatible with the new best practice and etc would be able to buy in and get enough new stuff to retrofit some of their extant tooling, buy a few full up new machines to avoid key bottlenecks and ride the amortization cycle safely to a point where they can step off the old merry go round.
        So the TL;DR here is…. NOPE / the reason you read with your preconceived notions and prejudices set aside as much as possible.

      • roguetechie

        Oh and it’s not that I can’t tell you… It’s that I WON’T tell you, capitalism and stuff ya know?

    • BlackTalon2000

      Anything specific? The only new eastern guns i know of are the Russian guns like the AK-12 and the Vintorez type guns in 9×39. But those are not exported yet.

      • roguetechie

        well we can start with the PKM lol… And Honestly taking a look at SOME of the 9×39 thumpers I could swear that they’ve got Gen 2.5 ak-109 / AEK-971 recoil mitigation tech baked in… Or pistols… Wanna talk pistols? They’ve got a pmm sized pistol that’s 18+1 fits tiny Asian hands makes AK’S look COMPLICATED and hi points look expensive…
        subguns… Aek-918 / pp-2000
        super thumpy big bore bullpups… Well we don’t have them and if we did we certainly wouldn’t have a selectable eject 12.7×55 version with combination recoil softening, bore evacuating, and apparently accuracy enhancing feature that is so simple it’s actually embarrassing…
        that’s the short list…
        oh and their optics are actually getting very interesting, I personally dropped all my American full size reflex sights in exchange for a heavier but IMHO much better pk-as. And don’t get me started on the crazy magic that is the pk-07! Finally in the optics category, it burns my ass that ROS frigging Optics bought the license to bifocal optics tech from a Scandinavian developer… What’s that you say? Well imagine a Spectre DR @ more like lucid prices where your 1x & 4x views are picture in picture superposed and each with it’s own reticle making snapshots from suddenly appearing danger close targets trivial things. They also have 3x / 9x and one other version potentially allowing DMR use. Oh and the PK-AS / 07 Have the ability to adjust for diopter…

  • micmac80

    For people in not know(LOL) these AKs are feed premium Lapua ammo that is as near match grade as it gets and actually Lapua reloads 7.62×39 for the military. That is first hand info i gained in my visits to Lapua factory .

  • Zebra Dun

    The Little brother long ago had a Valmet M-60 in 7.62 x 39 mm, I was impressed with it’s better than normal accuracy for an AK type rifle, the weapon had night sights built in and even the pipe type stock wasn’t a big drawback.
    At the time 7.62 x 39 mm could not be found and was high priced The brother wanting to shoot a rifle not stand around and admire it swapped in for a Ruger Mini-14 and got some boot along with it.
    He says now he always regretted than swap.
    I’d have to say the Valmet is the best of the AK type rifles maybe even better than the East German made of the 70/80’s era.

    • Esh325

      The Galil and newer Galil Ace should be basically equal or better.

      • Zebra Dun

        I agree, the Galil was a superior AK type weapon, yet the Valmet was closer to the original design.

        • iksnilol

          I am a bit sceptical of the partially plastic receiver the Galil ACE has.

          • Zebra Dun

            I have seen a Galil yet never handled one nor fired one I would be Leary of the plastic receiver on an assault rifle though.

          • iksnilol

            There are different Galils, the original Galil is steel all the way. The Galil ACE is a lightened version.

            Even if it is plastic I still want one in 7.62×39 with the shortest barrel. Would be handy trunk gun.

        • Tritro29

          In no way was the Galil superior to the RK. 62. or even the ill fated Rk. 71/2 (which in the eyes of many is the real starting point of the Valil/Balashnikov). For starters the Galil structural strength was poor and it has always had issues maintaining zero with consistency, until the steel level reached a different quality. It’s for a reason, the Galil was ditched in favour of suplus AR platforms, yet somehow the Rk’s never went away (despite all the alternatives being around the corner).

      • Tom

        The Galil was heavily influenced by the Valmet, I have heard the first few receivers were in fact Valmet produced.

        the Ace is interesting but I am not sure it has a place in today’s market though a couple of nations have adopted it so clearly they think so. At least that is too say I think they could of done so much more with it.

    • iksnilol

      He traded a Valmet for a friggin Mini-14?

      I hope I am not rude when I say that your brother might not be the smartest guy?

      • Zebra Dun

        He is a smart guy, 20 years in the Marines, an even longer career at a major CD-DVD making company out of Japan, he retired and now has a knew career driving semi trucks! He just loves to trade and swap firearms, he later swapped the Ruger Mini-14 for a SMLE and then that SMLE ofr an M-1 carbine.
        He likes to shoot different rifles and such, he hunts with old Savage Stevens single shot .12 ga shotgun for turkey and uses a Bolt action 30/30 for deer. His go to handgun defense was a Czechoslovak M-52.
        His first shotgun was a .410 for his birthday and his second was a Carcano cavalry carbine in 7.35 mm.
        Except for the Cz M-52, the shotgun and rifle he hunts with he trades a lot.
        I go by just to see and shoot what he’s found to play with LOL I hope one day he will get really fun gun!
        Yup, He is my l’il brother too.

        • iksnilol

          Well, it makes more sense now I guess. Personally, if I got my hands on a Valmet I wouldn’t let it go. I guess hindsight is 20/20. Also, if it makes him happy then he should go for it.

          It is nice to see there are others who appreciate the 7.62×25. I myself am a fan of the Tokarev. Word of advice, don’t make AP 7.62×25. It’s kinda pointless, its like making a faster 5.56. It already does that well so it isn’t too much of an improvement.

          • Zebra Dun

            He offered to sell me the Valmet first and if I’d had the cash and ammo was more plentiful and cheaper then I’d still have it!
            I was hard pressed not to go find a Tula Tokarev or Czechoslovak M-52 myself to buy, money was tight then and still is now otherwise…I’d have it all!
            That 7.62×25 mm round really impressed me. As did the TT 33.

          • iksnilol

            Tokarev is a local favorite in the Balkans. Goes through stuff, easy to shoot, cheap and common.

            I sorta want to design a doublestack frame for it. Similar to Para Ordnance and 1911s. Though I don’t have a starting point. Would be nice to have a couple of doublestack 7.62×25 mags on hand and the CAD files for a Tokarev frame. Will just have to wait I guess. All in due time like always.

          • Zebra Dun

            I’d like a Browning High Power in 7.62 x 25 mm even though the 7.65 x 21 Parabellum once carried by FN virtually twins the round.
            7.62 x 25 mm – 1340 fps- 360 ft/lb
            7.65 x 21 mm – 1200fps- 412 ft/lb
            I’d say the Tok round is better for personal reasons, I’ve actually fired some LOL

          • iksnilol

            Depends what load you use.

            There is many Tokarev loads in the 500-550 ft/lbs range (this is fired from a 4.7 inch barrel).

            I would recommend the Tokarev round, not because it is more powerful but simply because there’s more guns chambered for it (+ it is easier to get ammo). Though 9×19 weapons can easily be converted to 7.62×21, since the former is simply the latter necked up.

    • n0truscotsman

      That was a horrible trade 🙂 I bet he was sorry later on!

      I had a opportunity to trade my 76 for something a while ago, and I said ‘hell no’ for that exact reason. Overall, an excellent rifle.

      • Zebra Dun

        Dumb trades,
        We have all done them, I once swapped an old Ruger Super Blackhawk made in 1973 flat back trigger housing and that had the old style Click, Click, Click hammer thumb back, a classic .44 magnum with a seven and one half inch barrel. It was able to shoot better than me.
        Handgun deer hunting was illegal then here and didn’t look to be made legal for a long time and I wanted a self defense revolver that fired the same ammo as my 1911A1 so I swapped even for a 1917 Colt revolver in .45 acp plus five half moon clips for that Ruger.
        Dang, I wish I had that Ruger back now!
        At the time you must understand 7.62 x 39mm of any type was all but impossible to come by, and very, very expensive, very expensive as in possible shooting three to five dollars a round down range in late seventies money. Money at our age wasn’t easy to come by either!
        The rifle mostly sat as cold iron a wall hanger without even one shot to warm the soul if it was needed or desired to shoot it.
        The Brother is a gun swapper and a shooter and well, the Ruger was there and he swapped. He shot a lot more ammo after that and a lot cheaper, He has swapped more guns and shot them more and had a lot of fun, yet he to this day still regrets letting that Valmet go. He never missed the Ruger LOL I still miss the Valmet.

  • They should just put magpul Zhukov stock and furniture on it and call it a day.

    • Squirreltakular

      Maybe if they made the hinge on the Zhukov out of metal.

  • Mosit-Nuggets

    This doesn’t really change anything. Finland will still proceed with the original plan to replace its assault rifles in the 2030s BUT will not purchase significant quantities of new rifles to supplement its current inventory.

    About Beretta’s monstrosity:

    Beretta’s ARX was never in process of being adopted by the Finnish Defense Forces. Various websites started spreading unsubstantiated rumors about the FDF considering the ARX as its new service rifle after Beretta (or Sako, which is currently owned by Beretta) had invited two relatively new Finnish politicians to see Beretta’s product line firsthand at Sako’s Riihimaki manufacturing facility. At the same time Beretta’s representatives speculated about setting up an assembly line in Finland if the country adopts the rifle but also threatened to move Sako TRG sniper rifle production from Finland to Italy because of Finland’s strict export restrictions. To many, it came off as blackmail.

    The FDF recently purchased a batch of 300-500 FN SCARs for its special forces. That may or may not tell something about the ARX…

  • Kivaari

    It will save them a huge amount of money. The RK62 is a fine rifle. The 7.62mm is not as good of a performer compared to the 5.56mm. The Finn army trains pretty well. Larger caliber machineguns and more sophisticated weapons (missiles) have changed the snowy battle field. The RK62 is the best AK variant in the 7.62mm caliber.

  • Kyle

    Wow the optics are ridiculously high above the bore.

    • Esh325

      It’s a prototype, I’m sure they will change it.

      • With the AK, you get to choose between having the optics high above the bore, or having to take the optics off to field strip it.

        I chose the latter, and am quite happy with that, but I am not a military user where that could potentially cause issues.

        • Esh325

          With the many different optics options available for the AK, I would say that isn’t true across the board. With the AK’s I’ve owned in the past I don’t recall having high optics above the bore and having to take the optics off just to field strip it, and even if you have to it’s not a big deal as the side mount goes back to zero if it’s well made.

          • Like I said, that’s what I did. I am using a PK-01VS RDS on my Arsenal, which I have to take off during field stripping. Not a big deal, but I could see how it might be if you’re a big military and your soldiers are hard on the equipment.

          • Esh325

            Knowing the AK design and if the side mount in question is just as well made as the AK, I’m sure they took abuse into mind. And like I said, that isn’t the only option for mounting optics on the AK.

  • ghost

    There is no rifle than the one I have, there is no round than the one I have, there is no sight than the one I have. This could change. To change for the sake of change is not improvement, it is lunacy.

  • BlackTalon2000

    The Finns still use 7.62×39? They should upgrade to the AK-12 in 5.45×39.5 Then sell all their old guns to civilians in Finland, Thailand, New Zealand, Europe and the US ( as parts kits), they might even make a profit.

  • Arttu Hautanen

    Well. You cannot modernize RK62 really because the optic goes too high if you do not ditch the cover with rear sight. If you are using it more than once a year in the range you will see the rear sight won’t hold zero. I would choose quality DDR rifle over RK in any given situation. RK was built for range, not for combat. AK is crappy platform for optics, RK is even worse because the rear sight.

  • May

    Just a bit of information for the people supporting this (based on accounts from FDF conscripts I’ve had words with), this is probably a bad idea. In addition to the logistical downsides of using 7.62×39 when the countries most likely to support you in the event of conflict use NATO ammunition, the military issue guns are not up to the quality standard of the export line. These guns have been in service for between 17 and 50 years, and are widely regarded as being in a state of disrepair. Those guns have been run for too long already with not enough care taken to keep them up to snuff, they may not need the entire system to be fully replaced, but they at least need to go through about as much upgrading as the M16a1 did to eventually become the M4a1.

    • Finpower

      All service weapons are regularly maintained and broken ones either get fixed or they make spare parts out of them. Age doesn’t mean anything as long as they replace worn off parts and maintain the weapons aka take good care of them. I asked bunch of people who served with RK62 and none of them ever complained about it’s accuracy or anything else. Now, I don’t have any personal experience with RK62 as I was carrying the upgraded version of it, RK95 which was deadly accurate.

      5.56 isn’t suitable at all in Finnish territory(where most of the fighting would be in the woods during wartime)



      • r.m.r

        Well. Saying 5.56 is unsuitable for our terrain is like saying the only real off road car is a Toyota hilux. 7.62 tumbles too. Besides the fighting wouldnt be done majorily in the woods, but inside and around major urban areas. Russkies couldn’t care less about controlling a piece of forest. Yes we maintain our guns regularly and thanks to the downsizing of our army we have about 100k rifles in surplus in between models 62 and 95. The weapons are graded based on their overall functionality, not date of manufacture or appearance. Mostly the complaints coming from conscripts are attributable to nothing more than the conscripts not knowing how to use the gun – in other words the guy sucks and blames the gun. Speaking from lots of experience.


        Active duty

        • Finpower

          I disagree with the fighting part. I still argue that most of the fighting would be in the woods, hell if that wasn’t the case, then how come most of the infantry units are being trained to fight in those conditions? It’s just mostly military police units who actually train to fight in urban warfare.

          It’s true that the new military doctrine doesn’t relay on controlling some specific locations anymore(or a piece of forest like you put it) but instead the enemy is given a free pass inside the Finnish territory and then conducting fast attacks&retreats on them. So it’s just more about mobility in the new doctrine.

          And yes, I do agree with your last statement about conscripts. All it really takes is some research to get the real truth about the condition of those guns, conscripts just tell you how they think it is, without actually knowing the facts.

  • Plumbiphilious

    If they don’t like it, I would gladly help send monetary aid for their modernization in the form of recompense for RK kits being sent to me…

  • B Mead

    “Rifle is fine” level > 9000,

  • Fegelein

    Now if only Lilwolfy would come by to tell us how the AK is the
    worst thing ever and how the Finns made a decision dumber than laying
    down in freeway traffic…

  • roguetechie

    I’m actually very aware of automation and what it can do for costs. One thing Nathaniel and I have agreed on from day one is that you can’t manufacture AK’s in the U.S. and even hope to compete in the bargain segment of the market domestically in the U.S.
    Chiefly because the AR was quite literally designed to be mass manufactured with some of the earliest automated manufacturing processes. And labor cost is king.
    so question for you now?
    what do Shipunov, knight, stoner, Uzi gal, and the MP9 designers have in common?
    Give up?
    Well they all came to the conclusion some time back that the rotating barrel locking mechanism IS the future of pistols, and pistol caliber MP’s. I am on pretty sound logical ground agreeing with that group of men who, as a group, have done so much for weapons technology.
    throw in the extremely reasonably priced rotating barrel grand power pistols, and it’s a veritable cornucopia of rotating barrel locking system pistol designs. Honestly one of the things I believe Knight Stoner and Gal all saw were the way said guns would be very amenable to modern manufacturing processes.
    Frankly I think one lesson lost in the AR-15 versus AR-18 debate is the appropriate technology lesson. If you want to build a system, the manufacturing technology you have available dictates almost as much as the cost of labor.

  • Finnish end user

    1. FDF is broke and could not buy new rifles even if they wanted to.
    2. The regular Rk62 and Rg95 suck big time if you are using modern armour so the telescoping butt is a necessity.
    3. Swedes, Norwegians and everybody else is using 5.56 in the woods without problems. In the woods the contact distances are 20-100m so even M4 carbines would be within their lethal range. Trying to get supplies of 7.62X39 in war time from Nato friends would be impossible. So in time of war we would need to introduce both new weapons and ammunition to the supply lines cut of by the Red Bear (nobody else will ever attack us anyway).

    So yes, the stock modification is a good one and needed. No, sticking with 7.62X39 is a bad idea. Heavy ammo, rainbow trajectory, less than stellar penetration against any hard cover and no supply from friendly forces.
    The optic base costs probably more than the rifle it is fitted to. Besides it is heavy and unergonomic. -> If optics are needed then Rk62 or Rk95 are not the best platforms at all.

    As long as FDF sticks to 7.62X39 they must continue to use Valmets and Sakos. When the caliber is changed to something else (5.56, 7.62 Nato, 5.8mm or 4.7mm caseless) then the rifles will be changed unless they have already been replaced by AK-74Ms used by our friendly neighbours.