7.62x39 vs. M4 at shooting school over the weekend.

[moosedaddy]

After going through a precision shooting class with my bolt gun, we had some time to do some other things in the other areas. One of the things we did was go through a hot house with pistols. We had a chance to do it with rifles too. Most of the staff is aware of RA and the rifles. One guy there did not know of RA or the stuff they build. He was a bit skeptical of the new and improved AK (as he saw it). After running the house with it, he liked it fine except he was not sold on the 7.62x39 round. "not very accurate." was his excuse. We went out to the 100 yard range and shot clay pigeons that were laid out. This impressed him quite a bit. The kicker was when we opened the guns up and looked at both bolts. Mine still was clean and nice. His looked like a before picture of a clogged drain. He tried to buy it from me after seeing that. I still have it. Allie, his name is Sam and he will be ordering one soon. Watch for him.

[Mr. Riggs]

Way to go. Another convert!

[gunner69]

Go moosedaddy.....   If you develope a handload for that 7.62x39 the accuracy may surprise hell out of you.  Keep up the good work.

[marinewmu911]

Good to go, it's not the design of the  7.62x39 alone that makes it "inaccurate" it's the combination of low cost manufactoring on the ammo and low cost manufacturing on the AK47 and its progeny, they are not and were never meant to be precision rifles. But with hand loading and tighter tolerances (like the XCR's) the round can preform superbly within its effective range

[Blitz]

Thats what I like to hear.  I cant wait until mine in done.

[theryans33]

Good to go, it's not the design of the  7.62x39 alone that makes it "inaccurate" it's the combination of low cost manufactoring on the ammo and low cost manufacturing on the AK47 and its progeny, they are not and were never meant to be precision rifles. But with hand loading and tighter tolerances (like the XCR's) the round can preform superbly within its effective range

also because its typically linked ot the spray and pray that terrorists do.

[Cid1911]

And the less than stellar accuracy many AKs are known for due to their relatively loose tolerances and not exactly spectacular sights. On an average day, I can get around 1.5-2MOA out of my 74 but that's with the 5.45x39 round.

[dont_tread_on_me]

  There are many reasons the 7.62x39 has a bad reputation for accuracy.I assure you however it has nothing to do with cartridge design.Most of the reasons mentioned before are partly the cause to most of the myth.I personally would have to say that the majority of ammo loaded for it is manufactured as cheaply as possible,obviously to do that you have to use less expensive(read less consistant) components.I think the accuracy of the AK,or I should say lack of potential practical accuracy comes not from necessarily loose operating tolerances but barrel quality.Of course they "pray to Allah and spray the target" mentality of the trigger pullers don't do much for the reputation either.People sometimes irritate me when they go on about how their M4orgery is more accurate than an AK.Ok I won't argue that the concentric accuracy isn't better,but if you use the weapons in their originally intended role as an infantry weapon within their effective range (300 yards for the AK),the AK can be as effective in the hands of a trained operator,as the M16 family.Past that range the superior flatness of trajectory will certainly be an advantage to the AR/M16.I don't think the 5.56 is particularly well suited to engage targets much farther than 400 yards so to me it's not a huge advantage at that. 

[Cid1911]

I think the AK has perfectly acceptable accuracy for a battle rifle. I'd carry my Ak into a combat situation over most any other rifle that I own. However, it would not be my first choice to take to a precision rifle match because that's not what I feel it was designed for. It was not designed to shoot little groups at 500 yards. It was designed to be reliable as hell and operate within the average 300 meter mark that your average infantry engagements take place in. Within this role, it succeeds spectactularly.

ETA: CHANGED "I was" to "It was"

[dont_tread_on_me]

I think the AK has perfectly acceptable accuracy for a battle rifle. I'd carry my Ak into a combat situation over most any other rifle that I own. However, it would not be my first choice to take to a precision rifle match because that's not what I feel it was designed for. I was designed to shoot little groups at 500 yards. It was designed to be reliable as hell and operate within the average 300 meter mark that your average infantry engagements take place in. Within this role, it succeeds spectactularly.

  Agreed,you do your part it will certainly do it's.

[Underground]

A number of years ago, a friend of mine bought an AK that was supposed to have a 'target' barrel on it, although they may have just said that because of the longer barrel.  It was obviously very well put together, and it certainly gave one the feeling that it was a higher quality than most though.

We easily shot some 1.5 moa groups with that rifle and iron sights using factory ammo.  I didn't know much about the different types of AK's at the time, but from what I can remember I think now it was an RPK of some sort.

I really wish he'd told me before he sold it a couple months after that, I would have come up with the $425.  It was a really nice rifle.

[Jbpark55]

Let us not forget the 7.62x39 (M1943) cartridge. Was based off of the 7.62x54R mm cartridge. The Soviets (like the Germans) wanted a round that could go out to 500 meters for defensive reasons. And the SKS was the first rifle to use the M1943 round. Also the SKS did have a 20 inch barrel on it. But when set up right as with the XCR the 7.62x39 cartridge can be both accurate and have range out to 500 meters. As we all know, it's just that the AK was designed to first; WORK (pull trigger-go BANG), second; be easy to use and maintain. And it is a 300 meter or less weapon. Like the M16/M16a1 was supposed to be. And just look at the AK, it is made of simple and cheap materials, wood and steal.

My question is this. The AK is ideal for Soviet/Russian military doctrine. Is the M16/M4 ideal for U.S. military doctrine?

This report dated Nov. of 2009 might help answer that question.
http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/p4013coll3&CISOPTR=2515&filename=2516.pdf#search=%22adopt%22


But looking at the title. I think the title might be misleading. We have a cartridge of one weapon (the AK) against another weapon and not the cartridge of the other weapon (the M16/M4). But in the end I think we have to look at it from the point of view of the armies that employ the weapons and how they use them.

[dont_tread_on_me]

Let us not forget the 7.62x39 (M1943) cartridge. Was based off of the 7.62x54R mm cartridge. The Soviets (like the Germans) wanted a round that could go out to 500 meters for defensive reasons.

  No I have to disagree,The m43 cartridge was more inspired by the 7.92x33 Kurz than probably any other.This came from the captured German STG44's during WWII.I think 500 meters is quite optimistic for the 7.62x39 as well.I believe the German idea for the "assault rifle" was to be able to still engage targets at 300 meters effectively,not 500.It may have killing power at that range but the trajectory is such that it's more of indirect or volley fire.Much the same way that the old battle rifles that were graduated out to 1000 yards were.Let's face it,shooting at someone with a WWII era bolt rifle at 1000 yards is for the most part wasting ammo,unless you have a very well trained man behind the trigger.Not saying it's impossible,but it was the exception rather than the rule.As far as the 7.62x39 being based on the 7.62x54R well the only thing the two share is bullet diameter.The case is nothing alike.

[Jbpark55]

OK, I stand corrected. R&D on 7.62x39 started in the 2nd half of 1943. They liked the German 7.92x33 over the U.S. .30 carbine. They kept the same bullet but they just shortened the casing and went from a rimmed to a rimless casing. From the 7.62x54R cartridge for the ease of production. But I do know the ranges in mind were correct. The Soviets also did studies during and after WWI. Like other countries they came to the same conclusions. That full-power bolt action cartridges were for most situations a waste.

[Fly Army]

I have chosen the XCR (intially anyway) in 7.62X39 because of a civilian contract "oportunity" in a sandy place. If I should find myself on the ground trying to get back to somewhere "better" I take comfort in knowing I can use the ammo of my great un-washed adversary. Additionally the spent brass of a 7.62 would not be as likely to give me away (maybe I should get some of the crappy footwear they have too or at least the soles).

Back on the homefront I like this round for WROL type scenairos. Especially in urban areas where engagements would be well within the sweet-spot of the 7.62 ballistics. In wide open spaces another round would make more sense. Compared to the 6.8 or the 6.5 Grendel the 7.62 ammo is a bargain so let the hording begin .  Although I do hope and plan to get a Grendel kit for the XCR if RA can ever come up with one as the ballistics of that round are nothing short of awesome.

[marrandy]

Go moosedaddy.....   If you develope a handload for that 7.62x39 the accuracy may surprise hell out of you.  Keep up the good work.

If you have, or hear of a 7.62x39 accurate handload, particularly for the XCR, please let us all know.

I am looking, yet again, to reload.