is the ak74 better than the ak47?

[Guest scott0]

whats the best ak?

[Magiccarpetrides]

Depends on what round you like better and a whole buncha other factors. I would recommend a Saiga though.

[Smith]

47! Why the Russians bought into the AR theory is beside me, unless it was a cost measure. (They were going under!) The 5.45 tumbles like the 5.56 but looses all the benefits of the 7.62x39 in the AK platform. Besides you're never going to get the benefits of the AR (range and accuracy) in the AK platform. It was designed for the x39 and that is what should be used in it.

[R1100R]

I have them both and each one has its merits.

[Guest 2HOW]

not no , but HELL NO, stick with the original.

[Guest gcrookston]

I'm going to say probably the Saiga, followed very closely by the Chinese (either Polytech or Norinco -- they were made in the same factories, just different import entities), then maybe the Bulgarians and all the rest, with the Egyptian Maadi Misr-47. Don't know anything about stateside kit builders, so can't offer any opinion.

Almost all the Ak's on the market are AKM (modern), or AK74 or in the case of Arsenal (Bulgaria), "Century" Series (AK102, 103, 105, etc -- I have a 107), which are far superior to the original AK for strength. There maybe someone out there building AK pattern instead of AKM, but I wouldn't be convinced why.

Most of my experience lies in the Chinese Type 56s and 84s that I have owned and shot over the last 25 years. Both were originally built as full autos and early imports are often marked "M22", denoting an original full auto intended for export that was converted to semi-auto (interestingly the first 1500 Maadi rifles imported had full auto carriers, but no sears -- when the BATF caught this many of them were recalled to correct the problem).

The 7.62x39 M43 round is ballistically quite similiar to 30-30 Winchester. Not exceptionally accurate, nor very fast, with a rapid energy discipation rate beyond about 300 meters. It is cheap and plentiful and great fun for plinking and will get the job done it was designed for.

The 5.45x39 M74 is ballistically on par with the 5.56x45 Nato round and was introduced with the M74 rifle. The round is more accurate, faster and farther hitting.

I'm not going to get into a debate of which round is better, both have their unique merits and I own multiple weapons in 7.62x39 and 5.56 and enjoy each round for it's own abilities.

When it comes to receivers, I recommend stamped vs. milled, only because of my experiences with the Chinese milled receivers which have a tendency to crack. Also they are heavier and I have yet to find a solid argument to their benefits (they are not stronger, won't wear better, do cost more...).

Polytech Type 84s (AKM) in 5.56Nato (now called the AK2000), Arsenal #10 Bulgarian AK107 in 7.62x39

Norinco Type 56s (AKM) in 7.62x39 -- Both the Polytech and Norinco came out of Factory /416\. The below gun is marked "M22", but otherwise has no exporter or importer marks.

But, I guess to answer your question, the AKM and AK74 really only vary significantly on calibre, whereas the AK47 is old school. The AKM was introduced in 1959 to fix obvious flaws and weaknesses in the original design, and the AK74 was introduced in 1974 with the only significant change being adopting a lighter, faster, more lethal round. The AK100 series offers no significant improvement to the 74, with the exception of the 107/108 with the recoil reducing mechanism. The replacement for the ak74, the AN94, appears to be on indefinate hold due to budgeting issues.

Edited June 14, 2008 by gcrookston

[molonlabetn]

Depends on whether you want lower recoil (faster follow-up shots) and the ability to carry more ammo (because it's lighter and more compact), or if you want increased barrier penetration...

The argument is the same as 5.56 NATO vs. 7.62x39.

Personally, the 7.62x39 seems to be a nearly ideal mid-range multi-purpose round as long as you can use some kind of expanding bullet. The 154gr soft-point Wolf seem to be excellent performers.

In terms of the guns, they are identical except for what they are chambered for.

[Burboy]

I know I'm new here but I can't pass up an AK question.

First of all, BEWARE! AK's ARE ADDICTIVE!

If, despite all the warnings, you still want one, then decide whether you want a .22 (.223) a medium .30 (7.62x39) or a big boy .308 then buy a Saiga. Absolutely, hands down, no contest, best AK for the money. You can spend more for authenticity or rarity but it won't be a better built gun. And once you get your best deal on one you can have fun turning it back into a real AK and making it look however you want. Read more here http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?act=idx

Unfortunately Saiga doesn't send the 5.45x39 over here so if you decide that's what you want you'll have to go Bulgarian $$$$, Polish $$$ or Romanian $$. Unless you get lucky and find a VEPR $$$$.

Other noteworthy things to consider;

parts- 5.45 or .223; could be difficult to find if needed, rare but it happens

mags- .223; different countries used different mags, they don't interchange well if at all.

5.45; They all pretty much work in all rifles.

7.62; They all work in all rifles.

One last thing, make sure whatever you decide on has the scope rail on the side and the sights aren't canted (not a problem with Saigas but has been on Arsenals, WASRs, SARs, Yugos and anything else built by Century).

Good luck!

Edited June 20, 2008 by Burboy

[Guest sling]

I'm going to say probably the Saiga, followed very closely by the Chinese (either Polytech or Norinco -- they were made in the same factories, just different import entities), then maybe the Bulgarians and all the rest, with the Egyptian Maadi Misr-47. Don't know anything about stateside kit builders, so can't offer any opinion.

Almost all the Ak's on the market are AKM (modern), or AK74 or in the case of Arsenal (Bulgaria), "Century" Series (AK102, 103, 105, etc -- I have a 107), which are far superior to the original AK for strength. There maybe someone out there building AK pattern instead of AKM, but I wouldn't be convinced why.

Most of my experience lies in the Chinese Type 56s and 84s that I have owned and shot over the last 25 years.

You think the Type 56 is superior to the Bulgarians AKM's? How in the world is a stamped recievered poor quality controlled Chinese copy better than the solid milled recievered Bulgie?

I just want your opinion why?

[Guest The Cat]

You think the Type 56 is superior to the Bulgarians AKM's? How in the world is a stamped recievered poor quality controlled Chinese copy better than the solid milled recievered Bulgie?

I just want your opinion why?

Ever seen them side by side? Back in the day, when you had your choice of the original Egyptian Maadis, Hungarians, Finnish, etc etc the Norincos were pretty much the bargain basement AKs but they were still good. Polytechs were a bit better, especially in the later days when they started including the firing pin springs. (Hey, back then we shot what ammo we could get - 7.62x39 wasn't especially plentiful at the time but now and then there was the odd bit of thin-primered commercial stuff to be had so the springs gave a bit of extra peace of mind.)

Nowadays the Yugos are about the best fit and finish wise, but the forends are different so if you want different furniture you could be in for a bit of a problem. Romanians work, but they're nowhere near what the pre-1990 Chicoms are.

They are sort of a hybrid between the AK47 and AKM design too. The ones I've seen have the slightly heavier barrel and front sight block of the 47, with the sheet-metal construction of the AKM. Also, their sheet metal is a bit thicker than AKM spec - ~1.5mm vs. ~1.0 mm - and so they don't have or need strengthening ribs stamped in the receiver or top cover. That eliminates any receiver flex that sheet-metal haters complain about, but it isn't as heavy as a milled receiver.

Triggers are pretty much the double-hook AK-47 type vs. single-hook AKM. I have a Polytech and a Romanian, and when you pull the trigger in the Romanian the disconnector contacts the hammer, and its spring tension adds to the trigger pull. That doesn't kappen in the PTK.

Wood furniture - Chicom vs. Romanian - back then the wood the Chinese used was pretty much the most non-good stuff you'd see on any weapon. Compared to the hand-molded-turd-shaped Romanian wood it was exquisite.

Bottom line - best AK's?

Caliber-wise, I'd go with the 7.62x39. If you want the buzzsaw effect of the 5.45-type cartridge, go with an AR. It's a right tool/right job thing.

Types - here are my preferences in order. Actual mileage may vary.

Polytech Legend

Original (mid-'80s) Maadi

Any pre-1990 Polytech

Any pre-1990 Norinco

Current Yugos

Current Romanians

A word about Underfolders - they're a great investment, particularly if another 'assault' weapons ban takes effect. They're also very high in CDI factor. They look cool and when it's folded the AK is really nice and compact. "For every Ddvantage, there is a Disadvantage." The underfolder sucks as far as cheekweld is concerned, and it wasn't designed for the 7.62's recoil. The Russkies took the design directly - and I mean directly - from the MP40, which fired 9mm pistol ammo. After extended shooting it tends to loosen up and flop around a bit.

Go with what GCrookston said - the guy obviously knows his AKs.

[Guest sling]

Yeah i've seen them side by side. I've put together several AK's off of both Bulgarian and Chinese parts. It probably just comes to personal preference for most but i really dont like the fit and finish on the Type 56 or the parts that its composed of. Though i do have a tendency to agree that the 7.62 x 39 is superior to the 5.45x39. The 5.45 was just a follow the leader from when the .223 was developed.

[Guest gcrookston]

You think the Type 56 is superior to the Bulgarians AKM's? How in the world is a stamped recievered poor quality controlled Chinese copy better than the solid milled recievered Bulgie?

I just want your opinion why?

After handling and owning several cracked milled receivers and having never seen first hand or experienced a deformed stamped receiver from a Chinese, or having ever encountered a first-hand experience of one in over two decades of shooting and owning them (only a friend of a buddy of mine had a neighbor that knew a guy that...), I will only propose what I know to be fact and not internet here-say...

I paid $289.00 for my first new type 56s back in the day, and I've owned several dozen over the years, falling in and out of love with them. When the 84 came along.... um, in 1984 (am I dating myself?), I fell in love all over again. These and the roughly finished Maadis were about the only AK type new rifles on the market (and I've owned those, too...), that I could afford (Valmets and Galils were almost $900 to $1,300 at the time).

But if you go into AK "types", certainly the authentic Valmet and Galil (not talking parts guns, but the real pre-ban), beat out all...

I avoid anything with "Century" stamped on it from my experiences with everything I've every bought from them (I keep forgetting my lesson and order something about every 5 years).

I keep coming back to the Chicom because I've never had one break, except the milled receivers. I recently decided to rejoin the AK ownership ranks and went through a WASR quickly. An Armory, even faster (never shot it), and finally settled on an Arsenal, complete with canted front site (I'll be getting that fixed shortly)... After taking the 107 home, Joe sold me the 84s

They just don't make them like they used to...

I'd like to know about some of these state-side builders and the quality they are putting together. I assume shortly the unfired parts kits with barrels will dry up and it would be nice to be able to throw a nice quality E.Block gun in my safe before they are all gone.

Edited June 26, 2008 by gcrookston

[Guest mikedwood]

I know I'm new here but I can't pass up an AK question.

First of all, BEWARE! AK's ARE ADDICTIVE!

Good luck!

They are not! I only have three and I can sell them any time I want. Just not today, I'm busy.

Aren't they though. Why isn't one enough? One of my friends keeps asking me why I have to have more than one. "You can only shoot one at a time." he says. The only reply I have is "So, that's not the point."

[Guest bkelm18]

They are not! I only have three and I can sell them any time I want. Just not today, I'm busy.

Aren't they though. Why isn't one enough? One of my friends keeps asking me why I have to have more than one. "You can only shoot one at a time." he says. The only reply I have is "So, that's not the point."

Well, technically, if you wanted to be a total badass you could shoot two at a time...

[Mausermeister]

If you think just owning them is addictive, then don't ever build one.

I've got, um, heck, I don't know how many AKs I got. More than one, less than fifty. Got a few kits put back for a rainy day also. 47's, 74's, even got a .223 ak and parts to assemble another.

I don't know why I like them so. I'm usually into bolt guns putting one round on target at 500+ yards. I've owned a few AKs over the years, but always sold or traded them 'cause they just didn't do it for me. Then I got a parts kit and built my first one just to see if I could.

It's been all down hill from there, and a slippery slope at that.

[nightrunner]

[Burboy]

Well, technically, if you wanted to be a total badass you could shoot two at a time...

I bet with some duct tape and a little ingenuity you could shoot THREE at once!