A history of the AK-47, the gun that made history

washingtonpost ^ | October 29, 2010 | Mark A. Keefe

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

Interesting pic,,,

I saw one at a local gun show,,,(near $2,000),,,

The vendor offered me one for $1,500(he had 2 ),,,

IIRC they use M-16 mags so we are back to square one,,,

It did look like a good entry weapon,,,

All the AK-M-16 guns were gone in the first hour or so...

[blackbart.223]

My intent is not to offend anyone. Well maybe once in a while. I have certain opinions and stick with them.

[OneWingedShark]

IIRC they use M-16 mags so we are back to square one,,,

No. No, they don't.
As you can see in this picture the magazine is VASTLY different than any other; the rounds are held perpendicular to the direction-of-fire rather than parallel to it...
Linked to the picture is a [short] you-tube video demonstrating the feeding-action.

[OneWingedShark]

Here's a pic of the complete breakdown of the P-90 (6 pcs, including the mag):

The story behind this weapon is that the Belgians wanted to have a compact small-arms weapon for their tankers; something that wouldn't be awkward in the small/cramped confines of a tank... at the same time they wanted a weapon that was simple to maintain for their admin/rear-echelon types. These two goals were not mutually exclusive and the resultant firearm is the P-90.

[OneWingedShark]

Dangit, it ‘ate’ the images.

Here’s the page with the breakdown and magazine images:
http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg13-e.htm

Here’s the link to the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvjuIkHUc7o&feature=related

Sorry about the missing images.

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

No prob here Bart,,,

Always best to hash it out,,,

This is how we learn...;0)

[Brass Lamp]

We've got a Mini in .223 but as a common fighting rifle they've got some serious drawbacks. First they're in .223 NOT 5.56 NATO. Firing 5.56 ammo can create dangerous pressures in the Mini.

Try reading the manual. Unless it's the match-target version of the Mini, Ruger clearly states that it can shoot NATO 5.56.

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

I didn't know about the mags.,,,

The one I looked at seemed like a fine weapon,,,

I liked the small size of it,,,

Sort’a like an MP-5,,,

Our 10th.MT trooper spent 2 tours blowin’ down doors five

days a week to take down the moozzi’s,,,

Number 2 guy through the door,,,

That weapon seems like the tool they could use...

[wtc911]

I went with the “sport” version of the AK. I’ve got the Saiga .223 w/ 16” barrel. Same rifle, just made “legal” for NYS.

[Lurker]

Ruger clearly states that it can shoot NATO 5.56.

I guess that big stamp on my receiver which says ".223 Remington" is wrong then. How do you suppose the Ruger factory screwed that up?

[OneWingedShark]

>I liked the small size of it,,,
>Sort’a like an MP-5,,,
>Our 10th.MT trooper spent 2 tours blowin’ down doors five
>days a week to take down the moozzi’s,,,
>Number 2 guy through the door,,,
>That weapon seems like the tool they could use...

Good eye.
That’s precisely why SWAT-teams across the country have adopted it: the small size makes for better maneuverability when busting open doors and conducting home-invasions... I believe that the conduct of our “law enforcement” would make the founding fathers weep.

[Gabrial]

The mini14 receiver is marked “.223 CAL” not “.223 rem.”

The manual states this:

“AMMUNITION (580 series mini14 and above)

The RUGER® MINI-14® RANCH RIFLES are chambered for the .223

Remington (5.56mm) cartridge. The Mini-14 Ranch Rifle is designed to use either

standardized U.S. military, OR factory loaded sporting .223 (5.56mm) cartridges

manufactured in accordance with U.S. industry practice.”

The 180 series Mini 14 States this:

” The Mini14 is designed to use EITHER U.S. Military, Commercial sporting, Or Other .223(5.56mm) caliber ammunition manufactured to U.S. industry standards.”

Here is the .pdfs for the 580 series and 180 series mini14s listed above for verification: 180 series: www.ruger.com/Firearms/PDF/InstructionManuals/43.pdf 580 series: www.ruger.com/Firearms/PDF/InstructionManuals/55.pdf

The above means that 5.56nato ammunition can be used safely in the rifle. The Ruger Mini-14 has a 5.56 chamber but can shoot .223 remington ammuntion. It is a common myth that the mini14 is chambered in .223 remington. While 5.56mm NATO ammunition is identical in external dimensions to .223 Remington, there are two important differences:

1) The chamber dimensions between the two cartridges are different. 5.56mm has a longer throat or leade (the the unrifled portion of the barrel between the end of the chamber and the beginning of the rifling). This longer throat reduces pressures as compared to the .223 Remington. Consequently, .223 Remington ammunition is loaded to a lower pressure.

2) The 5.56mm cartridge is loaded to higher pressures than the .223 Remington. Taking advantage of the longer throat, the 5.56mm can safely operate at a more powerful loading level.

Firing a 5.56mm cartridge (which is loaded to higher pressure) in a .223 Remington chambered rifle (which has a shorter throat causing a further boost in pressure), could exceed the safety margin in a .223 Remington rifle. It cannot be done with complete safety.

A .223 Remington cartridge can be safely fired in a 5.56mm chambered rifle, but NOT vice versa.

Always use safe, reliable, and quality ammunition. When buying surplus 5.56 ammo make sure you examine it closely before using it in the rifle. It is also suggested in the manual that you don’t use handloads in the mini-14. using handloads can be dangerous and will void the warranty if damage is caused as a result using improper ammunition.

[Lurker]

Thanks for the information.

[blackbart.223]

"No prob here Bart,,,."

None here either. Time to do my part to giveHarry the boot tommorow. Take care.

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

Hey,,,

I think the dems are in for a bloodbath tomorrow,,,

Give em’ Hell...;0)

[blackbart.223]

"I think the dems are in for a bloodbath tomorrow,,,"

I sure hope so.

[Gabrial]

“Thanks for the information.”

You are most welcome. I bought my first Mini-14 in 1976. Too bad I lost it while canoeing. :-)

[Lurker]

I've had mine, now Mrs. L's, since the mid-80's. It's a nice rifle but it does suffer from the drawbacks I mentioned earlier.

That being said, they're a heck of a lot of fun to shoot!

[mcamp]

the ak 47 has the advantage of firing every round every time you pull the trigger, no matter what has been dumped into the receiver, unlike the other weapons you described. I am not just blowing smoke, I have fired the other weapons except for the Winchester ( I did shoot a marlin chambered in .44) I carried the M14 in Vietnam and shot the M16 (what a piece of crap) the 03a3 didn’t hold enough ammo and was too heavy and long, great sights but no good in urban settings, like the M14. I have 4 ak 47’s and wouldn’t trade them for any of the ones you described and I really love the M14 as a matter of fact beause it saved my ass many times.

[mcamp]

I agree hits count, love the M1 grand, M14, hate the M16 and sure the soldiers that died in Nam trying to unjam it did too (the early model) I had the M14 when I was there. But I love the ak47 just because, like the M14 I can drag it through the mud and beat the hell out of it and it will still shoot every round without fail. M1 grand, yeah that is a whole different class of rifle, like comparing apples and oranges, the M1 is not an assault weapon, neither was the M14 even though they wanted it to be, it was too damn heavy and long. But I do get your point about accuracy, one shot one kill, kind of a Marine motto in my book