I'll see your Kalishnikov, comrade, and raise you a Browning.
Posted on 04/17/2006 5:35:46 AM PDT by jmc1969
Mikhail Kalashnikov, designer of the world's most popular assault rifle, says that U.S. soldiers in Iraq are using his invention in preference to their own weapons, proving that his gun is still the best.
"Even after lying in a swamp you can pick up this rifle, aim it and shoot. That's the best job description there is for a gun. Real soldiers know that and understand it," the 86-year-old gunmaker told a weekend news conference in Moscow.
"In Vietnam, American soldiers threw away their M-16 rifles and used [Kalashnikov] AK-47s from dead Vietnamese soldiers, with bullets they captured. That was because the climate is different to America, where M-16s may work properly," he said.
"Look what's happening now: every day on television we see that the Americans in Iraq have my machine guns and assault rifles in their armored vehicles. Even there American rifles don't work properly."
Some U.S. troops in Iraq have reportedly taken to using AK-47s in preference to the standard-issue M-16. The Cold War-era gun, renowned for its durability and easy handling, is plentiful in Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at haaretzdaily.com ...
The M-16 has three glaring problems.
The rifle, the varmint round it fires and the idiots that got a lot of soldiers killed who shoved it down the throats of American fighting men.
No matter how much they improve the rifle, the round sucks. It is designed to kill chipmunks in the open not men behind cover.
As for the rifle all you have to do is watch the film after they first get into Baghdad. There is a solider engaged in a firefight shooting around a corner.
He'll fire a few rounds and then have to clear a jam,It happens three times in a matter of a couple of minutes. This is insane.
If Remington can build and sell a semi-auto for four hundred dollars which fire reliably a number of rounds all much better and more powerful than the .223in. or 5.56 mm then they should be able to build one for the military for $2000.
For a bullet to work it has to first penetrate and then expand.The Geneva Convention already outlaws soft nose expanding bullets.
We went them one better by giving our soldiers a round that neither expands nor penetrates.
Any congressman or general that would approve money for such ought to be shot with it if they can get it to work.
We send our people into a life and death battle with a cartridge that is outlawed in all states for a hundred pound deer because it is inadequate.
Now they want a bullet that is 6.8 cal. that nobody makes and will require manufacturers to re-tool to make them and the barrels and therefore greatly increase the cost of the of the unproven ammunition and weapon itself.
There are hundreds of thousands 6.5,7MM proven bullets and the rifle barrels to fire them made everyday. They want one in between that is a couple thousandths different.
Stupid, wasteful, stupid and SOP for congressmen who know nothing about firearms, shooting or the needs of a soldier, only about spending money.
We did, it was called the M-14.
Until we have a reliable caseless ammunition firing prefragemented crystal and tungesten penetrators. The M-14 is the BEST rifle in the world IMO.
I've been shooting the Indian made 7.62 (.308) and haven't had any probs. My wife shoots .223 and wants me to start reloading to save some money.
I've heard the steel case ammo causes broken receivers. I'd like to get more info before puting them in my guns.
Excellent post. I've fired many AR variants and I chose to purchase a Romanian AK clone over an AR. The only assault rifle I like better are G3's, CETME's, or FAL's.
When considering, weight, recoil, range,accuracy and penetration I considered the 260 with it's 120 or 125 gr bullet Rem.=6.5MM=.264in. to be about ideal though you are right it has never been very popular over here. However the .270cal.,=6.8MM=.277in.with its 130gr. would be just as good if not better as the B.C. would be about the same.
They should be able to design a case as done with the 7mmTCU or 7mm BR and still get 2500 fps.and allow the carrying of more rounds.
You are right I can't see them using a straight walled case when chambering and extraction seem to be better with tapered or bottle-necked cases.
Re: "...a nasty very LOUD and distinct "CLICK!!" when removing the safety!! "
yeah... but Hollywood LOVES it, don't they?
Sort of like the cowboy who racks the lever of his '94 or the Detective cocking the hammer of his double-action .38 when confronting bad guys... it sounds so MENACING!
Re your #119 - Well then, it seems that i'm a whole lot more "obsolecent" than you are! {;^{)~
Thanks for the update.
I have a CETME which runs great - just won't shoot better than minute of 5-gallon bucket at 100 meters.
Looking to sell it and rely on my old Vennie FN-49 in 7X57.
7.62 does have more stopping power and .223
I'll see your Kalishnikov, comrade, and raise you a Browning.
I am sure they do like it better. But wait until they are ordered into combat with their AK and 60 extra rounds of ammo. Then they'll wish they still had their .223.
I get a little tired of all the fanfare given to Kalashnikov. They handed him a captured MP-43 and said "dumb this down so we can copy it".
The best infantry rifle in the world is quite enough, thanks.
I have trained extensively on both in my prior life. The AK is a vastly inferior action for urban combat relative to the AR, primarily because it is bloody slow to use even in the hands of a competent soldier. An AR15 can put more rounds in more targets faster in the hands of a competent user than any assault weapon of its time, which is the genius of its design. It allows extremely rapid and precise target engagement, something that I have learned to appreciate. Incidentally, these weapons (and several others) have been put through performance metrics that measure this type of thing, and I have been involved in some such studies, though a cursory googling is not finding much in the way of published data on this point (not surprising, being pre-web studies). If the primary objective is to hit a lot of targets fast, the AR is your action.
As an aside, we never had any reliability problems with the AR actions out in the field, even when pretty filthy. But then, I never used Viet Nam era ARs with the defective Viet Nam era ammo that gave them their (undeserved) reputation for unreliability.
On the other hand, the reputation for poor accuracy of the AKs is not entirely deserved either. The Finnish Valmets (excellent AK actions), for example, have a rack-grade accuracy that easily rivals the M14, though neither is as precise as the AR action (which is intrinsically far more precise than it needs to be for a military weapon).
Until the front sight retaining screw loosens and the weapon loses its zero, until sand or lack of lubrication scores the bolt roller and it splits, leaving the rifle incapable of even single-shot fire as a manual repeater, or until the front swivel breaks through the stock, all common M14 failures I've encountered literally hundreds of times. That's before rookies tinkering with the rear sight manage to disassemble it into a handful of parts they're unable to get back together. We won't even consider scope failures, not a fault inherent to the weapon's design.
For close in work, I would have to agree that the AK47 is the way to go.
Not quite. For close in rifle work, the Kalishnikov action is indeed the way to go, but whether in the form of the far more effective RPK squad automatic weapon with 24-inch barrel that radically improves the characteristics of the 7,62x39mm M43 Soviet cartridge, or as the heavier PKM/Pecheneg light MG is quite open to debate. The RPK certainly serves better as a *rifle* or carbine, however, though early Soviet military literature described the AK47 as a submachinegun. The RPK needed only a quick-change barrel, as fielded on some Yugoslav versions, to be a truly great squad support weapon.
My recently seen favorite, someone "cocking" the "hammer" of a Glock, sound effects, thumb sweep, and everything. With the camera perspective from the front so that it was not obvious. I expect this kind of thing from Hollywood, but I can only take so much...
Looking to sell it and rely on my old Vennie FN-49 in 7X57.
I have one of the Egypyian FN-49s in the 7,92x57mm chambering, which not only routinely outshoots 90% of the Mauser boltguns that have come my way, but also neatly incorporates a hole for the cleaning rod in the rear of the receiver, allowing the barrel to be cleaned from the chamber end. Even the much-praised M1 Garand lacks that feature, and the 10-round magazine that can be refilled with a 5-shot clip once half empty is, if not an improvement over the Garand's *all 8 or nothing* en bloc clip, at least an alternate way of taking care of the problem.
I can think of another 7,92 rifle for which I *might* give up the FN-49 that I picked up for a bit under $400. But it would cost more than ten times that much....
I woudn't get too upset over that. Some can't see what's right in front of them.
I get more agitated over those that like to believe the Ruski's are our friends.
Like my dear old Dad used to say ... "Son, at the end of your life you will be able to count all your friends on one hand."
The United States is in the same position. Always has been, and always will be.
Regards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.