It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

AKS-74U is awesome!

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
An ak-47 shoots the soviet 7.62x39mm while the ak-74 shoots the smaller 5.45x39mm. The ak-47 is said to be unbalanced, over-powered and not so accurate at long range while the ak-74 is much better. Unfortunately both are full-scale rifles which make them a bit heavy, clumsy and unconcealable.

Meet the "perfect" scaled down weapon that shoots the 5.45x39mm round.



Needless to say it comes with a folding stock and you might be able to attach a suppressor and a scope to it.

Its sligtly larger than a personal defense weapon but the problem with the PDFs are they shoot unconventional(hard-to-find) ammunition.




posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Everyone knows the AK-74U is overpowered though. Gawsh..



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by WraithXV
Everyone knows the AK-74U is overpowered though. Gawsh..


As I said, its slightly larger than a PDW, but your correct in that it approaches the limits of what a scaled down rifle can shoot. Its definitely better than the outdated ak-47....thats for sure! Maybe you would like the mp-7a1 though?



Not a bad weapon but good luck trying to find 4.60x30mm shells......
And technically all auto-weapons made after the 1987 ban are illegal so were left with USED GUNS and transferrable licenses. I won't even talk about the illegal options, except to say with slight modifications you can turn a semi-auto to full-auto if you know what you are doing.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
This vid made me laugh because it reminded me of Borat singing his national anthem!! Geez that movie really kicked out the stops on all kinds of non politically correct humor. I did like the rifle but i didn't see the damage and therefore it wasn't as good of selling point as it could've been. I have been looking for a select fire rifle for a long time and I know the Mexicans are getting them somehow and I want one to keep in my arsenal for rabbit huntin because those bastards are fast lol. I am talkin the rabbits are fast and hard to hit not the mexicans lmao.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Having shot tons of rounds through my AK47 (from IO) I haven't found the accuracy to be as horrible as everybody seems to say. Then of course there are the stories of insurgents in Afganistan and Iraq hitting American troops with Aks at ranges the M4s and M16s can't match. So they can't be too inaccurate.

My main issue with the Ak range of rifles are the sights. The rear sight sits so far forward it hurts accuracy. Aside from a red dot or scope I don't see how to fix this though, as you couldn't mount a sight on the receiver cover. I mean you could, but it wouldn't be accurate at all as the cover is just that: a cover. It's not a structural part of the weapon and wouldn't keep a zero.

edit on 2-3-2011 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Another great PDW is from Knights Armament Corporation and fires the 6x35mm bullet:



According to some people this never went past experimental stage but I beat special op teams use it like delta force, sas, etc! Check out what that swat guy said.........



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by James1982
Having shot tons of rounds through my AK47 (from IO) I haven't found the accuracy to be as horrible as everybody seems to say. Then of course there are the stories of insurgents in Afganistan and Iraq hitting American troops with Aks at ranges the M4s and M16s can't match. So they can't be too inaccurate.

My main issue with the Ak range of rifles are the sights. The rear sight sits so far forward it hurts accuracy. Aside from a red dot or scope I don't see how to fix this though, as you couldn't mount a sight on the receiver cover. I mean you could, but it wouldn't be accurate at all as the cover is just that: a cover. It's not a structural part of the weapon and wouldn't keep a zero.

edit on 2-3-2011 by James1982 because: (no reason given)


I wouldn't claim to know but I have heard that the ak-47 butt stock is too diagonal, in relation to the gun bore, and makes the muzzle rise in repeat fire mode. Maybe they did this to relieve kick-back pressure, but it appears to affect bullet trajectory!
edit on 2-3-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by James1982
Having shot tons of rounds through my AK47 (from IO) I haven't found the accuracy to be as horrible as everybody seems to say. Then of course there are the stories of insurgents in Afganistan and Iraq hitting American troops with Aks at ranges the M4s and M16s can't match. So they can't be too inaccurate.

My main issue with the Ak range of rifles are the sights. The rear sight sits so far forward it hurts accuracy. Aside from a red dot or scope I don't see how to fix this though, as you couldn't mount a sight on the receiver cover. I mean you could, but it wouldn't be accurate at all as the cover is just that: a cover. It's not a structural part of the weapon and wouldn't keep a zero.

edit on 2-3-2011 by James1982 because: (no reason given)


I wouldn't claim to know but I have heard that the ak-47 butt stock is too diagonal, in relation to the gun bore, and makes the muzzle rise in repeat fire mode. Maybe they did this to relieve kick-back pressure, but it appears to affect bullet trajectory!
edit on 2-3-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)


Yeah that adds to the muzzle rise that's for sure. I've never fired a full-auto ak before, I would imagine it would be quite a handful and cause a lot of accuracy related issues.

When an M16, for instance, fires, the bolt goes straight back in line with the stock, so the recoil goes straight back to the shoulder.

With Aks, if you look at the charging handle side of the gun, you can see that the line the bolt follows when fired is above where the stock attaches to the receiver. So when the gun recoils there is additional leverage basically that torques the gun upward. Aks aren't the only guns that have this same "flaw" though



posted on Mar, 3 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by James1982
With Aks, if you look at the charging handle side of the gun, you can see that the line the bolt follows when fired is above where the stock attaches to the receiver. So when the gun recoils there is additional leverage basically that torques the gun upward. Aks aren't the only guns that have this same "flaw" though


I don't think its terribly important where the stock attaches to the receiver, what is more important is the angle of the stock in relation to the muzzle. If the stock is too diagonal then the recoil forces are more vertical than horizontal as with the ak-47 and not with the ar-15/m-16.

The aks-74u and ak-74 seem to have fixed the flaw of the ak-47 but I am not sure about the newer versions such as ak-101, ak-102, ak-103 etc. A lot of shotguns have dipping stocks and that is why hunters are told to aim at the base of the target to allow for muzzle rise, but with repeat fire rifles the upward momentum is exaggerated with each shot thus its more serious imo.

To be fair though I think its possible to have diagonal stocks and adjust the weight/balance of the gun to prevent excessive muzzle rise. Even with muzzle rise its not really a huge issue except when shooting on full-auto at long distance for the obvious reason of bullet dispersion. Just start lower and "lawn mow" your way up!

edit on 3-3-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Believe it or not an AK-47 is good to about 300 yards on semi auto(auto).It would make a good dear hunting rifle.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   
my only knowledge of guns is from playing cod4. yes,ak-47 sucks, ak-74u is awesome.
great iron sights, with silencer is a great run'n'gun/creeper gun, but i like mp5 better.
edit on 4-3-2011 by neonitus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by neonitus
 


Only problem with the mp5 is it shoots the parabellum pistol rounds which means its not a great weapon to fight a sophisticated enemy wearing body armour. Thats were the aks-74u and all the pdw come into play, so basically you have compact assualt rifles, which are almost as good as full scale rifles, without all the extra weight and clumsiness.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
I know, they should totally nerf that thing, its so overpowered.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 07:59 PM
link   
A great looking AK style gun. I want.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
AK-47's are so overrated.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Why are people that have never fired/handled a weapon trying to put in their 2c ?

Newer AK models have rail attachment on the left side that lets you mount "traditional" scopes as well as newer picatinny rail adapters for western style optics aka eotech, aimpoint, trijicon, elcan, etc.
Different stocks, hadnguards, grips are available as well.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
An ak-47 shoots the soviet 7.62x39mm while the ak-74 shoots the smaller 5.45x39mm. The ak-47 is said to be unbalanced, over-powered and not so accurate at long range while the ak-74 is much better. Unfortunately both are full-scale rifles which make them a bit heavy, clumsy and unconcealable.

Meet the "perfect" scaled down weapon that shoots the 5.45x39mm round.



Needless to say it comes with a folding stock and you might be able to attach a suppressor and a scope to it.

Its sligtly larger than a personal defense weapon but the problem with the PDFs are they shoot unconventional(hard-to-find) ammunition.


I'm glad they are perfecting an older design, but I don't think many guns are more fearsome than the classic AK-47, as far as looks are concerned. Not to mention the rifle has served in many wars and taken many lives.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaskad
Why are people that have never fired/handled a weapon trying to put in their 2c?


Pardon the pun but that is a bit absurd. You don't really have to fire every single weapon made to be able to have an opinion on something. I have not fired any rifle or pistol but I can still tell which weapons are slightly better than the competition from doing online research, watching videos, listening to comments, etc.



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by totalmetal
I'm glad they are perfecting an older design, but I don't think many guns are more fearsome than the classic AK-47, as far as looks are concerned. Not to mention the rifle has served in many wars and taken many lives.


Those that say its a terrible weapon are exaggerating their mistrust of soviet hardware, but still I think its a pretty mediocre and outdated rifle. I particulary don't like the stock design of the ak-47 and on full-auto it has the tendency to "spray" bullets upwards due to mussle rise.

Maybe the newer ak-47s, or the ones produced in america, have fixed/improved on the issue? I have noticed not all ak-47s are the same so perhaps it was a design issue only with the vintage models in europe. Either way I can't say for sure but since no one really knows what they are talking about lets leave it here..........



posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by neonitus
my only knowledge of guns is from playing cod4. yes,ak-47 sucks, ak-74u is awesome.
great iron sights, with silencer is a great run'n'gun/creeper gun, but i like mp5 better. ...


Then why do you comment anyway, AFTER admitting your input is 100% useless? Think about it.


Originally posted by James1982
...When an M16, for instance, fires, the bolt goes straight back in line with the stock, so the recoil goes straight back to the shoulder.


Recoil is the counterforce of the bullet momentum. It is irrelevant where the bolt goes (of course, in most designs the bolt will travel in the same direction as the recoil). The movement of the bolt may influence the felt recoil, but not the actual physical recoil.


Originally posted by James1982
...Aks aren't the only guns that have this same "flaw" though


Its not a flaw, its a conscientious design decision. It enables the sight line to be closer to the bore axis while still being comfortable to shoot. Almost all rifles were built htat way before the full auto era.


Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
...I don't think its terribly important where the stock attaches to the receiver, what is more important is the angle of the stock in relation to the muzzle. ...


The only relevant factor is how congruent the "focal point" of the stock is with the bore axis. In simple terms, the more of the shoulder is behind the barrel, the less the induced muzzle rise will be. It doesnt matter how the stock is designed, only the position of the shoulder is relevant.
edit on 14/3/2011 by Lonestar24 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join