The Truth About AK-47 Firepower

[rangersmith82]

As in the video most hunting rifles are more powerful than the evil AK-47

Thanks to Howzit for the link!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgr3kTU68uw&feature=related

[wtmusic]

1. Most hunting rifles are also unwieldy. nt

[bossy22]

6. quite the opposite my friend

hunting rifles tend to have a lightier barrel and have a synthetic stock to limit the weight. Also the barrel tends not to be any longer than 22". The gun has to be small enough to lug around in the woods for hours on end.

Target rifles on the other hand, usually have a minimum barrel of 22" and that barrel is usually some form of a "heavy barrel" to increase accuracy.

[wtmusic]

7. The AK-47's barrel length is 16"

and it's the AK-47, not hunting rifles, which are the choice of banana republic military forces around the world. It's for a reason.

[bossy22]

11. yes...and do you know what that reason is?

because the AK is the most numerous gun type in circulation. They are cheap, and the ammo is every where.

If it was soley based on killing power, you would see alot more forces with M14's than AK's. But since M14's on the market are almost non-existent the gun is not going to be the main battle rifle of a major army or security force.

this is not to say the AK-47 isnt effective as a battle rifle...its up there with the greats, but there are more effective weapons out there.

[Fabio]

17. You ever try to deploy with an m14?

[bossy22]

20. never deployed with an m14

i have lugged around with a scout version for many hours (even days). I will say that the AK is a bit more confortable to walk around with but i find the difference negligable. Also the 2 inch difference in barrel length didnt seem to cause me much problems...even when i was walking through the dense forests of new hampshire.

Now if we are talking about a full length M14, thats a different story. I could see where lugging that around could be an issue

[Fabio]

21. It's not just the gun

Which is obviously a wonderful firearm -- extremely reliable (piston system), very accurate -- overengineered probably for widespread use.

Carrying a combat load of .308 rounds is a pain.

[bossy22]

22. true

when i was in the woods i carried no more than 30 rounds in 3 10 round mags.

[tburnsten]

25. It would be the FAL, that is another ubiquitous weapon

Far more so than the M14 ever could have hoped to be. Plenty of countries built them under license.

[Fabio]

27. Popular 3rd world rifles all have on thing in common

they can be stamped, not milled, when built.

[tburnsten]

28. I didn't just mean 3rd world

And I was comparing it to the M-14. the FAL has always been more popular world-wide than the M-14, and I see no reason why it wouldn't stay that way in an alternate universe where true battle rifles were still preferred over light-caliber assault rifles. The G-3 would also be more widespread than the M-14 in our imaginary world.

[Tejas]

41. You got that right, they don't call the FAL

the "right arm of the free world" for nothing.


Gotta love .308, turns cover into concealment!

[bigbadwolf]

42. No sure I agree

Many modern hunting rifles are lightweight and easy to handle. If anything, the barrel length makes them unwieldy, but they can be chopped down to a legal carbine length and be quite nimble. You would lose some velocity and power, but still have greater range, accuracy, and terminal energy than most AK's or AR's.

I've always thought, too, that the deliberation needed with a bolt action rifle (and lower mag capacity) encourages more careful shooting.

[michreject]

2. Remember.....some want to ban the .30-30

as a cop killer bullet.

[rangersmith82]

15. In Massachusetts all bullets are cop killer bullets

At least according to the uninformed Senator.

Sorry as much as i like Ted, the day he called a Bushmaster AR-15 a Buckmaster, he lost all credibility(as far as guns) to me.

How can you vote to ban something you are not familiar with? Senators are required to do homework right?

Hopefully he we change his anti gun ways.....

[Fabio]

3. Lol. This is ridiculuous.

I support gun rights, have many a black rifle, and a few Aks, plus 308s that are bolt action, semi auto and yes! even Class III.

If you think people are trying to ban assault rifles because of the power of the cartridge, you are being silly.

It's an issue of capacity, rate of fire and compactness.

Or, to put in energy terms, answer me this:

Which gun is producing more ballistic energy in twenty seconds?

One that fires one round every three seconds with a 150 grain bullet at 2800 fps (say a remington model 800 in 308)

or

One that fires a round every second with a 55 grain bullet at 3200 fps? (say an m4 carbine in .556)

[michreject]

10. For someone who owns MANY black rifles

You should get your facts straight.

One that fires a round every second with a 150 grain bullet at 3000 fps? (say an m4 carbine in .556)


There's not a 5 point 56 round (5.56) on the face of the planet that shoots a 150 gr bullet.

[Fabio]

13. you are right.

i meant to write 55 grain, though I prefer a 77 grain black hills load.

i was deliberating on the .308 grain to include and I guess I wrote them both in.

I should have stayed in NSWF longer than 6 years since I dont know my shit..

Anyhow, which shoots more energy in twenty seconds --

A DMPS .308 AR rifle with a twenty round magazine

or

the same remington as mentioned above?

[rangersmith82]

24. No problem

I wasn't trying to be an ass, I apologize.

[Fabio]

26. no need.

it was a big error that would have caught my eye if someone was claiming domain knowledge.

[tburnsten]

29. With same caliber bolt rifles are often not significantly slower to fire

Provided that hits are required and not just trying to get the lead out as quickly as possible.

[Fabio]

31. This might be true at certain ranges

but for close range work (ie <25 yards) I think there is ample evidence that a semi automatic rifle will fire more rapidly than a bolt action -- particularly if training levels are low.

[bigbadwolf]

43. An unfortunate truth

At short range, firing into a crowd (sorry for the visual), an AK will be pretty deadly just due to the rate of fire and larger mag capacity. However, I'm not for banning so-called high capacity mags. With practice, a shooter can learn to switch mags out quickly--and in a mass shooting scenario, people are going to be too panicked, scared, and confused to try to rush the shooter while he's reloading. Besides, any decent metal fabricator can turn out illegal mags for criminals without too much trouble. In other words, like most bans, they affect the good guys and have little effect on real world violence.

[rangersmith82]

12. M4s use the 5.56mm cartridge

Common bullet weights are:

52gn
55gn
62gn
69gn
77gn
80gn(single shot, too long to go in Magazine)

There is no 150gn bullet for a 5.56 casing.

[Fabio]

14. see above.

[Xela]

37. It has been known to happen...

In Mexico for example, they made the mistake of creating legislation partially based on power of the cartridge. And what's even worse, the legislation is so confusing because they link power with caliber...it's just a mess of a law.

Xela

[guntard]

38. In some countries, military cartridges are banned

So, for example, 7.62x39mm is banned from civilian ownership, but .30-30 is not. I think Mexico has a similar law, so that while 9mm is banned, .380 isn't (something like that).

Makes all kinds of sense, right?

[tburnsten]

44. .38 Super is Mexico's favorite auto cartridge, I think

[tridim]

4. A hunting rifle is also more powerful than a grenade launcher

But I don't think you need to carry one of those either.

[MarcMus]

5. Even if they're more powerful, does that make the AK okay?

Aren't all guns too powerful?

[bossy22]

8. too powerful?

what do you mean by that? A .44 magnum is too powerful for a squirrel but a .22 LR is way too weak for bears

the AK is okay because its a simple semi-auto carbine. its not your typical AK you find all over iraq, legal AK's are semi-auto compared with their true battle rifle counterparts- which are full auto.

What it comes down to is the "furniture" on the gun. They take a semi-auto carbine and stick AK furniture on it and call it an AK type rifle

They could just as easily stick a standard straight stock and call it a Mini-30

[Fabio]

18. I dont consider magazines

and compensators as "furniture"

stocks, grips and rail systems are furniture.

[bossy22]

19. you are correct

but the magazine feeding system doesnt really differ much from one semi-auto to another in a specific calibre

Muzzle attachments for all intensive purposes are furniture when it comes to civilian use. the only one that can be argued otherwize is a muzzle brake, but for most shooters, the benefit of the muzzle break isnt really noticed.

[Fabio]

23. A good muzzle break

say a PWS or a Noveske, will make a big difference in sustained rapid fire in a semi auto firearm -- which I like. Not that you are disagreeing with me.

[benEzra]

36. Ah, but "assault weapon" is defined based on stocks and grips.

With the first stock, that small-caliber rifle was protected by name as "particularly suitable for sporting purposes" by the 1994 Feinstein non-ban.

With the second stock, it becomes an evil "assault weapon" in California or under H.R.1022 et seq.

With the third stock, it would have been an "assault weapon" under the 1994 Feinstein law.

[Fabio]

40. This is not true of the federal assault weapons ban.

First of all, a precondition to it being considered an assault weapon/rifle is it having a semi-automatic action (ie self-loading) and a detachable magazine. You could thus have a bolt action rifle with a drum magazine and no stock and you would be in the clear.
After that, it requires a combo of two other features - some of which I consider furniture -- like a pistol grip, or collapsing stock, bayonet lug or flash suppressor.

Either way, I hope they dont re-enact the AWB. You can get plenty of very dangerous weapons that are AWB compliant and, as many people have pointed out, criminals will always access hi-cap magazines and hacksaw their barrels and stocks if it suits their purposes.

Furthermore, it's been the private sector market that has driven innovation that has ultimately aided our troops. Companies like Magpul, Larue Tactical and Trijicon probably wouldn't exist without the commercial black rifle market thriving the last 6 years.

[slackmaster]

9. Generally, any rifle over .50 caliber is classified as a "destructive device"

So .50 or under is not too powerful for civilian use.

[Iktomiwicasa]

39. I better...

..hide my big .54 :evilgrin:

[tburnsten]

30. that's funny

[rangersmith82]

16. lets get this recomnded also please

Thanks

[nichomachus]

32. I'm always suspicious when someone tell me they're going to

give me "the truth" about something -- and then refers me to YouTube.

[ManiacJoe]

34. As you should be, but in this case

they are correct.

[gorfle]

35. Wise move

But there is nothing magical about the video. It is merely a graphical demonstration of hydrostatic compression. They are shooting watermelons.

The physics is quite simple, really, F = M*a . That is, force = mass times acceleration. Even though the mass of the bullet is relatively small, the high velocities result in an absolutely tremendous force being applied on the watermelon - literally tons of force. The watermelon, being mostly water, is essentially incompressible. Consequently, when the bullet hits it, it explodes.

The demonstration merely gives you an idea of the forces involved with various bullets by letting you witness the relative difference of explosion of each watermelon.

They say shooting cans of root beer is also a hoot.

[michreject]

33. K&R

:-)