sks or ak? - Page 4
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion > AK & SKS Discussion > sks or ak?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-01-2013, 05:28 PM   #31
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,545
Liked 1000 Times on 703 Posts
Likes Given: 1001

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spazzmodicus View Post
Um, because they like carrying more rounds per kilo of weight just like anybody else that would choose 5.56/223 over 7.62/30 caliber.

The 5.56 quickly loses it's power to punch through vegetation, body armour, walls and even "distance" compared to the 7.62. And we're talking practicality here, not shooting matches or ballistics test into gelatin at 30 yards. The 5.56 might exhibit better cavitation properties into the gelatin but lets throw some foilage, thick clothes or body armour, maybe some khat and light cover in there. You'd drop the AR in a hurry and pick up the nearest AK as did some of our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If the 5.56 is so great and all-sufficient, how come our own military elite are switching to the M-14/M1A in droves if and when given the choice? It's comparing apples and oranges in a sense with respect to the x39, x51, I understand, but the simple answer to your question is this: the 5.56 has it's place, purpose, advantages in specific areas. It is not by any means the end-all super-round that you would like to portray it as.

In handguns, the. 45acp has much more foot pounds of power than say the 9mm, but I carry a 9mm because I can carry twice the amount of ammo. That doesn't make the 9mm round a superior round. Spraying and praying is often the norm in handgun encounters and 9mm makes more sense in that situation.

Anybody that would argue the superiority of the 5.56 over the 7.62 when it comes to brute-force power obviously has an unrealisic and narrow perspective. And the example I gave with the plastic bottles exhibited my points perfectly.

The 5.56 works great on soft-tissue at close distances. In fact the "underpoweredness" of the round can be considered an attibute in urban combat where penetration isn't necessarily desirable. But when it comes to rifles, I would rather send the most power downrange and through obstscles, not spray and pray with lighter projectiles that rapidly loose their kinetic energy when they hit just about anything other than soft tissue. And for me, the 7.62x39 does just that.
Why don't you tell us something we don't know next time. And when did I compare the power of 5.56x45 to 7.62x51? You threw that in, we were talking SKS in 7.62x39. I just pointed out your empty plastic bottles proved nothing and that the Soviets moved on to a smaller cartridge almost 40 years ago.
__________________

______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together. You'll remember the quality of a gun long after you forget how much you paid for it.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

Quentin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 06:35 PM   #32
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
GhostUSA556's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spazzmodicus

Um, because they like carrying more rounds per kilo of weight just like anybody else that would choose 5.56/223 over 7.62/30 caliber.

The 5.56 quickly loses it's power to punch through vegetation, body armour, walls and even "distance" compared to the 7.62. And we're talking practicality here, not shooting matches or ballistics test into gelatin at 30 yards. The 5.56 might exhibit better cavitation properties into the gelatin but lets throw some foilage, thick clothes or body armour, maybe some khat and light cover in there. You'd drop the AR in a hurry and pick up the nearest AK as did some of our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If the 5.56 is so great and all-sufficient, how come our own military elite are switching to the M-14/M1A in droves if and when given the choice? It's comparing apples and oranges in a sense with respect to the x39, x51, I understand, but the simple answer to your question is this: the 5.56 has it's place, purpose, advantages in specific areas. It is not by any means the end-all super-round that you would like to portray it as.

In handguns, the. 45acp has much more foot pounds of power than say the 9mm, but I carry a 9mm because I can carry twice the amount of ammo. That doesn't make the 9mm round a superior round. Spraying and praying is often the norm in handgun encounters and 9mm makes more sense in that situation.

Anybody that would argue the superiority of the 5.56 over the 7.62 when it comes to brute-force power obviously has an unrealisic and narrow perspective. And the example I gave with the plastic bottles exhibited my points perfectly.

The 5.56 works great on soft-tissue at close distances. In fact the "underpoweredness" of the round can be considered an attibute in urban combat where penetration isn't necessarily desirable. But when it comes to rifles, I would rather send the most power downrange and through obstscles, not spray and pray with lighter projectiles that rapidly loose their kinetic energy when they hit just about anything other than soft tissue. And for me, the 7.62x39 does just that.
The 5.56 is used by the best in special forces all around the world. And I have found the ar15 to be far more accurate than the ak47. Also the 7.62x39 losses it's speed to fast because it is such a bigger bullet. It's like comparing a 9mm to a 45, they both have their pros and cons. My dad uses his ar in .223 for deer hunting. The 5.56 round goes through body armor better than the 7.62x39 Also I think the ar15 is more ergonomic than the ak47. My end point is that it is your choice to chose which you think is better. I am going to chose the ar15 and if you want to put yourself at a disadvantage then that's fine with me.
__________________
GhostUSA556 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 05:48 AM   #33
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Weirton, WV,PA
Posts: 250
Liked 20 Times on 18 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

The Russians have given some thought to the bigger is better argument..

This is a link to a an interesting pdf discussing lessons learned in Chechnya;

http://www.ditc.net.au/erm/russia.pdf

The readers digest extract;

"In its operations in Chechnya and Dagestan in 1999 and 2000, the Russian military expressed a preference for organic heavy-calibre weapons in combined arms sub-units.
As a result of the poor penetrating power of lower-calibre munitions, Russian soldiers in Chechnya called for the replacement of the 5.45mm RPK light machine-gun with the fullpower 7.62mm PK series general-purpose machine-guns.
Thus, the global trend towards equipping forces with smaller and lighter munitions has been found wanting in the urban battles in Chechnya and Dagestan. Russian soldiers have preferred small arms that use larger-calibre ammunition, such as the 7.62mm AKM assault rifle, the 7.62 mm SVD sniping rifle, the GP-25 40mm under-barrel grenade launcher, the Pecheng machine-gun and the Vzlomshchik 12.7mm heavy-calibre sniper
rifle."

Me; I'd be happy shooting nothing but .308 FALs and M1As - but who can afford that? So like all of you, I have a variety and shoot what I can afford to or feel like.

And nowadays with price and availability - that is pretty much becoming my airsoft guns...

__________________

In a victim nation, a classroom full of dead children is morally superior to a teacher holding a smoking gun knowing she just protected her students.

nfafan is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 10:59 AM   #34
Concealed Carry Instructor
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
AR10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lincoln Nebraska
Posts: 2,008
Liked 946 Times on 622 Posts
Likes Given: 229

Default

One can have the best of all worlds. AR15 for times when small light, easy to pack weapon is desirable, and a LR-308 for when you need to send something bigger.

In a handgun, the best load for me has all the better points of both .45.and 9mm. 10mm. Double stacked Glock mags, and I have high power and high capacity.

__________________
AR10 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 03:40 AM   #35
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 481
Liked 99 Times on 65 Posts

Default

I have two sks. A Russian and a Chinese. I love these guns. I like the fact that they only shoot 10 rounds at a time. This way your not going thru boxes upon boxes at a time. Also what I like about them is you can get different stocks and set them up the way you want to. The Russian one, I set up to look like a sniper rifle and it does shoot pretty accurate out to 200 yards. Past that depends on how serious I am and dial my scope in. Since I have the Russian SKS set up the way I like the Chinese just sits in the gun cabinet. I want to trade it for a bolt action rifle to hunt deer with. I can't hunt deer with my Russian one because it holds 10 rounds. Where I live you can only have a mag that holds 5 rounds. But I love them. They are so much fun and easy to build into something more to your liking with all the accessories they have for them on the net.

__________________
Crazycastor is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes