Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f25/)
-   -   .308 or 7.62x39? (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f25/308-7-62x39-1761/)

cnorman18 08-20-2007 02:01 AM

.308 or 7.62x39?
 
OK, I'm sold. I want a Saiga (Russian-made AK variant; looks like the best deal since the nickel cup of coffee. NIB for under $300).

Next question: .308 or 7.62x39? I need some help here.

I don't hunt; the weapon will be for defense only, especially in case of disaster of one kind or another (SHTF, e.g.). I live in a large city (Dallas), if that's relevant.

Here's what I know: the .308 has greater recoil, but also greater range and hits with more authority. The AK round has less range, less power, and less recoil, and is the ammunition the gun was designed for.

Here's what I don't know (sorry if I sound like Glenn Beck): relative accuracy; price and availability of ammo; if the .308 is significantly harder on the gun and will shorten its working life.

Comments? Advice? Insults? Whatever you've got...

Thanks.

Etho 08-20-2007 09:21 AM

7.62 Commie is a helluva lot cheaper and easier to find than surplus 7.62x51 or even .308 that isn't loaded with hunting projectiles.

I'd probably spend a bit more and just get a standard Ak. WASRs aren't much more and while they are the red headed step child of the Ak world(is that even possible?) everything I have read about them is they do work.

I wouldn't worry about accuracy. I'd expect combat accuracy from that rifle. Ak's and their variants were meant to work, be accurate enough to hit a man out to 4-500 meters and be simple enough for even the dumbest conscript to keep running. I don't think even the Dragunov is all that accurate.

allmons 08-20-2007 03:54 PM

If cost is a strong incentive
 
Then you will probably need to look at the 7.62X39. Ammo is very reasonable and it is a fairly accurate round. The .308 has the ballistic edge, and can be more accurate - BUT, the Saiga was designed as a shooter, not a MOA weapon. At 50 yards, I can bounce soda cans using iron sight with my .223 Saiga. That's good enough for me.

So, considering your choices, my vote would be the 7.62X39.

:)

BLS33 08-20-2007 03:56 PM

Another vote for 7.62x39. It is a proven battle rifle round and cheaper.

robocop10mm 08-21-2007 03:15 PM

Saiga
 
I would go commie. The mags for the .308 are not easy to find and will not likely get any easier. If you want a .308 get a rifle designed to be a .308. My personal preference would go
1. HK-91
2. CETME
3. M1A
4. AR-10
5. FAL

I know, I will get flamed for putting the FAL on the bottom of the list. I just happen to have an HK and a CETME I like the M-1A but do not like the weight/lack of pistol grip. The AR-10 is very much like the AR-15's I have but are expensive. The FAL has a rep for needing gas adjustments, different mags for inch pattern and metric. I just never got into the FAL hoopla. I have shot them and they are fine and I would not kick one out of bed for eating crackers, just not my cup of tea right now.

stalkingbear 09-28-2007 11:20 PM

7.62x39
 
There's no way that the standard will consistantly hit a man size target at 500 meters!







[QUOTE= Ak's and their variants were meant to work, be accurate enough to hit a man out to 4-500 meters and be simple enough for even the dumbest conscript to keep running. I don't think even the Dragunov is all that accurate.[/QUOTE]

Dgunsmith 09-29-2007 01:19 AM

Go 7.62x39
 
For strictly defense, reliability, ease of control and ammo price, the winner is 7.62X39 .

Basically a 30-30 auto in performance and good to 200 yards on a man size target.

All ammo is going up but with no more 308 surplus on the world market due to UN Ban on sale, 308 is around $ 450-550 per thousand.

AK Mags are cheap and guns handle well.

FYI:
A quality FAL with decent ammo will leave an HK or M1A in the dust and they DO NOT require frequent gas system adjustment. Our FAL MG has over 100K rounds thru it and runs flawlessly. At 500 yards and iron sights, a man size target has NO chance !:cool:

AR Hammer 09-29-2007 05:10 AM

Quote:

"OK, I'm sold. I want a Saiga (Russian-made AK variant; looks like the best deal since the nickel cup of coffee. NIB for under $300).
Next question: .308 or 7.62x39? I need some help here."

This is a case of 'You get what you pay for...',
How much is your life worth? ($300 apparently...)

Doesn't matter what chambering you get it in, it still has a crap Russian production barrel, so it's not going to be accurate.

Quote:

"...be accurate enough to hit a man out to 4-500 meters"...
NO PRODUCTION AK has ever been able to hit a torso size target consistently at 500 meters.
It was actually built to engage at ranges between 75 and 150 yards.
(and at 150 yards, things are a little shaky!)

.308 will give you a little more knock down power at closer ranges, but you are still going to miss everything beoynd 250 yards anyway, so the energy at the target doesn't matter since you won't deliver TO the target at 500 meters.

If you had gone with a M1A or AR-10 in .308 you could have had extremely accurate semi-auto that would be a tack driver at 500 meters...
-------------

Cart before the horse thinking...

If you want to shoot out to 500 meters,
Then start with the short list of semi-auto rifles that will be ACCURATE at 500 meters!
And work the list down from there...

I don't think anyone with any experience with SEGA would put it on a 300 meter list, and it doesn't have a chance at 500 meters.

Match grade AR-10, NM grade M-14, ect.
You won't get any of these for $300 either...
Start about $1,000 for a reasonable used and go up to about $4,500 from there.

Personally, I like my AR-10's in .308 and my new one in .300 WSM really kicks butt!
--------------------------

Quote:

"All ammo is going up but with no more 308 surplus on the world market due to UN Ban on sale, 308 is around $ 450-550 per thousand."
Surplus doesn't do 3" groups at 500 yards anyway...
Surplus is lucky to do 18" at 500 yards.
Volume or accuracy, it's hard to have both!

Recon 173 04-11-2008 06:09 AM

My vote would be for the 7.62 x 39 BUT I would also suggest that you look at getting some sort of scope for it too. Now, I know that some people think that an AK-47 type rifle shouldn't have a scope on it because it makes a lousy sniper rifle. But what I'm looking at here isn't using it as sniper rifle but to increase the rifle's over all accuracy within the framework of 0 to about 250 meters distance. In other words, from one location out to about 2.5 city blocks or so, if needed. If I were living in a built-up area like Dallas, especially with all those tall buildings all around, I would want to have a little better than average AK for vertical shooting as well as being able to control a couple of blocks near me too. Unless you mount a scope on a AK type rifle, you could very quickly find yourself at a disadvantage to a guy with another rifle. The scope does not have to be an expensive one. A decent 4X to 6X scope will probably do the job needed to increase a guy's survival chances a bit better.

DSAPT9 04-14-2008 10:57 PM

I to would go for the 7.62x39 if I were not all ready set up with ARs and FALs.

The FAL will shoot all day long just set the gas system to 5 on most guns and let her rip. I currently shoot 180gr hunting loads in both Federal and Remington and have for years. Cheaper than surplus ammo at the moment and I use it to hunt with.


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:43 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.