Okay, I get that the AK is the most popular military rifle in the world, but there are many superior rifles that are just as reliable. I happen to own an AK and - the gun looks/feels flimsy, - muzzle flip results in a nasty cheek slap, - the receiver looks like folded sheet metal, - safety is hard to engage/disengage and leaves a nasty scratch on the receiver, - the magazine doesn't fit right in (must insert the lip…
Always has to be an american guy claiming something is wrong with AK and prefers M1A who has used the guns only in his collection and perhaps shooting out in a gun-range on fine weather-days.
>The gun is nothing special. Its controls are unsophisticated; it is not even particularly accurate. But this simplicity is a reason for its success. Compared with other assault rifles, the AK-47 has generous clearance between its moving parts. That is bad for accuracy, but it means that the mechanism is unlikely to jam, no matter how clogged it gets with Sudanese sand or Nicaraguan mud. Designed to be operated by So…
I'll see your Wikipedia link and raise you one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_dimensions_of_quality When you're getting shot at and your life depends on being able to shoot back, reliability trumps all other metrics.
I submit that availability trumps even that. In many cases, you would not have a gun if it wasn't as simple and cheap to make as the AK-47.
>The gun is nothing special. Its controls are unsophisticated; it is not even particularly accurate. But this simplicity is a reason for its success. Compared with other assault rifles, the AK-47 has generous clearance between its moving parts. That is bad for accuracy, but it means that the mechanism is unlikely to jam, no matter how clogged it gets with Sudanese sand or Nicaraguan mud. Designed to be operated by So…
> That is bad for accuracy, one of the main version around is AK-74, same mechanics, only 5.45mm caliber instead of 7.62mm of AK-47. While not a sharpshooter's, it is a very accurate gun.
Most of the bad rep AK gets for precision comes from Mao's knock-offs. Chinese copies account for at least 80% of AK family guns on the worldwide market (e.g. nearly all Mujaheddin used Chinese copies shipped through Pakistan).
The idea that USSR couldn't produce a weapon with high tolerances in 1950s is laughable. It could teach precision machining to perhaps rest of the world, save the USA and Germany.
Okay, I get that the AK is the most popular military rifle in the world, but there are many superior rifles that are just as reliable. I happen to own an AK and - the gun looks/feels flimsy, - muzzle flip results in a nasty cheek slap, - the receiver looks like folded sheet metal, - safety is hard to engage/disengage and leaves a nasty scratch on the receiver, - the magazine doesn't fit right in (must insert the lip…
The safety was one of the few obviously 'wrong' aspects of the AK design; not only is it on the wrong side of the receiver for right-handed operators, requiring them to reach-over to engage, but it also makes a distinctive CLACK noise that resulted in many of its users being detected and killed. Rhodesian forces developed 'cover shooting' as a technique for responding to this noise, controlled firing into any clumps…
Also ironically, it was AKM that moved from milled receiver to stamped, making it both lighter and less expensive, but giving garage experts a reason to complain about.
When experts say that AK47 is not "particularly accurate", it's a bit misleading, because in a battle you don't shoot for bullseye, usually any shot within the inner 30cm (12inches) circle on the target is considered as a hit. Ak47 is certainly not the most accurate weapon, but in a real life situation and within its fire range of about 350 - 400 meters it's accurate enough. In my experience with the Yugoslav version m70 it's really hard to miss anything under 200m and when shooting further than that (because it doesn't have optics in the standard setup) your eyes are a bigger problem than the gun itself.
When experts say that AK47 is not "particularly accurate", it's a bit misleading, because in a battle you don't shoot for bullseye, usually any shot within the inner 30cm (12inches) circle on the target is considered as a hit. Ak47 is certainly not the most accurate weapon, but in a real life situation and within its fire range of about 350 - 400 meters it's accurate enough. In my experience with the Yugoslav version…
Most people who say that the AK-47 is "not accurate" are just parroting conventional wisdom and have never actually shot one. Poorly made AK-47s might not be accurate, but anything that is poorly made might not be accurate, regardless of the design. Well made AK's are plenty accurate out to hundreds of meters and could easily be used as sniper rifles with a scope. And by "well made" I don't mean a small batch made by a boutique manufacturer, there are millions of rifles made by various companies/countries that are fairly high quality. One of the problems of talking about the "AK-47" in general is that it's actually a family of rifles produced by a huge variety of folks. For example, the actual "AK-47" is fairly rare, most rifles of the type are the AKM model, or some regional variant of the AKM. Meanwhile, you have countries ranging from Bulgaria to Ethiopia to Vietnam all manufacturing their own models, with a very high degree of variation in quality.
Tl;dr It's a "good enough" gun that the Soviets and licensees made over 100m of. Guns, parts and ammo are available anywhere.
In my mind that is the only reason, because the USSR made a whole lot of them, and then shipped them out to every third-world country. It is for a similar reason AR-15s are so popular here in the USA, because the US Military mostly uses M16s ,which are almost the same, and therefore they are the "cool, I'm almost-for-really a soldier now" gun.
The AR-15 design uses a very common type of ammo (.223/5.56), it's light-weight with low recoil, it's fairly ergonomic and compact, and it's accurate. All of those things are factors that make it desirable for civilian uses ranging from recreational range shooting to home defense.
The "tacticool" factor is probably responsible for only a tiny fraction of all AR-15 sales.
The article does a somewhat poor job of explaining the success of the AK47 in the context of the time it proliferated. Because the discussion of such things tends to be dominated by fanbois of one military rifle or another, the good and bad of the weapons tends to be overstated. One of the biggest advantages of the AK47 is that it could be manufactured en masse with relatively simple manufacturing equipment that was…
However, its operational ergonomics are atrocious
I had to read that twice and I'm still not sure. You mean economics, right?
The article does a somewhat poor job of explaining the success of the AK47 in the context of the time it proliferated. Because the discussion of such things tends to be dominated by fanbois of one military rifle or another, the good and bad of the weapons tends to be overstated. One of the biggest advantages of the AK47 is that it could be manufactured en masse with relatively simple manufacturing equipment that was…
I guess you don´t need high tolerances when the guns are going to be used by untrained troops. Just an example I recently saw a Nigerian policeman walking with his Ak47 on his hand, using it as a walking stick. The Ak was doing the distinctive noise of a metal bar hitting the ground hard. As the Ak didn't have muzzle brake that could protect minimally the barrel, I guess there is not much accuracy left in that barrel.
If that happens in the middle of an international airport, I can not imagine how they are maintained and used in the middle of the jungle.