AK-47 vs AK-74... the future of 5.45... and the KING of assault rifles

[skypirate7]

The AK-74 was supposed to be the replacement for the AK-47 but that never happened. Well, let me rephrase: Russians switched to the AK-74 but the rest of the AK-World never bothered to make the switch and shows no signs of ever doing so.

In fact, the AK-47 has rebounded and it seems countries actually prefer 7.62x39 over 5.45x39. For example, just last year Venezuela ordered 100,000 new AK-47's from Russia (actually AK-103's... but they are the same thing... the AK 100 series just features new polymer stocks).

Even Russian special forces are reported to be using AK-47's instead of AK-74's.

Do you think the AK-74 will eventually be phased out completely? The rifle meant to replace the AK-47 certainly seems to be on a downward spiral. The AK-47 continues to be the most popular rifle in the world and Russia has a hard time exporting the AK-74 and 5.45x45.

In fact, even AimSurplus seemed to be trying to get rid of AK-74's and 5.45x39 a couple months ago... a case of 1,080 rounds of 5.45 was going for $129 and AK-74 WASR-2's were going for $289.

People just want the AK-47. It is the undisputed KING of assault rifles.

Let's discuss:

1) AK-47 vs AK-74 advantages and disadvantages (recoil, accuracy, penetration)
2) Thoughts on whether or not the AK-74 and 5.45x39 will be phased out and the future of the AK-47 as King of Assault Rifles (reportedly, many contractors in Iraq even prefer the AK-47 over the M-16 and M-4)

 

[HorseSoldier]

It's hard to tell exactly what the Russians are doing, since they are a bit short on R&D and fielding money for small arms systems, but I'm not aware of any efforts to update the 7.62x39 platform, beyond some piggybacking of work done on the AK-74.

I think the disparity of foreign sales of the AK-74 and the AK-47 says more about how the Russians used to give kit away like it was going out of style, and now want people to pay for it. The Soviet allies who did adopt the AK-74 are now mostly trying to convert to NATO cartridges, and the third string sorts in the 3rd World weren't high enough on the totem pole to get 74s before the Walls came down.

just last year Venezuela ordered 100,000 new AK-47's from Russia

Chavez needed something FARC already has logistical support for.

 

[skypirate7]

Interesting points, but I disagree with the following:

I think the disparity of foreign sales of the AK-74 and the AK-47 says more about how the Russians used to give kit away like it was going out of style, and now want people to pay for it. The Soviet allies who did adopt the AK-74 are now mostly trying to convert to NATO cartridges, and the third string sorts in the 3rd World weren't high enough on the totem pole to get 74s before the Walls came down.

Russia is selling new-production AK-47's and AK-74's under the new designations of the "AK 100 series." Nations could buy the AK-74's if they wanted to... but they are choosing instead to buy AK-47's.

If Russia was selling off warehouses of AK-47's for dirt cheap after it converted its own military to the AK-74, then it seems that this has actually backfired and hurt their AK-74 sales.

What I mean is that now so many countries have AK-47's and they don't want to buy AK-74's. They want more AK-47's... and the fact that the guns, spare parts, magazines, and ammo is so widely available is likely a major reason for this. In otherwords, the AK-47 is feeding on itself. More people buy AK-47's, so it becomes more common, so more people buy AK-47's, and the cycle continues.

Though I doubt Russia minds much. Yeah, they're forced to produce two guns and two calibers but they're still making money.

It's true that some Eastern European countries that recently joined NATO are switching over to 5.56. In fact, this sort of reinforces a theory of mine. I think the world will be split between two assault rifles cartridges: the 5.56x45 and the 7.62x39. Those who want accuracy and light recoil will go with the 5.56x45. Those who want penetration and power will go with the 7.62x39. The 5.45x45 will be left behind.

But then there's the Chinese and their wierd 5.8x42 mm.

 

[Frog48]

Everyone other than Russia uses AK47's because they're CHEAP and plentiful. 3rd world countries, terrorist groups, and warlords dont have alot of $$$ to throw around.

 

[Lucky]

From Quarry.nildram.co.uk

http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=autogun&msg=2700.1

From http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/channel_dti.jsp?channel=dti

Russian designers are working on two new infantry weapons that could finally provide an AK-47 replacement: Izhmash's AK-107 and the AEK-971 developed jointly by Kovrovsky Mekhanicheskiy Zavod (KMZ) and Degtyarev Plant in the town of Kovrov.

Details about Izhmash's new AK-107 assault rifle are closely guarded. A description of the new rifle was removed from the manufacturer's web site, and scant official information about its progress has been released. Baditza, citing security reasons, refuses to comment on the AK-107 program. However, he did confirm that the program is still underway.

The 5.45-mm. AK-107, as well as its AK-108 version adapted to fire 5.56-mm. NATO ammunition, features a mechanism that uses so-called balanced automatics, as does the AEK-971. Alexey Isakov, head of KMZ's Special Design Bureau, explains that, during automatic fire, a rifle of the classic AK-47 design has four impulses that shake the weapon and disrupt its aim: the recoil from the bullet; the forward impulse from the gas piston as it moves backward; blowback generated when the receiver assembly reaches the far end of its path, and the momentum of the receiver moving forward. Balanced automatics minimizes the impulses from the rifle's internal moving parts by using two gas pistons that move in opposite directions during firing. As a result, a shooter feels only the recoil generated by the bullet as it moves along the barrel.

Isakov says KMZ developed the first AEK-971 prototype in the early 1970s as a replacement for the 7.62-mm. AK-47. The company's designers initially wanted to modernize the AK-47's design. But they soon realized that they couldn't double the assault rifle's accuracy as desired by the military while staying within that classic design scheme. So they implemented the balanced automatics principle in the new rifle. Unfortunately for KMZ, the Soviet military conservatively chose the Kalashnikov 5.45-mm. AK-74, which offered decreased blowback due to its smaller caliber and, as a result, slightly better accuracy.

Yet the AEK-971 program resumed in the 1990s with the backing of then-Defense Minister Igor Rodionov. At comparative test firings sponsored by Rodionov, the AEK-971 faced both the AK-74 and the AN-94. Each rifle fired a standard 30-round magazine in automatic mode from a standing position into a 1 X 1-meter target at a distance of 100 meters. According to Isakov, the AK-74 hit the target only once and the AN-94 twice, while the AEK-971 scored 18 hits.

Since the restart of the AEK-971 program, KMZ has refined the rifle's parameters, decreasing its length and weight. The initial version of the weapon is designed to fire 5.45-mm. ammunition, but KMZ also developed modified versions for 7.62-mm. and 5.56-mm. NATO ammunition. The three versions share 80% design commonality. Compared with the AK-74, Isakov says, the AEK-971 has a more sophisticated design with more internal details but nevertheless is just as easy to maintain and can tolerate harsh operating conditions. The designers even made its partial disassembly routine, identical to that of the AK-47.

However, the AEK-971 has yet to be adopted by the Russian armed forces, a step that would facilitate both domestic procurement and export sales of the rifle. KMZ conducted preliminary tests of all three versions in 2006, Isakov says, and expects to start government acceptance tests in the near future. Various Russian military services already have purchased the AEK-971 in small numbers for evaluation.

But KMZ apparently sees a limited market for its new rifle. Early last year, the company decided to focus on producing equipment for the atomic energy industry, and subsequently began transferring its defense programs to the neighboring Degtyarev Plant, which already manufactures heavy-machine guns and anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles. During the Soviet era, both companies made up a single defense facility in Kovrov but, after they were split up, cooperated closely on several defense programs.

It's still not clear whether the Degtyarev Plant will continue the AEK-971 program. This weapon and its competitor--Izhmash's AK-107--currently both have an uncertain future. The manufacturers have to risk investing to complete their designs while having no orders until the rifles pass acceptance tests by the Russian military. Potential export sales also await a military decision, because Russian law prohibits the manufacturers from selling their defense products to foreign customers independently, and Rosoboronexport won't add the rifles to its sales catalog until they are accepted by the military.

The Russian army does not appear to be in a hurry to choose a replacement for its AK-74 assault rifles, despite the need for it demonstrated in counter-terrorist operations in the North Caucasus. Unlike in the previous decade, the Russian military budget has begun to grow at a rapid pace during the past five years. Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov keeps repeating that the nation's armed forces need to be reequipped with modern weapons to deal with today's security challenges. However, infantry weapons are evidently not near the top of his priorities list.



Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk

 

[wally]

On the History channel's "Tales of the Gun" series in an interview with Mikael Kalashnikov, inventor of the AK, he was opposed to the 5.45 -- "Americans had a .22 so now we Soviets must have .22 to keep up, I was all for modernizing the 7.62x39...".

--wally.

 

[skypirate7]

Everyone other than Russia uses AK47's because they're CHEAP and plentiful. 3rd world countries, terrorist groups, and warlords dont have alot of $$$ to throw around.

When Ruger produces a firearm in 7.62x39 (Ruger Mini-30) and the FN-SCAR has a version in 7.62x39 for special forces, you know something is up.

I don't think it's just a matter of money. Chavez has money. The new Iraqi government has money. But they order new guns, they order AK-47's.

It has a lot to do with ammo acquisition. For example, if Russia refuses to sell Country X more 5.45x45, then Country X will have a major problem if their forces primarily use the AK-74. On the otherhand, if Country X primarily uses the AK-47, then they can get 7.62x39 from virtually anywhere.

 

[HorseSoldier]

When Ruger produces a firearm in 7.62x39 (Ruger Mini-30) and the FN-SCAR has a version in 7.62x39 for special forces, you know something is up.

The 7.62x39 version of the SCAR is to replace the SR-47s -- total inventory could fit in the back of a pick up truck and still leave room for a couple coolers of beer. It's not exactly a high priority.

 

[skypirate7]

How about the FN-SCAR in 5.45?

 

[skypirate7]

But let's keep this to 7.62x39 vs 5.45x39, not 7.62x39 vs 5.56x45

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

Well, I'd say the ultimate problem facing the 5.45mm is that it's role has been filled by the 5.56 NATO. And, the 5.56 NATO does the same job as the 5.45x39mm, but is more inherently accurate, and has a longer range.

Why would Iraq load out with AK-74s in 5.45x39mm when they could just as easily have the U.S. provide them with 5.56 NATO and have the Russians or NORINCO give them their AKs in 5.56 NATO as well. If the US cut off supplies, there would be multiple sources of 5.56 NATO other than the US.

The AKs of Venezuela and Iraq are in 7.62x39mm because that round is not only common, and readily available, it is also harder hitting than the 5.45mm (the lower recoil AK-74 comes at the price of less effectiveness), and for the most part Iraqi and Venezuelan troops haven't got the skill to take advantage of the longer range, and better accuracy of a 5.56 NATO AK-47.

Also, although it might have been a joke that Venezuela got 7.62x39mm to be able to more easily supply FARC, I don't think it's that big a joke. That probably enters into it. Venezuela will probably attempt from now on out to use it's oil wealth to spread Communist revolutions in it's neighbors, and it probably wants the most ubiquitous weapon on Earth in the most plentiful caliber on Earth to get that done.

 

[skypirate7]

Well said Mordechai.

And just to reiterate what I said earlier: I think the world will be split between two assault rifles cartridges: the 5.56x45 and the 7.62x39. Those who want accuracy and light recoil will go with the 5.56x45. Those who want penetration and power will go with the 7.62x39. The 5.45x45 will be left behind.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

Keep in mind, all the modern rifles aren't simply measured in how they work solely in the hands of an infantryman but in the hands of an infantryman attached to a Company equipped with crew served weapons, and with air support.

Most calibers other than 5.56 NATO and 7.62x39mm simply aren't enough of a "jack of all trades" outside of the modern combat paradigm.

Many here like 7.62 NATO, and a fine cartridge it is. But, when you consider the weight of loadout, and the skill of a rifleman it takes to really take advantage of the full 800 yard capability of the cartridge, and us moving to 5.56 NATO makes more since.

5.56 NATO and 7.62x39mm both do good jobs in swamp, jungle, forest terrain. And in a mountain where 7.62 NATO, or one of the even older battle rifle cartridges would serve better, the point is moot when a butterbar can call in an airstrike, or have mortars and/or RPGs engage @ the ranges a heavier cartridge would serve.

 

[Lucky]

when a butterbar can call in an airstrike, or have mortars and/or RPGs engage @ the ranges a heavier cartridge would serve

If Iraq demonstrates anything it's that this is not the usual case. Complaint people post on internet seems to be that the assets are seldom available, seldom available in a timely manner, seldom approved for use in the target's area, and/or the assets require such a high level of authorization that it cannot be gotten, or cannot be gotten in a timely manner.

 

[rangerruck]

personally, i think that the 70 grain, 545 round is better than both the others.

 

[Number 6]

Some flaws in your argument.

First, saying that countries prefer the AK-47 over the AK-74 does not follow from your evidence. True Venezuela and Iraq purchased a bunch of 7.62x39 AK rifles, but all you can really based upon that is that Venezuela and Iraq chose 7.62x39 rifles, and as others have pointed out the reasoning has a lot to due with ammunition availability, and not the round's effectiveness. Unless you can cite more countries other than the two and their reasons for picking the rifle, your evidence is weak.

Second, it was not just the Russians the switched to the 5.45x39 round. Poland, Bulgaria, and I believe a few other Warsaw Pact countries developed AK-74 based rifles. Some of those that have joined NATO are switching over to 5.56 rifles. however.

Third, many countries adopted the AK-47 not just due to the merits of the rifle, but due to political considerations as well as economic considerations. During the Cold War the Russians flooded the market with AK-47s. With so many AK-47s out there, it does not make much economic sense for a poor country rearm their military with AK-74s, when it only offers a marginal improvement over the AK-47. Many African countries have the AK-47 as their primary rifle, a lot of which are Cold War vintage, and transitioning over to a new rifle just is not in their budget. In a perfect world where economics does not come into play, you might see a country like Rwanda, Burundi, or Uganda switch over to the AK-74, but that is not the world we live in. So the AK-47's true popularity seems to be difficult to determine given the economic realities of many country’s budgets.

Fourth, you seem to be assuming that Russia is the only source for AK rifles, and that there is no cost difference between the two rifles when Russia is competing for a contract. Most of the AK-47s I saw in Rwanda and the DRC were of Chinese origin, amongst other manufacturers. With China and other countries producing AK based small arms, Russia might not be able to compete with other’s prices. Russia must then compete for contracts, with other AK manufacturers that are not producing AK-74s.

All that being said, I do not think that the AK-74 is going to go anywhere anytime soon. Russia has a lot invested into the rifle and the cartridge, and dumping it would be expensive. Is the AK-47 going to be more popular then the AK-74? For the foreseeable future I would say yes, but that is not necessarily due to either rifles merit. Is the AK-47 the "King of Assault Rifles?" That is debatable and depends on what criteria you are using. It certainly is the most fielded rifle, but that does not necessarily speak to the rifle's merits.

 

[skypirate7]

Some flaws in your argument.

First, saying that countries prefer the AK-47 over the AK-74 does not follow from your evidence. True Venezuela and Iraq purchased a bunch of 7.62x39 AK rifles, but all you can really based upon that is that Venezuela and Iraq chose 7.62x39 rifles, and as others have pointed out the reasoning has a lot to due with ammunition availability, and not the round's effectiveness. Unless you can cite more countries other than the two and their reasons for picking the rifle, your evidence is weak.

You're right in that their choices might not be due to "which is better," but rather, "which is more available." Heck, 8mm Mauser was a great round... but after WW2 it was all downhill from there (though the Yugoslavians stuck with it for quite a while). But whatever the reason, it does seem that the 5.45 is on the downhill. Just because a round is great doesn't mean it'll be popular with world militaries. There's many, many other factors involved.

Second, it was not just the Russians the switched to the 5.45x39 round. Poland, Bulgaria, and I believe a few other Warsaw Pact countries developed AK-74 based rifles. Some of those that have joined NATO are switching over to 5.56 rifles. however.

Right, so like I said, the 5.45x39 is being phased out. In this case, at least, it's being phased out for 5.56x45 NATO. I imagine countries will opt to go with either 7.62x39 or 5.45x45.

Third, many countries adopted the AK-47 not just due to the merits of the rifle, but due to political considerations as well as economic considerations. During the Cold War the Russians flooded the market with AK-47s. With so many AK-47s out there, it does not make much economic sense for a poor country rearm their military with AK-74s, when it only offers a marginal improvement over the AK-47. Many African countries have the AK-47 as their primary rifle, a lot of which are Cold War vintage, and transitioning over to a new rifle just is not in their budget. In a perfect world where economics does not come into play, you might see a country like Rwanda, Burundi, or Uganda switch over to the AK-74, but that is not the world we live in. So the AK-47's true popularity seems to be difficult to determine given the economic realities of many country’s budgets.

Fair enough, but that's why I mentioned countries purchasing newly produced AK-47's. It's not like all of the countries listed above stopped buying weapons after the 1980's. Give me an example in the last 5 years where a country (other than Russia) purchased 100,000 new AK-74's.

Fourth, you seem to be assuming that Russia is the only source for AK rifles, and that there is no cost difference between the two rifles when Russia is competing for a contract. Most of the AK-47s I saw in Rwanda and the DRC were of Chinese origin, amongst other manufacturers. With China and other countries producing AK based small arms, Russia might not be able to compete with other’s prices. Russia must then compete for contracts, with other AK manufacturers that are not producing AK-74s.

Very good point... but that begs the question: Why don't the Chinese produce AK-74's? Is it because they themselves aren't a fan of the 5.45x39? Or is it because there just isn't enough demand from foreign sales?

All that being said, I do not think that the AK-74 is going to go anywhere anytime soon. Russia has a lot invested into the rifle and the cartridge, and dumping it would be expensive.

I don't think the AK-74 will be dumped immediately. It may be another 10 years before Russia decides to make a switch... and then another 10 years before the 5.45x39 is completely phased out. One thing is for sure: it hasn't replaced the AK-47, and in fact, the AK-47 may end up replacing the AK-74.

Is the AK-47 going to be more popular then the AK-74? For the foreseeable future I would say yes, but that is not necessarily due to either rifles merit. Is the AK-47 the "King of Assault Rifles?" That is debatable and depends on what criteria you are using. It certainly is the most fielded rifle, but that does not necessarily speak to the rifle's merits.

Maybe I was a *bit* biased in declaring it "King." However, when the AK-47 finally becomes extinct (50 years from now? 100 years? 200 years?), it will have been around longer than any other firearm in history. It is certainly the most influential assault rifle of all time.

If Iraq demonstrates anything it's that this is not the usual case. Complaint people post on internet seems to be that the assets are seldom available, seldom available in a timely manner, seldom approved for use in the target's area, and/or the assets require such a high level of authorization that it cannot be gotten, or cannot be gotten in a timely manner.

That's why I strongly agree with the Russian doctrine of having 1 designated marksman per squad (with a Dragunov SVD). If you're pinned down by a sniper, or are being pestered by some guy arching RPG's at you from the top of a bell tower, you're going to appreciate some immediate long-range firepower. M14's, FAL's, and Dragunov's shouldn't be issued to everyone (more weight, more recoil, less ammo) and assault rifles are certainly the jack-of-all-trades, but having one guy in the squad issued a battle rifle / marksman rifle / sniper rifle just in case you need some extra reach is a good idea.

 

[Number 6]

Very good point... but that begs the question: Why don't the Chinese produce AK-74's? Is it because they themselves aren't a fan of the 5.45x39? Or is it because there just isn't enough demand from foreign sales?

I am not sure how the Chinese feel about the 5.45x39, but they dumped the 7.62x39 round in favor of their home grown 5.8x42. What that means for the 7.62x39, I don't know.

Fair enough, but that's why I mentioned countries purchasing newly produced AK-47's. It's not like all of the countries listed above stopped buying weapons after the 1980's. Give me an example in the last 5 years where a country (other than Russia) purchased 100,000 new AK-74's.

You are right that there are few if any countries purchasing AK-74s, but like I have said before, that is not necessarily due to any functional failing of the 74. If you have stockpiles of 7.62x39 ammunition already in country and you have a limited budget, then the cost of transition will have to be calculated into the reasoning for a change. It is true that even developing countries continually purchase weapons and have done so since the Cold War, but you have to factor into that what economists call "path dependence." Russia and China flooding the market during the Cold War has skewed the market forces towards the AK-47 for good or for bad.

On a side note. When I was in the rougher part of the Democratic Republic of Congo, I did see a couple of AK-74s carried by government troops, and two M16A1s.

 

[El Tejon]

Exactly, path dependence. Same force at work in the USA's M16 as well.

 

[Evil Monkey]

The 5.45mm is not going to disappear for now, but it is being phased out because of certain factors.

Not all of the Warsaw Pact switched to the 5.45mm. Certainly none of the Soviet influenced countries switched to 5.45mm before the Soviet union fell. The problem for 5.45mm is that many of those ex Warsaw pact nations are switching to NATO, and part of the switch is to change munitions into what's NATO standard. If countries like Poland and Bulgaria, for example, weren't required to change munitions after joining NATO, you really think they would waste money converting over to 5.56mm and 7.62x51mm NATO when the 5.45mm and 7.62x54R can do the same damn thing?

That's the 2 core problems for the 5.45mm. It's too new and wasn't spread out by the Soviets enough before their fall and ex soviet client states are joining NATO and therefore, dumping the 5.45mm to NATO standard 5.56mm.

Hey, as long as there is surplus parts kits for ak-74 and companies making receivers for them, availability of cheap standardized mags and individual parts, then I'm happy with 5.45mm and look forward to getting an AK-74.

If any country or any of you are not happy with the 5.45mm AK-74 for any reason, please, feel free to dump your rifles and ammo in my backyard.

 

[pipboy]

the 47 has flooded the world
the 74 i would say is in the top 10 assault rifles in the world as far as current use goes, no its not as popular as the 47, but lets face it the 47 could be called the most popular rifle in the world right now as far as these kind of rifles go, i know the ar fans will object but the ak platform has made its mark in the world and it wont go away for a very long time due to the economic situation, i also would say that ammo for both is not scarce, but realistically the 7.62 39 round is more popular, older, and easier to get a hold of.

the comments about the 8mm round have nothing to do with this, as a huge 8mm fan i must say that the reason the 8mm has died out has nothing to do with the round, but the military platforms using it, same can be said the 30-06, 7.62-54 and so on, simply put its a generation thing, i also think that it is only a testimate to technology and brilliance that the ak platform will still be in use around 2047, however there is no doubt that somthing will eventually replace even that, combat has evolved and no doubt the weapons must keep up

 

[blackhawk2000]

I think the 5.45 is more effective on humans, but I bought the 47 because I can go anywhere and get ammo/mags for it.

 

[CDignition]

this is the best solution to the whole mess Yugoslav M95 in 5.56x45 (.223)

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

On the History channel's "Tales of the Gun" series in an interview with Mikael Kalashnikov, inventor of the AK, he was opposed to the 5.45 -- "Americans had a .22 so now we Soviets must have .22 to keep up, I was all for modernizing the 7.62x39...".

I fail to see how this is relevant.

His opinion didn't matter in 1947 and it doesn't matter now. He's not a ballistics expert.

He designed the AK-47 in 7.62x39 because that was the round the Russians wanted, not Kalashnikov. They changed it in 1974 because that's what they wanted.

 

[Evil Monkey]

Nice Yugo there CDignition.

Too bad mags are $35+ each. And where are you going to get parts if something bad happens to the rifle? For the practical shooter/non collector, the 5.45mm AK-74 clone wins. More parts which reduces prices, and certainly plenty of surplus mags going anywhere from $5-15 each.