Saiga Choice - 16" or 20"

[HoosierQ]

I am fixin' to go for it. Saiga in 7.62x39. I am not going to convert. I will use it for plinking, Home Defense (SHTF), scout rifle when I spend time in the Nevada desert. My dad has retired out there and since I fly and cannot bring my handgun along (or don't anyway), I carry his Savage over-under, 30-30, 12 gague combo out in the desert. I will probably leave the thing out there eventually as I do almost all of my long gun shooting out there.

I have seen both the 16" and the 20" here in Indiana (Russian American Armory is located in Indiana and availability is good in shops here). Aesthetically, the 20" is more pleasing and obviously should provide at least a margin of increased accuracy and velocity. Ergonomically, the 16" will be handier in brush, in home defense situations and I presume the 7.62x39 was developed for a 16" barrel.

So is there any technical reasons for chosing one barrel length over the other? Muzzle flash, velocity, accuracy...that sort of thing. My eye is saying get the 20"...my brain is saying stick with the 16". I am sure I'd be happy with either but I would like to think I can make an informed choice.

Any thoughts supporting either choice would be appreciated.

 

[REOIV]

Get the 16, it is closer in size to the traditional AK than the 20 is.

The Saiga will never be a tack driver and the 7.62x39 wasn't ever intended for ranges past 100 to 200 yards the 4 inches of barrel length isn't going to improve accuracy that much.

If you want it for SHTF the 16 is handier especially converted to accept a folding stock. You can stuff the sucker in a back pack at that point.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

For 7.62x39, I'd go with 16". For .308, go with 20".

 

[guntotinguy]

For 7.62x39, I'd go with 16". For .308, go with 20".

+1.

Especially when shooting out here in the Nevada desert.My own 16" 7.62x39 (mine IS converted 922r compliant) and its a lot of fun to shoot.My .308 I (try) to use it for distance firing at an outdoor range here,the 20" definitely made the difference.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

I prefer the 16" carbine length. The extra 4" will offer very little ballistic advantage.

 

[grimjaw]

- Will you shoot it often beyond 100 yards? Beyond 300 yards?
- Will you use the iron sights?

Those two things would influence my decision.

jm

 

[kBob]

Smith& Smith &Ezel show the AKs with 16.34 inch barrels cranking out 2330 fps while they list the SKS and RPD with 20and a bit inch barrels at 2410fps oddly the RPK with its longer 23.2 inch barrel also is listed at 2410

Besides the slight increase in muzzle elocity the 20 inch would give you a longer sight plain.

If all you want is a ten shot semi auto with traditional stock shape and only use iron sights why not get the 20 inch? I would bet the over all length will be less than a full sized AR with 20 inch barrel though I have not looked the lengths up.

-Bob Hollingsworth

 

[sarduy]

i had a similar problem when i wanted to buy my saiga .223, i was like 16'' or 20'' barrell?????:banghead: but i then againg i wen't for the 20'' barrel, is damn accurate at 100 yards 1.5 for an ak based rifle is great, but i'm not using the 7.62x39, i'm running with the .223,

if you want a 100/200fps faster bullets and a little more accuracy go with the 20 inches, and if just 4 inches of barrels bothers you just go with the 16''

"is better to have it and not need it, than need it and don't have it"

BTW here's my Saiga .223 20''

 

[rangerruck]

Because of bullet design, and velocity, I see no advantage of the 20 over the 16; as a matter of fact, for the very above reasons, I see an advantage with the 16. I have had two of them now, still have 1 of them, and the 16 is super handy, and the accuracy diff I think belongs to the shorter version bbl, with that cart., as opposed to a longer bbl. Now then , if the bbl was thicker as well, i would agree with you.

 

[rocinante]

If you want it for SHTF the 16 is handier especially converted to accept a folding stock. You can stuff the sucker in a back pack at that point.

I keep mine in a tennis bag.

 

[LKB3rd]

I think that for an Old School, true to the design configuration, 16" is the way to go. That's not to say you want that...

 

[MIL-DOT]

I also researched this question before buying mine. From what i've read, the long,very thin barrel has harmonics or vibrations that adversely affect accuracy, that the 16" is actually more accurate than the 20". Others say there is no discernable difference. As stated above, this ain't a target rifle, i'd also recommend sticking with the 16" for the only clear advantage, compactness. 'sides, the 20" just looks goofy.

 

[MartinS]

Saiga 308's have very thin barrels? Wish mine did.

 

[SSN Vet]

definately 16" for the x39.

what you loose balistically is insignificant.

what you gain in weight and balance is VERY significant.

 

[cluttonfred]

The Saigas generally have a reputation for being balanced very far forward, so unless you have a real need for the longer barrel, I'd go with 16" in .223 or 7.63x39. I will bow to the view that the longer barrel makes sense in .308, however, if the weight doesn't bother you.

 

[Girodin]

I will bow to the view that the longer barrel makes sense in .308

Even in .308 most seem to report a negligible difference in accuracy. In fact some who have cut their longer barrels down and recrowned them have reported improved accuracy. Others claim that out of the box the shorter barrel is slightly more accurate. In .308 the advantage of a longer barrel is that you retain a higher velocity (a few hundred fps) than with the shorter barrel. Which means the longer barrel will have a flatter trajectory but the difference in accuracy will not be much.

Almost with out exception people seem to agree that the shorter barrel gives them a better balanced weapon. This is an even greater factor if the rifle is converted. If you are after accuracy a conversion will go a long way in allowing you to shoot the rifle better as a result of the greatly improved trigger.

I dont think you'll be making a bad choice either way. For what it’s worth, I prefer the shorter barrel for its balance and handiness. I only shoot sub 200 yards with open sights from field positions. I haven't grouped my x39 (or even shot it) from a bench but it easily makes hits on the head of a silhouette from standing at 100 yards with wolf. That is accurate enough for my purposes. I have scoped bolt guns for precision or long range work. The sights seem to be more of a factor than the mechanical accuracy of the gun.

Saiga 308's have very thin barrels?

Compared to a heavy barreled target/varmint rifle, yes. If you ever see a saiga .308 next to a heavy barreled DMPS .308 the difference is glaringly obvious.

 

[kBob]

I guess by old school or purist wanting 16 inch barrels you guys mean that 16.34 inch barrel on the AK47

As for the M43 cartridge bing optimized for the 16 inch barrel... the guns it was originall used in were the SKS and the RPD both of which had 20 to 21 inch barrels.

The Russians also felt that barrel length improved performance in the next SOviet Squad Automatic Weapon the 24 +inch barreld RPK, which they DID expect to engage targets further away than with the 16 inch AKs.

Stop it with the M43 optimized for a 16 inch barrel stuff will you?

I cannot see how Joe Home owner is better off with a barrel only a handwidth shorter than the actual optimum barrel length.

Looks funny? Eye of the beholder.

Front heavy? Guys for low light snap shooting such as in home defence front heavy is a good thing.

Oh well, I say sweet potato and you say bannannas. Both are pretty good primate food but way far appart.

-Bob Hollingsworth

 

[Bartkowski]

4 inches of barrel length isn't going to improve accuracy that much.

The length of the barrel does not improve accuracy. It is the quality of the barrel and the stiffness that will effect accuracy. So assuming that the barrels are exactly the same except for the length, the 16" should be more accurate.

 

[SimpleIsGood229]

Guys, we're talking about AK's, so I don't think splitting hairs about accuracy is going to get us very far.

That said, I think the 16'' is the better choice for you, since you mentioned home defense. Besides, if you ever convert it back to proper Kalashnikov configuration, you're going to want the 16'' tube.