AK-12 Rifle Discussion

I would have loved to have seen an HK416 type magwell on the AK-12, a mag release button, a bolt-lock button and an SRVV jet-brake as standard.

AFAIK there is a bolt hold open device so there should be a bolt lock button already, though you need specific mags to make it work, though it should be compatible with all AK standard mags of the same calibre.

Instead of shortening the sight radius by moving the front iron sights back to the gas-block, why wasn't the option to remove the front iron sights [when needed] included?

I suspect to prevent them being lost... the rear iron sights are not removable AFAIK... and regarding the moving back of the iron sights to the gas block means that shifting the front sights back means no reduction in sight length. Of course if you are shooting beyond about 200m you should be using optics anyway... so a shortened sight radius is not relevant.

The AK-12's internals have been lightened to reduce recoil and increase accuracy, but won't this heat up the gun quicker in full-auto?

The bolt carrier and piston don't absorb that much heat and actually smaller items have a larger surface area to volume ratio so give off heat faster... (ie the moon is solid while the Earth still has a molten core).

Would the lightened internals make it more difficult to increase the cyclic rate of fire to 850-900 if a country specified such a high rate of fire?

No. Actually lightened internals can actually increase rate of fire... there are machine guns that have lightweight bolts for higher rates of fire... I think the MG42 had a high and a low rate of fire bolt mass.

Lastly, would a cyclic increase in automatic fire have an effect on semi-automatic fire in terms of recoil?

the lighter bolt and bolt carrier might lead to a slightly higher rate of fire but in terms of single shot it should just mean less mass slapping around which means less felt recoil, less barrel moving off target.

On the 12 the magwell conflicts with the new mag release mechanism and the quad-stack 60/90 round mags. They will have to find a solution if the magwell becomes a desire of the MoD.

Given the choice of a Magwell or a 90 round magazine I would choose the 90 round magazine, or even the 60 round double double stack mag... Instead of 9 magazines with 30 rounds in each (ie four chest pockets with two 30 round mags each plus one mag in the rifle and therefore 8 magazine changes to empty all your full mags, you could have 5 magazines with 60rnds in each, one in the gun and four in the chest pockets meaning 4 mag changes...

[quote]The current stock will have a cheek weld as a final product...[/quote

Good to hear.

BTW I noticed on a BLOG that they are discussing the AK12 and that there will be a one year delay for its mass production because they are making some changes to the design... I thought you would like that.

Elsewhere on that blog they talk about a new 6.5 x 39mm round and suggest that is the other secret calibre that gets mentioned when they talk about the AK12.

they are making two AK12s... one smaller for 7.62 x 39mm, 5.45mm, and 5.56mm and 6.5 Grendal and they are making a larger AK12 in 7.62 x 51mm. they talk about another calibre but don't mention it.

The BLog in question above claims they have a new 6.5 x 39mm they are developing to replace the 5.45 and 7.62 x 39mm, which I find strange.

I rather think the secret cartridge would have to be for the larger AK12... they wont make a larger AK12 and not use the 7.62 x 54mm, unless they are planning to change to 7.62 x 51mm NATO or that the other calibre is to replace the 120+ year old 7.62 x 54mm round... which in my opinion could only be the 6 x 49mm round they were working on previously that didn't get to service because of cost.

Perhaps experience with 338 Lapua Magnum rifles and new powders has led them to revive the new 6 x 49mm round with further improved performance to replace the heavy old cartridge...

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I would have loved to have seen an HK416 type magwell on the AK-12, a mag release button, a bolt-lock button and an SRVV jet-brake as standard. Instead of shortening the sight radius by moving the front iron sights back to the gas-block, why wasn't the option to remove the front iron sights [when needed] included?  I don't like the fact that the stock is so far below the optic section.

This was apparently done because the dust-cover wasn't optimized for mounting optics on it, so it was strengthened -- making it larger and higher in relation to the stock. I still prefer the side-mounted rails over anything as a solution to this problem with the Zenit rails coming second. If any AK variant ever got an AR type magwell, a bolt-lock button and a mag-release button, I would love a modernised side-mount that didn't prevent the use of these features.


The AK-12's internals have been lightened to reduce recoil and increase accuracy, but won't this heat up the gun quicker in full-auto? Would the lightened internals make it more difficult to increase the cyclic rate of fire to 850-900 if a country specified such a high rate of fire? Lastly, would a cyclic increase in automatic fire have an effect on semi-automatic fire in terms of recoil?

They have a magwell on the mk-107. It's "lifted" from the Galil ACE, but it works. On the 12 the magwell conflicts with the new mag release mechanism and the quad-stack 60/90 round mags. They will have to  find a solution if the magwell becomes a desire of the MoD. They have a mag release mechanism just on the trigger, a bolt lock mechanism based on an old AK project (which has similarities with the FNC).

And again the front post can be removed as they have introduced a new rail superstructure (it could be done since the AK 200, ironically that was one of the good ideas from the 200). The current stock will have a cheek weld as a final product...

Actually that was made because the previous solution was proven wrong by the other rifle. Before the AK200 used an over-rail like the Sig, FNC, Tantal/Beryl. It was a good "DIY" solution, but nowhere near a serial production. So they simply lifted the ideas from ZID with an integral "dust" cover that gives the current rifle. As I said, it's good, only 20 years late...meanwhile ZID has gone the other way by adopting a SIG solution (albeit the furniture looks taken straight out of a legacy H&K rifle) with a rail fixed on both ends of the "lower". So actually instead of fixing the rail on the "dust cover", ZID has created a chassis that goes around the rifle...with a twist.

Isn't the mk-107 just a civilian variant of the AK-107? In either case I was thinking of a full length, flared HK416 type magwell. Not that it's a bad thing but the mag release mechanism on the AK-12 seems to be no different from its predecessors. As you can already tell, I really do like certain aspects on the HK416A5 and think that some of its features [like an adjustable gas block] should be incorporated into the AK-12. The AK is apparently overgassed and this apparently helps it achieve its well earned reputation for unmatched reliability, but this apparently also has negative effects on accuracy. An adjustable gas block would fix this.  The reliability and operating mechanism of the AK is far superior to its 'western' counterparts but some of its features [even in this iteration] are not as user friendly.

Garry, thanks for your response, mate.

I'm going to pick your brains with some more admittedly [but not purposely] annoying questions. Yes, there is a downside to being so knowledgeable.

Is it true that the AK's barrel is 'pressed' into the front trunnion instead of being screwed into the receiver? Assuming that this is true, how would it effect the AK [in reliability terms] if the barrel was screwed into the receiver? Again on the reliability front, what would happen if the AK's recoil spring was located in front of the action and was attached to the gas piston [like the SIG 556] instead of being behind the bolt carrier? And would it be possible to create an AK variant with a hinged lower/upper receiver like the AR so as to better create a more suitable base for scope attachments? An 'AK' like that would *look* different but it should be able to retain its well deserved reputation for reliability if the clearances and parts are all the same.

[quote="GarryB"]

On the 12 the magwell conflicts with the new mag release mechanism and the quad-stack 60/90 round mags. They will have to find a solution if the magwell becomes a desire of the MoD.

Given the choice of a Magwell or a 90 round magazine I would choose the 90 round magazine, or even the 60 round double double stack mag... Instead of 9 magazines with 30 rounds in each (ie four chest pockets with two 30 round mags each plus one mag in the rifle and therefore 8 magazine changes to empty all your full mags, you could have 5 magazines with 60rnds in each, one in the gun and four in the chest pockets meaning 4 mag changes...

100% agreed.
[quote]

The current stock will have a cheek weld as a final product...[/quote

Good to hear.

The 12 stock is better than the current ZID one. It's more fussy but better. ZID had no idea on how to make the stock so they simply made it so that it would be a strict minimum. They have contracted with Zenitco for a a series of stocks and rails (their PKP versions were first on this regard).

BTW I noticed on a BLOG that they are discussing the AK12 and that there will be a one year delay for its mass production because they are making some changes to the design... I thought you would like that.

I actually don't hate the rifle itself. I don't think the rifle will be done with modifications til next year. I think from now on Izhmash should stop the tests and try to refine the current version structurally. Materials, barrel design, magazine design. The rifle is good enough as it is. Once the guys get them, the teething process will follow. So far it's mainly toying with the current rifles. Same for ZID we need to know how the hell they perform on the medium run.

Elsewhere on that blog they talk about a new 6.5 x 39mm round and suggest that is the other secret calibre that gets mentioned when they talk about the AK12.

they are making two AK12s... one smaller for 7.62 x 39mm, 5.45mm, and 5.56mm and 6.5 Grendal and they are making a larger AK12 in 7.62 x 51mm. they talk about another calibre but don't mention it.

Unified calibre (6x49) is good, but both current teams have toyed with it and both need a lot more time. On the same logic, the current AK-103-4 is a better option for an SVD replacement. The current AEK can't be stretched.

The BLog in question above claims they have a new 6.5 x 39mm they are developing to replace the 5.45 and 7.62 x 39mm, which I find strange.

Well the 220 Russian has been there for 60 years...these people know what they're doeing. Although the 6x49 seemed more interesting.

I rather think the secret cartridge would have to be for the larger AK12... they wont make a larger AK12 and not use the 7.62 x 54mm, unless they are planning to change to 7.62 x 51mm NATO or that the other calibre is to replace the 120+ year old 7.62 x 54mm round... which in my opinion could only be the 6 x 49mm round they were working on previously that didn't get to service because of cost.

Why would they change for a calibre that isn't better than theirs...So i concur the calibre will be the Unified one.

Perhaps experience with 338 Lapua Magnum rifles and new powders has led them to revive the new 6 x 49mm round with further improved performance to replace the heavy old cartridge...

No contest again...

Cyrus the great wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I would have loved to have seen an HK416 type magwell on the AK-12, a mag release button, a bolt-lock button and an SRVV jet-brake as standard. Instead of shortening the sight radius by moving the front iron sights back to the gas-block, why wasn't the option to remove the front iron sights [when needed] included?  I don't like the fact that the stock is so far below the optic section.

This was apparently done because the dust-cover wasn't optimized for mounting optics on it, so it was strengthened -- making it larger and higher in relation to the stock. I still prefer the side-mounted rails over anything as a solution to this problem with the Zenit rails coming second. If any AK variant ever got an AR type magwell, a bolt-lock button and a mag-release button, I would love a modernised side-mount that didn't prevent the use of these features.


The AK-12's internals have been lightened to reduce recoil and increase accuracy, but won't this heat up the gun quicker in full-auto? Would the lightened internals make it more difficult to increase the cyclic rate of fire to 850-900 if a country specified such a high rate of fire? Lastly, would a cyclic increase in automatic fire have an effect on semi-automatic fire in terms of recoil?

They have a magwell on the mk-107. It's "lifted" from the Galil ACE, but it works. On the 12 the magwell conflicts with the new mag release mechanism and the quad-stack 60/90 round mags. They will have to  find a solution if the magwell becomes a desire of the MoD. They have a mag release mechanism just on the trigger, a bolt lock mechanism based on an old AK project (which has similarities with the FNC).

And again the front post can be removed as they have introduced a new rail superstructure (it could be done since the AK 200, ironically that was one of the good ideas from the 200). The current stock will have a cheek weld as a final product...

Actually that was made because the previous solution was proven wrong by the other rifle. Before the AK200 used an over-rail like the Sig, FNC, Tantal/Beryl. It was a good "DIY" solution, but nowhere near a serial production. So they simply lifted the ideas from ZID with an integral "dust" cover that gives the current rifle. As I said, it's good, only 20 years late...meanwhile ZID has gone the other way by adopting a SIG solution (albeit the furniture looks taken straight out of a legacy H&K rifle) with a rail fixed on both ends of the "lower". So actually instead of fixing the rail on the "dust cover", ZID has created a chassis that goes around the rifle...with a twist.

Isn't the mk-107 just a civilian variant of the AK-107? In either case I was thinking of a full length, flared HK416 type magwell. Not that it's a bad thing but the mag release mechanism on the AK-12 seems to be no different from its predecessors. As you can already tell, I really do like certain aspects on the HK416A5 and think that some of its features [like an adjustable gas block] should be incorporated into the AK-12. The AK is apparently overgassed and this apparently helps it achieve its well earned reputation for unmatched reliability, but this apparently also has negative effects on accuracy. An adjustable gas block would fix this.  The reliability and operating mechanism of the AK is far superior to its 'western' counterparts but some of its features [even in this iteration] are not as user friendly.

Nope the 107 is a sporting rifle with "western" features. It's a solid product and can be "militarized" at will. However for a series of reasons the MOD didn't liked it. Mag release mechanism is not the same at all. See the pictures posted by Garry. The Mag can be dropped without having to use your hand to pull it out. No more of these...

Just press the mechanism and the mag drops.

Unified calibre (6x49) is good, but both current teams have toyed with it and both need a lot more time. On the same logic, the current AK-103-4 is a better option for an SVD replacement. The current AEK can't be stretched.

the 6x49 is optimised for longer range use, so it will likely be a 1,000m range cartridge the way the 7.62 x 54mm round could be on paper, but really isn't from a rifle.

from the look of the weapons designed for the unified calibre I suspect it needed a very long barrel, which is not really ideal... I am kinda hoping that new powder technology can get the same or better velocities from normal length barrels.

An enlarged AK12 using the 6x49mm calibre could be a useful replacement as a DMR to replace the SVD currently used in that role, while I really like the VS-121... a heavier barrel and lightened and worked trigger mechanism... that should put performance at least in the M21 range, possibly better. Try a new calibre with the VS-121 like 6 x 49mm and you should get a very decent rifle... add the new thermal scopes with laser range finders and ballistic bullet drop computers and Glonass etc etc and you should have a very capable and very modern sniper rifle in a fairly compact package.

Just press the mechanism and the mag drops.

Change mags behind cover, and don't drop mags on the ground... You should be working within a team with others covering you while you reload...

I actually don't hate the rifle itself. I don't think the rifle will be done with modifications til next year. I think from now on Izhmash should stop the tests and try to refine the current version structurally. Materials, barrel design, magazine design. The rifle is good enough as it is. Once the guys get them, the teething process will follow. So far it's mainly toying with the current rifles. Same for ZID we need to know how the hell they perform on the medium run.

My understanding was that they were working on another model called AK12SN which will be a fully modular multi calibre system that can replace current 9mm SMGs, (Bizon/Vityaz) current Assault rifle calibre SMGs, (AKS-74U), current Assault rifle carbines (AK-105), current assault rifle (AKS-74), Current LMG (RPKS-74), and current designated marksman rifle (SVD).

Using two standard mechanisms... ie light calibre and heavy calibre AK12 in 9x19mm, and various length barrels in 5.45mm for the rest except the LMG and DMR, which will use the larger frame rear ends and 6x49mm calibre uppers.

The Russians have toyed with Assault rifle calibre LMGs for some time and seem to have gone for the PKP in a larger calibre because despite the extra weight the better firepower is considered worth it... assuming that remains the case then a light AK12 and a heavy AK12 family could include a light 9x19mm version to replace Vityaz, a short barrel version in 5.45mm to replace the AKS-74U, a mid barrel length model to replace the AK-105, a standard length barrel model to replace the AK-74, plus perhaps a 9 x 39mm version to replace the AS/VSS and AK9, and a 12 gauge model perhaps based on the larger heavier model... and a 6 x 49mm version that is just a scaled up AK12 to replace the SVD and perhaps a more extensively modified larger AK12 with a belt fed upper for the LMG role in 6 x 49mm.

I would go a step further and make the heavier AK12s bullpups to allow more compact designs with longer barrels... With the heavier family memeber you could add 12.7 x 55mm models and .388 Lapua Magnum chambered rifles too.

In fact as a step above that a modular 30mm grenade launcher/12.7x108mm/14.5x114mm/23x115mm weapon system.[/quote]

Is there a chance that the AK-12 will feature a free floating gas tube or is that not possible in an AK platform? I imagine that Russia will provide an AK-12 variant with pillar bedding, an adjustable gas block and a single-stage trigger for its special forces.

I like some of the new features in the AK-12... features that addressed some of the short-comings of the AK platform, but why didn't Izhmash go all the way? The AK-12 didn't get a proper magwell like the M4. The stock is obscenely far below the optic section all because the dust-cover had to be made suitable to mount optics on it instead of redesigning it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't Izhmash just redesign the upper receiver to be more like the AR-15's upper receiver? The upper receiver should be able to mount optics on it without being as bulky and high as it currently is. The butt-stock should be elevated to be in alignment with the sights section, a tool free adjustable gas block [like the one on the HK416A5] would further reduce recoil and increase accuracy. The srvv muzzle brake seems to be the best muzzle brake in the world and so it should be incorporated into the AK-12 as it also reduces recoil like no muzzle brake  I've ever seen.

With all that being said, I wouldn't want a non-Kalashnikov rifle in war time.

Cyrus the great wrote:I like some of the new features in the AK-12... features that addressed some of the short-comings of the AK platform, but why didn't Izhmash go all the way? The AK-12 didn't get a proper magwell like the M4. The stock is obscenely far below the optic section all because the dust-cover had to be made suitable to mount optics on it instead of redesigning it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't Izhmash just redesign the upper receiver to be more like the AR-15's upper receiver? The upper receiver should be able to mount optics on it without being as bulky and high as it currently is. The butt-stock should be elevated to be in alignment with the sights section, a tool free adjustable gas block [like the one on the HK416A5] would further reduce recoil and increase accuracy. The srvv muzzle brake seems to be the best muzzle brake in the world and so it should be incorporated into the AK-12 as it also reduces recoil like no muzzle brake  I've ever seen.

With all that being said, I wouldn't want a non-Kalashnikov rifle in war time.

Told yah before, there's no way you'd have a proper magwell with the new high-cap mags and the rather crude bolt-catch/Mag release mechanism. The stock with have a cheek weld, like the MR modification, so that's taken partially care of. Why would Ishmash use an inferior solution. If you check the Mk107-AK15 was better than the AR15 platform in every way on its IPSC matches. Oh and for the rest of the complaints. The previous IPSC mk 107's had a magwell. The newest version...DID NOT!

Guess why? IMO so it could accept the high cap magazines and be modified for the Izh's mag release, bolt catch mechanism. AND it has ans SRVV-like MB.



http://world.guns.ru/civil/rus/saiga-107-e.html

BTW see how much the model was developped since april 2015 (pictures from link are of the last test variant 107).

Oh and video of AK-12

The AK-12 didn't get a proper magwell like the M4.

What do you mean proper magwell?

I own an M4 and I am not particularly impressed with its magwell.

My AK is similar to my SLR... place the front of the mag in position and rock back to lock... both work fine.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't Izhmash just redesign the upper receiver to be more like the AR-15's upper receiver?

No.

AR-15s recoil main spring is contained in its stock, not the receiver area so you would lose the ability to fold the stock.

If you want them to copy something why not copy a much better design like the FN FAL.

It has an upper and lower but because the upper includes the magwell if you want different calibre uppers you don't artificially limit yourself to rounds the same length as the 5.56mm NATO or shorter.

The upper receiver should be able to mount optics on it without being as bulky and high as it currently is.

It does not matter how high the receiver is... the key is the height of the barrel as that is where the thrust line of the recoil is... one could argue that the height of the receiver on the AR15 is irrelevant too as the sights are mounted so high anyway.

The butt-stock should be elevated to be in alignment with the sights section, a tool free adjustable gas block [like the one on the HK416A5] would further reduce recoil and increase accuracy.

the sights don't generate recoil... a simple cheek pad would allow optics to be used comfortably.

The srvv muzzle brake seems to be the best muzzle brake in the world and so it should be incorporated into the AK-12 as it also reduces recoil like no muzzle brake I've ever seen.

Is it compatible with rifle grenades? Who owns the design?

I rather doubt CK want to pay royalties to SRVV just to gain a small reduction in recoil.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:I like some of the new features in the AK-12... features that addressed some of the short-comings of the AK platform, but why didn't Izhmash go all the way? The AK-12 didn't get a proper magwell like the M4. The stock is obscenely far below the optic section all because the dust-cover had to be made suitable to mount optics on it instead of redesigning it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't Izhmash just redesign the upper receiver to be more like the AR-15's upper receiver? The upper receiver should be able to mount optics on it without being as bulky and high as it currently is. The butt-stock should be elevated to be in alignment with the sights section, a tool free adjustable gas block [like the one on the HK416A5] would further reduce recoil and increase accuracy. The srvv muzzle brake seems to be the best muzzle brake in the world and so it should be incorporated into the AK-12 as it also reduces recoil like no muzzle brake  I've ever seen.

With all that being said, I wouldn't want a non-Kalashnikov rifle in war time.

Told yah before, there's no way you'd have a proper magwell with the new high-cap mags and the rather crude bolt-catch/Mag release mechanism. The stock with have a cheek weld, like the MR modification, so that's taken partially care of. Why would Ishmash use an inferior solution. If you check the Mk107-AK15 was better than the AR15 platform in every way on its IPSC matches. Oh and for the rest of the complaints. The previous IPSC mk 107's had a magwell. The newest version...DID NOT!

Guess why? IMO so it could accept the high cap magazines and be modified for the Izh's mag release, bolt catch mechanism. AND it has ans SRVV-like MB.



http://world.guns.ru/civil/rus/saiga-107-e.html

BTW see how much the model was developped since april 2015 (pictures from link are of the last test variant 107).

Oh and video of AK-12

I'm sorry about droning on about something that was already addressed. I guess I just glossed over that in my rant. I think a lot of people would prefer a magwell over a 90 round magazine that just compounds an already existing problem -- the height of the magazine; in a prone position the height of the magazine greatly limits your ability to get as low as required, forcing you to get higher, exposing you to enemy fire.

Thanks for the mk 107 and AK-12 videos they really show how far the AK platform has come. The AK-12 should now be just as accurate as the AR-15 while still being infinitely more reliable. There was only ever a smidgen of difference between the AR-15 and the AK-74 in accuracy, but I'm now confident that the AK-12 has closed this little gap.

What do you mean proper magwell?

One that doesn't force you to rock and lock the magazine into place.

No.

AR-15s recoil main spring is contained in its stock, not the receiver area so you would lose the ability to fold the stock.

If you want them to copy something why not copy a much better design like the FN FAL.

It has an upper and lower but because the upper includes the magwell if you want different calibre uppers you don't artificially limit yourself to rounds the same length as the 5.56mm NATO or shorter.

So it would be possible to adopt the design in the FN FAL without compromising on the AK's greatest selling point - its reliability?

the sights don't generate recoil... a simple cheek pad would allow optics to be used comfortably.

I know the sights don't generate recoil I just think the butt-stock should be in alignment with the sight section; the part where I talk about the reduction in recoil was in relation to a tool free adjustable gas block. I guess I should have structured the sentence better.

Is it compatible with rifle grenades? Who owns the design?

I rather doubt CK want to pay royalties to SRVV just to gain a small reduction in recoil.

I don't know if the SRVV muzzle brake is compatible with under-barrel grenades but I imagine that it would be. You're right that Izhmash wouldn't want to pay royalties to another company, but SRVV is a Russian company and so the Russian government could just pay for that muzzle brake and incorporate it into the AK-12 without Izhmash having to pay a dime. You were right about the front iron sights and how it would be more sensible to move it back to the gas block instead of my hairbrained idea of having removable front iron sights, that could and would get loss.

Thanks for your reply, mate, I really do appreciate it.

Again the magwell issue is not really that important if you engage with 60 or 90 rounds instead of 30. So that's a choice.
Furthermore, the FAL was disawowed by FN Herstal once they put together both the FNC and the SCAR. Let us remember that the SCAR-L or H both have a higher sitting rail than the 416 and the M4...I trust the Belgians on that. Never mind that the FAL's "magwell" is useless really. Numerous "speed reloads" out there don't differ from the AK's, "smash and load" bar the lever being on the left thus enabling trigger hand staying on the trigger (in some cases NOT that interesting especially in a FF with poor vis and TRE, you risk red on red easily).

As for the MB: Izhmash doesn't need to have a 1:1 SRVV Jet or Zaslon, the IPSC AK-15 has a very close copy of the SRVV Jet on 5.56 and it's just perfect. So as said before it's just a matter of inertia and some things being what they are. Izhmash wants their first team to succeed so some things are done backwards or slowly.

That's why they take three full years to present an horrible rifle then two years refining it to the point it's totally different from the first one...(remember the deadline rant, well that's that).

What we need to know is what are they going to do with the solution they've found with the Saiga-107/AK-15. It's a very good package and broke some bones in Hungary. Italians seriously were impressed with the platform albeit they knew the principle for some time, the thing was fully flawless at the matches.


I'm personally fearing that the AK-15 will find its way among some troops and the whole rifle ordeal will restart. Once again ZID might wanna invest in tissues to my great disbelief.

VAE Victis.

I think a lot of people would prefer a magwell over a 90 round magazine that just compounds an already existing problem -- the height of the magazine; in a prone position the height of the magazine greatly limits your ability to get as low as required, forcing you to get higher, exposing you to enemy fire.

I think you have not seen the 90 round magazine... it does not stick down as far as the standard 30 shot mag...

One that doesn't force you to rock and lock the magazine into place.

What is wrong with that? ...at least you know the magazine catch has positively engaged and don't need to give it a slap like you do with the AR.

So it would be possible to adopt the design in the FN FAL without compromising on the AK's greatest selling point - its reliability?

Why not adapt their own design instead of copying something else?

I know the sights don't generate recoil I just think the butt-stock should be in alignment with the sight section; the part where I talk about the reduction in recoil was in relation to a tool free adjustable gas block. I guess I should have structured the sentence better.

The buttstock has a cheek piece to align the shooters eye with optics... the buttstock is where it should be... in line with the barrel.

I don't know if the SRVV muzzle brake is compatible with under-barrel grenades but I imagine that it would be.

Not underbarrel grenades... I mean NATO muzzle launched grenades.

I'm personally fearing that the AK-15 will find its way among some troops and the whole rifle ordeal will restart. Once again ZID might wanna invest in tissues to my great disbelief.

I have 5 grand set aside and I want to see what they export this year or next...

Ideally I would want a few features most armies couldn't care less about... like the ability to use different calibres in one package... a 12 gauge, .22LR, 5.45mm, and 7.62 x 39mm calibre options would be nice for a start, with 7.62 x 54mmR as an option too. Wont need anything bigger than a 15 round mag for rimfire and 7 round mag for centre fire though...

One that doesn't force you to rock and lock the magazine into place.

I'm not a fan of rock and lock either. I like the add on magwells you can get for the AK platform, the only problem is that often you have to file off a bit of the standard magazine to make it seat right, but not always. That's the big problem with them, otherwise, it's far easier to reload an AK with a magwell.

I've used both, and prefer AK's with magwells.

So far, the 90 round mags are not in service, or at least I haven't seen them in service yet. The reliability of high capacity mags is ALWAYS in question, and personally, I wouldn't choose a 90 round mag unless I was using it on the RPK variant of the AK-12 anyways.

Zivo wrote:

One that doesn't force you to rock and lock the magazine into place.

I'm not a fan of rock and lock either. I like the add on magwells you can get for the AK platform, the only problem is that often you have to file off a bit of the standard magazine to make it seat right, but not always. That's the big problem with them, otherwise, it's far easier to reload an AK with a magwell.

I've used both, and prefer AK's with magwells.

So far, the 90 round mags are not in service, or at least I haven't seen them in service yet. The reliability of high capacity mags is ALWAYS in question, and personally, I wouldn't choose a 90 round mag unless I was using it on the RPK variant of the AK-12 anyways.

At least 4 agencies use 60 rounders (one of the most infamous uses was by Chechen local police during the latest Grozniy attack). The said magazines are by far more reliable than the C or B-mags no questions asked. The 90 rounder is an AK-12 special so far, and it has to be taken into account as a prospective lead. Nevertheless I personally don't understand the fuss about the magwell. The pros don't seem to use them at all, despite being able to totally overhaul their 74's. Maybe it's cultural.

Ahhh, I get it... Magwell is a commercial product to change the way magazines are attached to the rifle by making them straight push in like the AR-15 instead of seating the nose and rocking back like the AK and FN FAL...

Like I said before I prefer the rock method as you know it is properly seated without having to slap it again...

I guess it is just what you are used to...

GarryB wrote:Ahhh, I get it... Magwell is a commercial product to change the way magazines are attached to the rifle by making them straight push in like the AR-15 instead of seating the nose and rocking back like the AK and FN FAL...

Like I said before I prefer the rock method as you know it is properly seated without having to slap it again...

I guess it is just what you are used to...

err actually the current offering for the AK it's just a drive in. Even those who specialize in AK mags (or design rifles to accept legacy magazines) haven't done "much" better in terms of a "real magwell".

Izhmash themselves did this : https://www.all4shooters.com/en/home/pro-zone/2014-news/Concern-Kalashnikov-SAIGA-Mk107-semi-automatic-rifle-Eurosatory-2014/

Then simply got rid of the magwell for the most recent Saiga-MK/AK-15.

NO, I thought you guys were referring to the magazine well... where the magazine was attached, when in fact you were talking about a commercial product that changes the mag area to allow the magazine to be inserted straight into the rifle.

As a hunter and civilian rifle user I can see the benefits of a straight insert mag... especially with much shorter mags that we have to use here in NZ, but I still prefer the normal insert method of inserting the nose of the mag and then rocking it back into a positive click position.

These commercial magwells work like a funnel, they widen the mouth, and are angled to decrease the margin of error for the "rock". For the most part you can jam the magazine upwards at an angle and it will snap right in. They don't change the functionality, but act more like a guide. I can reload an AK just fine without a magwell, but when reloading from awkward positions, or under stress, having that extra few millimeters does help. Many competition shooters have some sort of magwell modification on their AK's for this reason.

The only serially manufactured russian weapon I've ever seen that has a strait magwell that actually eliminates the rock and lock is the Vepr-12. There's no front tab on the magazine, so the magazine is held in place with only the heavy polymer magwell, and the mag release tab. Of course, this weapon uses it's own custom made magazine, so this method wouldn't work with something like legacy mags without modifications, and any modified magazine wouldn't be reverse compatible. That's really were the issue is, to have a viable magwell for something like the AK-12, the standard magazine would have to be changed, and that isn't going to happen. Having an easier reload just isn't worth the extensive overhaul.

I wonder how much recoil the 6.5 creedmoor round would add to the AK platform in comparison to the 7.62x39. I really like the near non-existent recoil of the 5.45 round and so I hope that potential [but not likely] 6.5 replacements wouldn't add too much recoil. How effective is the 5.45 round against body armour? The state of the art Russian Ratnik program will provide armour able to withstand 7.62x54 rounds from ten [10] meters, which would seem to suggest that 5.45 and 5.56 rounds may have to be replaced in the very near future.

Cyrus the great wrote:
I wonder how much recoil the 6.5 creedmoor round would add to the AK platform in comparison to the 7.62x39. I really like the near non-existent recoil of the 5.45 round and so I hope that potential [but not likely] 6.5 replacements wouldn't add too much recoil. How effective is the 5.45 round against body armour? The state of the art Russian Ratnik program will provide armour able to withstand 7.62x54 rounds from ten [10] meters, which would seem to suggest that 5.45 and 5.56 rounds may have to be replaced in the very near future.

There are enough gaps right now regarding ballistic protection in PPE that both .220/.223 rounds will be still more than enough, especially since the nature of the bullets makes them quite a nasty proposition (tumbling effect of the 7nX rounds after impact insures that even the most seemingly harmless penetration could potentially cause a casualty or KIA despite current level PPE being employed). Then the other aspect of warfare is the completely different configuration in thought. You can have somewhat inadequate tools, but well integrated in a doctrine, strategy and tactical scheme they can have the job jobbed. Look at the 5.56 issues in Afghanistan, still the round shortfalls are covered by the overall onion like tactical proficiency of the US troops.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:
I wonder how much recoil the 6.5 creedmoor round would add to the AK platform in comparison to the 7.62x39. I really like the near non-existent recoil of the 5.45 round and so I hope that potential [but not likely] 6.5 replacements wouldn't add too much recoil. How effective is the 5.45 round against body armour? The state of the art Russian Ratnik program will provide armour able to withstand 7.62x54 rounds from ten [10] meters, which would seem to suggest that 5.45 and 5.56 rounds may have to be replaced in the very near future.

There are enough gaps right now regarding ballistic protection in PPE that both .220/.223 rounds will be still more than enough, especially since the nature of the bullets makes them quite a nasty proposition (tumbling effect of the 7nX rounds  after impact insures that even the most seemingly harmless penetration could potentially cause a casualty or KIA despite current level PPE being employed). Then the other aspect of warfare is the completely different configuration in thought. You can have somewhat inadequate tools, but well integrated in a doctrine, strategy and tactical scheme they can have the job jobbed. Look at the 5.56 issues in Afghanistan, still the round shortfalls are covered by the overall onion like tactical proficiency of the US troops.

 

The 5.45 and 5.56 rounds might be effective -at this point- against sheep herders in Afghanistan without the luxury of even current level PPE... but what about when you're tasked with engaging war-fighters that have Ratnik level PPE? I know that it's unlikely for war to break out between equally capable armies and I'm also under no illusions -- I understand that it would be prohibitively expensive to phase out current rounds and replace them with 6.5 rounds, but I thought it would be good to discuss it. I read some very impressive posts [on this forum] about the 6x49mm round and how it was ballistically comparable to the 7.62x54 while being 2x more accurate and 1.5 times better at maintaining velocity. That is incredible, but I imagine that the 6.5 Creedmoor will have eclipsed it by now.

Having one round for an automatic rifle, a designated marksman rifle and a squad automatic weapon would be logistically more attractive. The only problem I have with adopting a 6.5 round [other than cost] is the fact that pairing it with the AK will re-introduce the recoil problem primarily because the long-stroke piston creates so much recoil when using larger rounds; the Grendel has more recoil than the 7.62x39. This could be solved by adopting a short-stroke piston but that would negatively impact on the AK's unmatched reliability.

The ballistics for the 6x49mm are unbelievable; it has a velocity of around 1100m/s and apparently has the same level of recoil as the 7.62x39, but an updated variant of this round will have to reduce the velocity to a more sustainable level that won't wear down the barrel. How effective would the 6x49mm round be in a 14 inch barrel?

I read up a little on the 6x49mm and it apparently has the same recoil as the M43 7.62x39, which isn't much if an SRVV jet brake is installed, and if it truly is 2x more accurate than the 7.62x54, than I think it would be an ideal round for the AK-12 if the Russians ever decide to replace the 5.45x39mm. Would I be wrong to assume that the 6x49mm could achieve 1-2 MOA in an AK-12?