Kalishnikov Accuracy

[deerslayer303]

Picking up my new C39 V2 tomorrow. I pretty much know how it will do and I'm perfectly happy with that. 4 inch group at 100 yards with my 37 year old eyes will make me a very happy camper. Why does everyone think that a rifle designed for battle should be sub MOA?? My motto is simply this, holes in an 8 inch paper plate consistently at 100 yards will do whatever needs done. These rifles were not designed to put bullets in the same hole.

[Brotherbadger]

Battle rifle accurate is all you need for an AK.

Agreed. That being said, an AK can be very accurate. Just like with an AR, a lot of it depends on your ammo and how good of a shooter you are.

I don't think you'll get sub MOA out of most WASRs, but it should give you 2-4 inch groups consistently. Honestly, that's REALLY accurate(for a non precision rifle) imo. I'll take that from a battle rifle all day long.

Why does everyone think that a rifle designed for battle should be sub MOA??

It's the internet, don't waste your time trying to understand people. Logic has no place here.

[Road_Clam]

Wolf and Tula through my Opap yields about 4 moa. My handloaded 150 gr Sierra spritzers with Benchmark powder I am able to get it down to about 2.5 moa , not sure if I can get to <2 moa , that seems a stretch but I still have more testing to do..

[bamaranger]

I own the above, the worlds most berated AK. Fitted with an Ultimak rail and a Primary Arms micro, which helps with the poor AK sights and 55+ eyes. Also has Tapco trigger, far ahead of factory crunch-bang slapper.

Four to five inches with about any ammo, the Hornady stuff seems most accurate. I have a very small quantity of Lapua FMJ factory ammo which I have high hopes for, but have not shot any thru the MISR.

[leadcounsel]

I love all the posters who insult and attack the AK - the most prolific and manufactured battle rifle in history, adopted by nearly every country in the world - far surpassing the AR, M14/M1, M1 Garand, and every other popular rifle we tend to like. The silliness of people is funny. The AK variants didn't get so popular by being inaccurate or junk. Cost has little to do with it, when looking at the world superpowers that adopted it. But cost is a factor of course.

Russia, China, Iraq, Iraq, African nations, South America, some European nations, and dozens of other large, relevant armies and revolutionary forces.

The "spray and pray" comment is simply dumb. That's the untrained user, not the weapon.

The AK popularity speaks for itself as an outstanding, premier battle rifle. It's nearly the perfect individual weapon in terms of reliability, use, weight, balance, firepower, capacity, ergonomics, cost, accuracy, etc. Sure, it can be tweeked here and there, but it is awesome.

[joeb]

Agreed..They are indeed awesome. I guess my not stopping at two or three makes a statement. My numbers come from someone that shakes with eyes which are not young. I get more than I could ever have expected in the beginning of my AK journey. My cetme's are as far as I've ventured from the darkside.
Ammo does affect them, and I really haven't tried 2-holing in years....I pretty much toss'em up, sight quickly, and squeeze the same. I don't play sniper shooting an AK because that they aren't. Going for tight I drag out a bolt.
I wouldn't want to be on the small end of even the worst at any distance.

[Mobuck]

The "spray and pray" comment is simply dumb. That's the untrained user, not the weapon.

And that (the untrained user) is exactly what the AK is meant for. If the shooter isn't trained to HIT their target, a rifle that pitches it's bullet in a random manner may actually improve the hit to miss ratio.
I consider myself to have above average shooting capabilities and putting myself in the same category(same type of equipment) as some 12 year old African seems below my level of self respect.
I have an AK type rifle. It's been tested for function, lubed and put away for some time when I need to equip an inexperienced shooter with a rifle capable of expending lots of ammo w/o real need for accuracy.

[Wishoot]

The "spray and pray" comment is simply dumb. That's the untrained user, not the weapon.

Well thank you so much for the nice, constructive feedback. I like being called dumb.

I'm not an expert marksman, but why is it I can pick up almost any other rifle and hit, with reasonably good accuracy, pretty much anything I need to hit? I don't have much experience with other AK's, but I've shot my Saiga enough to know that I wouldn't trust it to take a deer at 100 yards. Any other rifle? Absolutely.

I invite you to come to Wisconsin and shoot my Saiga. I'd love to be proven wrong.

[DMK]

1) What is your 100 yd 5 shot accuracy?

2) What rifle? Optic or irons? What optic?

3) What range do you normally shoot this gun at?

I never really saw the AK as a "shoot from the bench" kind of gun. (But then again I am kind of biased against shooting any gun from the bench. How is that a useful skill to practice? Benches are for zeroing and testing ammo. )

I doubt I've ever gotten better than 3" groups at 100y with my AK or SKS rifles. And that's when zeroing off a bench.

Red dots rock on an AK. Get an RS Regulate mount. They also have options for magnified optics. The mount is easily removable and holds its zero. You can remove the mount and practice with your irons, then put it back and shoot with your optic. All day long. I run Aimpoints on my Saigas and my SAR1 has a PK-A.

The AK is a fighting carbine. I like to shoot it like one (same with the AR and FAL). Off hand from various field positions and various distances. 7y to 100y (The longest range I have available in my area). Usually shooting at multiple targets at multiple distances, moving, reloading, etc. Transitions, using cover, working the gun efficiently and quickly.

Shooting offhand, I have no trouble hitting the black of a 6" gong or 6" "SR1 reduced" target at 100y, using use both optic and iron sights.

[Moomooboo]

Originally Posted by DMK

I never really saw the AK as a "shoot from the bench" kind of gun. (But then again I am kind of biased against shooting any gun from the bench. How is that a useful skill to practice? Benches are for zeroing and testing ammo. )

I doubt I've ever gotten better than 3" groups at 100y with my AK or SKS rifles. And that's when zeroing off a bench.

Red dots rock on an AK. Get an RS Regulate mount. They also have options for magnified optics. The mount is easily removable and holds its zero. You can remove the mount and practice with your irons, then put it back and shoot with your optic. All day long. I run Aimpoints on my Saigas and my SAR1 has a PK-A.

The AK is a fighting carbine. I like to shoot it like one (same with the AR and FAL). Off hand from various field positions and various distances. 7y to 100y (The longest range I have available in my area). Usually shooting at multiple targets at multiple distances, moving, reloading, etc. Transitions, using cover, working the gun efficiently and quickly.

Shooting offhand, I have no trouble hitting the black of a 6" gong or 6" "SR1 reduced" target at 100y, using use both optic and iron sights.

How is a bench test not accurate? People use walls and ledges or whatever if possible. Its not always 2 hands cqb.

[AK103K]

How is a bench test not accurate?

Its really only accurate in the respect of shooting off a bench. You need to zero in the manner you intend to shoot, or at least understand how difference will affect it. If youre doing all your shooting from a bench, then the bench would probably be your best choice.

There is a difference between a bench zero, and position zero. To take it further, knowing how different positions, lighting, sling/no sling, etc., refine it even more.

I try to avoid the bench as much as possible, as it really doesnt do you any good. Even when shooting for precision, load testing, etc, I usually shoot prone off a bipod or ruck, etc. Its much more comfortable, and stable, and generally gives better results.

Its not always 2 hands cqb.

No, but it helps if youre well rounded in your shooting. Offhand is generally most peoples weakest position, and should probably be practiced the most. I rarely ever see anyone shooting like that though. Then again, other than the occasional plinking range, and HP or military type matches, I rarely see anyone shooting anything but off a bench.

[DMK]

How is a bench test not accurate?

I don't know what you mean about bench shooting not being accurate. Obviously people can shoot small groups from a bench rest.

Not my thing, but if you want to forget life's frustrations a while by shooting your favorite rifle from a bench rest and working at getting the tiniest groups possible, that's a perfectly viable hobby/therapy. But the AK is not the right gun to use for that. Even an AR would be a lot better in that capacity.

People use walls and ledges or whatever if possible. Its not always 2 hands cqb.

if you can shoot well off hand and from shooting positions (kneeling, sitting, prone, etc) you also can shoot well from a bench or an improvised rest like a branch, fence or wall. The opposite is not necessarily true.

The other problem with shooting from a bench is you will never practice moving and shooting or at least shooting and scooting (shooting from one spot, then moving to another or moving to cover).

[Jo6pak]

I never really saw the AK as a "shoot from the bench" kind of gun. (But then again I am kind of biased against shooting any gun from the bench. How is that a useful skill to practice? Benches are for zeroing and testing ammo. )

Why is it always about practicing a skill? Shooting from a rest is the best way to determine the potential accuracy of a firearm. Whether that rest is "from the bench" or prone with a bipod or rest doesn't really matter as long as it reduces the potential for shooter input affecting the groups.

The topic of this thread is about the rifle, not personal proficiency. And shooting from a rest is the best way to determine a rifles capability in that sense.

[AK103K]

Why is it always about practicing a skill?

What else is it about?

The topic of this thread is about the rifle, not personal proficiency.

They tend to go hand in hand. If you dont have the skills, the most accurate rifle in the world, isnt going to help.

[Moomooboo]

You will never have to shoot offhand unless youre a navy seal gentlemen. Shooting from a bench is good and obvioisly other positions are also good. Not that none of you will ever use it anyways. But i can see the fun in practicing these as i would, had i the land and tools.

[Moomooboo]

Originally Posted by DMK

I don't know what you mean about bench shooting not being accurate. Obviously people can shoot small groups from a bench rest.

Not my thing, but if you want to forget life's frustrations a while by shooting your favorite rifle from a bench rest and working at getting the tiniest groups possible, that's a perfectly viable hobby/therapy. But the AK is not the right gun to use for that. Even an AR would be a lot better in that capacity.

if you can shoot well off hand and from shooting positions (kneeling, sitting, prone, etc) you also can shoot well from a bench or an improvised rest like a branch, fence or wall. The opposite is not necessarily true.

The other problem with shooting from a bench is you will never practice moving and shooting or at least shooting and scooting (shooting from one spot, then moving to another or moving to cover).

You should reread my initial statement about bench shooting.

You should also read my followup. I dont know why youre worried bout moving and scootin, red dawn is not happening.

[Moomooboo]

Originally Posted by AK103K

They tend to go hand in hand. If you dont have the skills, the most accurate rifle in the world, isnt going to help.

Absolutely true.

[skizzums]

I stand by my original post. a good ak with a decent receiver/barrel(arsenal, molot and saiga) will generally shoot @3 MOA with good ammo and a good shooter or scope. it's not really up for debate, that's just how they shoot. you will get worse results using a crappy gun or crappy ammo. that's the answer to the OP's question. simple answer to a simple question.


I see SKS' being brought into the conversation. I have owned several and have many co-workers that hae them. the most accurate of all of ours is a norinco which I could get 3.5 MOA with decent ammo. the worse was a Yugo, which had ALOT of $$'s dumped into it, getting 6MOA with decent ammo, para variant with short barrel and well used.

I have lots of experience with both AK's and SKS', a good AK will be slightly more accurate than a good SKS, although the differences are small. I put about 500dollars into a norinco SKS(stock, trigger, lapping, cut/crown and got the 3.5MOA with a good scope. the most accurate AK I have shot was a VZ2008 with all the ZAHAL stuff on it, bedded and recrowned with a fantastic bore, we got several 2.8" groups with 10 plus round samples. in my experience the AK's and SKS' are both right about on par with each other with the AK having a slight edge, on accuracy anyway. a lot to do with the fact you cannot pick up an unused sks anymore, so AK wins with accuracy, but the SKS seems like a longer lasting gun(way overbuilt. milled and an extremely simple design, not to mention CHEAPER!!). it takes a lot of work to find the bullet weight/type your x39 will shoot best since there are so many variants of each. neither platform was designed for benchresting, but both are minute of man out to 300 yards easily with optic.

anyways, where am going with all this, expect 3MOA fromagood AK with good x39 ammo. if you get beter.....that will be the exception, not the rule. loose tolerances make for dependable battle rifles, not MOA accuracy. if you want the MOST accuracy you can get out of an AK shooting x39, I would go with a VEPR/Krebs KV-13 with fixed stock. throw a dogleg scope mount and a tapco G2 trigger, re-enforce/bed what you can and throw a decent 9x scope on it. if your willing to drop that kind of cash on an AK, i'll bet you could squeeze close to 2.5MOA out of it and probably have one of the best shooting ak's out there. me?.....if I was stuck on x39, I would spend less the cash on a mutant and get 2.5 MOA and not have to deal with the uncertainty of the quality.

no-one is shooting benchrest comps with AK's for a reason, doesn't mean they aren't great rifles though. I would just pony up the 500$ on a VZ2008/VZ58 and be a happy shooter and build my AR for a really accurate semi-auto.

have fun. Russian designed guns are addictive as meth and are worth every low-priced dollar. find a cheap set up you like and just have fun with it, save the "accuracy" battles for other platforms though. I have had great experiences with the VZ58 types, and they didn't break the bank. they do really amazing at 50 yards and start to fall off by 100. but REALLY accurate at the 50's

https://www.primaryarms.com/TWS_Dog_...p/tws32310.htm

[AK103K]

You will never have to shoot offhand unless youre a navy seal gentlemen.

Ive shot quite few things standing on my hind legs, and all that practice paid off in the moment.

You get the shot you get, and youre not always in one of those cute little heated hunting shacks with a rifle rest.

[Jo6pak]

They tend to go hand in hand. If you dont have the skills, the most accurate rifle in the world, isnt going to help.

I agree with that statement. But edit my post to find and extract points to disagree with.

The OP wasn't asking about skills, he was asking about rifles. And to test a machine, you must eliminate as much human interference as possible to get the best results.

[AK103K]

But edit my post to find and extract points to disagree with.

I was simply pointing out that they really go together, and are not separate. Wasnt picking on you.

The OP wasn't asking about skills, he was asking about rifles.

And the question was answered numerous times, and started wandering off.

Again, you still need some skill, even from a bench or rest, to determine if the gun is accurate, so skills do matter. If you cant shoot, the bench wont necessarily help. Are those results a true indication of what the gun can/will do? No. maybe just the experience of someone who needs some work, and is blaming the gun for their own issues.

2-3 MOA is about the norm too, for most military type rifles shooting issue grade ammo. So assuming the gun is built to spec, which can vary a good bit with the US clones these days, and ammo is within spec, then 4" to 6" groups are within whats to be expected at 100 yards.

As I stated earlier, the only AK's Ive had issue with accuracy wise, were the guns assembled here, from parts kits, on US receivers. Properly assembled guns, built in the country of origin, or restored conversions, will shoot.

[dean1818]

FWIW

An AKs true value is in battle, where its a fully automatic weapon

Who cares if it gets 4-5 inch accuracy?.

It does spray the target. One will get in.

...... on fully automatic.......


But... just like the AR, the AK...... for us civilians.....

not the same weapon...... irregardless if it used by 200 countries


For HD...... to me.... I will take my shotgun or AR (6.8) over an AK

Not saying the AK is bad.... I had the SKS for several years, and shot the AK......

After I put rounds in under a 1 inch circle with the 6.8, I was hooked...

The SKS left

[Moomooboo]

Originally Posted by dean1818

FWIW

An AKs true value is in battle, where its a fully automatic weapon

Who cares if it gets 4-5 inch accuracy?.

It does spray the target. One will get in.

...... on fully automatic.......


But... just like the AR, the AK...... for us civilians.....

not the same weapon...... irregardless if it used by 200 countries


For HD...... to me.... I will take my shotgun or AR (6.8) over an AK

Not saying the AK is bad.... I had the SKS for several years, and shot the AK......

After I put rounds in under a 1 inch circle with the 6.8, I was hooked...

The SKS left

Not sure i buy into fully automatic AKs being where it shines. The recoil is ridiculous and better off being a semi auto. You can literally spray and pray and probably hit nothing on fully automatic. I think its true value come in in its rugged reliability.

[5thShock]

Sitting Buddha...when I do it right 4" at 100 yards, 8" at 200 and, same day, hits on a 12"X12" steel diamond at 300 when the wind stopped. You have to allow for even a breeze at 300.