AK-47 or AK-74?

[Jeff Freeman]

Given that most un-gunny people try to correct you if you mention an AK-74, "you mean 47?"... no. I know that most folks on here are AR people but for the Kalishnikillers on here which do you feel is a more effective fighting rifle and why?

 

[Biggsly]

I have had both in the past, and I like the 7.62 better. Nothing wrong with the 74. Ammo is cheap and easy to find. I am a suker for AKs. If I found a good deal on a 74, I would buy it in a minute. If you have a AR-15, you might look into a 556 AK. They are a blast and you could just keep buying one type of ammo.

 

[Snyperc]

There are so many things to consider that your question is very hard to answer. Personally, as someone who live in a semi-urban environment, I prefer the 5.45 due to penetration and liability should a round escape my dwelling. And the round is more than capable of doing its job in a CQB environment. Just me two cents worth.
Dave

 

[30BulletHoles]

Both. Although even finding an AK 74 in stock locally is damn near impossible right now.

 

[imacgyver]

7.62 was much easier to find on the shelves, either one is really nice. prices are affordable either way.

5.45 is lighter which should allow you to carry much more right?

i like the bigger caliber, i just feel comfortable with it.

 

[ldp4570]

During my tour of duty at Grafenwoher Germany, I worked with the first OPFOR unit in country. We had all kinds of fun toys to play with, so I have lots of trigger time behind everything from the PM pistol to the RPG-7. So AK47 versus AK74. I find that the 47 is more forgiving than the 74 in full auto fire(I know most here will be shooting the semi-auto fire version), but it still remains true that the 74 heats up faster than the 47. In full auto it does it really fast(2 full mags) to wear its uncomfortable to hold onto the forend. I don't find either to be more accurate than the other, and would prefer the larger caliber i.e. AK47

 

[MaddSkillz]

Even though I've never shot the 74, I would still go with the 47 just based on the bigger caliber and the ammo-availability factor.

 

[sumoj275]

I have had both, and shot both a lot. In semi-auto the 5.45 can be made to shoot very fast and accurate. The 7.62 rd takes a little more control. Both are good performers but the 7.62 will puncture things a lot more--cement, brick, steel, ect. as where the 5.45 will frag apart on a tire. Either way you should be good to go (especially with surplus 5.45).

 

[Perplexed]

There are so many things to consider that your question is very hard to answer. Personally, as someone who live in a semi-urban environment, I prefer the 5.45 due to penetration and liability should a round escape my dwelling. And the round is more than capable of doing its job in a CQB environment. Just me two cents worth.
Dave

I'm not so sure about this. There was a comparison made a few years ago between an AR and an AK-74, and the test was videotaped. I can't find it online just now, but the authors shot the AR through a frame with squares of wood spaced slightly apart. IIRC, the 5.56 round penetrated 6 or 7 of the boards before being stopped, while the 5.45 round went through 12 boards before yawing out of the frame, clipping the 13th board on its way out. The penetrating power of the 5.45 round was an eye-opener.

Keep in mind the core of a surplus 5.45 round is a steel rod, whereas a typical 7.62x39 round is lead-cored. Less deformation, more penetration, right?

ETA: On second thought, the 5.45 round is a lot lighter than the 7.62 round. So I'm probably talking apples to oranges

 

[thaHooligan]

I would have to go with the 74. I would rather have more than enough punching power, than not enough if I was in a SHTF situation.