I have real combat experience with AKM (7.62), AK-74 (5.45) and AKS-74U (5.45). All i can say about AKS-74U - it is a very good weapon, if you understand what it for. (The REAL problem is - just a few understand it). Well, yes - it has two major flaws - 1-It overheats really fast. 2-It's effective aiming distance is no more than 100-150 meters. So you should consider it a "close-combat tactical carbine". And you better set the fire selector to single shot mode. It's very good for assaulting enemy threnches and buildings or for scouting missions in forest or urban areas. It's bad for everything else. Putting a sound suppressor and reflex sight on it is a good idea. Putting optics and uderbarrel grenade launcher on it is a WORST idea you can come with. Once again - this is not a weapon for long range and for continuous combat. It's for few-seconds - few shots situations.
Kalashnikov thought it was a dumb knee jerk reaction that wasn't worth retooling factories for. In WWII when Kalashnikov fought, everything but anti-tank rifles were 7.62. Cut a Mosin barrel for 2 PPSH barrels. For standardization and mass production, 5.45 was a step back and the US is now thinking the 5.56 is too small because of body armor. Every design has tradeoffs. The smaller bullet wasn't magically better. Which is more useful in urban fighting, more ammo or penetration? The smaller rounds provide the worst of both worlds in a shorter rifle; wasted powder, higher recoil, excess flash, smaller holes and lower lethality. Small bullets rely on velocity which the smaller barrels couldn't provide.
He also never killed anyone with 545 and didnt have a modern understanding of terminal ballistics and effect on flesh. You idealize 7.62 ; theres a reason everyone is moving away and the only reason people use it is because it’s available in large quantity. 545/556 does the exact same thing on target while also having greaaatly extended range and more ammo capacity.
It's a small ak. Literally trades all the advantages for size. That's it. I have one for shits and giggles. It's super handy. And pretty useless past 100yards.
I own a Bulgarian semi-auto variant of this little rifle, and I absolutely love it. I know I'm not gonna win any sharpshooting or distance shooting competitions with it, but inside 150 meters it absolutley does the trick. I've wanted one of these ever since I saw one in the 007: GoldenEye movie, and years later I finally got one. I will never get rid of it.
If you understand and work with its limitations it's not bad imo. Obviously you're going to be disappointed if you expect it to be effective past 200 m. Personally I wouldn't use it past 100 m.
From the beginning, the AK was meant to be a submachinegun, with a longer range and potentially better accuracy. So the 74U is basically a step back to what they were trying to replace. The Russians relied a lot on submachineguns during WWII for quite a number of reasons - loss of true machineguns in the early months, rushed training, low cost, and firepower advantage over opponents mostly equipped with bolt action rifles. Although very effective at the optimal ranges, the power drops off rapidly (Pistol bullets generally lack the propellent and aerodynamics for rifle distances) so SMG forces could be caught in dangerous areas too far away to respond. Hence they wanted a new weapon that could fire full automatic, but with a longer-ranged single shot mode for emergencies.
It was not meant to be a submachine gun, that is a common mistake. It was meant to replace submachine guns, but from the start, they knew they wanted an Avtomat, not a Pistolet Pulemyot (SMG)
I agree that Kalishnikov also realized that the problem was one of ammunition and not the weapon. Smaller lighter projectiles require longer barrels to fully utilize the powder charge in an intermediate cartridge case. For CQB, mass is king. 7.62 to 9 mm bullets in the 125 to 160 grain range provide sufficient terminal ballistics to cause trauma in targets that are not wearing body armor. If you want to use the AKS-74U, effectively replace the current service ammo types with a copper clad steel penetrator that is fluted to punch through body armor, then cause cavitation in bodily fluids. Military officials really should look to ballisticians who are in the west who have played with everything from the 5.7 x 28 mm to .450 SOCOM. Then, change their squad entry team & their weapons structure to include a high-low skill set. Breachers, SMG operators, and designated marksman. One size never fits the bill!
Hated? That's like saying "SEALS must hate the Mk18!" No they don't. This weapon is ideally suited for CQB, only the 9x39 Carbines (AS Val) are better in this regard. This weapon is literally a better smg.
@@lepepelepub12 You obviously have not seen how much the ak has evolved since the 1940's. The family has been fruitful and has multiplied, beyond the AR-15 too. These days they have the same set of accessories, one of their ancestors is still the most prolific and used military small arm on the planet, there are members for all budgets and all branches. You just didn't pay attention to this video we're commenting on.
@@lepepelepub12 You obviously have not seen how much the ak has evolved since the 1940's. The family has been fruitful and has multiplied, beyond the AR-15 too. These days they have the same set of accessories, one of their ancestors is still the most prolific and used military small arm on the planet, there are members for all budgets and all branches. You just didn't pay attention to this video we're commenting on.
I would think the best gun to compare the AKS-74U wouldn't be the M4 Carbine, but the Colt Commando XM177 or MK18 variant of the M4 which is even shorter than the M4 and designed for use in a similar capacity (personal defense and covert operations). They also have a similar flash hider as well to compensate for the shorter barrel. The M4 has a shortened handguard, but it still has a 14-inch barrel, quite a bit longer than the AKS-74U's. The XM177 and its modern-day successor the MK18 have 10 inch barrels closer in size to the AKS-74U's 8-inch one.
Well, everyone in America owns an M4 style AR15, no one really complains about them in the US military and nations are dropping their homegrown designs for some variant of it. Meanwhile, no one has kept the 74u in service
@@korcommander i think what the original poster means comparing m4 to the 74u is like comparing apple to orange, m4 is standard issue carbine and the aks-74u is a pdw reserved for rear echelon units. of course the 74u going to lose because it's designed for different purpose than that of the m4
FYI: There's a "krinkov" in 762x39 but not Russian, it's Zastava M92 Yugoslavian rifle and Zastava M05 C1 If there's people who prefer that caliber. There are also some 556 Zastava M21 and Zastava M21 BS
It's a lie... the AKs74U is fully capable of full auto with a suppressor... Soviet Subsonic ammo for 5.45mm quality was poor so it wasn't reliable. But now you can freely watch videos of AKS-74UB/ AKS-74UNB mag dumping while suppressed
In Call of Duty games this gun is exceptionally good specially its accuracy and damage. it has the recoil of M4 speed of a submachinegun, and the stopping power of standard Ak47.
AKS-74UB and AKS-74UNB attach the PBS-4 suppressors purpose built for the AKS-74U weapon family. Note There are THREE B versions AKS-74UB - 74U W SUPP AKS-74UNB - 74UN W SUPP AKS-74UBN- AK PART OF THE CANARY COMPLEX AKS-74UN= 74U WITH SIDE RAIL FOR NV OPTICS
"Both of these rounds have less armor penetrating ability compared to larger calibers like 7.62mm rounds." ... 7.62 what? Both 5.45×39 and 5.56×45 have better armor defeating capabilities than 7.62×35 (.300 Blackout) and 7.62×39; 7.62×25 (7.62 Tokarev) and 7.62×33 (.30 Carbine) are not ever worth comparing to. The statement is misleading as it presents armor penetration to be the function of projectile caliber instead of projectile velocity. On the other hand, full power 7.62 cartridges like the .308, 7.62×54R, .30-06, .300WM and all the flavors inbetween still do much more soft tissue damage than 5.45×39 and 5.56×45 despite overpenetrating and retain their armor defeating capabilities due to their high velocity. If you want an example for the complete opposite of the earlier implication, the H&K 4.6mm and FN 5.7mm have excellent armor penetration capabilities, but do barely any soft tissue damage and require multiple shots to take a target down, even when shooting at vital organs. TL;DR Ammunition performance against armor and soft tissue is too broad of a subject to be condensed into a blanket statement like as 'A is good at this and bad at that while B is good at that but bad at this'.
Pretty sure it's an objective fact that 5.56x45mm and 5.45x39mm have less armor penetrating potential than 7.62 (at least 7.62x51mm, not as sure about 7.62x39mm). Body armor that can withstand 7.62x51mm NATO is rated higher on the NIJ scale than armor certified to protect against 5.56x45mm. The enhanced wounding potential of 5.56 and 5.45 isn't their velocity per se but the tumbling effect inside the tissue. Looks like you are nitpicking. Obviously, the statement he made isn't true in every individual circumstance, but it's not inaccurate as a generalization.
@@redcommander27 It _is_ an objective fact that 5.56×45 and 5.45×39 have less armor penetrating potential than any full power cartridge. But if you say 7.62 when talking about an AK-74, and don't specify you're talking about rifle rounds, the logical comparison is with it's predecesor, the AK-47. Otherwise you're comparing apples to oranges - assault rifles to battle rifles or bolt action rifles; intermediate cartridges to full power cartridges. But either way you flip it, the argument is wrong: either 7.62 penetrates better AND does more soft tissue damage (rifle rounds), or it does neither (pistol rounds). And I'd still be reluctant to say 7.62×39 and .300B have less _stopping power_ than 5.45 and 5.56. As for the enhanced wounding potential of 5.45 and 5.56, it is very much dependant on velocity... it's well documented that M855 starts to icepick when it slows down and M855A1 is less likely to tumble to begin with due to the weight distribution in the projectile (penetrator shifts the mass further forward). 7N6 is less affected in its terminal effects by velocity loss due to its design aiming to maximize the tumbling effect, but it's not immune either. P.S. 7.62×39 ball will perform worse than 5.45 and 5.56 in armor penetration, there are some spicey AP rounds for it with subcaliber penetrators, but there are some spicey AP rounds for 5.45 and 5.56 as well, so there's that. It's a golf ball that hits hard, but for armor penetration you really need velocity and to focus that energy at as fine a point as you can. Same reason why tanks use APFSDS for anti-tank purposes. Also, check out some terminal ballistics tests between 5.45, 5.56 and 7.62×39, it's really interesting stuff.
Well this gun deployed during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, of course a short barreled weapon would perform poorly on Afghanistan mountainous and open terrain
This is why Spetsnaz keep using Custom or upgraded AK47 and AKMs over the New AK74 during the Soviet-afghan war AK-74u should always be treated as a Submachinegun or a PDW with a little more power and reach
Let's just throw the top three crap things about AK platforms. The ergonomics are crap. The bolt weight in the carrier and all that of the metal changing directions which makes the whole rifle move is excessive The sites are not conducive to good riflery. And the rock and rock magazine I think just the standard stick it in the hole magazines are better. The dust cover takes away space for better siding systems for improved suitability and accuracy
Ergonomics are absolutely Okay for me as a left-hand shooter. There are also AK variants that have a thumb selector on the left side for right-hand shooters. If you ever shot a 5.45x39 AK, you would know that the rifle doesn't jump as much as the 7.62x39 variants. It is pretty flat shooting, very comparable to AR-15. The sights are indestructible and if used correctly, very effective. Just because you were not trained to use them correctly doesn't make them bad. Rock and lock magazines are very reliable. When you lock it into the rifle, you can be sure it is there and will stay there. With straight-pull AR-15 mags, sometimes it can happen that some mags that are fully loaded cannot even be locked in position when the bolt is forward. Which makes them fall out. A common practice is to smack the bottom to make sure it is in, which is another move you need to make to load the rifle reliably. Rock and lock just wins lol. The dust cover take away space? What? How? You have multiple ways to mount an optic to an AK these days.
I'd like to give some constructive criticism. I think this video needs to be better structured. You ended up repeating information a couple times and jumping from history, to specifics, to history again to specifics again... It makes the video longer than it could be and a bit annoying to follow. I'd also prefer if some overly specific data wasn't included, because I feel like I am listening to someone reading specifications from a manual rather than hearing a person speaking.
honestly... short AK's of all calibers are a bit of a poor joke. They all work like portable flashbangs and recoil is weird, accuracy is subpar as well... that type of action is honestly suited to longer barrels. Simply doesn't work.
"we all know about the AK-47 as this legendary rifle is used worldwide" Yeah, except that's wrong. Not a good look to start you deep dive video with such a nonsense. Only 1.5k of AK-47 were ever produced and never entered any service, neither it's a platform official name. First mass produced AK was simply named AK, naturally the platform is referred as AK as well. With the most mass produced AK variant being AKM, when "AK-47" is shown or referred (implying an AK with a wooden handgrip), 90% of time it's AKM, and the rest being foreign AK variants or even AK-74 at times. Calling all AKs or even 7.62 AKs as AK-47 is even more ridiculous and factually incorrect as referring to all AR-15 rifles as M-16 (which at least have been to an actual service).
I have real combat experience with AKM (7.62), AK-74 (5.45) and AKS-74U (5.45).
All i can say about AKS-74U - it is a very good weapon, if you understand what it for.
(The REAL problem is - just a few understand it).
Well, yes - it has two major flaws - 1-It overheats really fast. 2-It's effective aiming distance is no more than 100-150 meters.
So you should consider it a "close-combat tactical carbine". And you better set the fire selector to single shot mode.
It's very good for assaulting enemy threnches and buildings or for scouting missions in forest or urban areas.
It's bad for everything else.
Putting a sound suppressor and reflex sight on it is a good idea. Putting optics and uderbarrel grenade launcher on it is a WORST idea you can come with.
Once again - this is not a weapon for long range and for continuous combat. It's for few-seconds - few shots situations.
That's REALLY interesting.
Thank you for sharing
Only useful comment here if true, real experience trumps tarkovkiddies every time.
Reminder. Kalashnikov himself did not like the 5.45 round and considered it inferior to the 7.62
Yeah he wasnot that smart .
If you would've known anything about firearms, you would've understood why this claim is absolutely moronic
He has this mentality of bigger is better Cyka Blyat soldier 😂
Kalashnikov thought it was a dumb knee jerk reaction that wasn't worth retooling factories for. In WWII when Kalashnikov fought, everything but anti-tank rifles were 7.62. Cut a Mosin barrel for 2 PPSH barrels. For standardization and mass production, 5.45 was a step back and the US is now thinking the 5.56 is too small because of body armor. Every design has tradeoffs. The smaller bullet wasn't magically better. Which is more useful in urban fighting, more ammo or penetration? The smaller rounds provide the worst of both worlds in a shorter rifle; wasted powder, higher recoil, excess flash, smaller holes and lower lethality. Small bullets rely on velocity which the smaller barrels couldn't provide.
He also never killed anyone with 545 and didnt have a modern understanding of terminal ballistics and effect on flesh. You idealize 7.62 ; theres a reason everyone is moving away and the only reason people use it is because it’s available in large quantity.
545/556 does the exact same thing on target while also having greaaatly extended range and more ammo capacity.
It's a small ak. Literally trades all the advantages for size. That's it.
I have one for shits and giggles. It's super handy. And pretty useless past 100yards.
you can hit shots up to 300meter with them
tf you got, a draco? lol
I own a Bulgarian semi-auto variant of this little rifle, and I absolutely love it. I know I'm not gonna win any sharpshooting or distance shooting competitions with it, but inside 150 meters it absolutley does the trick. I've wanted one of these ever since I saw one in the 007: GoldenEye movie, and years later I finally got one. I will never get rid of it.
If you understand and work with its limitations it's not bad imo. Obviously you're going to be disappointed if you expect it to be effective past 200 m. Personally I wouldn't use it past 100 m.
From the beginning, the AK was meant to be a submachinegun, with a longer range and potentially better accuracy. So the 74U is basically a step back to what they were trying to replace.
The Russians relied a lot on submachineguns during WWII for quite a number of reasons - loss of true machineguns in the early months, rushed training, low cost, and firepower advantage over opponents mostly equipped with bolt action rifles. Although very effective at the optimal ranges, the power drops off rapidly (Pistol bullets generally lack the propellent and aerodynamics for rifle distances) so SMG forces could be caught in dangerous areas too far away to respond. Hence they wanted a new weapon that could fire full automatic, but with a longer-ranged single shot mode for emergencies.
It was not meant to be a submachine gun, that is a common mistake. It was meant to replace submachine guns, but from the start, they knew they wanted an Avtomat, not a Pistolet Pulemyot (SMG)
I agree that Kalishnikov also realized that the problem was one of ammunition and not the weapon. Smaller lighter projectiles require longer barrels to fully utilize the powder charge in an intermediate cartridge case. For CQB, mass is king. 7.62 to 9 mm bullets in the 125 to 160 grain range provide sufficient terminal ballistics to cause trauma in targets that are not wearing body armor. If you want to use the AKS-74U, effectively replace the current service ammo types with a copper clad steel penetrator that is fluted to punch through body armor, then cause cavitation in bodily fluids. Military officials really should look to ballisticians who are in the west who have played with everything from the 5.7 x 28 mm to .450 SOCOM. Then, change their squad entry team & their weapons structure to include a high-low skill set. Breachers, SMG operators, and designated marksman. One size never fits the bill!
Hated? That's like saying "SEALS must hate the Mk18!"
No they don't.
This weapon is ideally suited for CQB, only the 9x39 Carbines (AS Val) are better in this regard.
This weapon is literally a better smg.
@@lepepelepub12 You obviously have not seen how much the ak has evolved since the 1940's. The family has been fruitful and has multiplied, beyond the AR-15 too. These days they have the same set of accessories, one of their ancestors is still the most prolific and used military small arm on the planet, there are members for all budgets and all branches. You just didn't pay attention to this video we're commenting on.
@@lepepelepub12 You obviously have not seen how much the ak has evolved since the 1940's. The family has been fruitful and has multiplied, beyond the AR-15 too. These days they have the same set of accessories, one of their ancestors is still the most prolific and used military small arm on the planet, there are members for all budgets and all branches. You just didn't pay attention to this video we're commenting on.
I would think the best gun to compare the AKS-74U wouldn't be the M4 Carbine, but the Colt Commando XM177 or MK18 variant of the M4 which is even shorter than the M4 and designed for use in a similar capacity (personal defense and covert operations). They also have a similar flash hider as well to compensate for the shorter barrel. The M4 has a shortened handguard, but it still has a 14-inch barrel, quite a bit longer than the AKS-74U's. The XM177 and its modern-day successor the MK18 have 10 inch barrels closer in size to the AKS-74U's 8-inch one.
@@redcommander27 or a g36c
M4 should be compared to the regular ak74
Well, everyone in America owns an M4 style AR15, no one really complains about them in the US military and nations are dropping their homegrown designs for some variant of it.
Meanwhile, no one has kept the 74u in service
@@korcommander i think what the original poster means comparing m4 to the 74u is like comparing apple to orange, m4 is standard issue carbine and the aks-74u is a pdw reserved for rear echelon units. of course the 74u going to lose because it's designed for different purpose than that of the m4
Comparing to a MK-18 would be a much closer comparison but mk-18 still has about 2 more inches to slightly bring up the velocity.
@@Heisenbrickmk18 would be comparable to ak-105 tho
Still it's is far superior to a true SMG
FYI: There's a "krinkov" in 762x39 but not Russian, it's Zastava M92 Yugoslavian rifle and Zastava M05 C1
If there's people who prefer that caliber. There are also some 556 Zastava M21 and Zastava M21 BS
6:43 turning into A bolt action AK is crazy
It's a lie... the AKs74U is fully capable of full auto with a suppressor...
Soviet Subsonic ammo for 5.45mm quality was poor so it wasn't reliable. But now you can freely watch videos of AKS-74UB/ AKS-74UNB mag dumping while suppressed
In Call of Duty games this gun is exceptionally good specially its accuracy and damage.
it has the recoil of M4 speed of a submachinegun, and the stopping power of standard Ak47.
That's for balancing
The short barrel version is design for close quarter combat like the AR-15 carbine. You got little chances of hitting anything over 200 meters.
AKS-74UB and AKS-74UNB attach the PBS-4 suppressors purpose built for the AKS-74U weapon family.
Note
There are THREE B versions
AKS-74UB - 74U W SUPP
AKS-74UNB - 74UN W SUPP
AKS-74UBN- AK PART OF THE CANARY COMPLEX
AKS-74UN= 74U WITH SIDE RAIL FOR NV OPTICS
"Both of these rounds have less armor penetrating ability compared to larger calibers like 7.62mm rounds." ... 7.62 what? Both 5.45×39 and 5.56×45 have better armor defeating capabilities than 7.62×35 (.300 Blackout) and 7.62×39; 7.62×25 (7.62 Tokarev) and 7.62×33 (.30 Carbine) are not ever worth comparing to.
The statement is misleading as it presents armor penetration to be the function of projectile caliber instead of projectile velocity.
On the other hand, full power 7.62 cartridges like the .308, 7.62×54R, .30-06, .300WM and all the flavors inbetween still do much more soft tissue damage than 5.45×39 and 5.56×45 despite overpenetrating and retain their armor defeating capabilities due to their high velocity.
If you want an example for the complete opposite of the earlier implication, the H&K 4.6mm and FN 5.7mm have excellent armor penetration capabilities, but do barely any soft tissue damage and require multiple shots to take a target down, even when shooting at vital organs.
TL;DR Ammunition performance against armor and soft tissue is too broad of a subject to be condensed into a blanket statement like as 'A is good at this and bad at that while B is good at that but bad at this'.
Pretty sure it's an objective fact that 5.56x45mm and 5.45x39mm have less armor penetrating potential than 7.62 (at least 7.62x51mm, not as sure about 7.62x39mm). Body armor that can withstand 7.62x51mm NATO is rated higher on the NIJ scale than armor certified to protect against 5.56x45mm. The enhanced wounding potential of 5.56 and 5.45 isn't their velocity per se but the tumbling effect inside the tissue. Looks like you are nitpicking. Obviously, the statement he made isn't true in every individual circumstance, but it's not inaccurate as a generalization.
@@redcommander27 It _is_ an objective fact that 5.56×45 and 5.45×39 have less armor penetrating potential than any full power cartridge. But if you say 7.62 when talking about an AK-74, and don't specify you're talking about rifle rounds, the logical comparison is with it's predecesor, the AK-47.
Otherwise you're comparing apples to oranges - assault rifles to battle rifles or bolt action rifles; intermediate cartridges to full power cartridges. But either way you flip it, the argument is wrong: either 7.62 penetrates better AND does more soft tissue damage (rifle rounds), or it does neither (pistol rounds). And I'd still be reluctant to say 7.62×39 and .300B have less _stopping power_ than 5.45 and 5.56.
As for the enhanced wounding potential of 5.45 and 5.56, it is very much dependant on velocity... it's well documented that M855 starts to icepick when it slows down and M855A1 is less likely to tumble to begin with due to the weight distribution in the projectile (penetrator shifts the mass further forward).
7N6 is less affected in its terminal effects by velocity loss due to its design aiming to maximize the tumbling effect, but it's not immune either.
P.S. 7.62×39 ball will perform worse than 5.45 and 5.56 in armor penetration, there are some spicey AP rounds for it with subcaliber penetrators, but there are some spicey AP rounds for 5.45 and 5.56 as well, so there's that.
It's a golf ball that hits hard, but for armor penetration you really need velocity and to focus that energy at as fine a point as you can. Same reason why tanks use APFSDS for anti-tank purposes.
Also, check out some terminal ballistics tests between 5.45, 5.56 and 7.62×39, it's really interesting stuff.
Not hated. More versatile.
They did not do any calculus towards the barrel length. At least.
Fascinating video. Remember seeing this gun in Goldeneye, at least I think it was this one. Nice to know how good and bad it really was
The MP5K also had a specialized briefcase it could fire inside for covert missions.
The problem is when they try to make a "tool" that fits everyone in all situations.
Well this gun deployed during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, of course a short barreled weapon would perform poorly on Afghanistan mountainous and open terrain
The AKS74U could use the GP25/30/34 series.. it wasnt optimal but pics do exist of soviet made examples
Wonders aloud, “why didn’t they just issue updated and improved Sudayevs to drivers and cooks?”
Preferred variant of obl/ubl
The accurate comparison for the AKS74U is the XM177E1 NOT the M4.
Its
AK-74 Vs. M16A1
AK-105 Vs. M4
AKS-74U Vs. XM177E1
Let me see, the size and weight of a sub-machine gun but uses rifle rounds instead of pistol caliber.....ANSWER it is NOT bad at all.
I hav have one in 556 it’s more of a danger to the user
Love ❤️ all ak rest in peace mikal
because it has a shorter barrel
This is why Spetsnaz keep using Custom or upgraded AK47 and AKMs over the New AK74 during the Soviet-afghan war
AK-74u should always be treated as a Submachinegun or a PDW with a little more power and reach
Let's just throw the top three crap things about AK platforms. The ergonomics are crap.
The bolt weight in the carrier and all that of the metal changing directions which makes the whole rifle move is excessive
The sites are not conducive to good riflery.
And the rock and rock magazine I think just the standard stick it in the hole magazines are better.
The dust cover takes away space for better siding systems for improved suitability and accuracy
Ergonomics are absolutely Okay for me as a left-hand shooter. There are also AK variants that have a thumb selector on the left side for right-hand shooters.
If you ever shot a 5.45x39 AK, you would know that the rifle doesn't jump as much as the 7.62x39 variants. It is pretty flat shooting, very comparable to AR-15.
The sights are indestructible and if used correctly, very effective. Just because you were not trained to use them correctly doesn't make them bad.
Rock and lock magazines are very reliable. When you lock it into the rifle, you can be sure it is there and will stay there. With straight-pull AR-15 mags, sometimes it can happen that some mags that are fully loaded cannot even be locked in position when the bolt is forward. Which makes them fall out. A common practice is to smack the bottom to make sure it is in, which is another move you need to make to load the rifle reliably. Rock and lock just wins lol.
The dust cover take away space? What? How? You have multiple ways to mount an optic to an AK these days.
I'd like to give some constructive criticism.
I think this video needs to be better structured. You ended up repeating information a couple times and jumping from history, to specifics, to history again to specifics again... It makes the video longer than it could be and a bit annoying to follow.
I'd also prefer if some overly specific data wasn't included, because I feel like I am listening to someone reading specifications from a manual rather than hearing a person speaking.
Yea, but… it is sexy af.
why compare with m4 bbbbad "compare too" a better US gun would be the MP5
kinda of a no brainer 🙄
honestly... short AK's of all calibers are a bit of a poor joke. They all work like portable flashbangs and recoil is weird, accuracy is subpar as well... that type of action is honestly suited to longer barrels. Simply doesn't work.
You’re a bit of a idiot
"we all know about the AK-47 as this legendary rifle is used worldwide"
Yeah, except that's wrong. Not a good look to start you deep dive video with such a nonsense. Only 1.5k of AK-47 were ever produced and never entered any service, neither it's a platform official name. First mass produced AK was simply named AK, naturally the platform is referred as AK as well.
With the most mass produced AK variant being AKM, when "AK-47" is shown or referred (implying an AK with a wooden handgrip), 90% of time it's AKM, and the rest being foreign AK variants or even AK-74 at times.
Calling all AKs or even 7.62 AKs as AK-47 is even more ridiculous and factually incorrect as referring to all AR-15 rifles as M-16 (which at least have been to an actual service).
Он не хуже, у него совсем другие задачи.
LIES! FAKE! PROPAGANDA!
THE AKS74U IS THE PINNACLE OF SMG/PDW
don't talk that way about my wife
You are literally compairing this to a full rifle, compare it to a SMG and you will see it is far superior.
is codm
Why are you stealing content from 'Weapons geek' channel? Link original video, if you only translator/
I don’t need to! Because both of the channels are mine
@@bulletsword ты мог оставить ссылку на канал, буржуй.
@@bulletsword prove it. link this channel on 'Weapons geek's description
Reality check: AKs, like ARs, suck. Full stop. That is the starting point.
Slightly better suckage for either will never make either a 'good' rifle.