The POI shift from pulling an M4 to your shoulder with a VFG isn't going to be enough to make a difference at 100 meters. Maybe 1/2 MOA below POA, which isn't even going to be noticed with military ball ammo, nor will it mean the difference between a hit and a miss.

Trust me; you would have to be stronger than the Hulk and consciously trying to induce POI shift to cause enough to prevent you from getting COM hits.

You are actually retarded

Dude, just stop.

best post of this thread

and don't believe the article OP quoted

Are you kidding?

This is the best entertainment I've had all week.

And twice on Sunday.

I doubt Russia is issuing new ak12's to the regular army since they just spent a ton of money on ratnik upgrade kits for all the old 74's.  Doesn't make sense.  I think op is tarded.

Seconded. Holy shit this is dumb.

hacker n cock halp pls

OP, when everyone here is in agreement, even the ones that argue to death about other things and cannot get along and agree on other things but even agree that you're full of it...then it is you.

In police work they call that a clue.

I agree with you, and that scares me.

QFT

A new arfcom challenge, the 15 moa all day challenge.  Must use your sling and a barricade.

I think I could do 15 moa just by firing from my hip.

lol

from the article "about the possibility of adopting both rifles"

So maybe... but OP is freaking out.

One handed or two?

I haven't laughed this hard in a while.  Lol.  Op is convinced we will lose a war with a Russia or China because........wait for it........our M-4's don't have FF barrels

This has to be a dream. This can't be real.

I read that in a kill hats voice ROFL

Check a few posts up. Looks like that is the "new AK-12"  and the old one with a different receiver was cancelled. I can only assume that the "old AK-12" was still dated by modern day standards. No upper/lower receiver, still made from steel, looks like sights were mounted high, still had a fixed front sight. Functional, but probably cost the same as a more modern design. I can imagine the military looking at the "old AK-12", then looking at the SCAR or BREN, and knowing they could build better.

Short term = upgrade AK-74s with a better stock and mag release / safety, rails and optics.
Long term = build something more modern and modular which would probably be cheaper than a steel gun.

Or Russia just does not have the money to upgrade rifles so will continue using the AK-74 for decades and put the money into T-14s, Su-50s and the various other new heavy equipment programs they have going.

that's the same website that the said the Russian Army was adopting the AK200..........

LOL

In 50 years....presuming rifle production mirrors tank and 5th gen fighter production.

Lol, yeah because modern soldiers will be much better with a 1 moa rifle vs 3 moa.

I thought that for a second, too.  The "new" ak12 has a different rear sight base and top cover latching mechanism than the ratnik upgrade kits.  It's a completely different model (albeit very similar).  The ratnik upgrade kit simply bolts onto existing 74's.

OP, you're way off. In the early M16s that were issued in Vietnam with the pencil barrels and 1/12 twist, if you make a hasty sling , good and tight, like you would on an M14 or Garand, you would see a shift of up to 10moa if the barrel was already hot, and 5-7moa if it wasn't. That is a lot, but that's why they did two things, made the barrel profile thicker, and started teaching not to use a tight of sling on the M16s.

The M4s are a different world. With a non free float, you will see 2moa shift on average when front loading a bipod, using a sling tightly, or resting the barrel on something instead of the hand guard or rail.

You're right that the free float rails with take that out, and anything helps. At 300 yards that M4, at it's worst, is an extra possible 6 inches off, and at 600 it's 12 inches off. A well respected poster here did a series of tests to measure this exact thing. Archived I'm sure, but the videos are out there.

Free floating is a good thing, but does the improvement vs cost justify it compared to other things the infantry needs?

Also as a one off point, doesn't the red army have a metric fuckton of 74's? I recall them having a few times more rifles than personnel.

I would be interested in seeing that video.

Is there any link? My search function is limited.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_12/295633_FREE-FLOAT-VERSUS-NON-FREE-FLOAT.html

Also, going back and reading that thread you keep referencing I'm pretty sure he made a typo and it was supposed to be 1.5 MOA not 15 MOA. As someone who has many of both FF and non-FF ARs 15 MOA is ridiculous. Thats over a foot POI shift at 100 yards!

They still look like antiques

OP, have you ever shot a gun before? Serious question.

A friend had me help trouble shoot an AR he built, as he said it was shifting POI. It was shifting about 6-8 MOA at 100 yards. This was due to his barrel not being tightened completely.

The claim that you are making is absolutely absurd, and it hurts that you cannot see you are wrong, and that you keep parroting bad information.

I work in the retail firearms business. I hear some amazingly stupid things every single day, but I honestly think that you are now in the running for dumbest firearms related thing I have heard all year.

OP, put your money where your mouth is.

Get a video camera, a Colt 6920 and a KAC rail and successfully reproduce the 15 MOA variation in POI you are proposing.

10 round group. 100 yd. Your choice of position so long as it is a reasonable combat shooting stance (i.e. prone on sandbags, no dangling weights off the end of your barrel and all that shit).

Post a time-stamped video here with your username somewhere in the frame, one continuous shot, no editing.

lol

ETA: This was entertaining.  And a good example of why I want to be able to flag people, but not ignore them.  Say for example as "big fucking dummy".  I want their posts to show up in brown to signify they are full of shit.

Well, you got that correct at least.

LOL, do people think that this shit actually matters?

Does it look like the "new" AK-12 parts can be thrown on an AK-74, or does it require a new receiver? Because if that requires an all new receiver, I don't really see the point. Unless something underneath the furniture has changed, it looks like the only thing that stands out would be a unique top rail. Which doesn't seem worthwhile to buy when the upgrade is so minimal over a regular old AK.

In either case, I think they're upgrading their AKs and waiting for something newer. The AK-12 was probably not accepted and they were told to go back to the drawing board. Makes sense. Start issuing modern armor, optics and night vision now while they wait for a better replacement. No need to poor money into a not so great rifle like the AK-12.

LOL no its not.  Your being dramatic.  There's no damn 15 moa shift.

The Derp runs deep in this thread.

You are correct on the huge shift , see it ALL THE TIME when ROing 3 gun.
Enough to miss at 12" target at 100 yds, change from resting(more like pushing on) the barrel, to the forend. hit, hit, hit.

My question is - HOW can the AK have a free float barrel ??  what changes did they make on the gas tube/piston?
Can't see the pics very well.

70%?....500 meters? 15 seconds? 15 moa of shift?
I've seen some crummy AR based rifles but not that crummy.

Better get your 20" bbl back, make it a heavy and put an acog on it.  Better yet make it an 18" 6.5 Grendel.

Do we want a truck carbine or a battle rifle?

WTF

Looks like CAA furniture to me. For comparison:





It's nice to know that my UTG Pro side rail mount is Russian operator approved, though.

This is my first inclination. I've got both free and non-free floating rigs, and the only real difference between them is the barrel nut and the handguard itself. Free-floats tend to be heavier in order to support the load, but screwing FF fore ends onto M4s don't exactly require a re-engineered rifle.



Which is why I don't understand why every infantry rifle we issue doesn't have a can hanging off it.



Sniff... Never thought I'd see the day where Combat Engineers were the front line troop of choice.

I don't know for sure.  My point was to illustrate the massive expenditure the Russians just undertook with the upgrade "kits" and how such an expenditure would not make sense if a "new" ak12 were in the works. The kits do not match the pics of the new ak12.  There are distinct differences.  The kits are direct, bolt on units designed to be installed by the end users (supposedly).  Differences are the 100 series folding buttstock is replaced by an m4 style buttstock with multiple position tube, CAA lookalike grip, uber stupid handguard, vert front grip, uber stupid top handguard (looks useless), FS/GB () - uh....that's not being replaced in the field, and last and most intriguing is the top rail and rear trunnion tensioner.  There is exactly ONE picture on the internet of this piece, but it leaves a bit to the imagination.  Given most of the replacement parts, it seems this would also follow a super easy install method like all the others, but I can't figure out how it mounts to the rear trunnion yet.  I'm an AK nut, so any corrections or follow up would be extremely welcome.  The biggest and most obvious difference between the finished RATNIK AK74 upgraded rifle and the "new" AK12 is the rear sight base.  The AK12 is built from the ground up to accept the picatinny rail, whereas the RATNIK upgrade kit adapts to the original rear sight base via a pin and has a simple folding rear sight in between the contoured "wings".  The other, less obvious difference, is in the rear latch mechanism to secure the rail to the rear trunnion.  The RATNIK kit has a subtle lever outside the thumb button section combined with a tension catch underneath the machine cover.  The new AK12 has something different.

So, yes, it appears the new AK12 is just a remanufactured version of the AK74 instead the the pretty cool version they came out with a couple years ago.  BUT, they are not the RATNIK upgrade kit added to an existin AK74 that were announced a while back.  They appear to be a newly manufactured firearm.  Hence, my argument still stands.  I don't understand why Russia would drop all that money on the kits only to replace them with "newish" firearms so soon afterwards.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Good eye. Looks like CAA stuff. Probably works good enough even if ugly. I know some of the special units are using Zenitco stuff, but in recent years lots of Russians who got deployed to combat areas used the cheap stuff. I assume most of them have not switched it out. But hey, at least went don't have to spend $500 on high end furniture and we can Tapco the fuck out of our AKs for $50 and get a correct clone right?

Save for the Zenitco stuff, the American accessories look a lot better than the stuff the Russians have brought out. And used.

Uhm... Not to be taking either side here, and I'm also doubting the big number, but just math...

If you have a 5moa rifle, and you load it with 3moa ammo (just for instance), you have a range of between dead fucking nuts, and 8moa for actual target impact, depending on attributes outside of your control.

If you swap rifles to a, say, 2moa rifle... okay, it's an AK, and everybody here hates AKs, so we'll call it a 2.5moa rifle. Feed that exact same 3moa ammo into it and you've got dead fucking nuts to 5.5moa.

5.5moa is still better than 8. WHATEVER you can (reasonably) do to minimize the role of RNJesus in the equation, you should do so. Just sayin'.



I love that guys are taking this quote, which was the response of an idiot to a guy who was arguably the smartest man on the planet at that time, and applying it as though it's an insult.  And you're all doing it completely unironically.  

Not taking sides here, just pointing that out.



6.5 Creedmoor is a .308 length (And, hence, not good candidate for M4 upchambering) round based on the old .300 Savage. Very good long range cartridge that uses very slippery bullets. Think 6.5 grendel with an extra couple hundred yards of reach.

So the Russians finally discover TAPCO and suddenly we are the ones who are behind.  Hmm.

So sad that the US uses 9lb carbines.

Did you get that weight estimate with or without add on's?