“The AK-47 is a copy of the Sturmgewehr 44”. W/ poll, please read (AND THINK!!!) before voting - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - “The AK-47 is a copy of the Sturmgewehr 44”. W/ poll, please read (AND THINK!!!) before voting (Page 2 of 5)

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:11:42 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Tilting bolt vs rotating bolt.

If you're going to only use lockup design instead of overall design as your deciding criteria, what about the lockup design of the Fedorov Avtomat?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG/250px-FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG

You asked if it was a copy. It *clearly* is not. Hell if anything the Garand is more similar due to also being a rotating bolt.

Now, I would bet good money the Stg44 influenced the design of the AK47. The stg44 would have assuredly been known about by Mr. Kalashnikov but mechanically the rifles function in fundamentally different ways.

The only diff, near as I can tell, is tilting bolt vs. rotating bolt. Other than that, they share some 90% of the operating characteristics. Close enough to be a copy to me.

Look, frankly I dont give a rats ass what you think. I could say "Well, a Wankel engine is just a copy of a piston engine" and base it on the fact they both have an intake and exhaust but the statement isnt made in truth.
So if you want to say that a rifle which fundamentally functions differently then another is a copy be my guest. Most might buy the bullshit while those who understand the rifles will, as happened in the other thread, call you an idiot.

I'm starting to think deep down you know your wrong but you wont admit it and are simply looking for like minded people to make you feel better about your claims. So be it. Rest assured I wont lose sleep regardless of how you feel on it.

And a very nice evening to you, sir.

If I thought I was wrong, I wouldn't have posted the thread. Have a drink, relax, try to let go of some of that bile.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:12:33 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Stg.44: left-side charging handle, tilting bolt, full-auto only, 400 RPM, push-button safety.

AK-47: Right-side charging handle, rotating bolt, select-fire, 600 RPM, lever selector.

Oh yeah, they're 90% the same fucking gun all right. Just like the AR-15 and Mini-14 are the same gun. And the FAL and Cetme are the same gun. And the Uzi and the Steyr UMP are the same gun.

Are you trolling?

See my post a little ways up. I'd bet dollars to donuts I'm right.

Quoted:

Look, frankly I dont give a rats ass what you think. I could say "Well, a Wankel engine is just a copy of a piston engine" and base it on the fact they both have an intake and exhaust but the statement isnt made in truth.
So if you want to say that a rifle which fundamentally functions differently then another is a copy be my guest. Most might buy the bullshit while those who understand the rifles will, as happened in the other thread, call you an idiot.

I'm starting to think deep down you know your wrong but you wont admit it and are simply looking for like minded people to make you feel better about your claims. So be it. Rest assured I wont lose sleep regardless of how you feel on it.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:14:21 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Tilting bolt vs rotating bolt.

If you're going to only use lockup design instead of overall design as your deciding criteria, what about the lockup design of the Fedorov Avtomat?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG/250px-FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG

You asked if it was a copy. It *clearly* is not. Hell if anything the Garand is more similar due to also being a rotating bolt.

Now, I would bet good money the Stg44 influenced the design of the AK47. The stg44 would have assuredly been known about by Mr. Kalashnikov but mechanically the rifles function in fundamentally different ways.

The only diff, near as I can tell, is tilting bolt vs. rotating bolt. Other than that, they share some 90% of the operating characteristics. Close enough to be a copy to me.

http://gotavapen.se/gota/ak/stg/mp44_apart_w.jpg

http://static.zooomr.com/images/4137453_a9763890be.jpg

Stg.44: left-side charging handle, tilting bolt, full-auto only, 400 RPM, push-button safety.

AK-47: Right-side charging handle, rotating bolt, select-fire, 600 RPM, lever selector.

Oh yeah, they're 90% the same fucking gun all right. Just like the AR-15 and Mini-14 are the same gun. And the FAL and Cetme are the same gun. And the Uzi and the Steyr UMP are the same gun.

Are you trolling?

STG's are select fire.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:14:33 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Tilting bolt vs rotating bolt.

If you're going to only use lockup design instead of overall design as your deciding criteria, what about the lockup design of the Fedorov Avtomat?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG/250px-FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG

You asked if it was a copy. It *clearly* is not. Hell if anything the Garand is more similar due to also being a rotating bolt.

Now, I would bet good money the Stg44 influenced the design of the AK47. The stg44 would have assuredly been known about by Mr. Kalashnikov but mechanically the rifles function in fundamentally different ways.

The only diff, near as I can tell, is tilting bolt vs. rotating bolt. Other than that, they share some 90% of the operating characteristics. Close enough to be a copy to me.

Look, frankly I dont give a rats ass what you think. I could say "Well, a Wankel engine is just a copy of a piston engine" and base it on the fact they both have an intake and exhaust but the statement isnt made in truth.
So if you want to say that a rifle which fundamentally functions differently then another is a copy be my guest. Most might buy the bullshit while those who understand the rifles will, as happened in the other thread, call you an idiot.

I'm starting to think deep down you know your wrong but you wont admit it and are simply looking for like minded people to make you feel better about your claims. So be it. Rest assured I wont lose sleep regardless of how you feel on it.

And a very nice evening to you, sir.

If I thought I was wrong, I wouldn't have posted the thread. Have a drink, relax, try to let go of some of that bile.

I have no bile, no worries there. I would like to say I'm surprised someone claims rifle A is a copy of rifle B after the information posted here but really it doesnt surprise me at all. Whats interesting is I'm sure other comparisons could be made which you would not support....Say, that the Uzi is a copy of an MP-44. You would most likely say no, however you will argue a '47 is a copy of a '44. It makes no sense.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:14:39 PM EDT

[#5]

In the other thread, you said:

Quoted:

Oh, you must be joking me. It's a direct, indisputable, practically part-for-part ripoff. Granted, the tank mechanic made it simpler; as John Milius said, "he made it so a monkey could field-strip it".

Which isn't too far off of your average Rooooskie soldier.

You have already been proven wrong in this thread. It's not even close to part-for-part.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:20:06 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

In the other thread, you said:

Quoted:

Oh, you must be joking me. It's a direct, indisputable, practically part-for-part ripoff. Granted, the tank mechanic made it simpler; as John Milius said, "he made it so a monkey could field-strip it".

Which isn't too far off of your average Rooooskie soldier.

You have already been proven wrong in this thread. It's not even close to part-for-part.

Look, you have to deal with the fact that the p51d mustang is just a part for part copy of an am6 zero.

I mean, single pilot, mono-wing, full glass cockpit, forward facing machine guns, tail section, prop driven, gasoline power plant, with retractable landing gear....its practically the same plane.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:22:22 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Let's pretend it was a copy. Then what?
Bolt action rifles sure share a TON of the same characteristics with each other.
So what?

The basic premise is those who seem to think Kalashnikov was some sort of gifted genius, who developed this rifle design out of the blue. He was not. He copied heavily from prior designs. As all sensible designers do: why would you not see where the other guy fucked up, so you would not repeat his mistakes? As one of my teachers said, "If you're going to make mistakes, at least make them origional ones!"

Did our buddy Mikhail make a great design? Absitively. More folx are using his design than Uncle Eugenes'. Does he walk on water? Definitely not. I think my point, and the point of Der_Hans and others in the origional thread, was that while Mikhail did bring together many previous design ideas into a pleasing, cohesive whole, he really wasn't first. In many ways, again, the Krauts got there before he did. Had the Nazis not been idiots & won that war, the StG 44 would be the standard by which all others are judged.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:23:14 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Tilting bolt vs rotating bolt.

If you're going to only use lockup design instead of overall design as your deciding criteria, what about the lockup design of the Fedorov Avtomat?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG/250px-FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG

You asked if it was a copy. It *clearly* is not. Hell if anything the Garand is more similar due to also being a rotating bolt.

Now, I would bet good money the Stg44 influenced the design of the AK47. The stg44 would have assuredly been known about by Mr. Kalashnikov but mechanically the rifles function in fundamentally different ways.

The only diff, near as I can tell, is tilting bolt vs. rotating bolt. Other than that, they share some 90% of the operating characteristics. Close enough to be a copy to me.

http://gotavapen.se/gota/ak/stg/mp44_apart_w.jpg

http://static.zooomr.com/images/4137453_a9763890be.jpg

Stg.44: left-side charging handle, tilting bolt, full-auto only, 400 RPM, push-button safety.

AK-47: Right-side charging handle, rotating bolt, select-fire, 600 RPM, lever selector.

Oh yeah, they're 90% the same fucking gun all right. Just like the AR-15 and Mini-14 are the same gun. And the FAL and Cetme are the same gun. And the Uzi and the Steyr UMP are the same gun.

Are you trolling?

STG's are select fire.

Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:23:30 PM EDT

[#9]

I think the real question here is:

Is

and

A copy of

?

Or is

a copy of

?

Which in turn would mean

is not a copy of

because

came first?

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:24:03 PM EDT

[#10]

This thread is useless.
Too many people here have serious hard ons for Mr Kalashnikov.

YES, he used a different bolt lockup.
YES, he improved upon it by making it cheaper and more reliably and idiot proof.
YES, he ruined the ergonomics provided by the left-side charging handle.

Thats about it.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:24:26 PM EDT

[#11]

My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:24:57 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWBF84pVHQo

"Oh, I got it on semi."

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:29:09 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Tilting bolt vs rotating bolt.

If you're going to only use lockup design instead of overall design as your deciding criteria, what about the lockup design of the Fedorov Avtomat?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG/250px-FedorovMechanismSchematic.JPG

You asked if it was a copy. It *clearly* is not. Hell if anything the Garand is more similar due to also being a rotating bolt.

Now, I would bet good money the Stg44 influenced the design of the AK47. The stg44 would have assuredly been known about by Mr. Kalashnikov but mechanically the rifles function in fundamentally different ways.

The only diff, near as I can tell, is tilting bolt vs. rotating bolt. Other than that, they share some 90% of the operating characteristics. Close enough to be a copy to me.

http://gotavapen.se/gota/ak/stg/mp44_apart_w.jpg

http://static.zooomr.com/images/4137453_a9763890be.jpg

Stg.44: left-side charging handle, tilting bolt, full-auto only, 400 RPM, push-button safety.

AK-47: Right-side charging handle, rotating bolt, select-fire, 600 RPM, lever selector.

Oh yeah, they're 90% the same fucking gun all right. Just like the AR-15 and Mini-14 are the same gun. And the FAL and Cetme are the same gun. And the Uzi and the Steyr UMP are the same gun.

Are you trolling?

STG's are select fire.

Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

I guess so.

Rate of fire is slow, and you can do that, but it is select fire.

The StG.44 (like its earlier
versions MP.43 and MP.44) is a gas operated, selective fire weapon. The
receiver and trigger housing with pistol grip are made from steel
stampings, with machined steel inserts. The trigger housing with pistol
grip is hinged to the receiver and folds down for disassembly. The gas
drive utilizes a long-stroke piston, and the bolt is tipped down to
lock into the receiver. The gun is fired from a closed bolt. The MP-43
and subsequent versions all were hammer-fired, while the MKb.42(H) was
striker-fired. The safety lever is located at the left side of the
pistol grip unit, and a separate cross-bolt type of fire mode selector
allows for single-shot and full auto fire. The charging handle is
attached to the gas piston rod, and the ejection port has a dust cover.
The recoil spring is located inside the wooden butt. At the top of the
butt there is container for a cleaning kit, closed by the spring-loaded
steel cover. The Stg.44 was provided with open, leaf-type sights, and
could be fitted with telescope sights or a specially developed active
infrared sighting unit, called “Vampir” (vampire).

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as51-e.htm

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:29:16 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
STG's are select fire.

Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

IIRC, the lever by the StG's grip is the safety, while the crossbolt control is actually the selector. Perhaps it is the other way around, though.

ETA - Did some hunting around the intarwebs... yep, there is the safety lever, and then the selector, which is of a crossbolt style.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:32:47 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:

STG's are select fire.

Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

IIRC, the lever by the StG's grip is the safety, while the crossbolt control is actually the selector. Perhaps it is the other way around, though.

It's been at least a year since I've shot the one in the picture, but yes, unless I'm having a total brainfart, the pushbutton/crossbolt is the selector.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:34:18 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
It's been at least a year since I've shot the one in the picture, but yes, unless I'm having a total brainfart, the pushbutton/crossbolt is the selector.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWBF84pVHQo
Yup

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:35:18 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

I confess, I have ass-u-me'd that Mikhail picked up a StG 44 and used it as the basis for his design, working on it while he was in the wounded ward (as Rooooskie legend has it... and you know how accurate that is

). Perhaps you have a valid point: they were developed at roughly the same time.

Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:35:47 PM EDT

[#18]

The AK is actually a copy of the Remington Model 8!

See! Look at the safety!

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:38:35 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

The AK is actually a copy of the Remington Model 8!

See! Look at the safety!

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l246/TonyRumore/Mdl8a.jpg

Eliphalet Remington will be filing an injunction Monday morning.

"This aggression just will not stand, man..."
Wait....does that mean JMB designed the AK47?

Wow man, you just blew my mind....

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:40:44 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

"Mikhail, you should see these new weapons the facists have! They look so strange! They have grips like an MP-40, and long curved magazines like several SVT-40 welded together! They shoot strange bullets, like a Mauser or Nagant, but half as long!"

"Say, comrade, could you perhaps draw one of these for me?"

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:41:44 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's been at least a year since I've shot the one in the picture, but yes, unless I'm having a total brainfart, the pushbutton/crossbolt is the selector.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWBF84pVHQo
Yup

E for single and D for continuous fire.

Unlike the AR15, on the MP 44 the safety lever ( s and f) operate with the gun on safe when s is visible and fire when f is visible. On an AR, you push to fire to fire and safe for safe: on an MP44 you push to F and the s is visible, so the gun is on safe.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:42:08 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

I confess, I have ass-u-me'd that Mikhail picked up a StG 44 and used it as the basis for his design, working on it while he was in the wounded ward (as Rooooskie legend has it... and you know how accurate that is

). Perhaps you have a valid point: they were developed at roughly the same time.

Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

Well I'd liken it more to two cavemen inventing the wheel independently apart from one another after seeing said boulder, stuff like that has happened several times in the past with all manner of inventions.

Information above is out of my copy of "The AK-47 and AK-74 Kalashnikov Rifles and Their Variations".

It's weird. Some of the similarities are uncanny like the gas system location/apperance, front sight, stock and grip.. but if it were a copy or even an evolution, you'd expect some of the other things that were changed to have been left alone, like the charging handle, tilting bolt, takedown, and so on.

Guess you'll have to just phone up Mr. K. and ask.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:43:13 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

I confess, I have ass-u-me'd that Mikhail picked up a StG 44 and used it as the basis for his design, working on it while he was in the wounded ward (as Rooooskie legend has it... and you know how accurate that is

). Perhaps you have a valid point: they were developed at roughly the same time.

Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

7.92k was around in 1941. StG precursors were around in late '41-'42.

7.62x39 came about in 1943.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:46:15 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
E for single and D for continuous fire.

OK I'm curious...Why "D"?

S = Sicher = Safety
E = Einzelfeuer = Single-shot (Semi)
F = Feuer or Feuerstoss = Fire or Burst-fire

But...D?

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:46:56 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
And the Uzi and the Steyr UMP are the same gun.

Are you trolling?

Styer UMP? Drugs are bad for you!

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:51:06 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

I confess, I have ass-u-me'd that Mikhail picked up a StG 44 and used it as the basis for his design, working on it while he was in the wounded ward (as Rooooskie legend has it... and you know how accurate that is

). Perhaps you have a valid point: they were developed at roughly the same time.

Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

Well I'd liken it more to two cavemen inventing the wheel independently apart from one another after seeing said boulder, stuff like that has happened several times in the past with all manner of inventions.

Information above is out of my copy of "The AK-47 and AK-74 Kalashnikov Rifles and Their Variations".

It's weird. Some of the similarities are uncanny like the gas system location/apperance, front sight, stock and grip.. but if it were a copy or even an evolution, you'd expect some of the other things that were changed to have been left alone, like the charging handle, tilting bolt, takedown, and so on.

Guess you'll have to just phone up Mr. K. and ask.

“Mr. K?”

“Da?”

“Mr. K, I’d like to ask you about your maybe copying the StG 44?…”

<untranslatable Russian oath> *click*

Nah, don’t think that would work out too well…

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:51:38 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
E for single and D for continuous fire.

OK I'm curious...Why "D"?

S = Sicher = Safety
E = Einzelfeuer = Single-shot (Semi)
F = Feuer or Feuerstoss = Fire or Burst-fire

But...D?

Dauerfeuer

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:51:52 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
My problem with the idea that the AK-47 is based on the StG.44 is simply the timing. They were in development at the same time, so how could one have influenced the other? Kalashnikov designed a blowback smg in 42/43 for 7.62x25. The design was rejected but he started on a new one in '44 based on the M1943 / 7.62x39.

Obviously during the time period the Russians could have sent home a captured '42 or '44 but the internals are so different I tend towards the 47 being a (basically) original design.

I confess, I have ass-u-me'd that Mikhail picked up a StG 44 and used it as the basis for his design, working on it while he was in the wounded ward (as Rooooskie legend has it... and you know how accurate that is

). Perhaps you have a valid point: they were developed at roughly the same time.

Still, it seems weird that the two guns would share so many traits, and not have the guy seeing one beforehand to have based his ideas on.

Sort of like a caveman building a wheel from scratch, before he had seen a boulder rolling down a hill.

Kalashnikov actualyl began his career in gun development in the late 30's. The Russians were no strangers to semi auto designs. Look into the PPSH41 history to see even in the 20's and 30's semi auto weapons were not a new concept to the Russians.

Perhaps you dont give the Russians enough credit. As I said way back I'm sure the STG44 influenced the AK47 but certainly it is NOT a copy and Kalashnikov was developing semi auto designs (At least on paper) long before he could have ever handled a '44.

I'm not sure what more information you could possibly be given to make you realize a '47 is NOT a copy of a '44.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:52:02 PM EDT

[#29]

If anything the AK is the predecessor of the HK91/93 series of rifles.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:53:01 PM EDT

[#30]

This needs more StG44 porn.

The great great grand daddy of the ACOG.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:54:41 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

This needs more StG44 porn.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/690/bundesarchivbild1461979.jpg

The great great grand daddy of the ACOG.

Awesome pic. Never seen that one before.

As for the topic at hand, it depends on what you mean by "copy." Clearly there are enough mechanical differences between the two to say that the AK is not a "clone" of the StG44. But I find it hard to believe that Kalashnikov (and other Russians involved with the AK-47) never once came across an StG44 during the war, considering that the majority of StG44s were empoyed by the Germans on the Eastern Front. That, combined with the Russian proclivity to copy foreign designs that they admired (Tu-4 bomber, K-13 missile, for example), inclines me to believe that they at least borrowed many of the basic concepts of the select-fire assault rifle from the StG44.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:55:14 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

If anything the AK is the predecessor of the HK91/93 series of rifles.

Actually, the HK rifles were the result of the Spanish CETME, which was developed by a bunch of ex-Mauser employees who worked on the STG-44's proposed successor, the STG-45, which was a roller locked rifle, like the CETME and subsequent HK designs.

Posted: 11/14/2009 8:59:22 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

This needs more StG44 porn.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/690/bundesarchivbild1461979.jpg

The great great grand daddy of the ACOG.

I agree...

My brother shooting the STG...note the ghetto brass catcher...

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:02:30 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
This needs more StG44 porn.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/690/bundesarchivbild1461979.jpg

Fukkin' A! And note the hand position - one thing I will give Mikhail credit for is putting a fucking insulated front grip on the fucking gun!!! The Krauts may have been excellent designers, but putting a metal front grip on a select-fire rifle surely has to rank right up there with their more sadistic crimes against humanity!

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:04:36 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

This needs more StG44 porn.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/690/bundesarchivbild1461979.jpg

Fukkin' A! And note the hand position - one thing I will give Mikhail credit for is putting a fucking insulated front grip on the fucking gun!!! The Krauts may have been excellent designers, but putting a metal front grip on a select-fire rifle surely has to rank right up there with their more sadistic crimes against humanity!

It does get hot.

And they didn't learn a lesson about it either....

The G1 and STG-58 FAL's (Germany and Austria respectively) have steel handguards too. They get BLAZING hot.

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:04:46 PM EDT

[#36]

Mikhail's stated in some interviews that he was inspired by the Garand - a view that's borne out by inspection of the action.

The pistol grip / mostly inline action / mag forward arrangement is a pretty logical setup. Our AR15 basically has it, too. Convergent evolution - out of similar needs come similar solutions.

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:11:32 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Mikhail's stated in some interviews that he was inspired by the Garand - a view that's borne out by inspection of the action.

The pistol grip / mostly inline action / mag forward arrangement is a pretty logical setup. Our AR15 basically has it, too. Convergent evolution - out of similar needs come similar solutions.

As far as the AR-15 is concerned, Eugene Stoner was influenced by the M1941 Johnson and its straight inline action:

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:13:59 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Kalashnikov actualyl began his career in gun development in the late 30's. The Russians were no strangers to semi auto designs. Look into the PPSH41 history to see even in the 20's and 30's semi auto weapons were not a new concept to the Russians.

Perhaps you dont give the Russians enough credit.

That is true, I don't. The popular characterization of the Rooooskies is of them stealing credit left & right for the work of others, and claiming it as thier own. And not without reason, as they were liable to take credit for the work of others. Sort of like affirmative action; when you have that one member of the minority group who actually works & earns his way, you just assume he's just another of the 99% who are clock-punchers & credit thieves. What is that quote of "The Russians are alcohol-sodden barbarians, but occasionally they manage to vomit up a genius"?

Quoted:
As I said way back I'm sure the STG44 influenced the AK47 but certainly it is NOT a copy and Kalashnikov was developing semi auto designs (At least on paper) long before he could have ever handled a '44.

I'm not sure what more information you could possibly be given to make you realize a '47 is NOT a copy of a '44.

Perhaps so. Just seems weird he would come up with a design that so closely parallels the '44 and not say he (Russianlike) didn't try to steal credit for the work of others.

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:17:07 PM EDT

[#39]

Nah, screw that "it's not a copy" noise, '44 is before '47.

The leader of the design team for the Stg 44, Hugo Schmeisser, was captured by a covert team of NKVD agents at the close of the war.

He then assumed the identity of Mikhail Kalashnikov (for reasons previously unknown to tinfoil), and as such did a mechanical "Island Of Dr Moreau" monkeyfuck, splicing the features of various firearms to create... the AK47.

Different weapon, same designer.

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:21:26 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Nah, screw that "it's not a copy" noise, '44 is before '47.

The leader of the design team for the Stg 44, Hugo Schmeisser, was captured by a covert team of NKVD agents at the close of the war.

He then assumed the identity of Mikhail Kalashnikov (for reasons previously unknown to tinfoil), and as such did a mechanical "Island Of Dr Moreau" monkeyfuck, splicing the features of various firearms to create... the AK47.

Different weapon, same designer.

Dammit!!! I knew it was so!!!!! It was him on the grassy knoll, wasn't it?!?!? Wasn't it?!?!?!?!

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:24:10 PM EDT

[#41]

I chuckle at these threads.....

I'll throw out a couple things to for folks to ponder based upon traveling to the large museums in Russia,
interviewing various Russian designers including Kalashnikov, visiting the factory and numerous years of
research. Do with it as you may.

1. Fedorov is the father of the assault rifle concept and the assault rifle itself. Period. He came up with the concept
for a selective fire rifle firing an intermediate cartridge which fed from a high capacity detachable box magazine
prior to the First World War. His rifle first saw action in 1916, prior to the Germans fielding a submachine gun.
He wrote extensively and was considered the father
of automatic rifle design in Russia. He was brilliant and far ahead of his time. If anything, the Nazi designers used
his writings as the foundation for their work.

2. Kalashnikov was nobody when it came to Soviet designers of this period. A nobody. It is EXTREMELY doubtful
that he would have been given access to a captured MP43/44 StG44. They would have been given to much better
known and respected designers (such as Tokarev) who were much higher up politically.

3. Who greatly influenced Kalashnikov? Fedorov. That is well known.

4. Kalashnikov readily states that he did not develop an entirely new rifle. Which is obvious. He had great respect
for Garand.

5. Regarding the LOOKS of the two designs, consider a Soviet PPS-43.......

6. Regarding German technological superiority in weapons design......how did they do regarding fielding a
reliable semi-auto 7,92x57mm rifle? Not so hot....they used all the captured SVTs they could get their hands on.

7. Regarding semi-auto rifles, the Soviets had replaced the bolt action Mosin series PRIOR to the start of World War II
and had completely halted production. The Mosin wasn't placed back into production until 1942.

8. Kalashnikov was not a one shot wonder.....he also designed one of the best GPMGs ever fielded.

I suggest reading Boloton's work on Soviet weapons as well as Kalashnikov's autobiography. Might provide some
insight.

Posted: 11/14/2009 9:26:29 PM EDT

[#42]

They look similar and were built to fulfill similar roles. Internally, they are 100% different. Not a copy.

Posted: 11/15/2009 7:56:06 AM EDT

[#43]

I have learned some stuff as a result of this thread.

Thanks,

EMSflyer

Posted: 11/15/2009 8:37:14 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
I chuckle at these threads.....

I'll throw out a couple things to for folks to ponder based upon traveling to the large museums in Russia,
interviewing various Russian designers including Kalashnikov, visiting the factory and numerous years of
research. Do with it as you may.

1. Fedorov is the father of the assault rifle concept and the assault rifle itself. Period. He came up with the concept
for a selective fire rifle firing an intermediate cartridge which fed from a high capacity detachable box magazine
prior to the First World War. His rifle first saw action in 1916, prior to the Germans fielding a submachine gun.
He wrote extensively and was considered the father
of automatic rifle design in Russia. He was brilliant and far ahead of his time. If anything, the Nazi designers used
his writings as the foundation for their work.

2. Kalashnikov was nobody when it came to Soviet designers of this period. A nobody. It is EXTREMELY doubtful
that he would have been given access to a captured MP43/44 StG44. They would have been given to much better
known and respected designers (such as Tokarev) who were much higher up politically.

3. Who greatly influenced Kalashnikov? Fedorov. That is well known.

4. Kalashnikov readily states that he did not develop an entirely new rifle. Which is obvious. He had great respect
for Garand.

5. Regarding the LOOKS of the two designs, consider a Soviet PPS-43.......

6. Regarding German technological superiority in weapons design......how did they do regarding fielding a
reliable semi-auto 7,92x57mm rifle? Not so hot....they used all the captured SVTs they could get their hands on.

7. Regarding semi-auto rifles, the Soviets had replaced the bolt action Mosin series PRIOR to the start of World War II
and had completely halted production. The Mosin wasn't placed back into production until 1942.

8. Kalashnikov was not a one shot wonder.....he also designed one of the best GPMGs ever fielded.

I suggest reading Boloton's work on Soviet weapons as well as Kalashnikov's autobiography. Might provide some
insight.

+1

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:10:25 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Not for sure on this but I thought the STG-44 was a delayed blowback roller lock type gas system. and that the SKS is more closely related to the STG.

Try HK G3.

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:25:32 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
STG's are select fire.

Really? Then I guess the guy firing one in that video I watched was retarded or something, because he repeatedly said it was full-auto only. He even commented that the rate of fire was low enough that it was easy to squeeze off single shots despite being full-auto only.

IIRC, the lever by the StG's grip is the safety, while the crossbolt control is actually the selector. Perhaps it is the other way around, though.

It's been at least a year since I've shot the one in the picture, but yes, unless I'm having a total brainfart, the pushbutton/crossbolt is the selector.

You are correct. From the Haenel MKb-42(H) to the StG-44 they were all select fire weapons that use the crossbolt control as the semi to automatic selector.

Vulcan94

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:28:21 AM EDT

[#47]

I am not so sure about whether or not its a direct copy. My understanding though is that the AK47 uses certain design elements that the Stg44 has.

The SKS rifle made by Simonov uses a short stroke gas piston with a tilting block bolt carrier (much like the FAL).
The AK uses a Long Stroke Gas System where the Piston is directly connected to the Bolt Carrier. The Bolt rotates and locks/unlocks into place. The Gas System used on the AK is similar to the Gas System used on the Stg44. However the Bolt Locking mechanism is different on the Stg44. On the Stg.44 the Bolt Tilts and locks into place like on the SKS

Here is a picture of an Stg44. Note how the Gas Piston is long and attached to the Bolt Carrier (from: http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as51-e.htm

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:32:58 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Mikhail's stated in some interviews that he was inspired by the Garand - a view that's borne out by inspection of the action.

The pistol grip / mostly inline action / mag forward arrangement is a pretty logical setup. Our AR15 basically has it, too. Convergent evolution - out of similar needs come similar solutions.

Form follows functions.

Vulcan94

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:38:49 AM EDT

[#49]

There are only so many ways to accomplish something.

Selective fire rifles firing intermediate cartridges tend to all look similar because they're accomplishing a similar goal. Bolt action MBRs all look similar for the same reason.

Sports cars also tend to share some similar traits.

Mikhail Kalashnikov did not copy the Stg44. He designed a rifle intended to accomplish the same goal as the Stg44. It's no surprise they share some exterior similarities. Kalashnikov MAY have copied the concept, but I doubt he copied the design.

Posted: 11/15/2009 9:39:02 AM EDT

[#50]

The concept is similar, but the Russians focused more on cheaper and more simple like the submachine guns at the time. They wanted a $7 submachine gun with a rifle stuffed into it.

While it's obvious they borrowed from the 7.92 Kurz round and a few other things, I'd say the AK is decidedly different.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - “The AK-47 is a copy of the Sturmgewehr 44”. W/ poll, please read (AND THINK!!!) before voting (Page 2 of 5)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us