Your Preferred T2K Personal Weapon

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Raellus

For the reasons already cited, I would go with an AK-74 as well, preferably with an underslung 40mm GL.

Switch that with an AKM, and I'll agree.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Switch that with an AKM, and I'll agree.

I respect the more powerful cartridge of the AKM but I chose the AK-74 to save a little weight on carried ammo and because I think my marksmanship would be better shooting the smaller round. I've read in numerous places that the AK-74 is easier to handle in full auto. I probably wouldn't use it in that mode very often but it would be nice to know that my chances of getting more rounds on target were a little better.

[Cpl. Kalkwarf]

Id go with my SVD Dragunov (chinese NDM-86), plenty of 7.62x54r around the states.

[mikeo80]

If I was wandering across Europe, trying my best to survive the t2k insanity, my vote for my personal weapon would be a 9mm Beretta. Relatively small, probably 9mm ammo available in Europe, easy to cary. I figure I would want to carry as much food, water, clothing and other survival gear as I can possibly find, steal, or otherwise appropriate.

If I am by myself, I want to follow the old 1950's idea of "duck and cover". I do not want to stick out, or be brave, or otherwise draw the attraction of ANYONE out there. I would probably move at night and hide as best I can during the day.

[JHart]

I prefer carrying a rifle/GL combo. Artillery is generally in short supply in a T2K world, and a couple of 40mm grenades can give you an edge. Someday I'm going to play a character and try to talk the GM into letting me have a SAW/GL combo.

[Legbreaker]

I can't say much for the AKM or AK-74, but I have shot the earlier SKK and SKS rifles in 7.62S and I wasn't all that impressed by them.
Accuracy at longer ranges (anything beyond a couple of hundred metres) was woeful and they certainly didn't hit as hard as a 7.62N/.308.

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I can't say much for the AKM or AK-74, but I have shot the earlier SKK and SKS rifles in 7.62S and I wasn't all that impressed by them.
Accuracy at longer ranges (anything beyond a couple of hundred metres) was woeful and they certainly didn't hit as hard as a 7.62N/.308.

I've never heard of the SKK rifle and a Google search didn't yield much. Is it a variant of the SKS?

[Legbreaker]

Yes, they're basically the same weapon. One has the internal magazine and the other a detachable of up to 30 rounds capacity.
Both have integral spike bayonets (I think, it was near 20 years ago).

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Yes, they're basically the same weapon. One has the internal magazine and the other a detachable of up to 30 rounds capacity.
Both have integral spike bayonets (I think, it was near 20 years ago).

Thanks for the info.

[pmulcahy11b]

That's correct. I haven't been able to find anything that deals exclusively about the SKK, but I've been able to find out that it's a conversion of the SKS done by NORINCO (China's primary arms company) to take AK magazines. They started making those about 20 years ago, and in various firearms blogs, people complain that they are hard to find and usually overpriced when they can find them.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I respect the more powerful cartridge of the AKM but I chose the AK-74 to save a little weight on carried ammo and because I think my marksmanship would be better shooting the smaller round. I've read in numerous places that the AK-74 is easier to handle in full auto. I probably wouldn't use it in that mode very often but it would be nice to know that my chances of getting more rounds on target were a little better.

I have to chime in here.The AK-74's and AK-47's recoil is night and day. The 47 has a major muzzle climb and more push to your shoulder. The 74 has almost none, it feels like it has less recoil then a M16 to me. I never gave the 74 much thought, until I shot one. It has better range then a 47 and is more accurate. The damage that it causes is pretty bad from what is said. The 7.62x39mm is just a spray and pray cartrigde with no intention of really reaching out there. Only probelm is it's still not as common in the world or U.S.A. as the 7.62x39mm.

[Trooper]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

I have to chime in here.The AK-74's and AK-47's recoil is night and day. The 47 has a major muzzle climb and more push to your shoulder. The 74 has almost none, it feels like it has less recoil then a M16 to me. I never gave the 74 much thought, until I shot one. It has better range then a 47 and is more accurate. The damage that it causes is pretty bad from what is said. The 7.62x39mm is just a spray and pray cartrigde with no intention of really reaching out there. Only probelm is it's still not as common in the world or U.S.A. as the 7.62x39mm.

There is huge differences between AKM type weapons. And the same goes for 7.62X39 rounds. You cannot compare accuracy of some chinese second grade steel cased ammo and Lapua round.

Its not uncommon to find that chinese AKM makes 8 inch group if shoot from 150 metres (even with decent ammo). On the other hand skilled rifleman can shoot 100 with ten rounds if they use M-62 or serbian AK.

Best AK series weapons are made in serbia, finland in russia. Worst carbines come from china. Some bulgarian AKs are fine and some are quite worthles.

Most soviet (and russian) units dont train their privates to shoot targeted single shots. Most men were trained to run behind some BMP or BTR and use sustained fire same time when they were moving. They dont even zero their weapons! In russian company captain zeroes the AK:s after three best shooters have fired them! (Yes you can forget any accurate firing...)

With decent AKM and with quality ammunition you should have no problem hitting targets to 200 metres.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Trooper

There is huge differences between AKM type weapons. And the same goes for 7.62X39 rounds. You cannot compare accuracy of some chinese second grade steel cased ammo and Lapua round.

Its not uncommon to find that chinese AKM makes 8 inch group if shoot from 150 metres (even with decent ammo). On the other hand skilled rifleman can shoot 100 with ten rounds if they use M-62 or serbian AK.

Best AK series weapons are made in serbia, finland in russia. Worst carbines come from china. Some bulgarian AKs are fine and some are quite worthles.

Most soviet (and russian) units dont train their privates to shoot targeted single shots. Most men were trained to run behind some BMP or BTR and use sustained fire same time when they were moving. They dont even zero their weapons! In russian company captain zeroes the AK:s after three best shooters have fired them! (Yes you can forget any accurate firing...)

With decent AKM and with quality ammunition you should have no problem hitting targets to 200 metres.

Ah a Finn. You guys have those fancy Valmet's and Sako's. Those are in a different league, but AK's no don't. With training like you described, I guess that's why you shot the shit out of the Russians in 1939. It helps that the Valmet M62 is made with a milled receiver and a non chrome lined barrel too. As far as the 7.62x39 though it's just not a good ballistic caliber for range or accuracy. The type of Ak you use will help maybe, but it's like a fat kid on the run. If he runs into you, your on your ass, but he has make the distance first.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Trooper

Most soviet (and russian) units dont train their privates to shoot targeted single shots. Most men were trained to run behind some BMP or BTR and use sustained fire same time when they were moving. They dont even zero their weapons! In russian company captain zeroes the AK:s after three best shooters have fired them! (Yes you can forget any accurate firing...)

On a show I saw on the History International channel (Guns of the World -- worth watching), one of the commenters summed up the AK and M16 very well: "The AK is a machinegun capable of semiautomatic fire. The M16 is a rifle capable of automatic fire."

If you have one of the newer, decently-made AK clones, like those made by Arsenal USA or IO, you actually have a good rifle. Add in the vastly-superior quality of US-made 7.62mm Kalashnikov ammo, and you have a round that actually has good ballistics. The problem with the AK and its ammo has always been primarily one of workmanship and manufacturing standards, and not necessarily the design.

[Webstral]

I'd be inclined to go with what I know personally: the M4 with the M203 underneath. The logic of an AK series weapon behind the lines in Poland can't be beat, I'll admit. Certainly, if you're in a firefight under these circumstances, you want to be using the same weapon firing the same rounds as everyone else. However, despite having fired the AK-47 and SKS on many occasions, the M4 is what I know best at this point. Once I have to start shooting, I don't want to discover that I don't really know my weapon. I don't want to invest RAM in managing an unfamiliar rifle in a firefight, if I have a choice in the matter. Looking through that soda straw (thank you, SSG Bick), I'm going to need what little forebrain power remains to make choices, not think about the differences between what I know and what I'm using. Having automatic recognition of subtleties, like the way the rifle feels when the bolt locks back on an empty magazine, can mean the difference between life and death.

If I can opt to be familiar with my weapon of choice, I'll go with the AK-74 based on reputation (v AK-47) and ammunition availability.

Webstral

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Trooper

There is huge differences between AKM type weapons. And the same goes for 7.62X39 rounds. You cannot compare accuracy of some chinese second grade steel cased ammo and Lapua round.

The North Koreans really make some crappy AKs. Nasty. We had more than one range day with some when I was stationed in Korea, and I've seen sniper-trained shooters who couldn't get a decent score with them. My best with one of those was an astounding 12 out of 40 -- and that was back when, if I shot a 36 out of 40 with my M-16, I thought I was having a bad day.