Because that's how it always goes when a new system is introduced. Some people rather not change what they're already used to. Especially if they have a choice.
Yup, Its technology. The 74 came in unproven in the eyes of the Spetsnaz so they stuck to what they knew. Also operating behind enemy lines, 7.62x39 was easier to come by. Its the same reason some MACV guys in Vietnam used AK’s plus the sound confused them as they expected M16 fire
There were only 4 actual reasons and other reasons s just a muths 1) subsonic 7.62*39 is significantly better than subsonic 5.45*39 both in performance and availability 2) solders generally prefer familiar systems, especially well trained ones 3) 7.62*39 ammo can be taken from locals if needed and it's a benefit for units operating away from supply lines 4) presence of new Soviet weapons in a unit that tried to pose itself as a local group clearly gave them away and it's basically a failure for recon or ambush mission, as enemy will hide/run if they are weak or gather and attack if they are strong
the ballistics argument makes sense, heavier bullets are less affected by environmental factors. It also retains more energy at a longer range, look at some ballistics charts. I partially believe the more punch argument because 5.45 didn't really fragment, it only tumbled. Especially with a high-velocity round at close range, the relatively small bullets wouldn't do a lot of damage if they didn't hit anything solid. The Soviets were probably still working out how to maximize the size of the wound cavity.
In a book about the Soviet-Afghanistan war.There was a black & white photo showing 2 Spetsnaz,one was holding an AKM underneath folding stock model.The caption read something like this:"sometimes AK-47s/AKMs are chosen from the Armory cause of the better "punch" from 7.62×39 cartridge at very close to quarter ranges for Spetsnaz missions".
True here in Ukraine too. A lot of "elite" troops seem to prefer using the 7.62 (often in beautiful new manufacture but old style AKM) than the 5 45 or NATO 556
Both 7,62 and 5,45 are lethal. Key reason why spetsnaz used AKM is availability of 7,62 subsonic munitions for supressed guns. Subsonic 5,45 was adopted and mass produced only in late 80-s, therefore was a bit late to see widesrpead service
A number of reasons 1. Resupply. Once in deep enemy territory you cannot resupply with your gov issued weapons 2. Sound. The noise made out of a AK47 is different then a AK74. If you use a 74 inside enemy territory, the enemy can recognize the sound and assume correctly that enemy soldiers have breached their territory. If you use enemy weapons during a firefight, who ever hears it will pause for a moment and try to figure out whats going on. It gives the spec ops unit momentum to retreat or setup ambushes. During the American-Vietnam War MACV units where issued with AK47's and shorten RPD's, and in some cases if the mission was short, the M4Commando rifles they had where issued with a special muzzle adapter, to mimic the sounds of a AK47 when fired. 3. Plausible deniability. Spec Op units usually try if they can, not use weapons issued to their respected armies. If captured the enemy wont have access to their weapons and use them in their own infiltration missions, also your government can deny the mission ever taking place.
The same happened when Indonesian forces transition from AK-47 (not AKM ones) to M-16A1 around 1966-1976 due to change in political alignment. The commando units prefer AK-47 than the newly supplied M-16A1.
@@mitchjames9350 I read a story where Argentinian troop armed with FAL once dueled against a British soldier with M-16. The Argentinian guy survived few rounds hit from M-16 while the British one knocked out only by a single shot from FAL.
@@michamichaowski8375just a handful of British soldiers had them during the war.Tho it's mostly SAS and SBS operators that were issued M16.For regular infantry, one had to be very lucky to find a soldier with M16
Another thing that's rarely talked about. The guys who REALLY have to use their rifles for combat, tend to learn them very well. So you see SF guys, funnily enough, hold onto yesterdays technology a little bit longer than the ground troops who tend to get issued new but unproven designs.
As an American, this reminds me of how many US soldiers preferred the M14 (and sometimes, the AK) over the new M16 in Vietnam. Of course, teething problems with the M16 caused a lot of distrust of the lighter rifle. Great video! The perspective of Soviet soldiers is really interesting and informative--thanks!
I worked with an old Uranian Paratrooper in the Balkans back in 99 who said he hated the AK74 and also preferred the old AKM mostly due to the heavier projectile.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 They prefer, most of all - a Bren 2 to any other rifle honestly. To the point where the Ukrainian government is licensing production. Otherwise the selection goes like this: M16/M4 (Mainly for all the accessories. A 4x ACOG is indispensible) > AKM > AK-74. Source: served with the international legion as a support role.
@@gae_wead_dad_6914 not from anything I've heard..maybe international Legion because they are foreign and used to such things, already familiar. But they are a tiny portion of the overall armed forces (notwithstanding numbers which our media inflates for propaganda purposes , as is normal and expected in war)..edit, the preference for me/ar15 is certainly contrary to any Ukrainian soldiers in Vinnytsia/the 47th brigade actually ditching their issued M16 in favour of akm. Really I think it is the preference of people who already spent long careers in western armies speaking in the cases you cite, which is a justified preference, but only a few thousand within an army which is the better part of one million troops.
Some additional info to the supressor part: If you want a really silent rifle the silencer itself is not enough, you have to use subsonic ammo too. The subsonic bullet heavyer, because of this travels slower, and do not make the sonic crack. The 7.62 bullet is heavy and relatively slow compared to a 5.45, so much easier to slow down under the sonic crack level so its more supressor friendly than the fast and light 5.45.
@@17MrLeonnot it’s not, very common to run a suppressor with standard velocity ammo, more common. A suppressor hides flash well and even if it doesn’t make the gun quite it make it harder to locate where shots are coming from.
@@awsysumer3814there are pros and cons to both. General consensus is that 7.62x39 is better up close in urban or jungle type of environments, 5.45 is better at range and out in the open
@@awsysumer3814I own both of these ak platforms and I can tell you the 7.62 carries more muzzle energy than the 5.45. Against steal targets at 300 yards has greater impact energy.
@@awsysumer3814 according to wikipedia, a 7.62 round with a 181 grain bullet has 3,614 J of energy, whereas a 5.45 round with a 53 grain bullet has 1,328 J of energy, so the 7.62 has more than twice the energy of the 5.45 round. So, the 7.62 round is more equivalent in energy to the NATO 7.62×51mm and .308 Winchester rounds which are around 3500-3600 J of energy. It's wierd how the M14 and FN FAL, the primary 7.62mm military weapons of the West, were always criticized for their recoil and how hard they were to control in full auto fire, and that was one of the reasons for developing the smaller 5.56mm round and the low recoil M-16. Nobody ever thought about maybe just re-tuning the gas ports and BCG-spring coupling to reduce the recoil, because the AK-47/AKM don't have a huge recoil, and civilian semi-auto .308 DPMS pattern rifles can be tuned and modified to have a recoil close to that of an AR-15. The M14 was essentially the same gas piston and rotating bolt BCG mechanism as the semi-auto M1 Garande, which was fine with firing one round at a time.
I heard that the drum mags were usually ditched for 30 and 40rnd box mags. -The drums were less reliable and jammed alot. -The drums took a long time to reload. - There is no good way to carry spares as you can with box mags
Drums basically never lasted for any weapon in history because of those reasons. Most countries who adopt a drum mag weapon, replace the drum mag part pretty quick.
@KrikZ32 Yup. They look cool, I especially like the PPSH. But it was crazy that most of the drum mags weren't quite interchangeable. Sometimes a file was needed.
Don’t say that you haven’t seen what is being produced now bro. When the last Soviet base closed by Putin ? 2002 I think …. That’s when he tried to be friends with west , thinking they’ll treat us equal to themselves. Anyways , I hope we get back our friendship going like back in the day . We always loved Cuba . I haven’t heard a single bad word about Cubans but I know a lot of ppl who served there and sailors too … right now I think it’s time . I heard you guys need some sugar cane cultivating machines , ask Russia . They have driverless cars ( the ones that were tested in Vegas ) , robots n stuff . You’ll be using AK15 and let us know what’s better 😁
You missed one important point: if you fight behind enemy lines, your distinktiv AK74 sound gives your position away. Better you use the same weapons like your enemy. Thats why SOG used AK47 in Nam
In addition to Spetsnaz, it is my understanding that even in regular line Soviet infantry units in Afghanistan, small unit leaders always tried to make sure that at least one or two guys in a squad or a company had the older AKMs, because when fighting the mujahadeen among their mud huts in villages, the 7.62x39mm had better penetration through those walls. They wanted at least a few of their guys to be able to do that. Here in the US, among firearm enthusiasts, there is a never ending debate between what is better, the AR platform in 5.56x45mm NATO vs the AK platform in 7.62x39mm, and central to this debate is the issue of the comparative advantages and disadvantages respectively between these two cartridges. The arguments on both sides are very similar to the points brought up in this video re the comparison between 5.45x39mm versus 7.62x39mm. Where I work we have a high proportion of military veterans, many of whom served in Iraq or Afghanistan. The consensus among the majority of these veterans with whom I have discussed this topic was that 7.62x39mm was a better practical fighting round than 5.56x45mm. Yes, 5.56x45mm was flatter shooting and easier to shoot accurately over longer distances, but within the range of most real-world infantry combat - within 200m - it was widely felt that the 7.62x39mm was simply a more effective round. According to an interview Mikhail Kalashnikov himself gave to a South African magazine years ago, he said that he was personally opposed to the replacement of the 7.62x39mm round by the 5.45x39mm round. However, the top military brass insisted, and told him that if he wouldn’t develop a new rifle around that cartridge, they would find someone else who would. So, he gave them what they wanted. As an American infantry veteran myself, from the Cold War era, I too consider the 7.62x39mm round to be arguably the best practical fighting cartridge ever developed. The only major drawback as far as I’m concerned is the weight; it is definitely easier to carry more of the smallbore high velocity ammunition, and that is a clear advantage. But otherwise, I too would prefer 7.62x39mm. It is simply a better all around fighting round for what combat soldiers have to do in real world situations.
To be more detailed the 5.45 subsonic cartridge it could not be fired out of standard AK74 or RPK74 the round just refused to leave the barrel. And it was only after alterations to AKS74U(B varient) to it's gas regulators the round could be fired but still the ballistics were appalling so the soviet engineers just gave up on the 5.45 subsonic round all together. Also 7.62x39 proved to be very effective in Close combat inside mujahadeen Hideout caves and in trench warfare where accuracy was not much of a thing. Also Razvedos (Russian spec ops veteran) criticised AK-12 (2016) Version and he would rather have AKMs because it doesn't need adaptors to attach suppressor.
I love how this broke it down with a numbers guy yelling about ballistics and lethal range it was all acuall reasons fighters preferred one over the other
The big main reason is everyone had the Kalashnikov, and everywhere you go there would be parts and ammo availability. Makes sense and not that difficult to figure out
It was easier to train conscripts in a 3 month boot camp to use an ak74, while well trained special forces had many years of experience with the older rifle. In short with sufficient training and experience the akm is a better pick as skill makes the cartridge perform better even if it the platform has disadvantages compared to the ak74
The problem of subsonic ammo was an issue for the 5.45mm rounds which rely on velocity for effect. The eventual solution was for recon forces to use 9x39mm weapons like the AS and VSS. These weapons had 260+ grain bullets at subsonic speeds compared with the 80 grain 5.45mm subsonic round and the 193 grain 7.62x39mm round. With all three bullets moving at about the same muzzle velocity (subsonic) the heavier round is always going to be more effective.
This was not a "universal" preference. Personal accounts from Spetsnaz I've read have explicitly stated a preference for the -74 and satisfaction with its performance. But I can't say this was a "universal" sentiment. Given what's said in the vid and my own reading and experience, I suspect "preference" depends on the mission requirements, the age of the new system, the capabilities of all systems, the availability of all systems, etc. "It depends....."
Yes, you are absolutely right) It would be stupid if I talked completely about the entire special forces. I just wanted to highlight this fact, and that it was quite common. And yes, some people really preferred the AK-74, this can be seen even in some of the photos that I gave in the video
I have been using weapons, professionally one way or another since I was in my teens. Now in my 30s, the overall trajectory of my preferences has been a preference for smaller and lighter weapons shooting softer cartridges. The first two weapons I ever carried into battle were an STG-58 (Austrian FAL) and an M1911 (RIA USGI style). And when I quit adventuring, the two weapons I preferred most were the AK-74 and the XD40. Now in context of my current professional role, I use an AR15 styled after the M-16a2 and a Glock 19. For personal use meaning for the weapons I have chosen to defend my home and property with I have a semi automatic AK-74 clone and a CZ83. In terms of calibers, I started out using 308Win (7.62x51) and 45ACP (11.43x21), and by the end am using 5.45x39 and 9X17 when I get the choice. I have four major reasons why this is so. 1. Smaller and lighter weapons are simply easier to carry and handle. Training issue or gym issue, the mathematics and numbers don’t lie. 2. The performance differences, especially in handguns, were marginal. The extra power was simply wasted. 3. Any caliber you can shoot competently, you can shoot caliber minus one even better. So down from 308 to 30 Soviet to 223 to 545. And down from 45 to 40 to 9 to 380. My split times became quicker and I had higher ratios of hits on target. 4. To a certain extent, bigger cartridges are simply more expensive, so going to smaller calibers was an economic decision. It meant I could take the savings and apply them to spend more ammunition and training, so I could grow my skills better to perform better at my job, and combined it with the advantages of the easier to use calibers in order to have a drastic performance increases that gave me a significant advantage over my enemies.
@@Mortablunt I'm curious what country you currently call Home. That may be private information and I respect that. Your experience is similar to mine, though I bet I have less experience than you do. But for what it is worth, the trajectory of my experience started in a similar place and has landed in a similar place. The one different thought I have is "depending on context, grab and use what those around you are using." If not a lot of 9x17 is available in a location, it may not be the best choice. But that is not criticism of you. It is just an observation for those others who may come along and read this. Thank you for sharing your own experience here.
@@woodsghost9088 Well, shucks, I'm just a bored man on youtube. I live in the USA, but I could reasonably transfer my skillset anywhere I can speak the local language. Living as a private citizen in a place of my choice, I get a lot more freedom to pick what I want to use. Things aren't so nice in the field. If you're living that roving "contractor" life, here's some advice: 1. Payment, in full, on time, every time. Ideally in USD, EUR, or GBP. Either they budgeted to pay you or not. Never work for free, and never go into danger uncompensated. And if it's in a popular strong currency, it'll hold value and you'll lose less in the conversion process if you have to do that, if you can even find a place for that, ie, something odd like Turkish Lira or Kenyan Shillings. 2. Don't bother with weapons any more than you must. If they're so important, your employer can take care of them. The biggest bureaucratic and legal issue is always weapons. And they're the easiest way to get into trouble. 3. Avoid fighting on the wrong side of any conflict from the perspective of your home country. If you're not inconvenient, you can get away with a lot. But if you're on the enemy side, don't think your own soldiers or allies will hesitate to kill you, or your government hesitate to incarcerate you. Happy adventures.
5.45 ia a good cartridge, but redundant for the USSR, the 7.62x39 was good enough, there's a reason why it wasn't widely adopted by everyone in the Warsaw Pact, in my opinion it was more of a ideological decision than a technical one, like "the US have 5.56 so we should too".
The 5.45 was way better ballistically. The Soviets had the infrastructure to switch to the 5.45 but the Warsaw pact didn’t which is why you will see many of them still using 7.62x39
@@rioyr6210 AKM and AK 74 are close enough in performance that there is no real difference in strategic level except the slightly better logistics with lighter ammunition of 74. Individual soldiers weapon doesn't really have that big of an effect in large scale compared to having better heavy equipment. At least as long as you are comparing assault rifles.
@@henrihamalainen300 that's the point, the increase in performance is negligible and the overall logistical gain is negated by the necessity of a newer supply of another type of ammo, even worsen if you consider that by that time the USSR had a standard bore diameter, 7.62, the added cost for the benefits they got is not really worthy, is different from the US with the 5.56, which was their first intermediate cartridge, if the US had something similar to the 7.62x39 they wouldn't adopted the 5.56, the better performance and weight outcost the practicality.
Here in Ukraine, 545 or, often now, 556 from NATO is issued but a lot of special/elite troops apparently prefer AKM. Good guns in brand new condition but old 7.62x39 cartridge. Also worth mentioning is, in Vietnam, Americans were using 556 against unarmored, lightly clothed enemies who physically were quite small on average. The typical Russian soldier wears body armour and is quite sturdily built. especially if one is in a trench facing someone, I expect that stopping them quickly is very important.
Акмс underfolder stock , akm I thought is the same as ak47 only stamped reciever instead of milled one and a muzzle break that let gases up 45 degrees and the barrel didn’t jump up as much . Special forces only used it with pbs-1 , but in a group there are 5.45mm as well .
Really good video. The blending in with the enemy would be huge. But a big one you pick up on was the ability to use subsonic US 7.62 rounds with the suppressor. I just recently learned this watching a video about the AS Val/VSS, which was created to replace this.
Thank you) Do you think if I hired a voice-over announcer to make more videos, would you also be interested in watching my channel? I want to finish my studies, which I interrupted a few years ago, but I'm afraid I won't have time to do all my things at the same time
@@AirAssault7 Yes, the fact is that English is not my native language, and it takes me 3 days to work out the voice acting at the level that you can see in the videos. Now I'm thinking about hiring an announcer who will do this job, but everything else (choosing topics, writing text, editing videos) I'll still do it myself)
@@casperarms I mean it should be fine. Though you might still want to occasionally say things here and there from time to time. I think you need to somehow show that you are the source of the content.
@@AirAssault7 That's the problem I'm facing myself. I don't want the channel to be just some kind of business. For me, this is primarily my personal business, my personal creativity. But if I continue to run it the way I am now, I won't be able to continue my studies and other things that are important to me too
Ive heard that alot that the 5.45 tumbles alot,which can be good, but problem is let's say a guy is behind brush,or small trees ,tall thick grass, rocks etc,it tends to zig zag after hittinf objects. Where as the ak 47 round altough not known for it's penetration against armour, it definitely will keep flying and not deviate its path if its shot into the brush.
Just like the M16 when it was introduced, there were people who doubted the lethality of the 5.56 round..Much to their disbelief, the mouse shooter has left a lot of dead in its wake..The Soviet's tested the 5.56 round and understood the advantages of the smaller caliber, high velocity round, which is why they adopted their version of it....
I had used both .... the ak74 had left much dirt of copper in the barrel .I had used american instruments for cleaning ak74, and it really takes a lot of time to clean .. of course, every shooter knows how much clean barrel effort with accuracy
Awesome. Thank you. I found your channel about an hour before today’s video premiered and now I’ve finally finished all of your videos. I can tell your channel will be huge within two years. I hope you’ll make even longer form videos from time to time as your channel grows.
3:09 I thought drum mag in the course of history has always been the pain in the butt. It is cluncky, hard to carry, heavy by itself and have a higher chance of malfunctioning & jamming because the mechanism is a bit more complex than a simple 30 round mag.
I'm pretty sure the Spetsnaz could use any weapon the USSR had. If the range was bigger than 200 metres, the Spetsnaz had SVDs and sniper rifles. Worth mentioning that nowadays the Russians are starting to partially reintroduce the old 7.62x39 mm cartridge to some units. They are doing this by issuing AK-103s and AK-104s.
I preferred my SLR 7.62 to the newer SA80 5.56 basically because the SA80 the A1 variant was shit, the handguard would break, the extractor, just didn't! The firing pin would break and the lower caliber, well i just didn't like it, plus the workings that had to be cleaned were fiddly and numerous. The SLR was sturdy, battle tested, simple to field strip and clean and the rounds were powerful and accurate. But that was my personal preferences.
hit-kill ratio - deeper pen ? 5.56 vs 7.62 ? max distance projectile ? Weight one clip 7.62 - max ammo per clip does it make sense to use 5.56 in mountain area ?
I would like to make a video about them, but I'm afraid we have too little data and there are almost no videos with these guys. In the future, I plan to shoot footages on my own in the images of the FSB, SVR, Army, and other units whose videos are very rare or of too poor quality)
The close range power of them suits special operations at night/in woodland/urban areas. Same reason SFs use a lot of intermediate cartridge MGs like the SAW
The AKM is AKM-S and has been widely used by Russian special forces for many years, mainly with various accessories, for example the Soviet Wolverine suppressor,
Likely troops were dependent on resupply from their own logistics. Spetnaz operated without support in the field for operations so they used what the muj used.
I admit this possibility, but again, it was hardly a regular practice. No matter how reliable the AK was, but Afghan cartridges are not what you would like to see in your weapon, because often it was just garbage, even compared to the quality of Soviet cartridges
The same thing happened with the T-34-85 and the T-44. The T-44 was a better machine (the T-54 is basically a T-44 with a 100 mm gun) but the T-34-85 was better for soldiers who already used to the T-34.
Why? Because 5.45 is even lamer than 5.56. There is a big myth in the US that the Afghans called the 5.45 the poison bullet. Speaking with several Afghan interpreters, they told me the actual term was "stinging bullet". They said it wounded like a wasp but did not often kill. I never saw an Afghan insurgent carry a 5.45 gun. They sure loved to pose with the AKS74U but would not go to combat with it.
Lame? I had conversation with a combat medic about 5.45 lethality. He said :"The bullet is so fast it's literally waporize your muscle when it hits". I think the same is 5.56. P.S. just remembered mr. "Spicy Biceps", one of Kyle Rittenhouse's "friends"
@@MrPovsekakiy Yeah, but a 7.62 vaporizes muscle BESIDE where it hits from all the energy. It's not that a 5.45 or a 5.56 can't be lethal, just that it's a lot easier to be lethal with a 7.62, especially if you step up to 7.62x51 or 7.62x54.
@@FuckGoogle502 well there's a limit to that because at a certain point calibers just pass through you like butter not really doing anything unless its like helicopter rounds as big as your forearm
Who told you any of this stuff? The Farsi words for poison and sting are extremely different. There’s no way anybody would make that error. I know Farsi, so don’t bogus me. Furthermore, feel free to watch close combat footage coming out of Ukraine If you don’t believe 5.45 is exceedingly deadly.
AKMs were what the mujahadeen used so it was also easier to obtain ammo when behind enemy lines while front line forces could depend on logistics for the new ammo type.
So basically the 5.45 is better for frag while 7.62 just punches big holes so while the more accurate and experienced soldiers put well placed hits with the big caliber the less accurate used low recoil and flesh shredding rounds to put people out of combat for the moment
The term and concept of low-pulse ammunition appear in Soviet sources. 5.56x45 and 5.45x39 fall under this concept as the next step in the development of ammunition for infantry main weapons. As far as I understand, the previous generation is the generation of the first intermediate cartridges (7.62x39 and AK, 7.92x33 in Stg-44, etc.) which cannot be called low-pulse. And before them, the generation of heavyweights (7.62x63 in the M-1 Garand or 7.62x54 in the Mosin rifle)
Lower recoil impulse... especially since inexperienced conscript armies were Doctrinated to use their rifles in Full-Auto like aubmachine guns... watch the movie Kalashnikov... 🎬 🎞 🎥 scenes in youtube
@@RosaParksWasWyt In the video he says that the 5.45 bullet drops faster and needs more vertical adjustment when shooting while the 7.62 bullet flies straighter... Is that true in your experience ?
Yep, he said about the distance when you hit a torso sized target while directly aiming at it without making any ballistic calculation. There are videos on Robski channel where he fired 600 yards with 7.62x39 with proper optic and good wind conditions.
@@MrPovsekakiy you should look up 9 Hole Reviews on TH-cam. They hit targets at 500 yards with iron sights on different types of Aks such as the Type 56, Zastava M70, Ak74s, AK12 and etc. Yet people claim that the Ak is inaccurate, when they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Copy the American5.56, use new round in basically an AK platform design and get a meh rifle. The Ak platform was designed with the 7.62 medium engagement/velocity round(likely a German STG influence. The AK platform was never meant for long range engagements, nor high levels of accuracy. The only big advantage the AK 74 would be lighter weight of ammo, and less recoil.
4:20 no way someone is taking multiple hits of rifle caliber rounds to center mass and continuing, I think there's probably a lot of folklore and mythologizing going on here because that just isn't physically possible with your spine broken in two, regardless of "magic potions", lol
I’d imagine having plenty of ammo to pick up from departed muhj was part of the reason, when you’re involved in special operations you don’t always have to ability to sit tight and get resupplied like regular military does.
*Back then* Soviet Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-74’s I really love them! Soviet Spetsnaz Soldier: I hate it, prefer old AKM’s or AKMS’. *Now* Russian Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-12’s I really love them! Russian Spetsnaz Operator: I hate it, prefer old AK-74M’s.
Consripts have to use what they are issued . Special units are given more freedom to choose the weapon for their function . Our military works the same way .
Are you Ukrainian? Because I've noticed that here. We still make new akms. Amusingly, one of the elite NATO trained brigades, was photographed with all new AKMs having, apparently, ditched their issued m16s once the photo ops for media were over and they got into combat. Despite TH-cam revisionism, the stories of American grunts in Vietnam seem to hold true today, albeit in the trenches of eastern Ukraine rather than the jungles of SE Asia
@@michaelwarenycia7588 I was referring to American soldiers. In Vietnam, soldiers claimed war trophies of AKMs but amassed ammo and used it in combat. Our Special Forces insisted on using enemy weapons.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 The idea of using a small projectile was the kinetic energy imparted on impact. K=.5*m*v*v. With velocity bring a square function, speed was emphasized over mass. Battle data showed that the worse wounds were when a bullet hit a man at mach 2 or higher. So, if you hit a man 500 meters away with any bullet going fast enough... However, mass cannot be ignored. A large bullet is effective even at subsonic velocities.
Because that's how it always goes when a new system is introduced. Some people rather not change what they're already used to. Especially if they have a choice.
Yup, Its technology. The 74 came in unproven in the eyes of the Spetsnaz so they stuck to what they knew. Also operating behind enemy lines, 7.62x39 was easier to come by. Its the same reason some MACV guys in Vietnam used AK’s plus the sound confused them as they expected M16 fire
Rather it was mostly because of the PBS1 suppressor, the AK74 lacked a suppressed option back then
Are you talking about Boomers and their 2-World Wars?
@@toska3528 that basically sums it up.
Uh, no. It was due to different calibres, and the 7.62x39 being more suitable for longer ranges due to higher mass and hence momentum than 5.45.
There were only 4 actual reasons and other reasons s just a muths
1) subsonic 7.62*39 is significantly better than subsonic 5.45*39 both in performance and availability
2) solders generally prefer familiar systems, especially well trained ones
3) 7.62*39 ammo can be taken from locals if needed and it's a benefit for units operating away from supply lines
4) presence of new Soviet weapons in a unit that tried to pose itself as a local group clearly gave them away and it's basically a failure for recon or ambush mission, as enemy will hide/run if they are weak or gather and attack if they are strong
This
the ballistics argument makes sense, heavier bullets are less affected by environmental factors. It also retains more energy at a longer range, look at some ballistics charts. I partially believe the more punch argument because 5.45 didn't really fragment, it only tumbled. Especially with a high-velocity round at close range, the relatively small bullets wouldn't do a lot of damage if they didn't hit anything solid. The Soviets were probably still working out how to maximize the size of the wound cavity.
@@justine5799 all test shows that 5.45 just sheds biologic targets on 1-450m ranges. High speed tumbling bullets makes insane wounds
Is it a europoor think to write 7.62*39 instead of what's actually printed on every box irl? (7.62x39).
@justine5799 he argued that 7.62x39 had different ballistics than 5.54 in rain when rain doesn't affect point of impact at all. This video is off.
In a book about the Soviet-Afghanistan war.There was a black & white photo showing 2 Spetsnaz,one was holding an AKM underneath folding stock model.The caption read something like this:"sometimes AK-47s/AKMs are chosen from the Armory cause of the better "punch" from 7.62×39 cartridge at very close to quarter ranges for Spetsnaz missions".
I think the photo you are referring to is the front cover of the book ‘Boys in Zinc’ by Svetlana Alexievich
@@ev1217 i searched to this book, and both spetsnaz guy have a sidefolder AKS-74 not underfolder AKMS rifle.
True here in Ukraine too. A lot of "elite" troops seem to prefer using the 7.62 (often in beautiful new manufacture but old style AKM) than the 5 45 or NATO 556
Spetsnaz also used M16s
And more quite when on suppresor
Both 7,62 and 5,45 are lethal. Key reason why spetsnaz used AKM is availability of 7,62 subsonic munitions for supressed guns. Subsonic 5,45 was adopted and mass produced only in late 80-s, therefore was a bit late to see widesrpead service
Why are we switching from 7.62 to 7,62?
@@clongshanks5206 It's not a switch but rather a personal preference.
A number of reasons
1. Resupply. Once in deep enemy territory you cannot resupply with your gov issued weapons
2. Sound. The noise made out of a AK47 is different then a AK74. If you use a 74 inside enemy territory, the enemy can recognize the sound and assume correctly that enemy soldiers have breached their territory. If you use enemy weapons during a firefight, who ever hears it will pause for a moment and try to figure out whats going on. It gives the spec ops unit momentum to retreat or setup ambushes. During the American-Vietnam War MACV units where issued with AK47's and shorten RPD's, and in some cases if the mission was short, the M4Commando rifles they had where issued with a special muzzle adapter, to mimic the sounds of a AK47 when fired.
3. Plausible deniability. Spec Op units usually try if they can, not use weapons issued to their respected armies. If captured the enemy wont have access to their weapons and use them in their own infiltration missions, also your government can deny the mission ever taking place.
Number 3 is patently false lol.
You can't use AK47 because such rifle has never entered the service. And that's not the name of the platform either.
The same happened when Indonesian forces transition from AK-47 (not AKM ones) to M-16A1 around 1966-1976 due to change in political alignment. The commando units prefer AK-47 than the newly supplied M-16A1.
In Vietnam Australian troops preferred the SLR as it had more punch and worked well against troops in the dense jungle.
@@mitchjames9350 I read a story where Argentinian troop armed with FAL once dueled against a British soldier with M-16. The Argentinian guy survived few rounds hit from M-16 while the British one knocked out only by a single shot from FAL.
@@UnionAndroidSRboi funny as UK troops during the Falkland war had no M16 in inventory...
@@michamichaowski8375just a handful of British soldiers had them during the war.Tho it's mostly SAS and SBS operators that were issued M16.For regular infantry, one had to be very lucky to find a soldier with M16
@@michamichaowski8375 only British SAS and sbs/royal marines had m16 rifles. The Argentine sf had m16 rifles as well
Another thing that's rarely talked about. The guys who REALLY have to use their rifles for combat, tend to learn them very well. So you see SF guys, funnily enough, hold onto yesterdays technology a little bit longer than the ground troops who tend to get issued new but unproven designs.
As an American, this reminds me of how many US soldiers preferred the M14 (and sometimes, the AK) over the new M16 in Vietnam. Of course, teething problems with the M16 caused a lot of distrust of the lighter rifle.
Great video! The perspective of Soviet soldiers is really interesting and informative--thanks!
I worked with an old Uranian Paratrooper in the Balkans back in 99 who said he hated the AK74 and also preferred the old AKM mostly due to the heavier projectile.
Same here among some higher grade troops in Ukraine. Issued m16s or ak74 but use AKM. Never asked one why though
@michaelwarenycia7588 Victor and I talked, and drank, a lot together lol
i thought in the bosnian war and liked the 74 better
@@michaelwarenycia7588 They prefer, most of all - a Bren 2 to any other rifle honestly. To the point where the Ukrainian government is licensing production.
Otherwise the selection goes like this: M16/M4 (Mainly for all the accessories. A 4x ACOG is indispensible) > AKM > AK-74.
Source: served with the international legion as a support role.
@@gae_wead_dad_6914 not from anything I've heard..maybe international Legion because they are foreign and used to such things, already familiar. But they are a tiny portion of the overall armed forces (notwithstanding numbers which our media inflates for propaganda purposes , as is normal and expected in war)..edit, the preference for me/ar15 is certainly contrary to any Ukrainian soldiers in Vinnytsia/the 47th brigade actually ditching their issued M16 in favour of akm. Really I think it is the preference of people who already spent long careers in western armies speaking in the cases you cite, which is a justified preference, but only a few thousand within an army which is the better part of one million troops.
So basically one gun could be modded and was battle proven; the other was just getting its feet wet.
A tale as old as time honestly lol
Some additional info to the supressor part:
If you want a really silent rifle the silencer itself is not enough, you have to use subsonic ammo too. The subsonic bullet heavyer, because of this travels slower, and do not make the sonic crack.
The 7.62 bullet is heavy and relatively slow compared to a 5.45, so much easier to slow down under the sonic crack level so its more supressor friendly than the fast and light 5.45.
Thats a given that with supressor you use subsonic ammo.
@@17MrLeonnot it’s not, very common to run a suppressor with standard velocity ammo, more common. A suppressor hides flash well and even if it doesn’t make the gun quite it make it harder to locate where shots are coming from.
Would love to see a analysis between the 7.62 vs the 5.54!
I will say more, I have already collected data on this topic 😊
556 u mean? Just google it, ballistics are extremely different
@@mr.c.3760 i think he meant 5.45
@@mr.c.3760 He meant 5.45
There are plenty of videos out there on that topic if you are interested.
7.62x39 is just a deadly little stopping power round. Phenomenal 30 caliber round.
Still slower than the 5.45 thus less velocity and in some cases energy
@@awsysumer3814there are pros and cons to both. General consensus is that 7.62x39 is better up close in urban or jungle type of environments, 5.45 is better at range and out in the open
@@awsysumer3814I own both of these ak platforms and I can tell you the 7.62 carries more muzzle energy than the 5.45. Against steal targets at 300 yards has greater impact energy.
Completely wrong on the energy part. @awsshkara3814
@@awsysumer3814 according to wikipedia, a 7.62 round with a 181 grain bullet has 3,614 J of energy, whereas a 5.45 round with a 53 grain bullet has 1,328 J of energy, so the 7.62 has more than twice the energy of the 5.45 round. So, the 7.62 round is more equivalent in energy to the NATO 7.62×51mm and .308 Winchester rounds which are around 3500-3600 J of energy.
It's wierd how the M14 and FN FAL, the primary 7.62mm military weapons of the West, were always criticized for their recoil and how hard they were to control in full auto fire, and that was one of the reasons for developing the smaller 5.56mm round and the low recoil M-16.
Nobody ever thought about maybe just re-tuning the gas ports and BCG-spring coupling to reduce the recoil, because the AK-47/AKM don't have a huge recoil, and civilian semi-auto .308 DPMS pattern rifles can be tuned and modified to have a recoil close to that of an AR-15.
The M14 was essentially the same gas piston and rotating bolt BCG mechanism as the semi-auto M1 Garande, which was fine with firing one round at a time.
I heard that the drum mags were usually ditched for 30 and 40rnd box mags.
-The drums were less reliable and jammed alot.
-The drums took a long time to reload.
- There is no good way to carry spares as you can with box mags
Drums basically never lasted for any weapon in history because of those reasons. Most countries who adopt a drum mag weapon, replace the drum mag part pretty quick.
@KrikZ32 Yup. They look cool, I especially like the PPSH. But it was crazy that most of the drum mags weren't quite interchangeable. Sometimes a file was needed.
So, you should carry 1 drum mag and the rest box mags.
Yeah you either have regular magazines or belt-feds
Someone told me this fact without explaining a few years back and I honestly thought they made it up thanks for the explanation !
As a Cuban, I'll say AKM and AKMS are over 1KG lighter and way more reliable than any and every AK model ever produced
Don’t say that you haven’t seen what is being produced now bro. When the last Soviet base closed by Putin ? 2002 I think …. That’s when he tried to be friends with west , thinking they’ll treat us equal to themselves. Anyways , I hope we get back our friendship going like back in the day . We always loved Cuba . I haven’t heard a single bad word about Cubans but I know a lot of ppl who served there and sailors too … right now I think it’s time . I heard you guys need some sugar cane cultivating machines , ask Russia . They have driverless cars ( the ones that were tested in Vegas ) , robots n stuff . You’ll be using AK15 and let us know what’s better 😁
We love Cubans. They defeated the Apartheid army of South Africa.
You missed one important point: if you fight behind enemy lines, your distinktiv AK74 sound gives your position away. Better you use the same weapons like your enemy.
Thats why SOG used AK47 in Nam
Still looking forward to 9x39mm project and VSS Vintorez and As Val project development episode!
Very interesting! Thanks for the video!
Thank you very much, it's always very nice to hear! ^^
In addition to Spetsnaz, it is my understanding that even in regular line Soviet infantry units in Afghanistan, small unit leaders always tried to make sure that at least one or two guys in a squad or a company had the older AKMs, because when fighting the mujahadeen among their mud huts in villages, the 7.62x39mm had better penetration through those walls. They wanted at least a few of their guys to be able to do that.
Here in the US, among firearm enthusiasts, there is a never ending debate between what is better, the AR platform in 5.56x45mm NATO vs the AK platform in 7.62x39mm, and central to this debate is the issue of the comparative advantages and disadvantages respectively between these two cartridges. The arguments on both sides are very similar to the points brought up in this video re the comparison between 5.45x39mm versus 7.62x39mm.
Where I work we have a high proportion of military veterans, many of whom served in Iraq or Afghanistan. The consensus among the majority of these veterans with whom I have discussed this topic was that 7.62x39mm was a better practical fighting round than 5.56x45mm. Yes, 5.56x45mm was flatter shooting and easier to shoot accurately over longer distances, but within the range of most real-world infantry combat - within 200m - it was widely felt that the 7.62x39mm was simply a more effective round.
According to an interview Mikhail Kalashnikov himself gave to a South African magazine years ago, he said that he was personally opposed to the replacement of the 7.62x39mm round by the 5.45x39mm round. However, the top military brass insisted, and told him that if he wouldn’t develop a new rifle around that cartridge, they would find someone else who would. So, he gave them what they wanted.
As an American infantry veteran myself, from the Cold War era, I too consider the 7.62x39mm round to be arguably the best practical fighting cartridge ever developed. The only major drawback as far as I’m concerned is the weight; it is definitely easier to carry more of the smallbore high velocity ammunition, and that is a clear advantage. But otherwise, I too would prefer 7.62x39mm. It is simply a better all around fighting round for what combat soldiers have to do in real world situations.
When I was stationed in Shindand Afghanistan I found a lot of live 5.45x39 rounds and other rounds as well.
To be more detailed the 5.45 subsonic cartridge it could not be fired out of standard AK74 or RPK74 the round just refused to leave the barrel. And it was only after alterations to AKS74U(B varient) to it's gas regulators the round could be fired but still the ballistics were appalling so the soviet engineers just gave up on the 5.45 subsonic round all together.
Also 7.62x39 proved to be very effective in Close combat inside mujahadeen Hideout caves and in trench warfare where accuracy was not much of a thing.
Also Razvedos (Russian spec ops veteran) criticised AK-12 (2016) Version and he would rather have AKMs because it doesn't need adaptors to attach suppressor.
they did created the 9*39 subsonic round for that reason.
@@rapatacush3 Yeah the 7.62x39 US (subsonic) was what inspired 9x39
Also, 7,62x39 tracers can be fired from AKM with RPG optical sights much easier, and special forces liked to use it.
Back then, when looking at the AK-74, it’s bakalite magazine gave me the ick, but I have learnt to appreciate it.
Bought an AK 47 bayonet in 1992 in Torkam, my best souvenir.😅
I love how this broke it down with a numbers guy yelling about ballistics and lethal range it was all acuall reasons fighters preferred one over the other
The big main reason is everyone had the Kalashnikov, and everywhere you go there would be parts and ammo availability. Makes sense and not that difficult to figure out
It was easier to train conscripts in a 3 month boot camp to use an ak74, while well trained special forces had many years of experience with the older rifle. In short with sufficient training and experience the akm is a better pick as skill makes the cartridge perform better even if it the platform has disadvantages compared to the ak74
4:11 is that from a movie? What is the movies name?
The problem of subsonic ammo was an issue for the 5.45mm rounds which rely on velocity for effect. The eventual solution was for recon forces to use 9x39mm weapons like the AS and VSS. These weapons had 260+ grain bullets at subsonic speeds compared with the 80 grain 5.45mm subsonic round and the 193 grain 7.62x39mm round. With all three bullets moving at about the same muzzle velocity (subsonic) the heavier round is always going to be more effective.
This was not a "universal" preference. Personal accounts from Spetsnaz I've read have explicitly stated a preference for the -74 and satisfaction with its performance. But I can't say this was a "universal" sentiment.
Given what's said in the vid and my own reading and experience, I suspect "preference" depends on the mission requirements, the age of the new system, the capabilities of all systems, the availability of all systems, etc.
"It depends....."
Yes, you are absolutely right) It would be stupid if I talked completely about the entire special forces. I just wanted to highlight this fact, and that it was quite common. And yes, some people really preferred the AK-74, this can be seen even in some of the photos that I gave in the video
@@casperarms thank you for the reply! I agree. Good points.
I have been using weapons, professionally one way or another since I was in my teens. Now in my 30s, the overall trajectory of my preferences has been a preference for smaller and lighter weapons shooting softer cartridges.
The first two weapons I ever carried into battle were an STG-58 (Austrian FAL) and an M1911 (RIA USGI style).
And when I quit adventuring, the two weapons I preferred most were the AK-74 and the XD40.
Now in context of my current professional role, I use an AR15 styled after the M-16a2 and a Glock 19.
For personal use meaning for the weapons I have chosen to defend my home and property with I have a semi automatic AK-74 clone and a CZ83.
In terms of calibers, I started out using 308Win (7.62x51) and 45ACP (11.43x21), and by the end am using 5.45x39 and 9X17 when I get the choice.
I have four major reasons why this is so.
1. Smaller and lighter weapons are simply easier to carry and handle. Training issue or gym issue, the mathematics and numbers don’t lie.
2. The performance differences, especially in handguns, were marginal. The extra power was simply wasted.
3. Any caliber you can shoot competently, you can shoot caliber minus one even better. So down from 308 to 30 Soviet to 223 to 545. And down from 45 to 40 to 9 to 380. My split times became quicker and I had higher ratios of hits on target.
4. To a certain extent, bigger cartridges are simply more expensive, so going to smaller calibers was an economic decision. It meant I could take the savings and apply them to spend more ammunition and training, so I could grow my skills better to perform better at my job, and combined it with the advantages of the easier to use calibers in order to have a drastic performance increases that gave me a significant advantage over my enemies.
@@Mortablunt I'm curious what country you currently call Home. That may be private information and I respect that.
Your experience is similar to mine, though I bet I have less experience than you do. But for what it is worth, the trajectory of my experience started in a similar place and has landed in a similar place.
The one different thought I have is "depending on context, grab and use what those around you are using." If not a lot of 9x17 is available in a location, it may not be the best choice. But that is not criticism of you. It is just an observation for those others who may come along and read this.
Thank you for sharing your own experience here.
@@woodsghost9088
Well, shucks, I'm just a bored man on youtube. I live in the USA, but I could reasonably transfer my skillset anywhere I can speak the local language. Living as a private citizen in a place of my choice, I get a lot more freedom to pick what I want to use. Things aren't so nice in the field.
If you're living that roving "contractor" life, here's some advice:
1. Payment, in full, on time, every time. Ideally in USD, EUR, or GBP. Either they budgeted to pay you or not. Never work for free, and never go into danger uncompensated. And if it's in a popular strong currency, it'll hold value and you'll lose less in the conversion process if you have to do that, if you can even find a place for that, ie, something odd like Turkish Lira or Kenyan Shillings.
2. Don't bother with weapons any more than you must. If they're so important, your employer can take care of them. The biggest bureaucratic and legal issue is always weapons. And they're the easiest way to get into trouble.
3. Avoid fighting on the wrong side of any conflict from the perspective of your home country. If you're not inconvenient, you can get away with a lot. But if you're on the enemy side, don't think your own soldiers or allies will hesitate to kill you, or your government hesitate to incarcerate you.
Happy adventures.
The drip in the footage clips is insane
5.45 ia a good cartridge, but redundant for the USSR, the 7.62x39 was good enough, there's a reason why it wasn't widely adopted by everyone in the Warsaw Pact, in my opinion it was more of a ideological decision than a technical one, like "the US have 5.56 so we should too".
The 5.45 was way better ballistically. The Soviets had the infrastructure to switch to the 5.45 but the Warsaw pact didn’t which is why you will see many of them still using 7.62x39
@@rioyr6210 AKM and AK 74 are close enough in performance that there is no real difference in strategic level except the slightly better logistics with lighter ammunition of 74. Individual soldiers weapon doesn't really have that big of an effect in large scale compared to having better heavy equipment. At least as long as you are comparing assault rifles.
@@henrihamalainen300 that's the point, the increase in performance is negligible and the overall logistical gain is negated by the necessity of a newer supply of another type of ammo, even worsen if you consider that by that time the USSR had a standard bore diameter, 7.62, the added cost for the benefits they got is not really worthy, is different from the US with the 5.56, which was their first intermediate cartridge, if the US had something similar to the 7.62x39 they wouldn't adopted the 5.56, the better performance and weight outcost the practicality.
Here in Ukraine, 545 or, often now, 556 from NATO is issued but a lot of special/elite troops apparently prefer AKM. Good guns in brand new condition but old 7.62x39 cartridge. Also worth mentioning is, in Vietnam, Americans were using 556 against unarmored, lightly clothed enemies who physically were quite small on average. The typical Russian soldier wears body armour and is quite sturdily built. especially if one is in a trench facing someone, I expect that stopping them quickly is very important.
Great video and channel!
Thank you ✨
Акмс underfolder stock , akm I thought is the same as ak47 only stamped reciever instead of milled one and a muzzle break that let gases up 45 degrees and the barrel didn’t jump up as much . Special forces only used it with pbs-1 , but in a group there are 5.45mm as well .
Really good video. The blending in with the enemy would be huge. But a big one you pick up on was the ability to use subsonic US 7.62 rounds with the suppressor. I just recently learned this watching a video about the AS Val/VSS, which was created to replace this.
Your videos are awesome. Very informative.
Thank you) Do you think if I hired a voice-over announcer to make more videos, would you also be interested in watching my channel? I want to finish my studies, which I interrupted a few years ago, but I'm afraid I won't have time to do all my things at the same time
@@casperarms You mean like have someone else say the information that you've laid out?
@@AirAssault7 Yes, the fact is that English is not my native language, and it takes me 3 days to work out the voice acting at the level that you can see in the videos. Now I'm thinking about hiring an announcer who will do this job, but everything else (choosing topics, writing text, editing videos) I'll still do it myself)
@@casperarms I mean it should be fine. Though you might still want to occasionally say things here and there from time to time. I think you need to somehow show that you are the source of the content.
@@AirAssault7 That's the problem I'm facing myself. I don't want the channel to be just some kind of business. For me, this is primarily my personal business, my personal creativity. But if I continue to run it the way I am now, I won't be able to continue my studies and other things that are important to me too
Ive heard that alot that the 5.45 tumbles alot,which can be good, but problem is let's say a guy is behind brush,or small trees ,tall thick grass, rocks etc,it tends to zig zag after hittinf objects. Where as the ak 47 round altough not known for it's penetration against armour, it definitely will keep flying and not deviate its path if its shot into the brush.
Man I love your videos, I’ve legit watched every one you’ve come out with keep up the great work!
Thank you so much!
Just like the M16 when it was introduced, there were people who doubted the lethality of the 5.56 round..Much to their disbelief, the mouse shooter has left a lot of dead in its wake..The Soviet's tested the 5.56 round and understood the advantages of the smaller caliber, high velocity round, which is why they adopted their version of it....
but akm recoil was much more manageable than m14
Yes and the M16 recoil was much more manageable than the AK..@@Tonyx.yt.
@@hairydogstailup close 762 is king
The "lethality" was never disputed, but the distraction of the 5.56 by bushes...
@@alex-ki5wm up close the extra power of 7.62x51 its useless and you get much stronger recoil and more than double the weight of ammo
What’s the name of the movie at 1:09
I had used both .... the ak74 had left much dirt of copper in the barrel .I had used american instruments for cleaning ak74, and it really takes a lot of time to clean .. of course, every shooter knows how much clean barrel effort with accuracy
Main reason is because they go on long raids, and can always loot 7.62 from enemies.
Spetsnaz commandos also used ak47 milled receiver version along with akm
What is that soviet-afghan war movie in the video
What movie was the footage from at 1:05?
What is the name of the movie you showed a few clips of in this video (it’s also the film that gave you your thumb nail)?
"Nobody but us", 2008
Awesome. Thank you. I found your channel about an hour before today’s video premiered and now I’ve finally finished all of your videos. I can tell your channel will be huge within two years. I hope you’ll make even longer form videos from time to time as your channel grows.
Whats the name of the movie/vid at 1:11 ?
This is equivalent of the Master chief swaping his sniper or rocket with some marines rifle.
Mark 1:14, what is the movie title please
What is the movie footage used in this video?
3:09 I thought drum mag in the course of history has always been the pain in the butt. It is cluncky, hard to carry, heavy by itself and have a higher chance of malfunctioning & jamming because the mechanism is a bit more complex than a simple 30 round mag.
@@ramilv739 lol that’s interesting.
I'm pretty sure the Spetsnaz could use any weapon the USSR had.
If the range was bigger than 200 metres, the Spetsnaz had SVDs and sniper rifles.
Worth mentioning that nowadays the Russians are starting to partially reintroduce the old 7.62x39 mm cartridge to some units. They are doing this by issuing AK-103s and AK-104s.
Holy moly so MGV the phantom pain is right, higher level Russians use akm equivalents instead of ak74
I preferred my SLR 7.62 to the newer SA80 5.56 basically because the SA80 the A1 variant was shit, the handguard would break, the extractor, just didn't! The firing pin would break and the lower caliber, well i just didn't like it, plus the workings that had to be cleaned were fiddly and numerous. The SLR was sturdy, battle tested, simple to field strip and clean and the rounds were powerful and accurate. But that was my personal preferences.
hit-kill ratio - deeper pen ?
5.56 vs 7.62 ?
max distance projectile ?
Weight one clip 7.62 - max ammo per clip
does it make sense to use 5.56 in mountain area ?
hey what's the movie at 1:02?
"No one but us...", 2008
Thanks!@@casperarms
can't find it anywhere, got a link maybe?@@casperarms
Does this car have the fa20dit?
Dude this is the most civil gun comment section ive ever seen with my 10 years of gun youtube
Can you do a video on zaslon next??? 😳
I would like to make a video about them, but I'm afraid we have too little data and there are almost no videos with these guys. In the future, I plan to shoot footages on my own in the images of the FSB, SVR, Army, and other units whose videos are very rare or of too poor quality)
@@casperarms no worries friend, I’m sure you’ll put out another great video soon. 👍🙌
The close range power of them suits special operations at night/in woodland/urban areas. Same reason SFs use a lot of intermediate cartridge MGs like the SAW
I own both AK 47 and AK 74. Original Russian military and I love them both . Real work horses. Would never trade them for any Caliber
Cause 7.62x39 rules
1:05 movie name?
Simple to operate easy to use ,super robust and plenty cheaply available . 🇬🇧
The veterans preferred the AKM’s because “rifle is fine.”
What’s the movie?
You repeat 4 times that they traded the weapons before actually answering.
Hitting power and there's 7.62mm x 39 surplus ammo everywhere. Even NATO is looking at moving to 6.5 to get back some stopping power.
Training beats the newest equipment every time.
Exactly
Movies on the video?
The AKM is AKM-S and has been widely used by Russian special forces for many years, mainly with various accessories, for example the Soviet Wolverine suppressor,
Likely troops were dependent on resupply from their own logistics. Spetnaz operated without support in the field for operations so they used what the muj used.
I admit this possibility, but again, it was hardly a regular practice. No matter how reliable the AK was, but Afghan cartridges are not what you would like to see in your weapon, because often it was just garbage, even compared to the quality of Soviet cartridges
Anyone know what movie the thumbnail is from?
"Nobody but us", 2008
@@casperarms Thank you man!
>muh stahping powa
>reddit
The same thing happened with the T-34-85 and the T-44. The T-44 was a better machine (the T-54 is basically a T-44 with a 100 mm gun) but the T-34-85 was better for soldiers who already used to the T-34.
Why? Because 5.45 is even lamer than 5.56. There is a big myth in the US that the Afghans called the 5.45 the poison bullet. Speaking with several Afghan interpreters, they told me the actual term was "stinging bullet". They said it wounded like a wasp but did not often kill. I never saw an Afghan insurgent carry a 5.45 gun. They sure loved to pose with the AKS74U but would not go to combat with it.
5.45 & 5.56 are far from lame. If you're using them outside of their intended engagement ranges, that's a training issue.
Lame? I had conversation with a combat medic about 5.45 lethality. He said :"The bullet is so fast it's literally waporize your muscle when it hits". I think the same is 5.56. P.S. just remembered mr. "Spicy Biceps", one of Kyle Rittenhouse's "friends"
@@MrPovsekakiy Yeah, but a 7.62 vaporizes muscle BESIDE where it hits from all the energy. It's not that a 5.45 or a 5.56 can't be lethal, just that it's a lot easier to be lethal with a 7.62, especially if you step up to 7.62x51 or 7.62x54.
@@FuckGoogle502 well there's a limit to that because at a certain point calibers just pass through you like butter not really doing anything unless its like helicopter rounds as big as your forearm
Who told you any of this stuff? The Farsi words for poison and sting are extremely different. There’s no way anybody would make that error. I know Farsi, so don’t bogus me. Furthermore, feel free to watch close combat footage coming out of Ukraine If you don’t believe 5.45 is exceedingly deadly.
Stopping power. They don't want to see their friends die because the smaller round doesn't do the job in time.
AKMs were what the mujahadeen used so it was also easier to obtain ammo when behind enemy lines while front line forces could depend on logistics for the new ammo type.
"Nyet, rifle is fine."
So basically the 5.45 is better for frag while 7.62 just punches big holes so while the more accurate and experienced soldiers put well placed hits with the big caliber the less accurate used low recoil and flesh shredding rounds to put people out of combat for the moment
The availability of ammunition alone made it a better choice for SF soldiers due to their different mission sets.
Battalion 32. Why AK and RPD? 😁 its simply ...
What is "low pulse cartridge"??
The term and concept of low-pulse ammunition appear in Soviet sources. 5.56x45 and 5.45x39 fall under this concept as the next step in the development of ammunition for infantry main weapons. As far as I understand, the previous generation is the generation of the first intermediate cartridges (7.62x39 and AK, 7.92x33 in Stg-44, etc.) which cannot be called low-pulse. And before them, the generation of heavyweights (7.62x63 in the M-1 Garand or 7.62x54 in the Mosin rifle)
Lower recoil impulse... especially since inexperienced conscript armies were Doctrinated to use their rifles in Full-Auto like aubmachine guns... watch the movie Kalashnikov... 🎬 🎞 🎥 scenes in youtube
👍
Hmmmm…wind affects 7.62x39 much more than 5.45. So that part of the video is just plain wrong lol
As does gravity for that matter
2 identical objects. One weighs 60 pounds and one weighs 123 pounds. Which one is easier to push?
@@coryrohrbaugh1208 clearly you have no idea what ballistic coefficient means and have no idea what ballistics means. You trying to argue is pointless
@@coryrohrbaugh1208 and how many 7.62x39 ak’s do you own? How many 5.45 ak’s do you own? I have (4) 7.62 and (2) 5.45
@@RosaParksWasWyt In the video he says that the 5.45 bullet drops faster and needs more vertical adjustment when shooting while the 7.62 bullet flies straighter... Is that true in your experience ?
7.62x39 can reach 500 yards out of the Ak.
Yep, he said about the distance when you hit a torso sized target while directly aiming at it without making any ballistic calculation. There are videos on Robski channel where he fired 600 yards with 7.62x39 with proper optic and good wind conditions.
@@MrPovsekakiy you should look up 9 Hole Reviews on TH-cam. They hit targets at 500 yards with iron sights on different types of Aks such as the Type 56, Zastava M70, Ak74s, AK12 and etc. Yet people claim that the Ak is inaccurate, when they don’t know what they’re talking about.
Subspnic 7.62 will have way more elpower tha subsonic 5.45 as theyre flying same speed but one has way more mass
Copy the American5.56, use new round in basically an AK platform design and get a meh rifle. The Ak platform was designed with the 7.62 medium engagement/velocity round(likely a German STG influence. The AK platform was never meant for long range engagements, nor high levels of accuracy. The only big advantage the AK 74 would be lighter weight of ammo, and less recoil.
4:20 no way someone is taking multiple hits of rifle caliber rounds to center mass and continuing, I think there's probably a lot of folklore and mythologizing going on here because that just isn't physically possible with your spine broken in two, regardless of "magic potions", lol
The 5.45 was actually designed not to kill right away but to wound
I’d imagine having plenty of ammo to pick up from departed muhj was part of the reason, when you’re involved in special operations you don’t always have to ability to sit tight and get resupplied like regular military does.
This is how I felt making an essay in high school. In addition, More over. Lmao good video though
it is not true that 7.62x39 retains energy longer, the bullet has a worse ballistic coefficient. also the ranges are not accurate like that
What is this special 'potions'?
opium, they would be so high that they wouldn't feel pain and would continue even when mortally wounded
knock down power... is equivalant to big displacement engines.." no replacement for displacement"
the same reason why spetstanz prefer using ak74 rather than the new ak 12
*Back then*
Soviet Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-74’s I really love them!
Soviet Spetsnaz Soldier: I hate it, prefer old AKM’s or AKMS’.
*Now*
Russian Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-12’s I really love them!
Russian Spetsnaz Operator: I hate it, prefer old AK-74M’s.
Consripts have to use what they are issued . Special units are given more freedom to choose the weapon for their function . Our military works the same way .
The 74 was said to shot a poison bullet because you die later.
Our own soldiers prefer the 7.62x39 AKMs to either the 5.45 or 5.56.
Are you Ukrainian? Because I've noticed that here. We still make new akms. Amusingly, one of the elite NATO trained brigades, was photographed with all new AKMs having, apparently, ditched their issued m16s once the photo ops for media were over and they got into combat. Despite TH-cam revisionism, the stories of American grunts in Vietnam seem to hold true today, albeit in the trenches of eastern Ukraine rather than the jungles of SE Asia
@@michaelwarenycia7588 I was referring to American soldiers. In Vietnam, soldiers claimed war trophies of AKMs but amassed ammo and used it in combat. Our Special Forces insisted on using enemy weapons.
@@Bob-qk2zg interesting that the same preferences hold true here today.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 The idea of using a small projectile was the kinetic energy imparted on impact. K=.5*m*v*v. With velocity bring a square function, speed was emphasized over mass. Battle data showed that the worse wounds were when a bullet hit a man at mach 2 or higher. So, if you hit a man 500 meters away with any bullet going fast enough... However, mass cannot be ignored. A large bullet is effective even at subsonic velocities.
POWERFUL