Garry

In army I witnessed a thing which is always being shown to novice soldiers.... AK-47 shooting into the hanging rairoad rail.... at 10 meters it shoots throug. Snipe I have seen it myself and then few soldiers were also given chance to shoot into the rail. I never shot M-16 to compare but that demostration of firepower looked really IMPRESSIVE....

Tronic

yes, on Discovery they even showed the firepower demonstrations of an Ak-47 and an M-16 both firing into a heavy concrete block... the M-16 bullet hit the block and made a small hole where it went in... the Ak-47 bullet, went right through the concrete block and came out on the other side, splitting the block into two...

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

Anon

He said a tree.

An AK-47 will not penetrate most adult trees(saplings, maybe, depends on the type of tree)...neither will an M16. A .30-06 wont penetrate most adult trees fully either.

The M855 5.56 round handily outpenetrates the AK47s 139gr FMJ projectile in most mediums.

Anon

An M-16A2+(or any rifle) firing M855 will shoot through several concrete cinder blocks.

I've done it myself plenty of times up my uncles cabin in the Pocono mountains.

Tronic

I was talking about Vietnam...

Triple C

Garry, interesting operational perspective on effectiveness of German heavies here. My impressions is that on the tactical level German tanks' edge in superior weapony and armor protection is better exploited in the steppes, where the Russians could be observed and engaged at ranges in excess of 1,000 meters. At long range, Russian guns have ineffective penetration or insufficient range to challenge German tanks, and attempts at manueovering would be difficult due to the lack of cover. In complex terrain, inferior armed and armored Sherman tanks could use their mobility to take the Germans at the flanks or rear under the cover of hills and forests.

Triple C

You still have not explained how did the Discovery Channel proved Ak-47's superior penetration against tree trunks when we know for a fact that it can't penetrate them.

Tronic

they showed the god damn bullet passing through a concrete block and a tree stump!!! I don't know how thick the tree trunk was, but I can tell you the M-16 bullet didn't make it through...

sappersgt

AK-47 rounds are notorious in their lack of energy at longer ranges. If it were not so I would be not be writing this. You can however you can by non Soviet ammunition with much better ballistic characteristics. Many buy cheap Soviet style ammunition complete with corrosive primers for their SKSs and AKs for backup or to practice with. They then get the better (and more expensive) for hunting, etc.

Tronic

I do not know about lack of energy but I know that the AK-47 is not very accurate at long ranges... the tendency of the gun to keep going upwards... the M-16 is a stable platform... but... neverthless, in close range the AK-47 bullets were far more deadlier and powerful...

Tronic

damn... maybe someone with Vietnam experience can explain better...

gunnut

I have a Mini-14, which uses the same type of bullet as the M-16. It went through a 1/4" thick stainless steel plate at about 20 meters, clean. The 5.56mm round has pretty good penetration power compared to a 7.62 Russian. I have doubts about how well the 7.62 Russian can penetrate the 1/4" stainless steel plate.

Mini-14 has 1/11 twist and an 18" barrel. M-16/M-16A1 from the Vietnam era had 1/11 twist (I believe) and a 20" barrel. Both are made to fire the M193 ball ammo. I tested mine with M193 ball, not the new SS109 (M855).

For a comparison, we shot the .303 Brit from an Enfield No.4 at the same target. It went through TWO 1/4" plates staggered with 2" space between them. The 5.56mm went through the first one clean and bounced off the 2nd plate.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

gunnut

Both aren't that good at long ranges. M-16 is actually more deadly in close ranges than the AK. The 5.56 has a tendency to tumble in tissue, causing devastating wounds.

The good thing about the 7.62 round is that it's heavier so it keeps its momentum better after going though light material. This, however, doesn't mean it will stay straight after going through some material.

Triple C

Tronic, I am not trying to a smart ass, but I am might suspicious about Discovery or History Channel's Greatest Gun/Aircraft/Tank ever shows. I have NEVER heard from any veteran from Vietnam or other conflicts that the AK-47 can breeze through trees. Or concrete. I have read Black Hawk Down and I cannot recall a single instance in which an AK bullet actually went through the wall and got someone. Clearly, if AK is so powerful observed instances in which a 7.62 went through a wall and hit someone would be observed more frequently. Sure the AK eventually would shoot the wall to pieces and could punch through more concrete, but breazing through them in the first burst and got the guy behind it? It bears all the hallmarks of urban legends...

Triple C

LCompanyRangers.com, a website maintained by and dedicated to Vietnam era 101st Airbourne's LRRP troopers, has a neat short guide to Russian weapons encountered in Vietnam. The AK-47 entry says:

Capabilities:
All 7.62-mm Kalashnikov assault rifles fire in either semiautomatic or automatic mode and have an effective range of about 300 meters. At full cyclic rate, they can fire about 600 rounds per minute (up to 640 rounds per minute for the AKM), with a practical rate of about 100 rounds per minute fully automatic or 40 rounds per minute semiautomatic. Both the AK and AKM can mount a grenade launcher. Both can have passive image intensifier night sights. Both can function normally after total immersion in mud and water. The fully chromed barrel ensures effective operation even at very low temperatures. The muzzle of either weapon fits into the swiveling firing points of the BMP. Thus, the infantryman can fire the weapon while the vechicle is moving.

Limitations:
The most serious drawback to the AK and AKM is the low muzzle velocity (710 meters per second) of the relatively heavy 7.62-mm round. This results in a looping trajectory that requires a clumsy adjustment for accuracy at ranges beyond 300 meters. The barrel overheats quickly when the weapon fires for extended periods, making the weapon hard to handle and occasionally causing a round to explode prematurely in the chamber. The exposed gas cylinder is easily dented, sometimes causing the weapon to malfunction.

If the AK has so much penetration advantage, why isn't it mentioned anywhere? If the AK came out so cleary superior to the M-16, why would the Russians adopt AK-74? The AK series have some strong characteristics, but blasting through trees is one thing it cannot do.