Talk:AK-74/Archive 1

Keep it separate
The AK-74 is a different firearm all together. Though it is related to the AK-47 the changes made and the reasons for them set it apart. Why else would the Russian military have made such a huge and expensive change in their frontline combat weapon when they already had a tried and true one in place? Trust me, a comment noting their relationship is justified in each article, but they are truely different.
 * LOL It's 90% the same gun chambered for a different cartridge. I'd bet you've fired neither one. Riddley 02:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Ditto. It is certainly NOT "a different firearm all together". There are differences, but the biggest one is the different chambering. CynicalMe 02:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The M4 Carbine isn't included on the M16 page and shouldn't be. Same here.  Gяaρнic  20:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, but you could make the case that the M-4 should be at least mentioned, since it is a direct derivative of the M-16. I agree with Riddley that the AK-74 and 47 are almost the same. I own both, and if you look closely at the two, you will find that the design, operation, feel, size (almost) etc. are exactly the same between the 47 and the 74, or actually, the AKM and the AK-74. The only differences are the cartridge, the muzzle brake on the 74, a grenade launching lug on the 74, and the ID cuts in the stock (and a couple of teeny-weeny changes, like a grooved buttplate). Everythng else is fundamentally the same. AK person 02:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Arguing that the AK-74 Article should be merged into the AK-47 Article is like arguing that every AR-10/15 Derivative (since all M16/M4 Family weapons are just variants of the AR-10, shrunk down and in the case of the latter with the end chopped off) or that the AR-18 series of weapons should be merged with the L85, since the L85 was just the AR-18 action crammed into a bullpup housing. Or that the AK-series should be merged with teh Galil or SIG-550 articles, both of which have massive influence from said design. Spiz101 (talk) 13:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

No international law!
There is no international law. You're talking conventions and treaties. At any rate, ALL bullets will yaw. The smaller the bullet and the higher the velocity, the greater the tendancy to yaw. International conventions and treaties specify the use of ammuniton that causes undue sufferring beyond their military asset. The use of soft-point and hollow-point ammunition arguably causes the same damage as a modern, well designed 5.56 bullet.--Asams10 17:31, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Additons I made
I added the little firearms table featured in other firearms articles to this article. --Skyler Streng 23:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Pulling "Children's Section"
I've pulled the 'children's section' of this article here to the discussion. In keeping in line with the encyclopedic nature of Wikipedia, we don't need a listing of each of the hundreds of times you've watched "Die Another Day" or other such movies and thought the AK's were cool. Also, we don't need a laundry list of video games in the main article. I think there might be a call for a "Firearms in Movies" article with a listing of guns and the movies they've appeared in. A similar article could be made for Video Games if somebody is so inclined. Just keep it out of this article, please. Deleted text here: --Asams10 17:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The AK-74 is held by enemies in Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon games series.
 * The AK-74 is available in the Hitman game series, during missions in Russia.
 * Known as the AKS-74 in Sony's SOCOM: US Navy SEALs II
 * In the Act of War : Direct Action game, the Consortium faction's basic rifle infantry uses the AK-74.
 * A variation of the AK-74, it is labeled as a KSI-74 in Perfect Dark Zero.
 * In Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty the Gurlukovich soldiers use silenced/suppressed AKS74u's a shortened variant, also it is gained by the main character Raiden.
 * The weapon is attained (As the 'KF7 Soviet') when fighting the KGB in GoldenEye 007 for the Nintendo 64. Rareware is notorious for altering the names of known guns for copyright reasons.
 * The AK-74 is widely available in the video game James Bond 007: Everything or Nothing.
 * The AK-74 is available in the computer game Soldier of Fortune II
 * In 24: The Game, the M80 is a featured weapon in several missions.
 * One of the 10 primary weapons in the popular online game Soldat is the AK-74.

thank you! it gets just as bad on sports car pages... -- 69.35.37.97 00:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

For the Childrens section could you just link to Internet Movie Firearms Database. Here is the AK 74 page for example http://www.imfdb.org/index.php/AK-74 Falcon5nz (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Image
Why not an image of the rifle in the article?
 * What? An image is right there NeoExelor 04:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

What makes this an assault rifle while the US M2 Carbine isn't? -Boris B 23:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This is not an article about the M2 Carbine, so your question would be better posed on that article's talk page. CynicalMe 00:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. I understand why M2 Carbine redirects to M1 Carbine.  Talk on that article compares the M2 to the AK-47 and Sturmgewehr 44, weapons with much higher muzzle energy.  That's not true of the AK-74.  Maybe this isn't particularly pertinent to Wikipedia though, so I'm happy to drop it.  -Boris B 06:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy
Seeing as how people generally get all worked up about the supposed deadly accuracy of Western small-caliber assault rifles (When was the last time any ordinary footsoldier hit anything with his weapon in real combat at 500 yards? By skill instead of luck?  Never.), it would be interesting to see how the AK-74 using a broadly comparable design philosophy stacks up in the accuracy department. In any event the article would benefit by its inclusion.

I note that the 500m effective range listed would put the AK-74 on par with the vaunted accuracy of the M-16 and in the middle of the sighting marks of the G36. Kensai Max 15:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, the AK design is inherintly less accurate than the M16 design. This is not argued by anybody in the know.  You seem to acknowledge this by starting your statement with the suggestion that nobody can shoot at 500 yards anyhow.  This is bunk.  I shoot high-power rifle matches and, at 600 yards, even I can get decent scores with my modified AR-15.  However, whatever ranges are listed, soldiers rarely ENGAGE targets beyond 300 yards.  At that range, the M16 still has a distinct advantage over the AK. This isn't bravado, it's fact.  --Asams10 18:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, but be honest. You got decent scores w/ the AR-15, but nobody was shooting at you. I have been in combat in Iraq, at short and long range, and believe me, when a bunch of guys are shooting at you, you won't usually take the time to line up a perfect shot. I perfectly agree with the assertion that at practical combat ranges, the AK-74 is just as accurate and effective. Remember too that combat accuracy does not mean shooting a one inch group. Combat accuracy means hitting the center-of-mass, and both the M-16 and the AK-74 fit the bill here. However, from a purely objective POV, the M16/AR-15 is probably more accurate out of the box. --AK person

If the effective range listed for both guns in their wiki articles is based on the same standards (I assume US Army ones), the AK-74 has accuracy on par with a standard-issue M-16. Now, the AR-15 design can probably be accurized to a much higher degree, but that's completely irrelevant with the ordinary infantryman's assault rifle and only comes into play when talking about marksman rifles - and I note that the Russians have had the Dragunov (at the ranges involved, a far more effective weapon than any 5.56mm rifle) at a squad level for far longer than we have been deploying marksmen.

Did you even read what I wrote? I quote, "When was the last time any ordinary footsoldier hit anything with his weapon in REAL COMBAT at 500 yards?" Target shooting and theoretical ranges are completely irrelevant here. You yourself admit that accuracy beyond 300m for an assault rifle means little beyond better shot placement at the range of real-world firefights - <300m.

Now, that the AK-47 is less absolutely accurate than the M-16 is not open to debate. It's an entirely earlier generation of weapon firing a larger, slower bullet - still quite straight enough to put all its bullets inside a torso-sized target at 300 yards if you aim straight. The question at hand here is the accuracy of its small-caliber successor, the AK-74, whose effective range is listed as 500m in the article - merely 50m short of the M-16's. Assuming the standards are the same, the M-16 has no real advantage in accuracy over the AK-74, while its usual disadvantages remain in full force.

On a tangent, people continually spout off that a marginally more accurate weapon translates to a real advantage in a firefight. I have yet to see anyone actually back that statement up substantially. I have a hard time seeing how better accuracy will make up even one soldier's gun jamming due to its delicate, easily-fouled design in a serious battle. Kensai Max 16:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see where this is going. Not going to argue with you.  You're wrong on most points, but I doubt you'd admit it, so there's no point in me wasting your time.  I concede you are more stuburn.  You can have your point that the effective ranges are equivelant.--Asams10 18:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Wrong on most points how? By your declaration? Give me a break. You say yourself that you refuse to argue, so you effectively concede ALL points to me. I don't mind winning an argument on the first reply, but I can be surprisingly reasonable about differing viewpoints.

Stubborn? I refused to accept your unqualified dismissal of the "AK" system (not all of which are made equal), your hasty misinterpretation of my previous post, your irrelevant tangent on target-shooting and your often-repeated, never-proven mantra about the advantages of a somewhat more accurate weapon in a frantic firefight. You want to make claims, back them up and understand your opponent's. Kensai Max 22:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not conceding any points but the one I mentioned. I'm refusing to engage.  --Asams10 00:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

If you had no interest in debate you wouldn't post in the first place. You either debate or concede - refusing to debate is concession. Kensai Max 14:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Uh, no. You don't get to tell me I have to debate.  You're proving my point and this is silly.  Good day.--Asams10 17:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Snipe and run is a valid tactic in warfare, but you look like a fool in an argument. If you want to, that's your business, but you're not getting the last word here. Kensai Max 23:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * For the record, personal attacks don't make your argument right, either. Again, this is silly.--Asams10 02:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Proof makes your argument right. Kensai Max 23:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So, prove your argument then... and this is still silly.--Asams10 00:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You're the one making broad claims that require proof. Kensai Max 05:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, nothing broad. I just said your broad claims were wrong.  You're trying to browbeat me into conceding like you've done a bunch of times in previous 'talk page wars' with other users.--Asams10 14:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to review your claims. As your claim is the extremely vague "wrong on most points", I'll assume that you object to my entire argument besides points you have explicitly agreed with.

1. Implication that the AK-74 is not as accurate as a stock M-16 by the use of weasel words. If the effective ranges are the same and they were tested to the same standards of accuracy, they are equally accurate. Full stop.

2. That the Russians have not been using designated marksmen for far longer than we have. I note that the Dragunov was in service in 1963 and we've only started talking about the concept recently.

3. That the AK-47 will not put most of its bullets inside a man's torso at 300m. I'm under the impression that US Army standard for effective range is >50% of rounds inside a 20-in diameter circle. I assume they know what they're doing when they test - or do you have some kind of insider info you'd like to share?

4. This is the big one, that a marginally more accurate weapon actually means something in a real firefight. Can you supply one single source saying that this is true by something other than testimony and opinion? Tests with obvious bias aren't going to fly either. Joe Infantryman may have been in a few firefights, but I doubt he's used an AK-47 in half of them and an M-16 in the other half and can even hope to scientifically compare their effectiveness. And the only people in the military who could make that kind of comparison... aren't going to be spouting off on the internet.

Hell, even the United States Military agrees with me here - or are you going to be claiming that an M-4 carbine can shoot the same kind of groups as a full-sized M-16? I note that with a barrel-length only slightly shorter than a stock AK-47's, an M-4 has an equivalent effective range of 300m. As far as handiness goes, the AK-74, while longer than the AK-47, is still some six centimeters shorter overall than a full M-16 and has a ten-centimeter shorter barrel (same lenght as the '47's) with an insignificant drop in effective range.

My claims are either common knowledge, simple logic, or not accepting unfounded claims at face value. Care to refute them by argument instead of open denial? Kensai Max 18:14, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow. I give up. I concede you have more time on your hands than I do. The AK-74 is, however, less accurate than the M16. Your arguing with flawed logic, therefore any argument I get into will be tedious.  Again, this is silly. You keep trying to get the last word in so I'll just let you.  I don't have enough time for this.  You're still wrong.--Asams10 21:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I concede that you're remarkably insistent. Cheers. Kensai Max 01:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Holy crap, both of you used some bad arguing. As a third party, I can honestly say that Asams sounds like he can't back up his position when he refuses to argue. And Kensai, you use some ad hominems that could really be left out. I would say that from a bench, the M-16 is probably more accurate. However, in combat both probably would have equal effectiveness. AK person 03:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The AK is built to looser tolerances, has a creepier, stiffer trigger assembly, poor ergonomics by modern standards, a short sight radius with a forward mounted rear ramp sight and cruder adjustments. By definition, it isn't even close to as accurate as a factory AR series, even disregarding the usually crappy tolerance Eastern bloc ammo.  And I speak as someone who's used an AR for 22 years in the military and has combat match trophies and related specialty training to back it up:)


 * The AK is adequately accurate for the use for which it is intended--infantry fire by illiterate peasants.


 * I wouldn't want to get shot by either of them.


 * Are we done now?Mzmadmike 00:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Illiterate peasants? That's a grossly inaccurate and inappropriate generalization. Some guy 19:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

As usual from the AK-hating crowd...

I have some experience with mechanical engineering. There are a lot of tolerances in a gun that are irrelevant to the actual accuracy of the weapon, namely all of those which do not relate to the chamber and barrel when the round is locked into position and ready to fire. All firearms have very precise chamber dimensioning as a simple fact of operation - the AK's advantage in that area is that is uses a fairly conical round that goes in and out easily. Saying that an AK is inaccurate because it has loose tolerances is misleading because the tolerancing has to do with moving parts of the gun that are only moving after the round has left the barrel and which thus have nothing to do with its mechancial accuracy.

This is proven quite clearly by the fact that AKs can be accurized - there are highly successful marksman rifles built off the action, like the Dragunov, and variants on the action that are generally known as accurate rifles such as the SIG 550! The Kalashnikov action is no more inherently inaccurate than any other gas piston action, end of story.

As such almost all accuracy issues with the platform have to do with the ammunition used. 7.62x39 ammo is fairly low-velocity and is not ballistically suited to long range fire, as such the standard AKM platform has its range limited by the ballistics of the round and the inconsistencies of its manufacture (and before you start talking about how superior Western ammo is to commie stuff, I highly suggest you look at the service ammo tests at boxoftruth.com showing Western service ammo getting 2MOA out of a highly accurized AR-15). The 5.45x39 round is a high-velocity round that is going to give you roughly the same ballistic performance as NATO 5.56 ammunition and as such the modernized AK-74 has a much longer effective range, comparable to any 5.56 rifle. It's highly worth noting that very accurate target rounds have been made by wildcatting 5.45mm ammunition, such as the 6mm PPC.

The sights on an AK are not an issue, nor are the ergonomics. I shoot on flat sights all the time and don't feel a significant accuracy difference. As long as the ergonomics of a weapon aren't egregious soldiers will deal with it and learn to love it.

And don't give me that "illiterate peasant spray and pray" line. The Russian Army was never composed of illiterate peasants and if you push the issue you're simply denying reality. Good day. 24.59.197.249 01:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC) (this is Kensai Max, I forgot to sign in before writing this)

I agree with you somewhat with the fact that the tolerances outside of the action don't affect the round that has already left the chamber, HOWEVER, They DO affect shot follow through. The larger tolerances have an effect of pretty much moving the rifle around. If you watch an ak47(or 74) fire in slow motion, you can see the action really moving things around. The AR15 doesn't have this problem because of the gas system it uses. And for all of those people who say that the AR isn't reliable don't know what they're talking about. The only problem the army ever had with it was when they said it was self cleaning, and used extremely dirty ammunition, and didn't issue cleaning kits. If it was as bad of a weapon as people say, we wouldn't use it.70.127.8.35 (talk) 14:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

And this folks is why we don't allow user feedback or "impressions" in firearms articles... Koalorka (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Loud?
Sure, it's noiser than the 47, but I never thought the 74 was "extremely" loud. Any thoughts? (67.175.99.33 07:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC))

Well, if you stand to one side or the other and get the full effect of the muzzle blast, it can be very loud, even louder than the M-16, in my experience. AK person 03:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Magazines?
Are the magazines made of plastic or bakelite? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.116.98.179 (talk) 19:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Good Question. The simple answer is "yes." The first Magazines were made of an orange/red bakelite. They changed sometime in...1982 or 83, if I remember right. They switched to polyamide (plastic) mags for 2 reasons: The bakelite mags had a tendancy to crack from the cold and harsh use in Afghanistan, and they reflected sunlight too much. The first Poly mags were a "plum" color (kind of a brown purple color; both of the "in action" pictures in the article have AK-74s with the plum colered furniture), then at about the time they switched from plum to black furniture (~1990), they also changed the mag color to black. AK person 03:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Operators ??
China seems haven't use any ak74, they use self-made Type 81. China only use 7.26mm and 5.8mm cartridge. Never see any report they use 5.45mm.

No, they have apparently stayed away from it, prefering their own designs AK person 03:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Estonia DOES NOT use G36 as primary service rifle, we use AK4 instead.

Picure mislabeling
I think that the pic of the Naval Infantryman with the AK-74 is mislabeled. The "M" designation would mean that the 74 has the plastic folding stock that all AK-74M's have. To have the triangular stock in the picture means that it has to be an AKS-74, not an AK-74M. whatever it is, the AK-74M already has a side folding stock, so there is no "S" in its nomenclature. AK person 03:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

a silly mistake, it's just a late production model AKS-74.

Totally Inaccurate
Bunk article. The 7.62 x 39 has been shown to be "ineffective" under 200m??? Ridiculous. And the 5.45 was shown 20 years ago NOT to fragment in the body. This article is bogus. 69.226.24.162

By who? I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I want proof. I do agree with you that the 200m argument is crap, though.


 * 7.62X39 is not "ineffective" under 200m. However, it is not as effective as the smaller cartridges, based on wound studies.  I'll make a note and see if I can amend the section slightly.Mzmadmike 00:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

You are right, it does not fragment. It does tumble, however

New Reference for review, and need updating...
Regarding the effective of the AK-74, I find the following article interesting. Please review for comment before adding it to the reference section.

Korac, Zelimer, "Terminal ballistics of the Russian AK 74 assault rifle: Two wounded patients and experimental findings"; Military Medicine, December 2001

I also found that the reference to Fackler's article is dead. It needs updating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pasvorn (talk • contribs) 17:21, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal
Today I noticed that there is an article for AKS-74. I would like to propose that it be merged into this article per WP:GUNS, which specifically states that telescoping, retractable, and other stock variations be merged into the parent gun's article.--LWF (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Support - duh, for anybody that knows me, but the two weapons are clearly the same with minor differences... many more differences than in the Glock, but still not enough to justify a separate article. --Asams10 (talk) 17:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Support per proposal. AKS-74 doesn't need its own article. N b u r d e n  (T) 00:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks like this article should have a section on the variants. If someone could do that it would be good, since I don't have enough time to do it for a while.--LWF (talk) 01:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It's done. I sure seem to be doing a lot of merges lately...--LWF (talk) 04:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Another merge proposal, AKS-74U
I'm about to re-write most of the article and I believe the AKS-74U should be included, it's a variant of the AKS-74 with a shorter barrel and a different sight setup and some minor changes to the gas system and dust cover. But it is still considered a part of the AK-74 family. Thoughts? Comments? Koalorka (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, some things to consider would be if significant portions of history and/or design would be lost, and if not, if merging would make this article too long.--LWF (talk) 03:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Apart from merging the AKS-74U I plan on rewriting most of the AK-74 article. It would be no longer than say my Heckler & Koch G36 re-write, but would have a similar structure with a detailed development history, technical design and variants (including the proposed AKS-74U). Hope I can count your support! Koalorka (talk) 03:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I would suggest making the rewrite first in a subpage then when it is done we could then decided if its all good if you catch my drift Bones Brigade  04:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Check out my user page and scroll through the articles I've rewritten, that will give you a good idea of what I plan on doing. Of course valuable facts already present in this version will be included but quite frankly, there aren't that many.... Koalorka (talk) 05:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty happy with the article now. What do you guys think? The nice folks at Izhmash were even kind enough to donate a high-res image of the AK-74M image to illustrate the article. Koalorka (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the AKS-74U should have its own article (epsecially since there was still things about it that could be expanded apon that I never had time to add), either (preferably) that or at least its own distinct section in this article. As far as your rewrite is concerned, it's got a lot of great info in it, but I feel the wording and structure needs to be slightly optimized. But still good work. Skyler Streng (talk) 04:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Intermediate Cartridge
What ever happened to 7.62x39? It's also an intermediate cartridge, and came before 5.45. SO how the AK-74 the first Russian weapon in an intermediate caliber?Rynky (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Some confusion arising from intermediate calibre and intermediate cartridge perhaps? Geoff B (talk) 19:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Nope, it was wrong. I corrected it. --Asams10 (talk) 19:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I thought it was fishy. Rynky (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Technically, it is a small caliber in terms of bore diameter. The term 'intermediate caliber' is used to describe cartridge power, not bore diameter or velocity.  The first of these type of cartridges was the German 7.92x33mm however the American 30 Carbine was developed alongside it and for much the same reason. --Asams10 (talk) 20:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The Soviets make a distinction between the M43 and M74 cartridges, our established phraseology does not necessarily apply. Koalorka (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think you're losing something in the translation there. "Intermediate" clearly means between something and something else. Since there is nothing on the other side, the M74 cannot be intermediate.  Either get a better translation or, as I'd already edited it out, leave it out. --Asams10 (talk) 20:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The M74 is most definitely an intermediate round, no confusion there, just like the analogous intermediate 5.56x45mm cartridge, after which it was modeled. Koalorka (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * True, it is an intermediate cartridge, however it replaced another intermediate cartridge. It's not an intermediate caliber (bore diameter) though and it's clearly a small caliber, intermediate power coartridge like the 5.56x45 and the half-dozen other SCHV's out there.  However, it was not the first intermediate cartridge.  Perhaps you can say it was the first small-caliber cartridge. Not sure if it says so, but Kalashnikov was against the SCHV concept and, I believe, still speaks about it being inferior to the cartridge it replaced.  I'd tend to agree in principle, but I prefer intermediate calibers like the 6.5mm Grendal or 6mm SAW. --Asams10 (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, I doubt most all of the things said about Kalashnikov in relation to the AK-74, some sources say he was enthusiastic, other say hesitant but willing, still others say he was forced, and still others say he did it, didn't like it, but saw it as a good way to revitalize the design.--LWF (talk) 21:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Saw this in a television interview, but I agree with your sentiment. Even Kalashnikov's statements are often contradictory.  I find no real fault with the 5.45 ammunition.  In fact, I think it's better designed than anything out there. Very efficient, reliable, inexpensive (compared to the 5.56) and much lighter. --Asams10 (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * True, much of the surplus Soviet/Russian ammo is of unusual quality for surplus. A good friend that happens to be a gunsmith explained that they sold their surplus not because it didn't meet their usual quality standards, but because they needed the money, unlike some surplus out there.--LWF (talk) 22:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Flag of Russia?
Why is English Wikipedia different? Just compare our description of the rifle to any other. We clearly show a far greater depth of insight than any other, that's why. And the AK-74M and the AK-100 series are all Russian-developed in the 1990s. Koalorka (talk) 11:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The heading is called place of origin; not place of series produced in the 1990s. El_C 11:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, exactly. The origin of the AK-74M and AK-100 series is the Russian Federation. Koalorka (talk) 11:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That fails to respond to my point about the origin of the original model, not the AK-101, etc. El_C 11:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we're both aware that the original AK-74 was developed in what was then the Soviet Union. The Russian flag signifies continuing development of the platform. We've had a huge discussion on this somewhere and came to the conclusion that origin flags should portray the historical state entity of origin. That's why we have German-made weapon articles built during WWII "decorated" with the Nazi Germany flag rather than just Germany. I cannot find the discussion. Koalorka (talk) 11:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not a conventional designation in other infoboxes I'm aware of. Short of examples that are linked, I'd like a 3rd opinion. El_C 11:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Take a look around. The Walther PPK - Weimar Republic, HK G3, HK33, MP5 - West Germany etc etc. Koalorka (talk) 11:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This is becoming tendentious. You can't even bother offering links? Walther PPK has only one place of origin. El_C 11:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, than what exactly is it that you're contesting? Dual flags are used, see M249 SAW, M240. Koalorka (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That looks like an exceptional circumstance; we already have articles on the series. El_C 11:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your last comment? There are quite a few more I can point out if that's what you're seeking..? Koalorka (talk) 11:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That is what I'm seeking. El_C 11:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Nagant M1895 and Mosin-Nagant off the top of my head. Koalorka (talk) 12:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, whatever. El_C 12:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AKS-74U
Is the AKS-74U an assault rifle or an SMG? Some websites list it as a assault rifle, but some video games (such as Call of Duty 4 and Battlefield Bad Company) list it as an SMG. 69.76.52.218 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Submachine guns by definition fire a pistol cartridge. The 5.45x39mm M74 round is an intermediate rifle cartridge, so the AKS-74U is an assault rifle, a compact one. It could also be classified as a carbine, but the definition is rather blurred and used in American nomenclature almost exclusively. Koalorka (talk) 00:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Is it worth noting that it is also known as the "Krinkov"? Krinkov redirects to the AK-74 page but nowhere in the text does it mention "Krinkov"Falcon5nz (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Hallo, I am from Russia. It may be worth mentioning that AKS-74U is often nicknamed "ukorot" (укорот), meaning "shorty". Sometimes it is called "ubliudok" (ублюдок) - literally "bastard". This is probably due to its ugly appearance... Lord Mountbatten (talk) 15:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

How many :)

 * How many items produced? --Berserkerus (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * 7,800,000 before production of AK-74M, so many more than that (according to serial numbers). That number does not include Soviet/Russian or foreign variants, such as the AKS-74U or RPK-74, etc. http://tantal.kalashnikov.guns.ru/variants.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.124.78 (talk) 07:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * That number is absolutely unrealistic. Koalorka (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Velocity of bullet
I don't understand why the shortened version would create a smaller muzzle velocity. It's counter-intuitive that a shorter barrel would create more resistance on the projectile. Is this correct, or am I confused? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.181.58.51 (talk) 14:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * A longer barrel ensures that high-pressure propellant gases have a longer time to interact with the projectile, a short barrel prevents the projectile from absorbing most of the kinetic energy. Koalorka (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Use in Iraq
Does anyone know if Iraqi soldiers and/or policemen use these? If there is I'll add the flag and name to The Users List. Thanks.All of the Names Were Taken (talk) 21:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Not as far as I know. They were supplied with recently produced AKM's from either Romania/Poland/Bulgaria. Prior to that, Iraq had only AKM's and a few older models. Koalorka (talk) 01:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Armor Piercing?
The AK's bullets are mostly solid steel and do not fragment. Are these things armor piercing? Is there possibly alternative ammo for them that does fragment?

http://www.btammolabs.com/fackler/ak74_wounding_potential.pdf

AThousandYoung (talk) 05:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * This is not a forum. The talk page is for comments or suggestions related to improving the article. Koalorka (talk) 05:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

merge
I think this article should be merged with the AK-101 and AK-103 articles because they are pretty much the same as the AK-74M except that they take different calibers. 72.129.158.17 (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. Koalorka (talk) 04:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

, as they differ significantly from the early model AK-74s. Unless there is going to be a whole new article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.124.78 (talk) 07:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. The differences can be handled in a sentence or two in the variants section of this article.


 * Disagree Strongly. They are two entirely different rifles. It's like combining the HK416 with the M4, bad idea. -ANK 71.244.133.129 (talk) 18:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Angola
Scroll down | this thread and there are some photos of Angolan Special Forces using the AK-74M rifle. 13dble (talk) 13dble (talk) 14:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Venezuela
Venezuela is not an user of AK74. They first imported, and now they are going to produce, AK103 in 7.62x39mm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poliorcetes (talk • contribs) 16:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The AK-100 series are variants of the AK-74, but since they have their own dedicated pages, the entry here is misleading. I will remove it. Koalorka (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Russian Navy pictures?
Why are there five pictures of Russian Navy and Marines using the AK-74, but not a single picture of the Russian Army? Just a thought, the photos need some balance. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the Navy is more photogenic? Kidding aside, these were simply available from the U.S. DOD website. Koalorka (talk) 03:31, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Infobox question
Can we add "2008 South Ossetia war" under the Service History - Wars section? Because from photographs of the war, I remember some soldiers who equipped with AK-74. To check myself, I searched a little bit and I found out this. AK-74 was used by both sides. So I wonder if we should specify this war here..


 * Some? The AK-74 is the most widespread service rifle in the Russian Armed Forces. Koalorka (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

60 round box magazines
The new 60 round quad stack magazines should be listed under the feed system, as they currently aren't. Reference: http://www.avtomats-in-action.com/pro18.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.122.191 (talk) 02:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Yugoslavian Variant & Chinese Variant
There is a Yugoslavian rifle called the Zastava M80, it is chambered for 5.56x45mm and it has the AK-74 style muzzle brake. Should we also list Yugoslavia on the main page? And there is a Chinese variant known as the Type 84, it's chambered for 5.56x45mm but lacks the AK-74 muzzle brake and is used mostly in Canadian and Australian TV shows as a "stand in" for the AK-74. The Type 84 was never accepted into Chinese service and there are 3 variants, Type 84 is fixed stock, Type 84-1 is under-folding stock, and Type 84-2 has the same side folding stock as the Type 56-2. UncleMikhail —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC).

North Korean Variants
There are also variants that are made by North Korea. The Type 88 is the copy of the AK-74 and the Type 98 is the copy of the AK-74M. Should we list North Korea as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UncleMikhail (talk • contribs) 02:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Airsoft Photo
The current main photo labeled "AK-74M" is just an airsoft gun and not an actual one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.72.154 (talk)
 * According to the file history [], the image is from the US Army, I would hope they weren't tricked... Monty 845 08:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

100% airsoft gun - as for US Army source - may be the author of the image just tagged it with the wrong license tag. As far - I'm for restoring the previous picture--82.196.72.200 (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I just reverted someone's attempt to add said image back after it was removed. As for the 'US Army' tag on it, I think that it might just be someone adding it to make the image seem legit. My $0.02 --L1A1 FAL (talk) 03:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

WP Note
I've reviewed this for WP:POLAND and I don't believe it is important enough to be included under that project. Milhist Polish task force is enough.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 21:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat wrong
The Western sources (Williams etc.) have very incomplete information about the development of this gun/program. Trials for a 5.45 mm weapon were held as early as 1968, with several contestants, including Kalashnikov's A-3. There was a 5.6 mm proposal even in 1965. A good source to fix this article (and the associated 5.45×39mm) one is:, part II, chapter 1, pp. 134-157. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.army-technology.com/projects/ak-74m-assault-rifle-russian-army-military/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

AK-74M universal upgrade kit photo
Here is a good photo of an upgraded AK-74M. 37.143.222.16 (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

AKS-74U with a plastic handguard
Personally, I highly doubt that AKS-74U with a plastic handguard ever actually existed, and if really did, that can only be some modification of the already existing weapon - a very bad modification, to be more precise.

Firstly, such AKS-74U has never been seen at all, except some Airsoft replicas of course (like the one on the photo most probably), which somebody ignorant obviously confused with real ones, either deliberately or accidentally.

Secondly, there is actually a pure logical reason why such AKS-74U never existed and why such modification would be a terrible idea - it is the fact that with firing, not just that such handguard would became so hot that it could not be even touched, it would literally melt down sooner or later on automatic mode in longer bursts due to relatively high rate of fire combined with a short barrel and gas tube for such weapon and caliber which all results in relatively higher and easier overheating by default.

Maybe ever better proof for this is another fact that the carbines of later AK-100 series (AK-102, 104 and 105) all have to be made with a slightly longer barrel and gas tube (longer than AKS-74U but still shorter than AK-101, 103, and AK-74M, except gas tube which is of the same length) exactly because of using a plastic handguard. Otherwise exactly the same would happen - a relatively quick and high warming of the handugard resulting in its meltdown in the worst case, which is the reason why the AKS-74U was never produced with such, as mentioned before. And by the way, production of AKS-74U finished back in 1994, so all of those 'new' variants with plastic handguards (if they ever existed at all) cannot be nothing more than modifications, like stated before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.155.43 (talk) 23:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on AK-74. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150221062623/http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/product/ak74m.shtml to http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/product/ak74m.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140221145947/http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/arc/021205.shtml to http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/arc/021205.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006092719/http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/product/akm.shtml to http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/product/akm.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120818080354/http://www.fnherstal.com:80/index.php?id=184&backPID=182&productID=7&pid_product=232&pidList=182&categorySelector=1&detail=&cHash=3a3be0ef69 to http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=184&backPID=182&productID=7&pid_product=232&pidList=182&categorySelector=1&detail=&cHash=3a3be0ef69
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131206214529/http://swissarms.ch/index.php?id=31 to http://www.swissarms.ch/index.php?id=31&L=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Assault rifle


Is this true? Assault rifle. Or is it confusion with Assault weapon? Many sources call the AK-74 an "assault rifle". For example, "Kalashnikov AK-74, AKS-74 and AK-74M assault rifles " We should reflect common usage. Felsic2 (talk) 15:40, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I've restored it pending a discussion. Felsic2 (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I concur. I do believe assault rifle is being confused with assault weapon, which is definitely a political term. - BilCat (talk) 18:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on AK-74. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402153725/http://kalashnikovconcern.ru/en/product/product_88.html to http://kalashnikovconcern.ru/en/product/product_88.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100109141220/http://www.tulatoz.ru/en/milaksu74.html to http://www.tulatoz.ru/en/milaksu74.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:57, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Airsoft gun photo
The first photo for the AK-74M is of an airsoft replica. The much larger pistol grip, folding stock button that is not drilled through, and other details give it away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FCC8:BFC0:72:D962:889E:7D98:79F0 (talk) 00:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Why it should be deleted
The file upload date is after the linked version of the image. The image on the link url is larger more detailed, means its the original. feb 08 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.68.23.149 (talk) 18:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. Such edits are considered vandalism and quickly undone.--RAF910 (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

NOTE: This IP user 73.68.23.149 has been Blocked for Disruptive Editing.--RAF910 (talk) 20:12, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * AK-74M-Обвес.jpg

AK-74 rate of fire and other changes from the AKM
Does the AK-74 rate fire control group and rate reducer fire faster than the AKM parts? I ask because in this video of a post-sample conversion WASR, the guy mentions that he put a 74 group in it and it fired faster. There's also this vid too of a regular full auto AKM with and without it's rate reducer to compare the rate of fire. Anyways, I'd also like details on the "light weight bolt carrier" the 74M section mentions. Light weight how? I do know AK-74 bolt carriers typically have a large lightening cut on their left side, but these were introduced almost a decade prior to the 74M. There is also a Romanian AK bolt carrier that has two lightening cuts drilled on each side of the tail found here. Can't find any info on it, specifically which rifle it's from. Lastly, the AK extractor. On the images of AKM bolts I've seen it is "housed" partially in the bolt body but on 74s it is exposed. Was this actually one of the changes made between the AKM and 74, because it's not listed on the page.--99.162.189.196 (talk) 05:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Back with an update, here's some youtube videos comparing the two in full auto:
 * AKM:
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU7GrFGCAZ8&t=24
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-Kcs-F9jhs&t=212 (sounds a bit faster than the other AKMs)
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PIk-VMXIyY&t=15
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY71nd0ZkSA&t=34
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDqAcdiEKqg&t=3
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5mvvK68xG4&t=9
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2VD7i6bBvg&t=28
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Lnx-YIjRUA&t=50 (short bursts)
 * AK74:
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSHWpB6Olnk&t=2
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UYoTWpFrfc (sounds a lot slower then the other AK74s)
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3O7BlTcPyk&t=11
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFQS5e_4qoI&t=13
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5txFgsRqO0&t=96
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNDlVVmDpzE&t=4
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In7qx8igVTc&t=2 (guy in the comments mentions something about the profile of the trigger hook, author responds back with something about the rate reducer [vague])
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-LkfXP_QA&t=137 (short bursts)
 * And here's a video with both and the rate of fire difference is a lot more noticeable on this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJnJhhX_Nqs
 * Should be noted I excluded short barrel versions of the guns as well as AKM/74 hybrid variants like the Tantal 88 and md. 86 since they'll likely to have rate of fire differences. Here's also another video showing the differences in bolt carriers, including the lightning cut on the 74 mentioned in my first post. Here's a thread that shows what looks like the Romanian bolt carrier I was also asking about, they say it's for the md. 86. I also found an article and thread talking about changes to the AKM to 74 trigger. Anyways, I know this isn't a really scientific comparison, hence why I'm not adding it to the article, but if anyone can help me find answers on this, know someone who has the answer, etc. it would be helpful. Am I just hearing things?--99.162.189.196 (talk) 05:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Turkey with the MPI-74
I have seen Turkey as one of the users, someone removed it, I added it back but I don't know how to add a flag, Turkey uses the MPI-74 and it is used by the village guards only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mig Pilot (talk • contribs) 14:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:23, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Russian paratroopers 9 may 2005 b.jpg