i see rock river has come out with a 7.62x39 ar that accepts ak mags. list is 1200 called a lar-47

Undoubtedly more money than a decent Yugo AK....so why not just buy the AK? I wouldn't buy a .223 AK either.

quote:

Originally posted by tendrams:
Undoubtedly more money than a decent Yugo AK....so why not just buy the AK? I wouldn't buy a .223 AK either.

Well one good reason not buy the AK is that the AR in 7.62x29 in a very very accurate rifle. Expect under inch groups easy with a good load and good bullet. The AK is a lead hose.

Never could like an AK-47 either. I've tried several times.

Terry

I have a Lancaster AK 47 made in Goodyear, Arizona that shoots 2"-2.5" with cheap ammo and a red dot site at 100 yds off the bench. May do a lot better with a really good site and good ammo.

An AR in 7.62X39 would really be a good mid range stopper.

Read up on the 7.62x39 on an AR platform.

Lots of users report lots of problems.

George

why buy an ak? well, scope and other optics choices, and quality mounts are about zero

quote:

Originally posted by GeorgeS:
Read up on the 7.62x39 on an AR platform.

Lots of users report lots of problems.

George

There are, or should I say were, three main problems. A good reliable feeding magazine which supposedly has been solved with RRA's LAR-47 is designed to use the AK magazine. The next area is light firing pin strike on military ammo with the hard primers. That has be resolved with a modification ( a very simple one) to the firing pin or bolt tail. The third is a build up of the coating used on the steel case ammo. It use to be lacquer, but I believe it's been changed to a polymer. It's possible the AR's chamber it on the tight side as compared to an AK. That RRA should run very well.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The third is a build up of the coating used on the steel case ammo. It use to be lacquer, but I believe it's been changed to a polymer. It's possible the AR's chamber it on the tight side as compared to an AK. That RRA should run very well.

I'll wait till I see some reports of actual use. I would be concerned that RRA made the chamber on the loose side, to compensate for those who want to use the cheapest and worst ammo, steel cases, lacquer, polymer, dirt, rust, corrosion, etc. I suspect they cut the chamber to feed practically anything, thus running handloads using Lapua brass is most likely silly.

I suspect that the magazines with the previous ARs was just part of the problems. Most likely there were complaints from those who expected the rifles to work with practically any trashy ammo they could scrounge up.

I read that the 7.62x39 is the world's most prolific cartridge, which most likely means that it has the most variations. It seems to me that to expect a rifle to fire even 80% of the sloppy stuff out there, the chamber would have to be rather generous. Otherwise, there will be lots of complaints. After all, why do most people shoot the cartridge in the first place? Either they are up to no good, intending to kill someone, looking for a bug-out rifle, cheap old ammo bought in bulk made in some godforsaken place. This is generally not a cartridge of choice for those looking for a precision weapon. Why would RRA think otherwise, if they really know the market?

This RRA LAR-47 is probably a bug-out rifle, and that's all expected of it.

Using AK magazines is an obvious improvment, but only part of the picture. I suspect the only way to have a really accurate and highly reliable AR15 in 7.62x39 is build one with a precision barrel, and chamber, and use high grade ammo or handloads, and avoid the mil-surp stuff altogether.

If RRA makes the lower available, then it's an option to make a precision weapon or hunting rifle.

I had a CZ 527 in 7.62x39 for a while and shot it a lot using factory hunting type ammo, and lots of different handloads. It's a fun cartridge, and capable of accuracy. My favorite handloads were using 150gr bullets, and I think that's the best bullet weight for the cartridge. With a good barrel, and 150gr handloads I think it is an adequate deer and hog rifle out to 125 yds, maybe a little further.

IMO, it's a great defense and bug-out cartridge, but the 6.5 Grendel is better for hunting purposes, and it works in the std AR15 package.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I would be concerned that RRA made the chamber on the loose side, to compensate for those who want to use the cheapest and worst ammo, steel cases, lacquer, polymer, dirt, rust, corrosion, etc. I suspect they cut the chamber to feed practically anything, thus running handloads using Lapua brass is most likely silly.

KB

Hey Buddy, this is that negative thing I was talking about -- Call RRA and ask them .. I got a 5 spot that says they won't warranty steel anything or lacquer coating ammo -- DPMS and Bushmaster BOTH disown them... Ruger, in the mini30, did not do this...

lots of conjecture that could have been summed up with "i wonder how they cut the chamber, let me call them"

btw, in a bolt gun, steel jacketed "crap" is less than 2 MOA with a cheap scope... about 1.25 with winchester amm

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Hey Buddy, ...

lots of conjecture that could have been summed up with "i wonder how they cut the chamber, let me call them"

I would rather conjecture at the moment.

Give us a report on what they say when you call them. Sometimes facts are interesting too.

KB

AS far as the 7.2x39 magazines for the non RRA LAR-47 AR's the problem is the round needs a continous curve magazine. With the earlier attempts on AR's the part of the magazine outside the magazine well is curved, but the part inside the well is straight. The 7.6x39 cartridge doesn't make the transition from curved portion to the straight portion reliably and to further complicate things if you stack 7.62x39's in a straight magazine they don't present a good feed angle in an AR.

The hard primers problem has been solved, it's not a problem anymore.

The newer coating on the steel cased ammo IS a polymer. It's not a fit problem the coatings presented it's a gumming up problem.

KB you're wrong about mil-surp not shooting good in a quality rifle. I'm getting half inch groups out of an AR-10 with mil-surp ammo...NOT all mil-surp ammo. All that "trashy ammo" works wonderfully out of SKS's and AK's.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
All that "trashy ammo" works wonderfully out of SKS's and AK's.

That's their claim to fame, which makes them so popular as weapons. They are not known for accuracy. My "conjecture" is that the LAR47 simply must give up something to gain that comment from their loyal customers "All that trashy ammo works wonderfully out of my LAR-47".

KB

Go watch this
http://www.gunsandammo.com/201...k-river-arms-lar-47/

KB, I am sometimes tired of some things, and I am a bit under the weather, so my patience is a tad thin today.

i do not mean this to be mean at you.. take this as the voice of a friend, over a beer, that disagrees with you, and not someone out to belittle you..

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I read that the 7.62x39 is the world's most prolific cartridge,

let me correct a couple things here.. i am not meaning this mean spirited - the AK 47 and variants are THE most produced single model on the planet. The round is given in aid packages of 100,000 units.. and that's the SMALLEST unit, by the comm-block - the round has to fire in ANY AK or SKS, without modification other than sight adjustment. the next closest centerfire round is the 5.56nato -- and they are both made to a spec, in factories around the world.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:


which most likely means that it has the most variations.

ish - but no-- like 5.56 nato, most of that ammo was made to a spec. a fairly wide spec, but that's on the POWDER for the most part. Anyone making the ammo has to make it work in all the commblock guns - imagine what would have happened, or could, if there was a rash of guns blowing up solely due to bad ammo?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
It seems to me that to expect a rifle to fire even 80% of the sloppy stuff out there,
RRA would make the chamber in ANYTHING other than SAAMI/CIP spec would open them up for MILLIONS in lawsuits - so, no, they'll specify commercial ammo only

based off poor assumption that

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
the chamber would have to be rather generous. Otherwise,

no, see your complaint at the end of your sentence

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
there will be lots of complaints.

only a foolish product manager would try to have a $1200 rifle that shoots only as good as an akAK 47

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
After all, why do most people shoot the cartridge in the first place?

you aren't talking about "most" people.. you are talking about those that DO NOT WANT an AK and its level of accuracy. The round is VERY much more potent than the 5.56 - and you are really stretching this to have an expensive rifle as a blaster or gat --

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Either they are up to no good, intending to kill someone, looking for a bug-out rifle, cheap old ammo bought in bulk made in some godforsaken place.

like south african or Malaysian 308? the malya 308 and 223 smells like horse manure when you fire it.. and turns in really good groups. You don't do much surplus ammo, right?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
This is generally not a cartridge of choice for those looking for a precision weapon.

dang it, stop generalizing your speculation on to an entirely different platform -- someone paying 1200 bucks for an AR isn't even close to the same guidelines of a dude wanting a $300 blaster .. Most military semiauto 308's can't do 1.5 MOA on their best day .. same ammo in a great bolt gun, its a great shooter .. totally DIFFERENT mission and shopper

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Why would RRA think otherwise,

dude, seriously .. do you think RRA would make a pray and spray that's got some other issues, including doesn't work with standard mags or other uppers for 3-4 times the price of an AK that didn't shoot any better?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
if they really know the market?

wow, and now they are incompetent either way they did the chamber?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
This RRA LAR-47 is probably a bug-out rifle,

HUH?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
and that's all expected of it.

Using AK magazines is an obvious improvment, but only part of the picture.

okay, you aren't a gunsmith, and don't understand feeding geometry, or price point.. custom curve mags cost a fortune-- and they used every AK mag they could find... which means DRUMS as well -

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

I suspect

or use billet custom made lowers and it feed, oh, yeah, and avoid military ammo

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
the only way to have a really accurate and highly reliable AR15 in 7.62x39 is build one with a precision barrel, and chamber, and use high grade ammo or handloads, and avoid the mil-surp stuff altogether.

accurate and milsurp are NOT USUALLY even inferred words together. Of course that part is correct, and of course you MIGHT could build a more accurate rifle if you spent 1200 bucks and then another 600 for a great barrel.. might as is MIGHT reduce group size by 50%

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
If RRA makes the lower available, then it's an option to make a precision weapon or hunting rifle.

do you really think RRA would intentionally release a mass produced, CUSTOM bullet and design action, that was a dog? WHY? Tell me WHY they would even consider letting it out of the lab..

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Give us a report on what they say when you call them. Sometimes facts are interesting too.

KB

I don't work for you, buddy .. give them a call if you want to be informed. Personally , i COULD (intentionally didn't say couldn't) care less, but if you'd rather be informed than barking at a "your own shadow" of conjecture, you sure can do that...

Jeff,

I've already talked to RRA months ago when it made their RRA LAR-47 made it's debut at the SHOT Show.

They ARE NOT planning to sell separate components of the rifle (like the lower) and both receivers are a little different from standard AR 15 receivers. They won't swap easily. I believe the upper receiver bottom is relieved to let the upper part of the magazine fit into it much like the conversion of AR 10 style receivers that use the G3 magazines for the 7.62 NATO because the mags for the G3 are wider. I suspect this of the AK 47 magazine. RRA won't divulge much about their new rifle. The only really different thing about the lower is the front of the magazine wall is totally cut away and the sides sloped accordingly to allow the curved AK magazine fit into. Other then that the only other thing is it doesn't have the typical last shot bolt hold open mechanism. I told them something that they overlooked and that was that the Yugo AK magazines have a modified follower that will hold an AK bolt open after the last shot.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
KB, I am sometimes tired of some things, and I am a bit under the weather, so my patience is a tad thin today.

Wow, jeffe, I believe you set a new record. I'm flattered. Just for the heck of it, something I learned here on AR, I sometimes post in a provacative way, just to see what response I can draw. Evidently I hit on a good day, or bad, depending on perspective.

You made a great response, BTW. I got a chuckle or two out of that.

Obviously my post was speculative, and I have no way to actually know one way or another. That's why your post in response is valuable. It's because I would actually like for the LAR-47 to be a great rifle, and not what I suspect it to be, as a pessimist.

Really, I learned to make posts like that right here on AR.

I hope, dear Buddy, that you get to feeling better real soon. I suspect that it's real springtime there in Texas, and the catfish are biting. Wish I was there. Where I live, we still have snow banks ten feet high along the streets in places. I doubt that the range will be open before June. It's been a bad snow year, and it may not be over yet. I just hope there are some deer left out on the islands, as seed for the future generations.

KB

I've actually owned an AR 7.62X39 upper. After I found the right magazines the rifle worked like a charm and never gave a moments trouble. Lots of companies still make them and there are thousands upon thousands of happy owners out there. A lot of what you read about these is just parroted info from people that want to impress you with their infinite knowledge on this platform . I'm sure RRA will sell a bunch of these because people want to try new things. I bet within 5 years it'll be out of production. It's an answer to a non existent problem.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I've actually owned an AR 7.62X39 upper. After I found the right magazines the rifle worked like a charm and never gave a moments trouble. Lots of companies still make them and there are thousands upon thousands of happy owners out there. A lot of what you read about these is just parroted info from people that want to impress you with their infinite knowledge on this platform . I'm sure RRA will sell a bunch of these because people want to try new things. I bet within 5 years it'll be out of production. It's an answer to a non existent problem.

Terry

Oh that's just wonderful. After you found the "right" magazine it ran just fine. Well RRA is trying to make it so you have the right magazine each and every time.

If you think you there isn't a problem with AR's and hard primers you live in a very secluded area of Mississippi. Did you know that most AR 10's and their clones have AR 15 firing groups in them? That is to be more specific the hammer and hammer spring. Have you ever compared an AR 10 firing pin to an AR 15 firing pin? What I'm saying is that the AR 15 parts aren't up to power needed to hit that massive firing pin on the AR 10. Yeah, they work, most the time.

Have you gotten your AR hot enough and shot enough polymer coated steel case ammo to gum up your chamber?


There just as many thousands out there that have problems with 7.62x39 AR's.

You may be right about the RRA LAR-47 being out of production in five years because that's exactly what happen to a lot of 7.62x39's made by AR manufacturers like Colt. They aren't super easy to find today as is the AR in 5.56.

One other area you didn't address since you're the firearms engineer Terry. Do you know what the bolt thrust is on a 7.62x39 AR? Do think that since the 7.62x39 operates at a lower pressure then the 5.56/223 that it is easier on the bolt? I bet you haven't a clue, but you'll research the internet to be able to reply back.

You are the great example and prove my point perfectly.

Thank you for the reply.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
You are the perfect example and prove my point perfectly.

Thank you for the reply.

Terry

Yup, I knew you didn't know what you were talking about...thanks for verifying that.

I'll trust my actual experience over your internet parroting info anyday. Keep trying though, it's very entertaining.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I'll trust my actual experience over your internet parroting info anyday. Keep trying though, it's very entertaining.

Terry

See that's the problem right there, "your" experience, which from reading what you write isn't much.

Reckon for two southern boys we'd been on the opposites during the war.

My experience is enough to know you're full of shit on this subject. Keep trying though.

Terry

Funny, Jeff already ticked off by another poster that seems to post to agitate people. He even admitted it. So along comes another agitator. These people make AR great...NOT. Let's just agree to disagree. You don't know my experience and I'd say nor do I know yours but what you write makes it appear limited.

So I'm done arguing with you and if you want the last say be my guest. If it makes you feel like a bigger or better man more power to you.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
You don't know my experience and I'd say nor do I know yours but what you write makes it appear limited.

And what you write seems to be nothing more than cut and paste. I've actually owned and used an AR in 7.62X39 and done nothing more than report my results. They don't agree with your opinion and you went on the attack. This ain't the 1st time either.

The world doesn't revolve around you or your opinions. We aren't always going to agree. BTW, I know Jeffe personally and call him a friend. I've visted with him in his home town in Texas. We don't always agree but we have respect for each others opinions. Think about that and maybe give it a try.

Terry

hey guys - i posted this because i thought it would be of interest to some, I did not post it so that it would become a urinary tract contest

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
You don't know my experience and I'd say nor do I know yours but what you write makes it appear limited.

And what you write seems to be nothing more than cut and paste. I've actually owned and used an AR in 7.62X39 and done nothing more than report my results. They don't agree with your opinion and you went on the attack. This ain't the 1st time either.

The world doesn't revolve around you or your opinions. We aren't always going to agree. I know Jeffe personally and call him a friend I've visted with him in his home town in Texas. We don't always agree but we have respect for each others opinions. Think about that and maybe give it a try.

Terry

[/QUOTE]

Although I said I was done I'll say this because this time I actually liked what you posted. First if I offended you now and in the past I apologize for that. It was not my intention to do so.

I don't copy and paste my experiences. I do copy and paste data, products, and other websites that may pertain to the thread. I build and shoot AR's, lots of them. Here's something interesting that does pertain to this thread. My last 7.62x39, which I recently sold to a member here, was a very good shooting one. I didn't use the steel or surplus ammo in it, but what is interesting is that I didn't use a magazine for the 7.62x39. I have a 6.5 Grendel AR and I used the Grendel magazine in it and it ran just fine with it. Has that always been the case? No. I'm sure RRA didn't spend lots of money just to sell a gimmick to the public. The magazine well on the AR has been a big limiting factor for other cartridges since it's inception. The 7.62x39 is no exception. There are issues with 7.62x39 magazines. Not all of them, but enough that it's turned people off to them. The hard primers on many surplus ammo is a real issue too. The firing systems on AR's is what has recently lead me to investigate the firing systems on AR10's. The AR15 firing system wasn't supposed to be put on an AR10, but it has because it's probably cost effective. For commercial primers is just fine, but there are instances with NATO ammo it won't fire the first strike. My recent AR10 built is exhibiting this. I've changed out the part of the syste (springs) and am looking for an actually heavier mass AR10 hammer. The match triggers are an issue on AR10 use because of a lighter hammer and hammer strike. Not all of them. In fact Jeff has one working well.

Again I apologize if I rubbed you the wrong way.

That's cool, please accept my apology as well.

Terry

butchloc,

In all honesty I'd wait till the RRA LAR-47 is out and see how it does. It's a dedicated rifle, not easy to swap lowers or uppers although when I talked to them I pointed out there are AK 223/5.56 magazines and just swapping a 223/5.56 upper on that AK magazine lower gives another opportunity. They were mum about it,but kept saying there are differences in both upper and lower receivers. We'll just have to wait and see what they are.

Well, whatever, I would like to own one.

For my purposes I think that I don't need the 20 or 30 round magazines, but it's also clear to me that the cartridge is shaped so that the curved clips, even short clips, will improve the feeding.

The std AR with the rather straight magazines work well with straight-sided cartridges.

I learned (the hard way - and expensive way) to be rather particular about feeding issues, in bolt actions. My same attitude applies to any rifle I shoot. It had better feed well. So IMO it's a good thing the RRA designed an AR platform dedicated to this particular cartridge.

KB

There are two good things about the AK 47 [civilian semiautos as well], the cartridge and the rifle.

They most always work in most any conditions.
They are acceptly accurate for the troops that use them.
Their one disadvantage is some people consider them a little heavy, and they do not take modern optics well.

The advantage of a 7.63x39 "AR", is that it is lighter, more accurate [it should be I would think], and will take modern optics. This is a plus for a "civilian sportsman" as the 30 Russian Short is not a bad close range deer and pig cartridge, with hunting bullets of course. I have killed 2 deer with an AK 47 and it worked great.

An "AR" that takes AK mags just might work...

For those of you that do not always need a 30 round magazine there are some 5 round AK mags out there. I bought two of them one time, they were of different overal lengths, but both were blocked to 5 rounds.
You do not have to have a 5 round mag in my state to hunt, so I took them apart and cut out the 5 round blocking device. Now one holds 11 rounds and the other 15 rounds.

They make the rifle very handy.

I am familar with several Rock River products, and I would be suprised if their 7.62x39 "AR" did not work...

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Well, whatever, I would like to own one.

For my purposes I think that I don't need the 20 or 30 round magazines, but it's also clear to me that the cartridge is shaped so that the curved clips, even short clips, will improve the feeding.

The std AR with the rather straight magazines work well with straight-sided cartridges.

I learned (the hard way - and expensive way) to be rather particular about feeding issues, in bolt actions. My same attitude applies to any rifle I shoot. It had better feed well. So IMO it's a good thing the RRA designed an AR platform dedicated to this particular cartridge.

KB

KB....get one and shoot it for a while and do a report here on it.

kb
thanks for putting up with me.

Terry -- gimme a call tomorrow, buddy?

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
There are two good things about the AK 47 [civilian semiautos as well], the cartridge and the rifle.

Amen.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
kb
thanks for putting up with me.

jeffe, I certainly don't just put up with you. I don't mean to be patronizing, but I really like your posts, and I think you are a great contributor to the knowledge base here.

It's really ok with me that we don't agree sometimes. I actually think it's more interesting that way. Open and constructive debate and disagreement is in large part what makes this forum thrive, and worthwhile, IMO.

KB

Thanks. And all that may be true. But sometimes I can just be a contrary a-hole!

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Thanks. And all that may be true. But sometimes I can just be a contrary a-hole!

Some times we all can be a bit Contrary

It's just the passion of the sport. I'm usually smiling while I type

Jeffe, I'll give you a ring after work today.

Terry

Back in the day, the military people I came in contact with in Vietnam suggested looking at the AK/SKS and the round as a semi/select-five 30-30. About the same accurate range and power levels. Actually, the 30-30 has more poop out to 200 or so, but the premise is valid.

IMHO, the only excuse for owning either is cheap ammunition, and that is not so cheap anymore.

I always wondered why some folks think it is so cool to own four or five different ammunition delivery systems, each shooting a different type of round.

Rich