ak pistol capable of hitting a target over a mile away

rodbender said:

Yes, a signature often reflects a personal feeling of the poster. I was just responding to his dumb assed signature.

Click to expand...

Fixed it for you. My signature is what an OCDO member posted in the Kentucky section of the forum ..his thoughts on unlicensed concealed carry are rather ironic, eh?

catass said:

Fixed it for you. My signature is what an OCDO member posted in the Kentucky section of the forum ..his thoughts on unlicensed concealed carry are rather ironic, eh?

Click to expand...

Excuse me, please. With a user name like that, I figured you for a female.

I have heard of people arguing with sign posts before but arguing with a signature is a new one. Evidently some people just love to argue over anything.

eye95 said:

Someone posted videos of accurate shots from over a mile. I do not recall the caliber.

Click to expand...

Not with an ak pistol or a .22lr pistol or rifle.

eye95 said:

Someone posted videos of accurate shots from over a mile. I do not recall the caliber.

Click to expand...

My guesses would be either a .50 Barrett (or similar), or a good .308 heavy barrel sniper rifle.

eye95 said:

Someone posted videos of accurate shots from over a mile. I do not recall the caliber.

Click to expand...

wrightme said:

My guesses would be either a .50 Barrett (or similar), or a good .308 heavy barrel sniper rifle.

Click to expand...

Here is the link: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...by-Gun-Range&p=1348013&viewfull=1#post1348013 . It was a small caliber, but not an AK pistol as mentioned in the thread title.

wrightme said:

My guesses would be either a .50 Barrett (or similar), or a good .308 heavy barrel sniper rifle.

Click to expand...

I've been able to maintain a 2-bill width and height group (US currency) at 800 yards with a custom .308 bolt action Rem 700. But, I'd say a .408 Cheytac or .50BMG with a heavy round would be needed for a quality 1 mile shot.

I guarantee that an 11 inch barreled AK WILL NOT accurately hit a target, unless it's an aircraft carrier, at a 1 mile range. The round will not have enough spin to maintain flight out to 1 mile, thus the accuracy is gone. Even with Russian 7N1 ammunition, the Dragunov SVD has difficulty being accurate out to 1 mile and it's 7.62x54R.

Anyone who has fired an AK already knows it's not built for accuracy.

The only reason a .308 round of any type maintains near-lethal capability at near the 1 mile mark is due to the extreme entry angle which puts the round into terminal velocity on its way down....likely there is little to no spin left, but the angle is so extreme that terminal velocity alone is enough to still get it to enter the body.

Example: on a level location (shooter to target), the entry angle at 1 mile with a .308 round will be almost vertical due to the distance and extreme dial-in for the scope that will be needed to hit the target rather than drive the round into the ground. You'd be looking at well over 30 feet above the ground mid-arc on a 1 mile shot.


FYI, the thread mentioned above states that the effective range of a .223 is 600m. That is incorrect. The effective range of a 5.56mm NATO round is 600m. The .223 Remington round would not be that far and I don't know of very many rifles that can push a .223 Rem round to 600 meters without the round tumbling. Why? The .223 Remington round has a thinner case which means less pressure and most rifles intended to shoot the .223 Rem are lighter barrels with not enough twist to throw out to 600m. A 1 in 7 twist with a 5.56mm NATO round and at least a 65 grain (74 is even better) in a heavy barrel is the best suited to hit 600m and remain effective. I love both the .223 Rem and the 5.56mm NATO, so if you don't own anything that shoots these I suggest you get one! I've had AR's that shoot both and what I smiled with was a bolt action Remington 700 super heavy with a 26 inch barrel...boy could that thing throw rounds at 500 yards!

???

30 feet above the ground at mid-mile doesn't make "near vertical entry" at the target. But it makes a nice invalid picture.
http://www.angelfire.com/tx5/snipersustainment/Table2.htm
And still over 1000fps at 1000 yds.

heresyourdipstickjimmy said:

The round will not have enough spin to maintain flight out to 1 mile, thus the accuracy is gone. Even with Russian 7N1 ammunition, the Dragunov SVD has difficulty being accurate out to 1 mile and it's 7.62x54R.

likely there is little to no spin left, but the angle is so extreme that terminal velocity alone is enough to still get it to enter the body.

Click to expand...

The way you speak of "spin", I start assuming you think rotational stability is required for the projectile to fly.

The thing is, velocity drops off faster than does rpm. This is how a marginally stable bullet at 100 yards will regain stability at longer ranges.

Terminal velocity of a bullet in the range of weights fired in your average 308 is unlikely to be fast enough for lethal impact.

Go out and read "The bullet's flight from powder to target." by Franklin Weston Mann.

You will be cured of your silly notions.

thx997303 said:

The way you speak of "spin", I start assuming you think rotational stability is required for the projectile to fly.

The thing is, velocity drops off faster than does rpm. This is how a marginally stable bullet at 100 yards will regain stability at longer ranges.

Terminal velocity of a bullet in the range of weights fired in your average 308 is unlikely to be fast enough for lethal impact.

Go out and read "The bullet's flight from powder to target." by Franklin Weston Mann.

You will be cured of your silly notions.

Click to expand...

Note the post above yours. 1000 fps at 1000 yds. Not enough for lethal impact?

Terminal velocity for a near-horizontally-fired bullet should not be a concern. The reason it is a concern for a near-vertically-fired bullet is because all bullets, at the apex of their flight, have a vertical velocity component of zero.

In a near-vertical trajectory, almost all of the velocity is in the vertical component that goes to zero. The bullet has to regain its velocity on the way down, but will never exceed terminal velocity, which is a fraction of the muzzle velocity.

A near horizontal trajectory also has its vertical component go to zero. However, the vertical component of the velocity is such a tiny part of the total velocity that the bullet never slows below terminal velocity. The bullet will hit its target, or the ground, long before it drops below terminal velocity.

So, in a near-horizontal trajectory, terminal velocity is not a concern.

heresyourdipstickjimmy said:

The only reason a .308 round of any type maintains near-lethal capability at near the 1 mile mark is due to the extreme entry angle which puts the round into terminal velocity on its way down....likely there is little to no spin left, but the angle is so extreme that terminal velocity alone is enough to still get it to enter the body.

Example: on a level location (shooter to target), the entry angle at 1 mile with a .308 round will be almost vertical due to the distance and extreme dial-in for the scope that will be needed to hit the target rather than drive the round into the ground. You'd be looking at well over 30 feet above the ground mid-arc on a 1 mile shot.


. A 1 in 7 twist with a 5.56mm NATO round and at least a 65 grain (74 is even better) in a heavy barrel is the best suited to hit 600m and remain effective.

Click to expand...

"Ouch" Please, no more lectures on ballistics till you learn a little about ballistics. That was really painful to read. Next time stop writing after you post about your good shooting because everything after that was pure Disney land.

Old Grump said:

"Ouch" Please, no more lectures on ballistics till you learn a little about ballistics. That was really painful to read. Next time stop writing after you post about your good shooting because everything after that was pure Disney land.

Click to expand...

lol, yes, there have been a few posts here that bring out the "Guffaw" in me. :lol:

wrightme said:

Note the post above yours. 1000 fps at 1000 yds. Not enough for lethal impact?

Click to expand...

Let's get back to the ak pistol chambered in 7.62x39 with a 11.5" barrel, not a rifle in 7.62x51 with a 24" barrel.

We're talking 1600 meters or 1760 yards.

kwikrnu said:

Let's get back to the ak pistol chambered in 7.62x39 with a 11.5" barrel, not a rifle in 7.62x51 with a 24" barrel.

We're talking 1600 meters or 1760 yards.

Click to expand...

No, you were talking about that. Others digressed.

thx997303 said:

The way you speak of "spin", I start assuming you think rotational stability is required for the projectile to fly.

The thing is, velocity drops off faster than does rpm. This is how a marginally stable bullet at 100 yards will regain stability at longer ranges.

Terminal velocity of a bullet in the range of weights fired in your average 308 is unlikely to be fast enough for lethal impact.

Go out and read "The bullet's flight from powder to target." by Franklin Weston Mann.

You will be cured of your silly notions.

Click to expand...

Absolutely not what I meant by spin and thanks for stressing weights as that's a vital component. The spin of the bullet is what stabilizes it in flight, lose your stabilization and the bullet will tend to tumble. This is where the term keyholing comes into play. I'd personally hate to factor everything in on a .308 round for a 1 mile shot as I'm not as good with spin-drift as I should be. The slightest change in wind anywhere along the shot could be disastrous and it's compounded if there are buildings around due to the possibility of multiple air currents in multiple directions.

T.V. should be just enough to cause some damage, though it may not be enough for a lethal shot. Really, all it needs to do is penetrate in the right spot and it's capable of being lethal although the velocity isn't what would be desired for a truly accurate and lethal shot. But it's still going to have plenty forward momentum as well as the drop from gravity under T.V. That's why I said a .408 Cheytac or .50BMG would be better suited at 1mile and beyond...if you're froggy and need the distance, slip into the 20mm.

Heavier is better on the long-shot.

heresyourdipstickjimmy said:

Absolutely not what I meant by spin and thanks for stressing weights as that's a vital component. The spin of the bullet is what stabilizes it in flight, lose your stabilization and the bullet will tend to tumble. This is where the term keyholing comes into play. I'd personally hate to factor everything in on a .308 round for a 1 mile shot as I'm not as good with spin-drift as I should be. The slightest change in wind anywhere along the shot could be disastrous and it's compounded if there are buildings around due to the possibility of multiple air currents in multiple directions.

T.V. should be just enough to cause some damage, though it may not be enough for a lethal shot. Really, all it needs to do is penetrate in the right spot and it's capable of being lethal although the velocity isn't what would be desired for a truly accurate and lethal shot. But it's still going to have plenty forward momentum as well as the drop from gravity under T.V. That's why I said a .408 Cheytac or .50BMG would be better suited at 1mile and beyond...if you're froggy and need the distance, slip into the 20mm.

Heavier is better on the long-shot.

Click to expand...

"Velocity at target" at 1000 yards is still over 1000 fps. How fast does it NEED to go to be fatal?

Here's a nice .308 Winchester ballistics chart courtesy of snipercentral.com. I wish I had one available for the Russian 7N1 ammo, but I do not.

http://www.snipercentral.com/308.htm

The steep angle that starts just past the 600 yard mark clearly indicates an even steeper progression beyond 1000 yards. Roll that steep drop-off out to 1760 yards (or 5280 feet) and you'll have a pretty steep pitch on the bullet at the 1 mile (1760 yards) mark.

Start factoring in different bullet weights, wind, spin-drift, humidity, day vs. night, twist of the barrel, and barrel length...it becomes very tough to hit a 1 mile shot on a precision .308 Winchester round. That alone should indicate that doing so with an 11 inch AK-47 with any degree of accuracy is flat-out an impossibility.

Snipers who served in Viet Nam (or any other current conflict) used bullet impact angles to judge distances of enemy snipers. The steeper the entry angle, the more likely the sniper was at a longer range.

At least one other poster hit the nail on the head and brought up the issue of bullet weight (grain). It's a HUGE factor at that distance. But then again, so is sight height as it will dictate if you have enough MOA or Mil movement to compensate before you're stuck in just mil-dot useage. I tend to prefer the 20 and 30 MOA bases myself with at lest a 25x scope, but the mil-dot ranging formulas are factored for 10x magnification. The difference between .223 Remington and 5.56 Nato at just 100 yards isn't a lot, but it's clearly notable.

World record was made on a .50BMG (US SF heavy sniper round) at 2430 meters which is 2657.408 (and change) yards. That's approximately 1.5 miles folks. Then we're talking the difference between a 165 Match boat tail or 174gr Matchking boat tail 308 vs a 647gr M33 Barrett or 750gr AMax .50BMG.

For those who would like the mil-dot ranging formula for MOA here it is:

Size of the target in inches x 27.778
Mil Reading

That underline is supposed to mean "divided by" and will give you your range in yards. Then you just need a ballistics card or scope-dope card to figure your scope clicks for that range. Just know that the card does not give you the wind, you have to adjust for it and some cards will give you how much added adjustment for a cross-wind, though that does little for a head wind. That's where a little added calculation, a good spotter, and conditions proper for a vapor trail become very important tools.

Mil Reading: the estimated size of the target as read at 10x via the mil dots.
I tend to place the base so that the crosshairs are at the bottom-right of the target. That way I'm near flush with the exposed bottom. Then I look at how large in mil-dots the target is and plug it into my formula to get my range. Then I just refer to my ballistics card and dial-it-in. All that's left is sending the mail.

eye95 said:

In a near-vertical trajectory, almost all of the velocity is in the vertical component that goes to zero. The bullet has to regain its velocity on the way down, but will never exceed terminal velocity, which is a fraction of the muzzle velocity.

Click to expand...

As I mentioned in the shot-spotter poll two days ago, it is a large, and potentially lethal fraction:


My 9 mm carry loads are 147 grain. Out of the muzzle, they're traveling roughly 950 fps. Given the above, they're terminal velocity is close to 300 fps (207 mph). I used to hunt rabbits with steel ball slingshot, and the load was travelling about 200 mph. The ball was just a little larger, but the same mass, as my 9 mm loads.

It would embed itself in the rabbit about 2-4 inches.

Put simply, firing upwards into the air is a bad idea. Any round which comes down hitting a human will do some damage, at the very least, will probably be serious, and could potentially be fatal.

wrightme said:

TV at 1000 yards is still over 1000 fps. How fast does it NEED to go to be fatal?

Click to expand...

"Terminal velocity" is not synonomous with "velocity on target." Terminal velocity refers only to the maximum velocity attainable by dropping (not firing) an object from a height sufficient for it to reach a velocity where the drag on the object has risen to the point where it matches the gravitational force on the object. There is no horizontal component.

since9 said:

As I mentioned in the shot-spotter poll two days ago, it is a large, and potentially lethal fraction:

"Based on the results of these tests it was concluded that the bullet return velocity was about 300 f.p.s. For the 150 gr. bullet this corresponds to an energy of 30 foot pounds. Earlier the Army had determined that, on the average, it required 60 foot pounds of energy to produce a disabling wound. Based on this information, a falling 150 gr. service bullet would not be lethal, although it could produce a serious wound." - Source​

My 9 mm carry loads are 147 grain. Out of the muzzle, they're traveling roughly 950 fps. Given the above, they're terminal velocity is close to 300 fps (207 mph). I used to hunt rabbits with steel ball slingshot, and the load was travelling about 200 mph. The ball was just a little larger, but the same mass, as my 9 mm loads.

It would embed itself in the rabbit about 2-4 inches.

Put simply, firing upwards into the air is a bad idea. Any round which comes down hitting a human will do some damage, at the very least, will probably be serious, and could potentially be fatal.



"Terminal velocity" is not synonomous with "velocity on target." Terminal velocity refers only to the maximum velocity attainable by dropping (not firing) an object from a height sufficient for it to reach a velocity where the drag on the object has risen to the point where it matches the gravitational force on the object. There is no horizontal component.

Click to expand...

Poor choice of initials on my part. The information source was synonymous with "velocity on target."