DX-7: American Kalashnikov


Here is the next novelty of the American arms market: the DX-7 assault rifle


Weapon from around the world. So the people are arranged that some are constantly drawn to novelty. Others, on the contrary, hold fast to the “good old”, but they do not approve of any new products there. A similar phenomenon, as it turned out, is very beneficial for humanity. And if someone, well, let's say, the same Lord God, once created it, he did the right thing by putting a passion for innovations in some people, and on the contrary, making others conservatives. One need only imagine for a moment how terrible a world consisting of innovators alone would be! They would improve everything all the time, because of which an abyss of resources would be spent on various improvements, and society would essentially stagnate. The society of conservatives alone would be just as bad, where everything new would be rejected from the doorway. In such a society, we would all just be sitting in the trees, and all the innovators would be waiting ... a feasting pot, well, so that their meat would not be wasted.


DX-7. Right view

And so, somewhere, innovators take over and we go ahead, then conservatives slow down the avalanche of improvements, and we prudently ride on the old luggage. Moreover, it is especially important to maintain this balance in the production of weapons. After all, by and large, no one needs it, although one cannot do without it. A novelty here is generally appropriate only to the extremes, when old samples are worked out well, just to the limit. As an example, take history с a tank T-54/55. It was a good car, still fighting. In Israel, captured Arab tanks were easily equipped with a new engine and an English cannon of 105 mm caliber, but we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62 mm caliber gun, which didn’t show itself in anything. But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank. But this is ... well, thinking about the topic-problem, because today we will talk about how craving for everything new coexists with traditionally good quality, that is, is it possible to reconcile the interests of innovators and traditionalists within the framework of a market economy. And it turns out that, yes, it is possible and he, this very market, and in some cases allows you to eat fish and ride bones. Well, as an example, let's turn to the recently appeared DX-7 assault rifle - the American patented clone of the Kalashnikov assault rifle.

DX-7: American Kalashnikov

Picatinny rail

To begin with, what all citizens of the USSR and Russia who had dealings with him probably paid attention to. First of all, it is a removable receiver cover, on which it is impossible to mount the sight. That is why it is moved far ahead, which is not very convenient for the shooter. I personally would prefer to have it directly above the protrusion of the guide rod of the return spring, closer to the eyes. Another brand name, but the controversial part of AK is a fuse. Yes, it closes the slot for the shutter, through which, in principle, dirt gets there. Or may fall. But in the classic version, it is inconvenient. And not without reason at the last AK-12 they thought of redoing it by changing the position of the thrust bar. But ... it’s obvious that the fuse must be on both the right and left. And one more thing: the shutter handle on a traditional AK is on the right. This is inconvenient, you have to remove the right hand from the grip handle. On the left it was necessary to do it, on the left! The experience of many samples clearly shows that this weapon does not do worse.


Shutter handle is removed

However, all these comments have no special significance. What does it have? It has only that in the conditions of the market you can create a company and release an analogue of AK with these changes. To the delight, innovators who always want something new. But there are also moderate innovators who need everything to be just the same, but “with mother-of-pearl buttons”.

And if there are such people, and they want, then ... in the market there will always be someone who will fulfill their desire, of course, not without benefit for themselves. There would be money to buy appropriate modern equipment.

And this is exactly what Eric Dienno, creator of DNO Firearms, did. Well, about how he came to this, Eric himself writes like this:

“At the age of 12, I already knew that I wanted to do different things with my own hands. And it just so happened that I had a choice between a welder and a Playstation. And I chose a welder. I spent day and night welding, grinding and collecting carts and choppers.


Upper receiver. Under the Picatinny rail, the screw holes for the left and right halves are clearly visible.

Later, I was lucky to engage in racing cars with my brother, who was finishing his master's course in mechanical engineering. Our team's motto was “Quick and Easy.” My brother with CNC made the throttle body of magnesium, and I made titanium manifolds and a fuel supply system. It was here that we became interested in the possibilities of working on CNC machines.

When we decided to start developing firearms components, we realized that we had to set up production ourselves in order to control the quality of our products in accordance with our own standards. It was a business for two brothers working together to create innovative high-quality products in America. Moreover, we would like to have not just a business for the sake of money, but a socially oriented business. So, one of our goals is to donate to organizations that help the mentally retarded.



Lower receiver with trigger and butt mount type AR-15

We also want to use our design and manufacturing knowledge and educate our youth so that they too can use their own potential to re-establish mass production in America. Today I see that in China there are too many things. It is completely incomprehensible why America should give in to them.

When we decided to produce our own AK assault rifle, we first of all decided to try to improve the simplicity and elegance of a standard Kalashnikov-style automatic rifle. With more than 15 years of engineering experience, I sincerely believe that we have achieved our goals to improve its design without detracting from the proven simplicity and reliability of the original design.



That's how the machine opens, if you remove the rear pin

The DX-7 was conceived as an advanced AK-style automatic rifle by redesigning components that did not work as optimally as possible. Thus, the addition of an upper and lower receiver significantly improved the ability to install modern optics and other furniture functionality. It’s nice to work with the DX-7 because it is equipped with an ergonomic fuse, which is activated by the thumb, and your left hand also moves to a natural place on the left side to charge when changing stores. On our DX-7, you can easily put a sight with a "red dot" or any other modern sight, which is a huge improvement over standard AK. Designing the DX-7 took more than two years and went through several successive stages of testing and redesigning to achieve the optimal result. "We spent time on providing the most reliable and functional firearms system with minimal costs when changing the original sample."

And in fact, if we look at this American Kalashnikov, it is easy to notice that it looks more modern, even purely outwardly. However, external changes are not everything! Inside, there are also quite a few changes. To begin with, the receiver of the machine is double. In it, as in the AR-15 rifles, there is an upper and lower receiver. There are several benefits to this. The first one is that there is no receiver cover, so the entire upper plane of the upper receiver is one solid Picatinny rail on which you can mount a lot of all kinds of sights with the necessary rigidity for their functioning. The second benefit is not so obvious, but it is, although it becomes clear only when the machine is completely disassembled. The fact is that the upper receiver case consists of two halves, which are made by milling of aluminum alloy 6061. That is, the AK receiver was once done this way too, but only technologically it was very difficult. However, the guides for the shutter in the halves of the receiver are still steel, which ensures the receiver of this design long and reliable operation, and also (which is also important!), Reduces its weight. Both halves of the receiver are connected after the barrel is inserted between them, using screws that are staggered to the left and right to screw into the tide under the Picatinny rail.


Lock pin mounting location

The shutter is redone in a minimal way. The handle on the right is cut off, and the handle on the left is set in its place. Also, the forend remained unchanged, and the gas-piston mechanism itself, although the back of the return mechanism, for obvious reasons, had to be changed. A butt from the AR-15 rifle was added.

Incomplete disassembly is carried out by removing the two pins connecting the upper and lower receiver, after which the upper part deviates down, and the return spring is removed from the bolt group. One pin is located in the area where the return spring is attached, the other in front of the store.


DX-7. Left rear view. The fuse is both left and right, which is convenient.

The weight of the machine without cartridges is 3,26 kg. Stores are used standard, "Kalashnikov", cartridges too, but it is planned to develop interchangeable barrels for other ammunition. Coverage - the most modern "black terracotta."

Naturally, our press immediately reported that the machine had lost the famous "Kalashnikov" reliability, but ... Why does she write like that, although there is no direct evidence for this, is understandable. However, this does not matter. The main thing is that this novelty improves the old, well-known machine, and that is why it can be sold and bought, if only in order to compare which is better and which is worse. For people with money, it matters, it’s interesting, it satisfies their craving for novelty and at the same time loyalty to the good old traditions. Well, smart man Eric Dienno, you will not say anything!
Author:
Articles from this series:
Beretta: the most coveted trophy
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

178 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir_2U 30 December 2019 18: 26 New
    • 33
    • 0
    +33
    however, we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62-mm caliber gun 115 mm caliber gun.
    1. Battle Cat 30 December 2019 20: 11 New
      • 16
      • 2
      +14
      I support and the T-62 is nevertheless made on the basis of the T-55 by expanding the frantic epaulette, replacing the turret, rearranging the suspension and slightly modified aft housing sheet.
      1. svp67 30 December 2019 21: 06 New
        • 15
        • 3
        +12
        Quote: Battle Cat
        by expanding a furious epaulette

        And didn’t you try to treat?
    2. Bad_gr 30 December 2019 23: 41 New
      • 15
      • 0
      +15
      ..... however, we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62-mm caliber gun, which didn’t really show anything. But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank. ....

      The 115 mm cannon, in contrast to the one hundredth that stood on the T-55, was not rifled, but a smooth-bore, which was much more powerful by muzzle energy, which caused the tower shoulder straps to be made much larger (it is wider than the hull). The undercarriage is longer and better adapted for shooting immediately than the short undercarriage T-55. So, the fact that under the new gun had to create a new tank, the decision is right. Another question is what a new tank could be made on the basis of object-167, the chassis and power of which were later used to create the T-72. And the conveyor with automatic loader already existed then. But they preferred the cheaper option, as an intermediate option, while the T-64 was brought to mind.
      1. nedgen 31 December 2019 01: 43 New
        • 12
        • 2
        +10
        Hi Vladimir, the shoulder strap of the T-54/55 tower is also larger than the width of the hull, although for the T-62 it is larger. And the T-62 has a longer shot length than the T-55 shot length. Nobody gave the Uralvagonzavod a loading mechanism due to market considerations (so that they would not make the tank better than the Morozovsky T-64). Also, no one gave the Uralvagonzavod a T-64 cannon (do not confuse it with the T-64A). The T-64 has a 115mm separate D-68 cannon and the T-64A has 125mm 2A26 after the 1979 separate 2A46. It is because of this that the U62-TC obtained as a result of cutting rifling of the D-5T barrel extension, etc., was installed on the T-10. The idea of ​​cutting (figuratively) rifling belongs to Kartsev. And it turned out U5-TS. And the T-64 had a D-68.
        So the charging mechanism from the T-64 existed, but no one was going to give it to Uralvagonzavod. Moreover, when the T-72 of the Uralvagonzavod was being developed, this loading mechanism was not at all satisfied, and therefore, AZ was developed. And the Ministry of Health is not only fire hazardous and unreliable, but also very dangerous for the driver. The T-64 mechanical drive of all modifications (just like the T-80, by the way) cannot get out of its place if for some reason the gun remains right in the center of the car. And do not give me an example that theoretically such a possibility exists. In practice, it does not work. Recently in Ukraine, the T-64 mechwater driver was drowned only because the tank was stuck in a pit with water and its hatch was under water. The rest of the tank was out of the water. None of the crew even thought of removing two trays with shells from the MOH so that he could get out. Water mechvod and utop.
        1. Vladimir_2U 31 December 2019 05: 22 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Thank you, but I didn’t see anything new and contradicting my comment. With the Coming!
        2. Bad_gr 31 December 2019 10: 47 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: nedgen
          Nobody gave Uralvagonzavod a loading mechanism due to market considerations

          Good afternoon. Happy New Year!
          "....... With the advent of the D-81 gun, work was resumed. A new sample received this gun, as well as an automatic loader. The new tank was assigned the Object 167M index. In January 1963, L. N. Kartsev wrote a letter NS Khrushchev, in which he still proposed to establish the serial production of “Object 167” due to the unavailability of the T-64. However, it was refused [2]. ......
          ...... Later in 1963, an autoloader manufactured for the Object 167M was installed on one of the T-62 prototypes (Object 166Zh). In 1965, work on its completion was completed. As a result, the Tagil automatic loader turned out to be better than the Kharkov one for “Object 432”. The submachine gun was simpler in design, more reliable, it provided the driver-mechanic from the control compartment to the combat one without any preliminary work, thereby increasing the survivability of the tank during shelling. The automatic loader had a capacity of 21 shots. As a result, starting in 1966, the Tagil plant was ready to produce a T-62 tank with an automatic loader that could use ammunition for the T-64. But even then the tank was not put into serial production. On November 5, 1967, Minister of Defense Industry S. A. Zverev arrived at the Uralvagonzavod, where he was shown the T-62 with a 125-mm D-81 cannon and an automatic loader. He liked the automatic loader and he proposed to install it in the Kharkov T-64. In this embodiment, all components and mechanisms worked satisfactorily, with the exception of the chassis. Because of this, it was proposed to use the chassis of the Object 167. Such a modification of the tank was assigned the designation “Object 172” [2]. ...... "
          It's from here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_167 ,
          Yes and here http://alternathistory.com/tank-obekt-167-dedushka-urala/ write the same thing:
          "..... In 1963, the autoloader developed by the designers of Plant No. 183 for the Object 167M was manufactured and installed in one of the prototypes of the T-62 tank (Object 166Zh). ..."
          1. Bad_gr 31 December 2019 13: 18 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            T-64.
            "... The predecessor of the T-64 serial main tank was the Object 430. Work on it began in the late 50s, and in 1957 the first experimental prototype appeared: it was installed on it. 100 mm rifled gun D-54TS with ammunition of 50 unitary shots.
            In 1964, a model was developed, testing and refinement of which continued until it was adopted in 1967. The tank, dubbed the T-64, was armed 115-mm smoothbore gun D-68, the ammunition of which consisted of 40 rounds of separate loading with a partially burning sleeve.
            In 1969, the production of a modernized tank began, which received the name T-1973A in 64, which differed from the T-64 in the installation 125 mm smoothbore gun 2A26, which caused changes in the design of the automatic loader, sight, rangefinder and stabilizer ..... "

            This is what I’m talking about: the T-64 with a 125 mm gun and the MZ became on the conveyor in 1969. And the Ural 125 gun with AZ was ready by 1966. That is, the Urals could put on the conveyor a tank, which in its combat characteristics was not inferior to the Kharkov tank even earlier than Kharkov its 64-ku, which, by the way. and after adopting it for a long time brought to mind.
          2. svp67 3 January 2020 21: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Bad_gr
            Because of this, it was proposed to use the chassis of the Object 167. Such a modification of the tank was assigned the designation “Object 172” [2]. ...... "
            And here they are wrong. You are not talking about object 172,

            But about the object 172M

            Do you see the difference?
        3. svp67 3 January 2020 21: 26 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: nedgen
          So the charging mechanism from the T-64 existed, but no one was going to give it to Uralvagonzavod.

          Here you are wrong. In general, one time it was planned to produce T-64 at UVZ
      2. svp67 3 January 2020 21: 41 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Bad_gr
        Another question is what a new tank could be made on the basis of object-167, the chassis and power of which were later used to create the T-72.

        You rush things. Nevertheless, the T-62 appeared rag \ earlier than about. 167 and yes the latter could become a really more serious machine.
  2. Brigadier 30 December 2019 18: 31 New
    • 17
    • 11
    +6
    Americans, Chinese and other nationalities from all over the world copy our products without any problems, making small changes and then passing them off as their "creativity" and getting a huge gain. And the "world community" does not seem to notice this ...
    And now try to do it with us, for the needs of our country, the "world community" will immediately raise a cry to heaven, and then Putin’s bureaucrats will immediately run in and cry out huge fines and deadlines to our "kulibin" with cries of copyright infringement of the bourgeois countries.
    As they say - feel the difference!

    P / S. Although the Chinese are well done, they spit from the big bell tower on all the cries of the "world community." This is because they don’t have our "moon-faced" man there.laughing lol good
    Lucky them ... repeat
    1. Shelest2000 30 December 2019 19: 07 New
      • 14
      • 1
      +13
      Yes, and we can release a clone of their M-16/4, only change the name, ARR for example. It just makes no sense - we do not have an arms market.
      1. Reserve buildbat 30 December 2019 19: 46 New
        • 18
        • 3
        +15
        The tirovy option))) I would look at the one who in the field will try to clean this product)))
        1. 3danimal 1 January 2020 22: 11 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And what is the "tyrovost"? AK 12 has many of the changes mentioned. Is he a toy too?
          1. panzerfaust 3 January 2020 18: 01 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I think if this is a civilian model, then there should be no possibility of automatic fire.
          2. KEX
            KEX 5 January 2020 15: 09 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Duc, the platoon handle on the left, finally it’s not convenient at the transitions, the hole will be rubbed either on the belly or on the back .... (moved, like in the old one on the right you need to remove your hand from the trigger to distort it, although this never bothered me and the reload speed was not inferior after a couple of days of exercise in the old version),

            You can of course make it shorter and wider and leave it on the left (IMHO)
            either old-fashioned .... and wear comfortably ...
            1. 3danimal 5 January 2020 15: 21 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              I like how the platoon is made on the G-36.
              Nothing catches, suitable for righties and lefties.
              1. KEX
                KEX 7 January 2020 22: 31 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                as an option, I thought about it, (on my AK, the bolt group after improvements allows the cocking handle and to turn it on the right and left, as a result, as you say (on g-36) came to the folding handle on the spring first, then after practice somewhere in 700-800 shots I redid it to a short thick handle, but still, on the right, I prefer more like that ...

                all these show-offs are reloading with the left hand ... as a result, when changing the store with my left hand, I just do not let go of the store after inserting it (half the shaft, by the way - I also don’t like mine, even with a neck - then I’ll explain why if I want to) I distort the shutter with my right and all speed gut turns out faster and more reliable ...

                1. 3danimal 9 January 2020 10: 57 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  A matter of skills and habits (and they are connected precisely with the experience of using AK and AK-74).
                  A person who was originally trained on the M-4 or G-36 will perceive it differently.
                  But the inconvenience is distracting, I think.
        2. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: stock buildbat
          The tirovy option))) I would look at the one who in the field will try to clean this product)))

          There is a second nuance - the cost of production. At a minimum, the AK-74 is twice as expensive. For our army, for sure, it would not have rolled.
          1. Mcsim78 3 January 2020 11: 45 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The cost of AK in the United States will also be greater.
          2. 3danimal 3 January 2020 19: 13 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Different armies have different budgets ..
            On the other hand, the same AK-12 is more expensive than 74m.
        3. Shelest2000 11 January 2020 12: 41 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I would look at the one who in the field will try to clean this product)))

          No complexity for field conditions - took out the pin, took out the bolt group, took off the gas pipe with an overlay and clean as much as you like.
          And nobody does a complete disassembly in the field. What for? The only thing that comes to mind is to replace the trunk with damage in the database. But our AK doesn’t have such an opportunity - only in the rembat.
      2. sedoj 30 December 2019 22: 35 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        DNO Firearms DX-7 Rifle Assembly

        Too many screws that after several disassembly assemblies will need to be changed.
        1. Nick 31 December 2019 16: 25 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          Quote: sedoj
          DNO Firearms DX-7 Rifle Assembly

          Too many screws that after several disassembly assemblies will need to be changed.

          Yes. And it’s harder to make. Even milling is present. Well for rich users, that’s it. And for military needs, the less labor the better. Therefore, milling was replaced by stamping. AK-47 was created by Kalashnikov not for trade on the market, but for the massive rearmament of the army.
        2. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 07 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: sedoj
          DNO Firearms DX-7 Rifle Assembly

          Too many screws that after several disassembly assemblies will need to be changed.

          Yes, there, most likely, with a large consumption of cartridges, the whole machine with the fighter assembly will go under replacement ...
      3. Boris Chernikov 30 December 2019 23: 05 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        civilian lyalka — of interest is only a convenient two-way translator of fire, I’m personally still sad why they didn’t put the same on the AK-12, it stands on the same AEK .. and the rest ... any modern army machine should have a minimum slots for dirt to get inside .. but instead of a single slot that is closed by a fuse on the march, there is always open .. more simply, if the M16 or AK can be dropped into the mud and be sure that nothing got there, then you can be sure that there exactly what hit
        1. nedgen 31 December 2019 01: 47 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Boris Chernikov
          civilian lyalka is of interest only a convenient two-way translator of fire, I personally am still sad why they didn’t put the same on the AK-12, it stands on the same AEK .. and the rest ..

          But for example, I don’t like this switch at all. It can very easily be inadvertently switched. I had such a clue. I shoot left and right. And when he threw the machine several times inadvertently switched the fire mode. Especially when he shot with his left. The fact that this translator is more ergonomic I do not argue at all.
          1. Boris Chernikov 2 January 2020 11: 19 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Well, "convenience" is the force of habit in fact, no more
        2. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 09 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Boris Chernikov
          Of the interesting things, only a convenient two-way translator of fire, I personally am still sad why they didn’t put the same on the AK-12, it stands on the same AEK ..

          Personally, all the manipulations with the shutter and changing the store with my right hand are more convenient for me. So it's a matter of taste.
    2. figwam 30 December 2019 19: 44 New
      • 6
      • 4
      +2
      Another brand name, but the controversial part of AK is a fuse. Yes, it closes the slot for the shutter, through which, in principle, dirt gets there. Or may fall. But in the classic version, it is inconvenient. And not without reason at the last AK-12 they thought of redoing it by changing the position of the thrust bar.

      They didn’t change anything with a fuse on the AK-12.
      1. Saxahorse 30 December 2019 21: 39 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        Quote: figvam
        They didn’t change anything with a fuse on the AK-12.

        Because as usual all the steam went off the whistle. Here's what they promised at the beginning:

        1. figwam 30 December 2019 22: 15 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Because as usual all the steam went off the whistle. Here's what they promised at the beginning:

          Non-serial samples can be anything, on the AK-12 everything is classic.
        2. Zefr 1 January 2020 15: 06 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And why did the butt with the central tube come about? In the M-16, this pipe is structurally needed (as I understand it). And why in AK-12?
          1. LastPS 5 January 2020 15: 53 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            This butt is telescopic - the pipe is just part of the structure, the axis on which the butt itself is put on, the cleaning kit can still be stored there, and AK naturally has no role for automation.
    3. 9lvariag 31 December 2019 19: 24 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      In general, the same thing has always surprised such a state of affairs. Try to copy even outdated from the West. If they do not sue, then they will start talking in articles in professional publications! They already have Tokarev-Colt and Makarov-Walter .... Schmeiser-Kalashnikov .....
    4. D-ug 1 January 2020 11: 42 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: Brigadier
      Americans, Chinese and other nationalities from around the world copy our products without any problems,

      What are these?
      Quote: Brigadier
      And the "world community" does not seem to notice this ...

      The product not protected by patent does not belong to anyone. And protected by a patent, belongs to the patent holder.
      Quote: Brigadier
      Although the Chinese are well done, they spit from the big bell tower on all the cries of the "world community."

      Ничего подобного.
  3. Strashila 30 December 2019 18: 42 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Another ode, about trying to cross a snake and a hedgehog.
  4. Thrifty 30 December 2019 18: 49 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    And why not make a flexible, folding store for the machine? Such a store will almost never take up empty space, you can create such a store for any number of cartridges, everything will depend on the store’s materials, its ability to stretch, or even to bend sideways.
    1. tracer 30 December 2019 21: 52 New
      • 11
      • 2
      +9
      You don’t smoke spice that much. Especially in front of the comments.
    2. Boris Chernikov 30 December 2019 23: 07 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      and where is the spring? it’s like the main element and it should not be constantly stressed, otherwise in the end there will not be any cartridges to be sent to the end and 4-5 cartridges will remain in the store
    3. IL-64 31 December 2019 11: 13 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      When dealing only with condoms, and not holding weapons, it is better to refrain from commenting on iron. Wait for the topic of gas masks
  5. Vladimir_2U 30 December 2019 18: 57 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank. Not really the author understands tanks. For example, replacing a 76,2 mm gun with an 85 mm gun made it necessary to create a completely new turret for the T-34 (and the introduction of 5 crew members, of course, but the new gun affected much more), but the “increase” was less than 10 mm. The result is two different tanks, with non-interchangeable towers. In the case of the T-62, the increase was 15 mm.
    In the mid 1950s The design of a new medium tank was begun. The 100-mm gun D-54TS compared to the D-10T had a longer shot. Since GBTU did not want to introduce separate-shell loading, it was necessary to increase the diameter of the tank’s shoulder strap. Which in turn required lengthening the hull of the tank. To maintain the correct alignment of the tank, the location of the track rollers was changed and so on. The result of these works was the T-62 tank. ... It turned out that, while maintaining all the external dimensions of the D-54 gun and refusing rifling, the gun caliber can be increased from 100 to 115 millimeters It was not possible to install a 115 mm gun on a 54-ku.
    1. polar fox 30 December 2019 20: 09 New
      • 19
      • 6
      +13
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Not really the author understands tanks.

      the author in the slops towards the USSR only understands well ... and weapons-longing-sadness.
    2. svp67 30 December 2019 20: 57 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      It was not possible to install a 115 mm gun on a 54-ku.

      But now it turns out to install 125 mm on it ...
      1. Vladimir_2U 30 December 2019 21: 06 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        All the same, 125 mm of separate charging, plus the refusal of the loader and the large volumes of the hull and turret than the T-72, allowed the automatic loader to stick there without much tension. However, is the suspension designed for increased weight up to 40 tons, is the protection of the upgraded tank brought from at least 105 mm guns? You can stick in 152 mm, whether the tank remains a tank at the same time and not a "sitting duck" question.
        1. svp67 30 December 2019 21: 23 New
          • 6
          • 2
          +4
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          However, is the suspension designed for increased weight up to 40 tons, is the protection of the upgraded tank brought from at least 105 mm guns?

          Yes, everything is done. and there are several options from different manufacturers
      2. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 December 2019 21: 10 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        It was not possible to install a 115 mm gun on a 54-ku.

        But now it turns out to install 125 mm on it ...

        I will supplement it. In Israel, no less trophy towers from T-54 were installed on the captured T-55/62 chassis.
        1. hohol95 30 December 2019 21: 46 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And with the help, how much work was done?
        2. Vladimir_2U 31 December 2019 05: 25 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Well, as a result, the analogue of the T-34-85 turned out, the old building, the new tower is actually a new tank, don’t you? Holiday greetings!
    3. Zaurbek 30 December 2019 21: 16 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      First they wanted to put 100mm T12. But she was more powerful and did not fit. It’s a pity that they didn’t give life to the 115mm gun. You can use long scrap in BOPS. A good armor penetration would be. And in light BT can be used.
  6. Operator 30 December 2019 19: 05 New
    • 7
    • 4
    +3
    In connection with the limitation of the cost of domestic AK, it is not possible to make a receiver from duralumin or milled steel. And a stamped steel does not get a break.
    1. Timeout 30 December 2019 23: 26 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Operator
      In connection with the limitation of the cost of domestic AK, it is not possible to make a receiver from duralumin or milled steel. And a stamped steel does not get a break.

      Operator, is this the Universe whispering to you? But nothing that AK has originally milled!
      1. Operator 31 December 2019 01: 01 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        But nothing that the receiver of the serial AK-47 was originally stamped - from 1949 to 1951? laughing

        Due to the large number of defects, the stamped box was replaced in 1952 with a milled one (heavier and more expensive). In turn, it was abandoned in 1959 when switching to a new machine model - AKM - with improved technology for stamping the receiver.
        1. Timeout 31 December 2019 02: 42 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Quote: Operator
          serial AK-47

          Is it serial? Or the party transferred to the troops for testing? Automatic machines have just become serial since 1951. So you can laugh further. As always, he waved the Old on top and is building an academician. And do not roll over, you generally argued about this
          Quote: Operator
          In connection with the limitation of the cost of domestic AK, it is not possible to make a receiver from duralumin or milled steel. And a stamped steel does not get a break.
          1. Operator 31 December 2019 10: 53 New
            • 3
            • 5
            -2
            When you get drunk, you have to have a bite: AK-47 was adopted in 1949, as a serial weapon, of course.
            1. Timeout 31 December 2019 11: 44 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              [quote = Operator] When you drink - you need to have a bite: [/ quote]

              You’ll be rude to mom, schoolboy.
              [quote = Operator] AK-47 was adopted in 1949 [/ quot] Especially for school academics, find the difference between the experimental series and the mass. AK in the first, stamped version was released by an experimental series for comprehensive testing in the army and was classified. The milled version was mass-produced, taking into account all those discovered during tests in the troops.
    2. 9lvariag 31 December 2019 19: 21 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Operator
      In connection with the limitation of the cost of domestic AK, it is not possible to make a receiver from duralumin or milled steel. And a stamped steel does not get a break.

      This is how you rushed in yesterday?
  7. Aerolab 30 December 2019 19: 16 New
    • 17
    • 0
    +17
    The author of this ... Do the shutter handle on the left and 99 fighters out of 100 have perforated abdomen.
    1. Catfish 30 December 2019 21: 40 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Ah, poor German Wehrmacht, machine gunners there are all "punched" to one. laughing
      1. Aerolab 30 December 2019 21: 44 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Yes, they just preferred to wear PP from left to right, so as not to damage the stomach. And during the battle, PPs under the right hand were perekidovany.
      2. Reserve buildbat 31 December 2019 13: 46 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        And you will familiarize yourself with the statutory wearing of the Wehrmacht software. He was not worn either on his belly or on his back. Carried on the right shoulder with the barrel forward. There are a lot of photos about this, no need to focus on the movie)))
        1. Catfish 31 December 2019 13: 55 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And I'm not guided by the movies, it would be stupid. I simply answered my colleague about his remark about “perforation”. He joked like him. Happy New Year, Ivan. )))
          1. Reserve buildbat 31 December 2019 14: 14 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            With the Coming, Konstantin))) I was just a little upset by the abundance of sofa commentators in this thread, who, judging by the opinions, had an automatic gun in their hands, if they were holding it, it was pneumatic in a dash for children. smile
            1. Catfish 31 December 2019 15: 10 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Here you are right, unfortunately, there is such a category of "know-it-alls" who are trying to judge everything without any understanding. But is it worth it because of this upset? smile Better to go and have a drink, seeing off the Old Year. drinks
              1. Reserve buildbat 31 December 2019 15: 11 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Support! drinks
  8. Basarev 30 December 2019 19: 21 New
    • 10
    • 24
    -14
    AK healthy person. I even think that it was against him that the Russian army should be re-equipped, and not these bottom-up divisions of Izhmash, who had been scattered, had been divided.
    1. MORDVIN13rus 30 December 2019 19: 52 New
      • 9
      • 3
      +6
      and how long will this fake live in a real battle? Will the E-4 hexagon constantly carry around with you?
      1. Basarev 30 December 2019 21: 10 New
        • 12
        • 27
        -15
        How strange. You do not doubt the reliability of the Chinese AK, which shone in Vietnam (with the vile Chinese culture of production), but doubt the American AK (we should study and study this culture of production from the States ... Yes, and just culture, in the States they do not spoil in the entrances, at least ... Yes, and the machines there are notable, not our garbage like German trophies). Or is everything western for you - frail junk?
        1. MORDVIN13rus 30 December 2019 21: 15 New
          • 12
          • 2
          +10
          And how many bolts in Chinese AK, do not tell. Or can you give an example of a modern automatic weapon, the receiver of which is connected by a handful of bolts.
        2. Revolver 31 December 2019 01: 29 New
          • 14
          • 2
          +12
          Quote: Basarev
          Yes, and just culture, in the States they do not spoil in the entrances, at least ...

          And it depends on where. There are areas with an appropriate population where it is in the order of things. And in San Francisco and Los Angeles, there are places where you can hardly walk down the street without treading, and mind you, not a dog. If the dog does his simple business on the street, and the owner does not collect it in a bag, the owner will be immediately fined. And if the homeless man piles up a bunch, you can’t touch him, in Kal and Fornia there are laws on protecting the rights of homeless people, illegal immigrants, and who else. But thank God, I do not live in California, and you can’t cross the ford between my town and the nearest town with a predominance of minorities.
    2. The leader of the Redskins 30 December 2019 21: 36 New
      • 8
      • 13
      -5
      I agree with you. The American welder succeeded in what whole KBs are working on.
  9. MORDVIN13rus 30 December 2019 19: 21 New
    • 19
    • 4
    +15
    Ndaaa, how many bolts in this craft. I won’t even talk about the resource, it doesn’t, from the word at all, since all these bolts in 3 hundred shots will order a long life. It is clear that this is a barrel for post-shootings, but as a military weapon this clone is not about anything.
  10. Engineer 30 December 2019 19: 37 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Later I was lucky with my brother, who was finishing his master's degree in mechanical engineering, engaged in racing cars. The motto of our team was "Quick and Easy." My brother CNC made the throttle body from magnesium, and I made titanium collectors and fuel supply system.

    Reading this, I feel a sense of evil envy angry
    How simple it is for them. As if to buy kefir
    1. Al_lexx 31 December 2019 11: 58 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: Engineer
      How simple it is for them. As if to buy kefir

      There is a real culture of tool ownership. And that is a fact. Just look at their custom bikes, hot rods, etc. garage crafts.
      Which does not detract from the exclusivity of such a decision on the topic of AK.
      Those. the pepper is clear that this assault rifle is never for everyone.
      1. 9lvariag 31 December 2019 19: 20 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The guys once watched the computer case U96 - the winner of the European Cup modding. You know: I can do the same with the “wow effect” as such a button accordion. Same thing with your posts. He brought pictures to the operator of the CNC machine tools and he did everything.
        1. Al_lexx 1 January 2020 01: 48 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          I don’t know what your name is. Judging by the nickname, you are probably the CNC machine itself. ))) But I assure you that just owning an autocad and having a machine do not give an understanding of what and how to do it.
          Therefore, when you say - "I can do this too", talk about what you already could, and not about what you dreamed of sitting at the computer. Better yet, show that you could.
          Happy New Year. :)
          1. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 21: 08 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            [quote = Al_lexx] I don’t know what your name is. Judging by the nickname, you are probably the CNC machine itself. ))) But I assure you that just owning an autocad and having a machine [/ quote] Well, let's start with the fact that "excellent knowledge of CAD software and similar software." This is a big plus to the speed of development. You can’t assure me with anything. In my pipe, in the comments of such ingenious grazes from the heels of Wilhelm Teleus and another company of couch special forces graze. In a word - I don’t believe anyone.
            [quote] do not give an understanding of what and how to do it. [/ quote] for the presence of a file-spike and a broken vise - does it mean automatically? In the same way, you can order any necessary units at the factory and dance from them. So do half the fashion bows and crossbows, and certainly 150% of the "adult" UAVs with piston engines. In them, the main thing is to assemble and center not their nodes in their housing. Well, for starters, you are right of course, first you need to understand the design if you do not want the extra costs of "cabbage" from your pocket. Although you can hire "knowledgeable and understanding", as practiced in the USA you lick.
            [Quote] So when you say "I can do that too"[Quote]
            Something that I and anyone can - if you do not set yourself sky-high tasks. In this model, as already said above and below me, is full of complete garbage! These Lower & aper- what the hell are they in AK? To everything: yes, and in FN & Beretta - they just got stuck in the same way! No one is going to turn the AK into a rifle or SCS or make PP from it. Is the barrel there anodized, for a fig? Any German / Dutch / Turkish company will produce and send you bipods, slats and other compensatory rubbish to you according to your measurements.
            [Quote] talk about what you already could, and not that you dreamed of sitting at a computer.
            Happy New Year. :) [/ quote]
            I can address the same thing, this is for the speaker. Emperor of the army from the couch. The fact that I was able to show you on TV is shown every day. And as a merit for this, instead of gratitude to me, every day from the Moscow Defense Ministry I only listen to swearing and Wishlist of the regiments and divisional officers. So they measure the diameter of the former atomic super mortars, the thickness of the armor of the future Russian battleships, the number of future Russian AUGs and the number M, in some of our KRs, this is to your friends here.
            [quote] Better yet, show that you could. [/ quote] Shchaz, maybe you should hang out a plan for the combat in the middle of the Moscow Ring Road. And it’s better to hang out, under the American or British embassy.
            1. Al_lexx 3 January 2020 22: 32 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: 9lvariag
              Shchaz, maybe you should hang out a plan for combat in the middle of the MKAD. And it’s better to hang out, under the American or British embassy.

              I didn’t just ask you. While still a schoolboy, I was very seriously engaged in aircraft modeling (youth team of Moscow). He independently developed and manufactured engines, a little later, when he worked in KB A.S. Yakovleva (factory team among the MAP). Therefore, many machine operations, including and on CNC machines. I know what autocad is, how to mold and cook carbon fiber, how to calculate a glider or a propeller (this is a merit of the teachers from the Moscow Aviation Institute, where I studied).
              That is why, I wonder what these Americans did. Just because I understand what kind of work is behind it. I look at it all through the eyes of the developer and manufacturer, not the operator. You begin to me something there about your military merits, in which I have no reason to doubt, as well as take your word for it. I was of little interest in the military use of this AK variant. I admire the way Americans work with materials and tools. This is a separate production culture.
              And who the sofa emperor is there, of course you know better, because you wound up half a turn from scratch, like that teenager of puberty age who needs to prove his worth in the eyes of others. )))
              1. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 22: 56 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Pff, why should I prove it to you. Like Yakovlev Design Bureau.
                Nothing of the kind; they didn’t do it there. And they won’t do it (by the way) if they don’t want to seriously worsen the AK or add to the price tag of the machine with $ 2000. It is time to soberly evaluate what there are show-offs, and what is needed in everyday life, including army. And do not look at the beautiful wrapper and ruffles with quilts, in which there is no sense, except to inflate the price tag of the product.
              2. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 22: 57 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                I am not interested in the concept, namely the military use and competition of the Kalashnikov concern with IT.
          2. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 21: 12 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            What the hell with comments and quoting. The last time this happened five years ago was on the web PP dvigla, on the forums.
  11. Reserve buildbat 30 December 2019 19: 41 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    This article, but a competent translation ...
    "So the addition of an upper and lower receiver has greatly improved the ability to install modern optics and other furniture functionality." just killed)))
    And so ... I have questions: the more access to the mechanism, the lower the reliability. And then there were continuous "cuts, cuts." This is the first:
    The second - if the shutter cocking handle is on the left, is it convenient when carrying the machine on the chest, what is behind?
    Third - the butt is good, but as always there is a question: But can you put it in any way? So carry the "oar" plastic?
    And finally: They praised the Picatinny rails, but the whole thing stands in the same place.
    1. SASHA OLD 4 January 2020 18: 51 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: stock buildbat
      but the pillar is in the same place.

      it is with the barrel - a single unit, so that after disassembly-assembly does not shoot again. Perhaps this is the smartest solution in this instance, everything else from the evil one
  12. Andrei Gurov 30 December 2019 19: 47 New
    • 20
    • 0
    +20
    Vasil Ivanovich and Petka look at the camel and give out Chapay - it was necessary to mutilate the horse like that.
  13. shinobi 30 December 2019 19: 50 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    They used aluminum. They ruined the machine.
  14. fa2998 30 December 2019 20: 13 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Quote: Basarev
    AK healthy person. I even think that it was against him that the Russian army should be re-equipped, and not these bottom-up divisions of Izhmash, who had been scattered, had been divided.

    AK is certainly not ideal, but it was created under the MASS ARMY (3,4,5 million including mobilization) IT SHOULD BE CHEAPER, RELIABLE. You can fall out for a long time, improve, upgrade. Any thieves butt, Piccartini, removable trunks, etc. As a result get a machine for several thousand. $.
    And the "partisans" will spin it, how to handle it. Now ALL who served with AK 47, AKM, AK 74 will deal with AK 12. yes hi
  15. John22 30 December 2019 20: 38 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    The brothers wanted to make money on a new one and created a machine that looked similar to AKM, taking AKM as a basis. They made a composite receiver and an arch type trigger box. Those. complicated the basis, and the bolt frame with a return spring was left the same, which added the inconvenience of assembly. About the handle on the left - generally silent. The result was a sample of aluminum for bottle shootings, but not a combat machine.
  16. Astronaut 30 December 2019 20: 40 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    that the assault rifle lost the famous "Kalashnikov" reliability, but ... Why does it write like that, although there is no direct evidence for this, it is clear. However, it does not matter at all.

    Think not? Well then, this is a weapon for hunting, and not for battle!
    PS I remembered from Mikhalkov:

    I know there are more families
    Where our screaming and scolding,
    Where they look with emotion
    On foreign stickers ...
    And fat ... Russian eat!
    1. SASHA OLD 4 January 2020 18: 57 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Astronaut
      Well then, this is a weapon for hunting, and not for battle!

      shooting / sport shooting ...
      shot, tightened all the screws with a hexagon (which is always with you), shot again, sorted out by "always with you" -cleaned-a couple of screws lost (garbage, on the way to "Everything for the house" I’ll still buy a handful) -twisted everything ( that "always with you") - let's go home ...
      funny "life" in aluminum trachtamate
  17. svp67 30 December 2019 20: 52 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    This is how the machine opens, if you remove the rear pin, it opens

    Yes, he is more a descendant of the AK-46 than the AK-47
    1. MORDVIN13rus 30 December 2019 21: 12 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      That's why when they compare the assault with the Ak-46, the Ak-46, the second model, and not the first, is constantly present in the picture. The first had a classic analysis
      1. svp67 30 December 2019 21: 17 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: MORDVIN13rus
        That's why when they compare the assault with the Ak-46, the Ak-46, the second model, and not the first, is constantly present in the picture.

        Because in this case, its design is more consistent with this "American."
        1. MORDVIN13rus 30 December 2019 21: 22 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Well, it does not correspond to him.
      2. Avior 31 December 2019 03: 31 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        But what is the fundamental difference between the first and the second in the sense of parsing?
        I do not see fundamental differences.
        there is a lid, but it is an addition to the rigid structure

        Kalashnikov removed it, because it didn’t make sense in the adopted design
    2. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 21: 14 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Half unnecessary on AK chlamyatso. Probably pile in the hope of not paying royalties and prove the relationship of STG and AK.
  18. Zaurbek 30 December 2019 21: 11 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    The T62 was much more advanced and more convenient than the T54 / 55 .... and the 115 mm gun was much more dangerous. The first smooth-bore such tool. Learn the materiel.
    1. svp67 30 December 2019 21: 21 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      Quote: Zaurbek
      The T62 was much more advanced and more convenient than the T54 / 55 ....

      Did you exploit them or are you simply quoting someone’s opinion?
      I served and operated both of these machines and I will say that this is not so. T-62 was a dead end in development and it could not surpass T-55 in more than one specified indicator
      Quote: Zaurbek
      A 115 mm gun is much more dangerous.

      Yeah, it’s more dangerous, it’s more dangerous, but it turned out with accuracy, not really, unlike the 100-mm T-55
      1. Zaurbek 30 December 2019 21: 35 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        I shot only from 100mm MT12. There the accuracy is excellent.
        1. svp67 31 December 2019 01: 46 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: Zaurbek
          I shot only from 100mm MT12. There the accuracy is excellent.

          Yeah, “Rapier” is famous for this, although if you look at how the “trunk” was pulled out to her, you should not be surprised.
          But with tank guns, it didn’t work right away, although the 125 mm then turned out to be quite on the level.
          By the way, the MT-12 had similar equipment for a guided projectile, and the projectile itself was similar to what was used on the T-55M and T-62M
          1. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 36 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: svp67
            I shot only from 100mm MT12. There the accuracy is excellent.

            Yeah, “Rapier” is famous for this, although if you look at how the “trunk” was pulled out to her, you should not be surprised.

            Barrel length U-5TS - 6050 mm
            Barrel length MT-12 - 6300 mm
            The difference is not so great. It’s not the same barrel length.
            1. svp67 3 January 2020 16: 28 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Captain Pushkin
              Barrel length U-5TS - 6050 mm
              Barrel length MT-12 - 6300 mm
              The difference is not so great.

              And in the "calibers"? Caliber is not only the internal diameter of the barrel, it is also the ratio of this diameter to the length of the barrel
              And here at MT-12 it is 6300: 100 = 63
              A U-5TS 6050: 115 =53
              How do you like this difference?
      2. 9lvariag 3 January 2020 21: 20 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yes, do not pay attention - the sect of witnesses to them. Red Barona (Tarasenki-Armored Head) and Apukhtina - condescended to disputes with us and you, the lower worms! hi am laughing This they themselves screwed the first tank radar and BIUS on about.485 "Hammer". :) It is a pity there is no bun: dash &: ban.-)))))
  19. acetophenon 30 December 2019 21: 20 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Collective farm tuning.
  20. K-50 30 December 2019 21: 26 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    And one more thing: the shutter handle on a traditional AK is on the right. This is inconvenient, you have to remove the right hand from the grip handle. On the left it was necessary to do it, on the left!

    On the “Kalash”, finding the shutter handle on the right is also due to combat techniques with weapons. So in the "on the chest" and "on the back" position, the handle will definitely interfere. Again, crawling while lying down with a gun, the handle will cling to the ground or form.
    Norms will not pass. request lol
    1. Catfish 30 December 2019 22: 32 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      In fact, as I understand it, these weapons were made for their market, and not for arming them with infantry units of the Russian Army. request
      1. Slavs 31 December 2019 00: 35 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Sea Cat
        Actually, as I understand it, these weapons were made for their market, and not for arming them with infantry units of the Russian Army

        That's just the author extols this product to us, forgetting that we are not his young students, but had experience with weapons not only in a warm dash ... Unlike the author himself.
        1. Catfish 31 December 2019 00: 51 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          Well, how to orient the article is up to the author. I would prefer AKMS with a monolithic receiver (lower receiver), for three years we were friends with him and I am absolutely sure of it. I would like to try the AK - 103 and AK - 104 for the "seven", but so far it has not worked out.
          1. Doliva63 31 December 2019 16: 31 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Sea Cat
            Well, how to orient the article is up to the author. I would prefer AKMS with a monolithic receiver (lower receiver), for three years we were friends with him and I am absolutely sure of it. I would like to try the AK - 103 and AK - 104 for the "seven", but so far it has not worked out.

            And if we add H2 to AKMS, then it was "our FSO" laughing Officers, warrant officers and senior intelligence officers with pleasure regularly used it. As a rule, it was also suitable for PBS. In general, an excellent universal "machine" drinks
      2. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 39 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Sea Cat
        In fact, as I understand it, these weapons were made for their market, and not for arming them with infantry units of the Russian Army. request

        This is unlikely at all for the market. Rather, it is a test of the pen of novice gunsmiths.
  21. erased 30 December 2019 21: 43 New
    • 6
    • 11
    -5
    The superamers made a new AK. What else can they steal from others? How many American developments in small arms do they have in service? Not a fountain. But someone else learned to tear apart. The Chinas have spied.
    1. Catfish 30 December 2019 21: 57 New
      • 17
      • 1
      +16
      M1911, Browning's fifty kopeck piece, Thompson, Garand rifle, M1 and M2 carbine, M16 rifle - who was "torn"? I'm already silent about the American revolving classics.
      1. Al_lexx 31 December 2019 11: 26 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: Sea Cat
        M1911, Browning's fifty kopeck piece, Thompson, Garand rifle, M1 and M2 carbine, M16 rifle - who was "torn"? I'm already silent about the American revolving classics.

        + 10500!
      2. Captain Pushkin 2 January 2020 16: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Sea Cat
        M1911, Browning's fifty kopeck piece, Thompson, Garand rifle, M1 and M2 carbine, M16 rifle - who was "torn"? I'm already silent about the American revolving classics.

        If you are talking about the classics, then this is a Maxim machine gun.
        1. Catfish 2 January 2020 16: 49 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quite fair. hi Happy New Year! drinks
    2. Michael HORNET 31 December 2019 08: 28 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Here all the ideas are mine. A good sports carbine has been created. Naturally, this is not a combat weapon.
      But one could do better
    3. Al_lexx 31 December 2019 11: 25 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The topic about this AK is separate. And it must be considered separately from military small arms. It is clear that it was developed not for the line infantry, but for American enthusiast collectors.
      But in general, if we talk about the American history of small arms, then Browning is one of the greatest gunsmiths of our time. Only the concern is Beretta and Belgian fn. Well, Mauser, to the heap.
  22. 75 Sergey 30 December 2019 22: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    But the disassembly-assembly process for servicing will not be shown?
    Yes, and where does the furniture?
    1. Catfish 30 December 2019 22: 38 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Sergey, look above, there the guys posted a video with the assembly.
  23. Simargl 30 December 2019 23: 16 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    As an example, take the story of the T-54/55 tank. It was a good car, still fighting. In Israel, captured Arab tanks were easily equipped with a new engine and an English cannon of 105 mm caliber, but we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62-mm gun, which didn’t show itself in anything. But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank.
    It is not clear what the 110 mm. Maybe 115?
    In addition, the author flashed a lack of knowledge and did not take into account that the new caliber is not only a new diameter, but also, say, a new shell. It can be longer, be unitary, have different purposes and the type of projectile and propellant ... and you have to increase the tower, shoulder straps, change the weight distribution, lengthen the tank ... and get ... a new tank.

    First of all, this is a removable receiver cover, on which it is impossible to mount the sight.
    Is this a problem for SVD?

    That is why it is moved far ahead, which is not very convenient for the shooter. I personally would prefer to have it directly above the protrusion of the return spring guide rod, closer to the eyes.
    Question to the author: Do you, man, know how to shoot? As I understand it, you do not know about the existence of two types of sight (at least). And the fact that it is easier to search for a target with an open sight, but if you move the rear sight to the eye - you can’t get there - you will have to change it to diopter, which is not so convenient if you need to quickly transfer fire.

    This is inconvenient, you have to remove the right hand from the grip handle.
    What for? It’s easier to turn the weapon 90 degrees and pull the bolt from the top with your left hand.

    When we decided to produce our own AK assault rifle, we first decided to try to improve the simplicity and elegance of a standard Kalashnikov-style automatic rifle
    How many times increased the number of parts? How many bolted connections are there? For example, I believe that weapons, if possible, should not contain threaded connections - only latches.
    ....
    Well, the “breaking” spring at the “fracture” is just wild game!
  24. Sarkazm 30 December 2019 23: 53 New
    • 6
    • 13
    -7
    Translation amused, especially about furniture laughing

    If in the case, then everything is new, it’s a well-forgotten old, AK returned to the roots and its roots.
    A good example of civilian weapons, and most likely precisely on the US civilian arms market, this version of the AK is designed. Our AK-12, etc. against his background is a miscarriage, stillborn. It is clear that this reincarnation of the AK is far from the army model, but the direction and ideas, or rather, my apologies for the repetition, reincarnation are correct in my opinion.
    In general, I think it’s high time to abandon the AK as the basis for the development of new samples, everything has its time and time gone AK.
    1. tracer 31 December 2019 05: 59 New
      • 11
      • 3
      +8
      You are not really “sarcasm”; you are “absolute zero” in weapons-related matters. And you talk with moisture about "things of cosmic importance" with "cosmic" stupidity. Now justify. You see, dear friend, "convenience" is not the ultimate goal of creating any weapon. It’s most convenient to sit on the couch (for example). And we must fight with weapons. Weapons are appreciated (again from our point of view) for reliability, efficiency and the possibility of mass, low-cost production (since these are weapons for defense against the enemy) in the required quantity in conditions of military conflict. And this is the minimum of requirements that just came to mind about the subject of discussion. Look at the video how many small threaded screws the character twists. You hope to understand that a very strong vibrational wave travels with a shot, and with a series of shots (turns) at regular intervals, there is also a resonance of imposing waves that shakes the structure even more. That is, all these screws and sooner or later just unscrew or the thread will be damaged by the load. That is, the design is simply shaken AND THERE WILL NOT BE A CYCLE OF WORK OF THE MECHANISMS OR THE QUALITY OF SHOTS. Understood the first two criteria of reliability and efficiency. And this design does not correspond to any of them. Now "the simplicity and cheapness of production." See how much work, refinement of molding on CNC. Have you looked? Have you presented the costs of equipment, maintenance, energy costs, hours to create a “machine”, add the salary of highly skilled workers and maintenance of the machine park? Well, how cheap? That is, this criterion does not meet any criteria for the requirement for a similar type of product. I’m silent about the fact that the trunk is clearly not cold forged. How? Have you figured it out? For justice, it must be said that the "creators" of these tasks set them. The task was simply to enter the arms market and sell something “their own”. It breaks perfectly ... they will sell additional spare parts, it is falling apart, buy a new one, it doesn’t fall, it’s even better to buy more cartridges. The construction of this unit is based on a completely different, incomprehensible to us logical consequence of ideas alien and nasty to the very idea of ​​creating an Kalashnikov assault rifle. This is a mutilated and comic image of a brilliant design in a crooked mirror of mercantile and selfish interests. You obviously did not understand this. Learn nothing ...
      1. Michael HORNET 31 December 2019 08: 30 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        This is not a military weapon, but a sport one. For sports, it’s possible, although it could be done even better. But as an option it has the right to exist.
        The question is how shutter guides are made and what they are made of. The Kalashnikov’s native bolt is designed for steel rails, but is there another question that has integrated them
        1. tracer 31 December 2019 15: 17 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Mikhail, as a person who is a little versed in mechanics, judging by the information, I can say no. No steel plates are integrated. CNC work on aluminum casting headers. For "sport" I do not see anything in it. This is cheap for a heap.
      2. Al_lexx 31 December 2019 11: 19 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        +1
        But in itself, an interesting approach. I would even say - unexpected.
        In general, I always liked American crazy hands, which does not at all cancel your judgment, with which I completely agree.
        This machine is not for line infantry. But it is possible that the American "wild geese" may be interested in them. Civil collectors and even more so. Just to have a trunk not like everyone else.
      3. Firelake 31 December 2019 14: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Agree to 200%
      4. Sarkazm 2 January 2020 19: 50 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        I don’t know, judging by the nickname you are special, I’m a simple “user”, I judge by what I saw, what I served with. There were Finnish valmetas, Jewish Galilians, Gdr ov AKs in our hands, unfortunately, our AK even had the same quality in terms of production. In terms of convenience (ergonomics), our AK is inferior to its clones, in the little things, everything is there “for humans”. If to compare with the competitor, from the civilian version M16 shot a lot after, my personal conclusion, I repeat this is purely my opinion of “user”, I do not insist and do not argue with you - I would prefer something close to M16 for myself, it also has ergonomics better and accuracy is higher.
        1. MORDVIN13rus 3 January 2020 00: 30 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          What better is Finnish, Israeli, and East German Kalashoid? The controls on the wallet, on the MPi-K, Galil’s only translator is two-way, but on the left side it’s not painful and convenient, exactly the same as in his native Kalash. Having run more than one year with 74m, I can honestly say that the machine is reliable, unpretentious, accuracy is enough for those tasks for which it is intended. To demand from him the accuracy of a target rifle for a shooting gallery, this is at least a bad manners.
          1. Sarkazm 4 January 2020 02: 06 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Here, everyone has his own - who has something to hurt. I “ran” with AKMS, and not with 74, the GDR folding butt looked to me more than ours, but the most convenient of all looked at Galil. Both the valmet and the galil are aimed more conveniently, the galil plus the most accurate one. For both, the magazine latch is differently made; for the valmet, the trigger guard is convenient. In short the little things done for people. The general impression is not in favor of our AK, AKMS.
  25. Undecim 31 December 2019 00: 16 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    To begin with, what all citizens of the USSR and Russia who had dealings with him probably paid attention to. First of all, this is a removable receiver cover, on which it is impossible to mount the sight. That is why it is moved far ahead, which is not very convenient for the shooter.
    Everything is possible. The main thing is correctly sharpened hands.
    And one more thing: the shutter handle on a traditional AK is on the right. This is inconvenient, you have to remove the right hand from the grip handle. On the left it was necessary to do it, on the left!
    With the handle of this, the Americans have some kind of freak. A lot of options.
    You can simply buy a kit with a slide frame with two handles and a removable receiver cover with a sight mounted on it.
    1. Undecim 31 December 2019 00: 20 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      There are options quite artisanal in appearance.

      By the way, the sight on a removable cover.
    2. tracer 31 December 2019 06: 10 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      You can buy it, you can’t shoot. A sight on a dangling lid? Yes, this is a brilliant constructive solution.
      1. Doliva63 31 December 2019 16: 42 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: tracer
        You can buy it, you can’t shoot. A sight on a dangling lid? Yes, this is a brilliant constructive solution.

        It is not clear why they do not like the dovetail. It’s quite convenient.
        1. tracer 31 December 2019 16: 44 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And the only acceptable in this design.
          1. Doliva63 31 December 2019 16: 48 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: tracer
            And the only acceptable in this design.

            Well, that is, it’s better not to come up with. It suited me. drinks
  26. cat Rusich 31 December 2019 01: 37 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The guys from the us decided to earn $ on behalf of Mikhail Timofeevich. And that would not have been presented "for plagiarism," they remade AK in their own way. A new look at AK is curious and interesting, you won’t go to battle with it, but you can go to the shooting range. In the article, you can write a price for cooling "hot heads".
  27. About 2 31 December 2019 02: 31 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    This machine is a hack for the civilian market no more. The abundance of bolts is definitely unreliable. For me, the recently created AK 12 that I purchased a couple of weeks ago in the SHP variant is quite a modern and convenient thing and operation in the troops will reveal all the pros and cons.
  28. Locksmith 31 December 2019 07: 37 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Our weapons are usually designed for military use, and warriors fight not only in pure Europe, sometimes, and this is becoming a trend in the Arctic. I remember from my youth I was very much surprised that the lubricated SCS nifiga does not move the shutter, if it is -40 on the street, and everything is to be blamed. But you have to pull the shutter handle off-hand, and this aluminum will not work at all - aluminum has a thermal expansion coefficient twice as much as at steel. And in Yakutia and under -60 it happens laughing
  29. Lunic 31 December 2019 07: 53 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    It turned out beautiful, but not for use in the army. So, for fans sometimes shoot at the shooting range. Just think - 10 minutes to disassemble .... and then incomplete.
    The original article was published in December 2017. On sale of this toy is not yet this startup DNOfairarms which continues to raise money for production for two years. The website of this startup has not been updated for a long time. At the American arms forums, many wrote that they would buy this model if the price was around $ 600- $ 700.
    And so, Kalash 47e is being riveted by Century Arms in our state of Vermont. good quality (of course not compare with the original but much better than the Chinese and Bulgarians) and the price of $ 579 is quite acceptable.
    1. tracer 31 December 2019 15: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Yes, I saw them many times, a gray vinyl cap on the hook of the shutter. The receiver's steel is as thin as paper. Made as a layout for Airsoft. I didn’t like it. Moreover, you can order Romanian or Bulgarian from Fleet farm without any problems.
  30. alexey alexeyev_2 31 December 2019 08: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Improved called. Disassembly with a screwdriver.
  31. Usher 31 December 2019 08: 18 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Is the author really what? "But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank." This is what the author did, if not in the know. I did not read further, this phrase showed the author’s technical illiteracy. If he is not aware that the T-62 is the T-55 with a new gun. Not a new tank.
    1. Doliva63 31 December 2019 16: 45 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Usher
      Is the author really what? "But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank." This is what the author did, if not in the know. I did not read further, this phrase showed the author’s technical illiteracy. If he is not aware that the T-62 is the T-55 with a new gun. Not a new tank.

      Plyusanul, but at 62 there was a lot of new. Taki different tanks.
      1. Usher 2 January 2020 18: 45 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        Well, of course, different tanks, the gun is different. And the rest is a remake of a new gun and all. Nothing new. We expanded the epaulette, increased the dimensions, the location of the rollers is different and that's all. Well, the release of cartridges.
        1. Doliva63 2 January 2020 18: 54 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Usher
          Well, of course, different tanks, the gun is different. And the rest is a remake of a new gun and all. Nothing new. We expanded the epaulette, increased the dimensions, the location of the rollers is different and that's all. Well, the release of cartridges.

          Are you probably a professional tanker? drinks

          Another gun, another PPO, another PAZ. These are tanks of different times for different wars. There are many different things, just sclerosis makes it difficult to list. If you are not a tanker, do not answer anymore - it is boring to read the comments of the nerds.
          1. Usher 3 January 2020 11: 00 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            Quote: Doliva63
            Quote: Usher
            Well, of course, different tanks, the gun is different. And the rest is a remake of a new gun and all. Nothing new. We expanded the epaulette, increased the dimensions, the location of the rollers is different and that's all. Well, the release of cartridges.

            Are you probably a professional tanker? drinks

            Another gun, another PPO, another PAZ. These are tanks of different times for different wars. There are many different things, just sclerosis makes it difficult to list. If you are not a tanker, do not answer anymore - it is boring to read the comments of the nerds.

            LOL is unaddressed. Ash stump is something else, and don't show off abbreviations. If you do not understand the meaning of the words, but only how you get to the bottom of a bore, then which of us is a bore and a nerd is not yet clear. I’ll say it easier for fools. The T-62 is a T-55 with a 115mm gun, that's it !!! And I do not need there mm, cm, kg and PPO and PAZ, PNV, PNK and other vypendrezhny craps to write. Judging by your childhood words, you are definitely not a tanker. I served in motorized riflemen, a radio operator.
            1. Doliva63 3 January 2020 15: 01 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Quote: Usher
              Quote: Doliva63
              Quote: Usher
              Well, of course, different tanks, the gun is different. And the rest is a remake of a new gun and all. Nothing new. We expanded the epaulette, increased the dimensions, the location of the rollers is different and that's all. Well, the release of cartridges.

              Are you probably a professional tanker? drinks

              Another gun, another PPO, another PAZ. These are tanks of different times for different wars. There are many different things, just sclerosis makes it difficult to list. If you are not a tanker, do not answer anymore - it is boring to read the comments of the nerds.

              LOL is unaddressed. Ash stump is something else, and don't show off abbreviations. If you do not understand the meaning of the words, but only how you get to the bottom of a bore, then which of us is a bore and a nerd is not yet clear. I’ll say it easier for fools. The T-62 is a T-55 with a 115mm gun, that's it !!! And I do not need there mm, cm, kg and PPO and PAZ, PNV, PNK and other vypendrezhny craps to write. Judging by your childhood words, you are definitely not a tanker. I served in motorized riflemen, a radio operator.

              Could not resist, poor fellow lol
              Unlike you, I studied tanks at a military school - from PT-76 to T-80. And it was produced on the T-62. He said it was boring to read you, restless.
  32. Romanenko 31 December 2019 09: 51 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Very interesting solutions in the style of the Arch, as in the work, is of course unclear, but a new design look at the AK is evident.
    A bit like an advanced air gun, but this is a feature of all American rifles.
  33. Mikhail3 31 December 2019 10: 35 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It’s bad, since the pie starts to stitch the boots, and the shoemaker starts to bake pies. However, everything has been done to increase sales. For war, you need an old AK, certainly with a wooden birch butt. And this toy is not needed at all by anyone, which adds to laughter. Why? Who knows how to think, he will easily figure it out. He who does not know how is hopeless.
    For those who want to open their minds and learn how to use it, I give a little hint. And why is a machine in general at war?
  34. Al_lexx 31 December 2019 11: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Very interesting development. I always liked American crazy hands.
    But the fact that this machine is four times more expensive and more difficult to manufacture compared to serial AKs is a fact. On the other hand, this does not detract from its value for the American market. Those "wild geese" will probably take him into service, in regions where there is an excess of ammunition for him.
    But to say that this is an alternative to the classic AK, of course not. And there is no need for any evidence of comparable reliability and ease of operation.
    1. tracer 31 December 2019 15: 27 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Wild Geese is a strong statement. Do you think that harsh and ruthless mercenaries will take this balalaika with them to the jungle or sands of Africa? In order to stay there with her? You wrote about the "wild geese", not idiotic ..
      1. Al_lexx 1 January 2020 01: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: tracer
        You wrote about the "wild geese", not idiotic ..

        I expressed my assumption only, knowing how Americans love weapons and their American developments. At the same time, they have a very positive attitude towards AK, which is confirmed by a bunch of photos from Iraq, Afghanistan and other places where AK has distribution.

        .
        It’s strange that it hurt you. Are you related to American PMCs?
        1. tracer 1 January 2020 02: 06 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          No, I have no glory to God. But I have an idea of ​​what and how is sold in North America. You do not confuse AK even of any production and this craft of lovers. Pros with this shnyaga will never go. In addition, pros and their almost never go except for official PMCs. They will give something and use it.
          1. Al_lexx 1 January 2020 02: 50 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            I took into account your opinion as a specialist in PMCs and the arms market of North America. smile
          2. Timeout 2 January 2020 03: 26 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: tracer
            But I have an idea of ​​what and how is sold in North America.

            But what about the Russian and Chinese cartridges? Desa turned out test
            Quote: tracer
            Now there is little Russian in North America. The remains of the old Soviet all were extinct for a long time. Chinese cartridges are now buying and 7.62 × 39 and 5.56 × 45 including 7.62 × 25 and 9 × 19.

            But in the end, there are enough Russians, but there are no Chinese in the forma, they are banned for import under sanctions.
            Quote: tracer
            except official PMCs

            Yeah, again first-hand information ...
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
  35. Frieda 31 December 2019 11: 33 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    In general, the article is interesting, like most of Shpakovsky’s articles, but, as they say, there is one caveat, or rather a consideration.
    And one more thing: the shutter handle on a traditional AK is on the right. This is inconvenient, you have to remove the right hand from the grip handle. On the left it was necessary to do it, on the left! The experience of many samples clearly shows that this weapon does not do worse.

    Here the author is wrong. The presence of the handle on the right is not just a tribute to fashion, but the features of statutory carrying weapons. In particular, "through the chest", it is clear that in this position the handle will rest against the sternum, that with a machine gun weight of 3,5 kilograms, it’s still a pleasure, for the same reason MP38 / 40 was criticized in the Red Army, in which the handle was placed in a similar way . Well, the second point, the reload handle, in addition to the main function in AK, SKS, SVD and other Soviet models, plays the role of a reflector of spent cartridges, after departure, the cartridge hits the handle and bounces right-up, without a handle (or with a handle on the left) , the sleeve will fly backwards, when shooting from the right shoulder — behind the back, from the left — into the face of the arrow, therefore, on the samples of sporting rifles based on AK, with a handle on the left, the “native”, right-side handle is also saved. hi
  36. mixail sherbakov 31 December 2019 12: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "..sell and buy, at least in order to compare .."))) A typical view of a manager who works on everything abroad. There is no question about a series of comparative tests of samples! The main thing is to GIVE!
  37. Disorder 31 December 2019 14: 20 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A butt was added from the AR-15 rifle.

    What the hell? At the arch in the butt are a buffer and a return spring, because of which it is impossible to realize a folding butt. Is it saving or not having enough brains to design a more suitable butt?
    And bending the return spring during disassembly is generally something with something.
    It seems that this is the influence of Chinese design thought. In the 20-40s. last century in China produced pistols, which are a compilation of well-known weapons systems.
  38. Doliva63 31 December 2019 15: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "... we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62-mm caliber gun, which didn’t show itself much."
    Figase. After this, you begin to doubt the competence of the author completely.
  39. Klingon 31 December 2019 15: 35 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Shelest2000
    Yes, and we can release a clone of their M-16/4, only change the name, ARR for example. It just makes no sense - we do not have an arms market.

    already released. AR-15 under the Soviet cartridge 7,62x39. as well as ORSIS AR-15J with a barrel from ORSIS
  40. Falx 31 December 2019 18: 43 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    As an example, take the story of the T-54/55 tank. It was a good car, still fighting. In Israel, captured Arab tanks were easily equipped with a new engine and an English cannon of 105 mm caliber, but we needed to create a new T-110 tank for a new 62 mm caliber gun, which didn’t show itself in anything. But it would have been much easier to put a new gun on the T-55, even if the tower was slightly enlarged, than to rebuild the whole tank. But it is so, ...
    blatant illiteracy !!! Shame on you!
    Then I didn’t even read ....
  41. Kunica 1 January 2020 11: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Shiny barrel? And why not reflective? Where is the muzzle brake compensator? Melee weapon? Why then picatini? The guys invented the bike. Congratulations.
  42. D-ug 1 January 2020 11: 38 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    the recently appeared DX-7 assault rifle - an American patented clone of the Kalashnikov assault rifle.

    Is it like that? What does this phrase mean?
  43. Bacha 1 January 2020 13: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    That’s what Americans don’t give in their hands, they will "improve" everything to AR15! Well, what prevented Kalash? Resource, unpretentiousness ... A pen on the right side ... A matter of habit. Two wars behind him, never felt discomfort.
  44. Zakonnik 2 January 2020 21: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Do they pay our money? Or again "overwhelmed"?
  45. Nikolai Redko 3 January 2020 00: 16 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    And what, the machine turned out offset.
    1. ELEZKIY 3 January 2020 11: 12 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Spice, you see, the test, was ...
  46. Oyo Sarkazmi 3 January 2020 16: 17 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The shutter handle on the left, the flailing butt ...
    Brothers, they didn’t do AK, but MP-44 !!! Only Hugo has a thicker spring and a wooden butt.
    Oh, and fool the American brother! They would have made a shutter with a warp. For happiness.
  47. napalm 5 January 2020 19: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well tanks and about the machine where the comments
  48. av58 5 January 2020 20: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Maydanniki made AK their own bullpup version, and so what? Yes, the idea of ​​reconstructing the box into an option for the upper and lower receiver is interesting in itself, but is it worth it? Milling is not only more complicated than stamping, it is also more expensive. The statement that it is possible to mount various Pribluda on a rigid base is understandable, but the same thing was successfully and easier done in the option of attaching the side bar to the AK box. Simpler and cheaper. Moved the platoon handle to the left side? Great, but why? The wacky idea that you need to keep your finger on the descent remains wacky. This has no practical value; firing a machine gun in battle has nothing to do with a cowboy shootout. By the way, they moved the bolt handle of the shutter for righties to the left, but what to do for lefties? On the right there is only a window for cartridges, there are no slots for the shutter. What, for a lefthander you need to buy a separate upper receiver with a shutter cocking with your right hand, and a window for the sleeves on the left? laughing All that the Americans have achieved with the DX-7 is the basis to challenge Kalashnikov’s possible lawsuit over the violation of intellectual property rights: the box is really different.
  49. Alexfly 13 January 2020 12: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    An interesting concept, but an unregulated butt lowers it back to the AK level.
  50. Good mat 21 January 2020 17: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    This garbage is even worse than AKM, with all their processing and refinement, the guys did not catch the concept: - "Everything ingenious is simple." And also - the world was invented as a right-hander, who is uncomfortable even if he does not go to war.