jimdigriz 580 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 My wife does not want to fire my 7.62x39. Too much recoil for her. She likes firing my Ruger 10/22 though. I'd like to get her set up with a more potent and reliable rifle. Was thinking a 5.45. What kind of setup (stock, handguard, etc.) would be optimal for my (relatively) light-weight, low recoil goal? And how much would a recoil buffer moderate things for her? Would a recoil buffer affect reliability? Thanks. Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RoughRider666 47 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Honestly, I have 2 Saiga's: an 7.62x39 and the new 5.45x39 and both of them have recoil buffers in them, and i dont notice ANY reduction in recoil whatsoever in either of them! However, i do know that the buffers are put in place to keep the bolt carrier from beating the rear trunion and reciever to death over time, so in that aspect, they are worth it. As far as recoil, goto www.carolinashooterssupply.com and pickup a Saiga compensator for her. i just bought 2 of them, and i am waiting to get them in the mail, but i hear they are going to kick ass! might try one of those on your guns Quote Link to post Share on other sites
saigafreake 27 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 id go with the stock handguard tapco buttstock and pg and swap out the fsb with a bulgarian one and put on a real ak74 brake and the recoil will be almost non existant. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nalioth 405 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 (edited) My wife does not want to fire my 7.62x39. Too much recoil for her. She likes firing my Ruger 10/22 though. I'd like to get her set up with a more potent and reliable rifle. Was thinking a 5.45. What kind of setup (stock, handguard, etc.) would be optimal for my (relatively) light-weight, low recoil goal? And how much would a recoil buffer moderate things for her? Would a recoil buffer affect reliability? Thanks. Jim Recoil buffers exist to separate fools from their money. They do not actually help anything, and in some cases their use has cracked receivers. Honestly, I have 2 Saiga's: an 7.62x39 and the new 5.45x39 and both of them have recoil buffers in them, and i dont notice ANY reduction in recoil whatsoever in either of them! However, i do know that the buffers are put in place to keep the bolt carrier from beating the rear trunion and reciever to death over time, so in that aspect, they are worth it. As far as recoil, goto www.carolinashooterssupply.com and pickup a Saiga compensator for her. i just bought 2 of them, and i am waiting to get them in the mail, but i hear they are going to kick ass! might try one of those on your guns The Kalashnikov is designed so that the recoil spring will stop the bolt carrier just short of the rear block. If you're having bolt carrier to rear block contact, that is a sign of a worn out recoil spring. Adding a recoil buffer just masks the symptoms of this (and adds stress to the receiver unforseen by the designers). Folks, just ask Uncle Google about recoil buffers. There's been plenty discussed about them here. Edited September 18, 2009 by nalioth Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted September 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 The Kalashnikov is designed so that the recoil spring will stop the bolt carrier just short of the rear block. If you're having bolt carrier to rear block contact, that is a sign of a worn out recoil spring. Adding a recoil buffer just masks the symptoms of this (and adds stress to the receiver unforseen by the designers). Hey, this reminds me. My 7.62 makes a ping sound every time I fire it. Is that normal, or the sign of something wrong? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nailbomb 10,221 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Hey, this reminds me. My 7.62 makes a ping sound every time I fire it. Is that normal, or the sign of something wrong? Could just be trigger reset... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigsal 757 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 Recoil buffers exist to separate fools from their money. They do not actually help anything, and in some cases their use has cracked receivers. Agreed, these things are more harm than good. You people should remove them from your rifles before damage is done. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TX-Zen 287 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 The easiest way is to put a grenade recoil pad over the butt of the stock. It pretty much eliminates the recoil from a 5.45, especially if you have a real 74 style brake installed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nalioth 405 Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 The 5.45x39 has recoil? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted September 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 The 5.45x39 has recoil? I have a feeling my wife would think so, even if I found it negligible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RoughRider666 47 Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) The 5.45x39 has recoil? I have a feeling my wife would think so, even if I found it negligible. Please dont take this the wrong way, because i mean you no disrespect, but if she is that scared of recoil, why does she even shoot guns in the first place? It comes with the territory... Edited September 19, 2009 by RoughRider666 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
clifton 354 Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Some woman don't like recoil, my wife's scared to death of it,, but shes getting used to it... if i took if shes scared of recoil why does she shoot "idea".. i bet half of the woman shooters would not exist... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6500rpm 670 Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 The 5.45 would be a great choice. As is, recoil is minimal without mods. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 What kind of rail could I use to mount the dot sight? I need the lightest possible rifle for her. She will not be using iron sights, so removing the leaf sight to install some sort of rail over the receiver would be fine. I assume a beryl style rail would be lighter than a side mount? (I haven't gotten my own side mount rail yet, so I don't know how heavy they are...I'm guessing one will add 8-10 ounces). The dot sight will be one of the Trijicon RMRs, so a scout mount will not work. (The RMRs are too tiny to mount very far forward, I would think). Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RoughRider666 47 Posted September 22, 2009 Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 What kind of rail could I use to mount the dot sight? I need the lightest possible rifle for her. She will not be using iron sights, so removing the leaf sight to install some sort of rail over the receiver would be fine. I assume a beryl style rail would be lighter than a side mount? (I haven't gotten my own side mount rail yet, so I don't know how heavy they are...I'm guessing one will add 8-10 ounces). The dot sight will be one of the Trijicon RMRs, so a scout mount will not work. (The RMRs are too tiny to mount very far forward, I would think). Jim Negative. I have seen them mounted on the front of the M1A Scout Rifle. They work remarkably well actually Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted September 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2009 What kind of rail could I use to mount the dot sight? I need the lightest possible rifle for her. She will not be using iron sights, so removing the leaf sight to install some sort of rail over the receiver would be fine. I assume a beryl style rail would be lighter than a side mount? (I haven't gotten my own side mount rail yet, so I don't know how heavy they are...I'm guessing one will add 8-10 ounces). The dot sight will be one of the Trijicon RMRs, so a scout mount will not work. (The RMRs are too tiny to mount very far forward, I would think). Jim Negative. I have seen them mounted on the front of the M1A Scout Rifle. They work remarkably well actually Thanks for the tip. If they do work well there, that would be the optimal rail choice for lightness. I'm about to get an RMR for my 7.62x39 rifle, so I'll experiment with how it works in the forward position when I get it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 The wife's 5.45 is on the way! Should arrive at the gunstore tomorrow. I'll report back in this thread on what furniture and mods I end up using to accomplish the "light weight, low recoil" goal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
volkov 318 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) The 5.45x39 has recoil? I have a feeling my wife would think so, even if I found it negligible. Please dont take this the wrong way, because i mean you no disrespect, but if she is that scared of recoil, why does she even shoot guns in the first place? It comes with the territory... Don't try to understand how (some/most) women think or why, it gets confusing. Needless to say if something gets them to the range and having a good time, its worth it. Better to accomadate then to question sometimes. Edited October 5, 2009 by volkov 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Azrial 1,091 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Don't try to understand how (some/most) women think or why, it gets confusing. Needless to say if something gets them to the range and having a good time, its worth it. Better to accomadate then to question sometimes. Absolutely! There is no reason to punish your Gal with something that kicks too hard. Let her shoot the 5.45 for a while, if she gets ready for more rifle she will let you know! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Some of the Tapco parts I was considering for lightness are actually heavier than the factory parts, unfortunately: 1. AK T6 Collapsible Stock - 12.8 ounces (factory buttstock: ~11 ounces) 2. Saiga Galil Handguard - 9.6 ounces (factory handguard: just under 8 ounces) 3. Intrafuse Saiga Handguard - 10.4 ounces (Tapco weights come from one of their employees; factory weights, from my kitchen scale). It looks like I will probably be retaining and ventilating the stock handguard, unless someone can point me to one that comes in at 7 ounces or less. But since I would also have to add a handguard retainer for non-Saiga forearms, that probably will not be viable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 It looks like my quest to lighten the gun may be futile. Every stock I've checked into weighs as much or more than the factory buttstock. Here are the latest values: - Ace Skeleton Stock with internal receiver block: 14.72 ounces - Ace Six Position Stock with internal receiver block: 28 ounces (can this be right?) - Ace "Ultra-Lite" Stock with internal receiver block: 14.56 ounces. This is disappointing. But I do appreciate Ace providing the weights for me so quickly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted October 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 More values from Tapco (thanks Stacy): - AK Original Style Buttstock, and - AK Folding Stock Both 12 ounces. I've got one more outstanding query to ATI about their Fiberforce stock. If that doesn't work out, and no one else has any suggestions, it's K-Var Warsaw Pact-length synthetic stock, at 11.5 ounces. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RoughRider666 47 Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 More values from Tapco (thanks Stacy): - AK Original Style Buttstock, and - AK Folding Stock Both 12 ounces. I've got one more outstanding query to ATI about their Fiberforce stock. If that doesn't work out, and no one else has any suggestions, it's K-Var Warsaw Pact-length synthetic stock, at 11.5 ounces. K-VAR is the only way to fly as far as I'm concerned. You can't beat their quality and they are as tough as nails. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted November 26, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2009 Well, I finally got this one done for my wife. I didn't have any luck in finding lighter furniture. The lightest handguard setup turned out to be the factory one. The K-VAR Warsaw Pact-length buttstock + pistol grip weighed a bit more than the factory stock, but less than all the other stocks out there that I researched. Now to get her to the range to train... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paulry 50 Posted December 12, 2009 Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 Jim, How'd she do with the new rifle? Any target results? Did you shoot it? If so, how did it do for you? What ammo are you using? Any photos of the rifle? Frosty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted December 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 (edited) Jim, How'd she do with the new rifle? Any target results? Did you shoot it? If so, how did it do for you? What ammo are you using? Any photos of the rifle? Frosty Hi Fluid Power, We're heading to the range for her first time with the rifle on Sunday, weather and babysitting permitting. I've been teaching her how to operate and handle it at home, and she is digging it. Hopefully she'll do OK and won't get too intimidated at the range. This will be the most powerful rifle she's ever shot. I've shot it twice now since the conversion, once with about 100 rounds of corrosive Russian ammo, and the next week with about 30 rounds of Wolf. The first week, I was working on getting the iron sights right, last week the red dot on a quick detach rail. Unfortunately, I think her front sight assembly is a bit canted, but not enough to make a significant difference at the ranges she'll be shooting. I'll get around to fixing it sooner or later. I love the rifle. It looks great, and handles even better. Very controllable compared to the 7.62x39; very easy to quickly and accurately put follow-up shots on target. That, and the cheap ammo, makes me want to get my own 5.45. At 13.8 cents a round, I could shoot that thing a whole lot without breaking the bank. As far as pictures go, my camera has been malfunctioning lately, squashing the pictures horizontally. I think I will borrow my mom's camera over the weekend to take pics of the rifle and some other stuff I've been needing to shoot pics of. Will post back. Jim EDITED TO ADD: I should mention that the rifle is very accurate. Using the Aimpoint Micro, I got a 7 shot .7 inch group at 25 yards. I think I could do better still with a sling. Edited December 12, 2009 by Jim Digriz Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Paulry 50 Posted December 12, 2009 Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 (edited) What weight bullets in the Wolf? I buy all my 5.45X39 from the Sportsmansguide outlet store (walk in and walk out with 600 rounds) If you check their web site, they have Wolf Classic at 70gr and Wolf regular at 60gr. Jim, when shooting the mil surp vers the Wolf, which is better? Thanks, Frosty One last thing, with the Saiga you don't have a muzzle brake. The AK74 brake does reduce what recoil is there, down to none! Does add to the blast! Did you install a break? Edited December 12, 2009 by Fluid Power Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted December 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 (edited) What weight bullets in the Wolf? I buy all my 5.45X39 from the Sportsmansguide outlet store (walk in and walk out with 600 rounds) If you check their web site, they have Wolf Classic at 70gr and Wolf regular at 60gr. The Wolf bullets that I have are the 60 grain ones. I only have enough at the moment to fill a 30 round magazine. I also have a small amount of Silver Bear on the way. (I have a goodly amount of the corrosive stuff, though). I keep the non-corrosive ones for loading the gun around the house, because I don't want the gun to rust if I have to turn the weapon over temporarily to the cops after a defensive shooting incident. Jim, when shooting the mil surp vers the Wolf, which is better? The corrosive stuff is better on my wallet (although it takes more effort to clean). I intend to use the corrosive stuff almost exclusively at the range for training purposes, and the non-corrosive stuff for fighting (if need be). As far as the ballistic differences between the different types, I don't know know much about that. I assume they're pretty similar. I know the Wolf has the air pocket that induces tumbling. One last thing, with the Saiga you don't have a muzzle brake. The AK74 brake does reduce what recoil is there, down to none! Does add to the blast! Did you install a break? No. This is primarily a home defense weapon, and will be loud enough in the house already without a brake. I may install a flash hider at some point. There is some muzzle rise, but you can get back on target very quickly without a brake. Jim Edited December 12, 2009 by Jim Digriz Quote Link to post Share on other sites
vonzeitgeist 0 Posted December 12, 2009 Report Share Posted December 12, 2009 One last thing, with the Saiga you don't have a muzzle brake. The AK74 brake does reduce what recoil is there, down to none! Does add to the blast! Did you install a break? I put an AK74 type US made brake on mine. The recoil is ridiculously low, but there is some blast to the sides. Not nearly as much as I have experienced with some AR brakes, let alone larger caliber rifles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimdigriz 580 Posted December 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 How'd she do with the new rifle? Great! She loved it. Exit quote: "I LIKE that rifle." We started off shooting the Ruger 10 22. She did well with that, and after about 15 rounds, moved on to the Saiga 5.45. She was scared to shoot it at first, but got into it quickly. She thought the recoil was negligible. She had some problems with elevation at first (shooting too high), but she finally got what I was saying about how to use the sights properly. Interestingly, she did better with the iron sights than the red dot. (I like using irons, but I'm a better shot with the red dot). Anyhow, I'm pleased. Looks like the 5.45x39 caliber was a good choice for her. Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.