AK Pistol CHOP

[kyledent3 4]

Hello

I recently bought a C.A.I. Ak pistol. I want to get the barrel shortened to make it a super short pistol. Can anyone suggest a good gunsmith whos up to the task. First pic is mine the second two are what i want to achieve. I also like the charging handle on the 4th picture any help would be greatly appreciated Thanks in advance.

 

[gregomega 929]

Tromix might be able to help

[Rockina 60]

Red Jacket perhaps...call and ask.

[Dudethebagman 222]

Good gravy, why? You'd be taking reducing that thing's ballistics to an unuseful degree while giving it the muzzle flash and blast of a cannon. You could probably see a chambered round poking outside the barrel of the one on the top right.

 

Why not just buy a glock 17 and a high capacity mag and save your hearing?

 

If you have no good reason, I respect that. But there IS no practical reason to go THAT short.

[YEL13 3]

well I don't honestly know the details on making it shorter, I do know that to get that handle onto your bolt carrier you've got to take the old charing handle off (your preffered method, but keep in mind you've got weld on it later) and then as previously stated weld on the new charging handle

[clifton 354]

Chopp it... iTS FUN you need to make a guide rod. http://www.tac47industries.com/product_info.php?product_id=2205

[kmanator 45]

Good gravy, why? You'd be taking reducing that thing's ballistics to an unuseful degree while giving it the muzzle flash and blast of a cannon. You could probably see a chambered round poking outside the barrel of the one on the top right.

 

I have found that the biggest critics of ak pistols are the guys that never handled one or don't have the skills to build one[AMD cut barrel kit$99.00]...That super short is mine and has 1-7/8 inches of rifling,measures 12 inches from tip to tip and can truly be shot like a pistol[one hand],Is just as accurate as a stub nosed revolver at 25 yards[7 inch group freehand]accepts a 75 round drum,chronoed at 1200 fps,fits hidden under my arm in a shoulder rig and baggy shirt,Makes one hell of a fire ball,and scares the shit out of Fudd's

Click on pic. below for vid.

Edited April 15, 2011 by kmanator

[kyledent3 4]

Kmanator has it down I want something I can put under a jacket or in a briefcase with a 30 round magazine or drum. Thanks for the tips tac-47 said they can do it I also emailed red jacket lets see what they say. Any other tips or advice would be greatly appreciated thanks. Oh ya tromixes response was i only work on saiga shotguns. Thanks.

[Dudethebagman 222]

Okay, 1200 FPS was better than what I actually expected. Still, it doesn't do anything a Glock 17 doesn't do better except look scary and throw fireballs. Yes, it accepts a 75 round drum, but then it's not really useful as a pistol. If that's what you're going for, more power to you. It is novel, I'll give you that.

 

33 rounds of 124 grain bullets @ 1200 FPS. And this ammo will actually expand at that velocity.

 

Edited April 15, 2011 by Dudethebagman

[kyledent3 4]

Im sorry but i cannot trust my life to a 9mm. This isnt going to replace my everyday carry of a 45 with 11 rounds and plenty of extra 13 rd magazines. Its mainly for fun and pure firepower I dont think you can compare a 9mm to 7.62x39 not even close. im not necessarilly gonna go to a 2" barrel im thinking maybe 4-8" depending on what the gunsmith suggests. Thanks.

[Dudethebagman 222]

Im sorry but i cannot trust my life to a 9mm. This isnt going to replace my everyday carry of a 45 with 11 rounds and plenty of extra 13 rd magazines. Its mainly for fun and pure firepower I dont think you can compare a 9mm to 7.62x39 not even close. im not necessarilly gonna go to a 2" barrel im thinking maybe 4-8" depending on what the gunsmith suggests. Thanks.

 

Would you trust your life to a 7.62 x 39 firing with the ballistics of a 9mm? It's damn near a perfect comparison - if an AK with a barrel that short fires a 124 grain bullet at 1200 FPS, and a 9mm fires a 124 grain bullet at 1200 FPS, what's the difference? The 7.62 x 39 would have higher sectional density and would therefore penetrate better. However, the bullet isn't designed to operate at that low velocity and would likely act just like a FMJ. On the other hand, the 9mm has a wider bullet that is designed to expand at that velocity. It would leave much wider, nastier wounds and hit with exactly the same energy as the 7.62 x 39.

 

Granted, a 4-8" barrel would probably do better. I'm not sure how much better. Really, you need the velocity to let the bullet expand/fragment as it was designed to do. As long as it's just a toy, more power to you. I certainly wouldn't trust my life to my 22 either, but it's still fun and cheap to kill cans with it. Good luck.

[kyledent3 4]

Thanks i think the 4" barrel will help get the velocity a little faster than 1200. Well see what happens. It should be lots of fun. thanks

[kyledent3 4]

Bump any gunsmiths wanna make some cash

[TX-Zen 287]

and hit with exactly the same energy as the 7.62 x 39

 

Actually it would hit with more energy if both were at 1200fps...9mm is the heavier bullet.

 

 

 

Z

[22_Shooter 1,560]

Good gravy, why?

 

I'm only 27, but I've already learned that I don't need any reason to buy a gun, other than "I want it and can afford it". If it falls into that category, I buy it.

[Saiga_rom 91]

and hit with exactly the same energy as the 7.62 x 39

 

Actually it would hit with more energy if both were at 1200fps...9mm is the heavier bullet.

 

 

 

Z

 

actually man, destructive capability is more complicated than only going by kinetic energy. momentum also contributes. the deeper understanding is the relativistic momentum and energy relationship, where

 

total destructive capability = [(P*C)^2 + (KE)^2]^(1/2)

 

P = momentum

 

C = speed of light

 

KE = kinetic energy

[Dudethebagman 222]

Good gravy, why?

 

I'm only 27, but I've already learned that I don't need any reason to buy a gun, other than "I want it and can afford it". If it falls into that category, I buy it.

 

How a person decides to spend their money is their prerogative. But like those kids who try to turn their Honda Civics (practical economy cars) into something they're not (race cars), their decision isn't above public ridicule.

 

There's a difference between want and need. There's also a difference between buying something you want with some practical use, and buying something you want that previously had some practical use before you "customized" it to death.

 

I was curious what his intentions were for chopping the barrel. He said it's just for fun, and I accept that.

 

Edited April 18, 2011 by Dudethebagman

[Dudethebagman 222]

and hit with exactly the same energy as the 7.62 x 39

 

Actually it would hit with more energy if both were at 1200fps...9mm is the heavier bullet.

 

 

 

Z

 

actually man, destructive capability is more complicated than only going by kinetic energy. momentum also contributes. the deeper understanding is the relativistic momentum and energy relationship, where

 

total destructive capability = [(P*C)^2 + (KE)^2]^(1/2)

 

P = momentum

 

C = speed of light

 

KE = kinetic energy

 

You make a persuasive argument. Allow me to retort.

 

[kyledent3 4]

Pure and simple fun is exactly why I WANT to do this. I want to keep the barrel long enough to keep some good velocity, rifling and try to keep it somewhat accurate, but also make it shorter than it is now Its hard for me to consider it a pistol with a 11" barrel on it Lol.

[Dudethebagman 222]

Pure and simple fun is exactly why I WANT to do this. I want to keep the barrel long enough to keep some good velocity, rifling and try to keep it somewhat accurate, but also make it shorter than it is now Its hard for me to consider it a pistol with a 11" barrel on it Lol.

 

I'm not above having toys, so don't take that as me giving you shit. I'm just saying there's a difference between something someone wants just for fun (an ak pistol) and something someone wants but is also going to depend on with unrealistic intentions (buying an AK pistol and expecting to be able to hunt with it at long range).

 

I also just like the panflute chart.

[kyledent3 4]

Dont worry i dont get my feelings hurt easily lol I dont plan on hunting with it got the 30-06. Its for all around fun, firepower and pure sexiness. Im not having much luck finding someone who wants to shorten it to much most say theyll do 7.5" barrel or super short but they want a grand to do the work. I think i may have to give up my want and just leave it at 11". Well see what happens.

[TR Young 175]

How a person decides to spend their money is their prerogative.

....aaaaaand I believe that is the OP's intentions; to buy something they WANT to have. Whether or not it is practical is of no consequence in that matter.

I just want to see him get it and post some video of it to make the rest of us smile and say, "HELL YEAH, MAN!"

[kyledent3 4]

Hell ya thank you I guess ive always wanted a flamethrower maybe this would be close enough for me im sure it would spit some great flames out.

[YEL13 3]

I know what'll settle the matter...how about the OP gets his draco chopped, THEN we do a side by side ballistics comparison between it and a 9mm at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 yards and see how hard hitting this thing really is!

[Saiga_rom 91]

and hit with exactly the same energy as the 7.62 x 39

 

Actually it would hit with more energy if both were at 1200fps...9mm is the heavier bullet.

 

 

 

Z

 

actually man, destructive capability is more complicated than only going by kinetic energy. momentum also contributes. the deeper understanding is the relativistic momentum and energy relationship, where

 

total destructive capability = [(P*C)^2 + (KE)^2]^(1/2)

 

P = momentum

 

C = speed of light

 

KE = kinetic energy

 

You make a persuasive argument. Allow me to retort.

 

 

heh, thats funny man

 

lol

[TX-Zen 287]

 

actually man, destructive capability is more complicated than only going by kinetic energy. momentum also contributes. the deeper understanding is the relativistic momentum and energy relationship, where

 

total destructive capability = [(P*C)^2 + (KE)^2]^(1/2)

 

P = momentum

 

C = speed of light

 

KE = kinetic energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Z

Edited April 19, 2011 by TX-Zen

[Saiga_rom 91]

well, i can try to explain exactly why this is the case, but be warned, its completely based on space-time physics (aka theory of relativity)

 

a projectile is an object which has both kinetic energy and momentum, which are essentially projections of a higher dimensional vector, which exists along "real" space like geometry, as well as "imaginary" time like geometry. this higher dimensional vector is the real destructive power of the projectile, and to describe it, we need to include contributions from both the momentum, as well as the kinetic energy. however, they dont both scale equally, because they exist i different dimensions, we need to multiply the momentive contribution by the speed of light in order to add both contributions together with the same units.

 

i apologize though, because im sure this sounds completely abstract. this picture may help clarify things

 

 

the longest leg of the triangle is the higher dimensional vector which describes the total destructive capability of the projectile, the horizontal leg represents the kinetic energy contribution, and the verticle leg represents the momentive contribution

Edited April 19, 2011 by Cali_Armz

[Saiga_rom 91]

also, please ignore most of the writing which is in the picture i used. i had to borrow it from another sight, so the labeling on it is a little different from what im trying to describe, but its essentially the same thing.

 

this picture is whats called the lorentzian invariant, and is the foundation of what theory of relativity is about, relationship between space and time

[kyledent3 4]

Wow !!!! thanks for the info.

[Saiga_rom 91]

Wow !!!! thanks for the info.

 

sure man, i hope that helps clarify things rather than make them more confusing.