• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Best Assault Rifle

The Galil seems to be a good improvement over the AK-47/74.

The charging handle and sights are obviously better. It being 5.56 and 7.62x51 make it more accurate. I am pretty sure it is still cheap to produce as well. Reliability should be similar to the normal AK, but I am not sure.

I disagree strongly with the charging handle, if you just use the propper technique, racking the AK charging handle is no problem, and it can be done with optics mounted just as easy as without.

With the Galil's upswept charhing handle, you can't rack it the "reach behind mag" way, and access becomes a problem if you are using optics on it.

Here's a little tube clip showing how to reload fast and easy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnqkgI-wo4kYouTube - Basic Kalashnikov Reload(Medium Speed)
 
Upvote 0
I disagree strongly with the charging handle, if you just use the propper technique, racking the AK charging handle is no problem, and it can be done with optics mounted just as easy as without.

With the Galil's upswept charhing handle, you can't rack it the "reach behind mag" way, and access becomes a problem if you are using optics on it.

Here's a little tube clip showing how to reload fast and easy: YouTube - Basic Kalashnikov Reload(Medium Speed)

Is he even hitting the mag release lever?
 
Upvote 0
Is he even hitting the mag release lever?

He's using a fresh mag to depress the magcatch with a "slicing" motion.
This step can be ignored if you don't want to dump your mags, but it does make for a very fast reload.

The interesting thing though is how he rack's the boltcarrier, reaching below the gun, and behind the magazine, it really does work, i tried it after seeing it done, and it's fast and intuitive, and since you reach below the gun, you could have any optics mounted on there and it would work just as well.
 
Upvote 0
The Galil seems to be a good improvement over the AK-47/74.

The charging handle and sights are obviously better. It being 5.56 and 7.62x51 make it more accurate. I am pretty sure it is still cheap to produce as well. Reliability should be similar to the normal AK, but I am not sure.

The galil is just a copy of the finnish RK :p

Btw, I think that the finnish RK sucks, it's just too heavy. Sure, it might be good at the shooting range when trying to hit multiple bullseyes, but in the woods while diving around it's such a pain. I tried the older AK copy that the finnish leopard 2 crews use, and boy how light it was.
 
Upvote 0
I disagree strongly with the charging handle, if you just use the propper technique, racking the AK charging handle is no problem, and it can be done with optics mounted just as easy as without.

With the Galil's upswept charhing handle, you can't rack it the "reach behind mag" way, and access becomes a problem if you are using optics on it.

Here's a little tube clip showing how to reload fast and easy: YouTube - Basic Kalashnikov Reload(Medium Speed)



That guy is quick.

This is me trying a reload:
YouTube - AKM quick reload

I've done it quicker before with the left hand, but I was sitting down this time and the mag snagged onto my shirt/pocket (the mag was in my pants pocket). I used my right hand for the charging handle because it always seems to double feed if I use my left hand, which is probably a combination of Promags and/or me doing a bad job or working the charging handle. :p

I've never used the Galil, but it seems just a easy to pull the charging handle from below like the guy did in that video. But maybe I am wrong.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Nah, the shape of the Galil handle makes it impractical to reach it from below, your finger slips off pretty easilly when you do it in a hurry (ofcourse the one i tried was Airsoft, but the shape is the same, so i don't think that makes any difference in the ergonomics of the handle).
It's definately ment to be reached from above, which is normally not a problem, thats as fast as reloading from below, but add optics and you've got a problem.

But Xendance has a point, both the RK and Galil are much too heavy, which cost them quite a few points on the "wot am best AK" list.
If anything, it is perhabs the Yugo M70's that deserve that title (the stamped reciver versions), they are light, more accurate than the russians, they come with night sigts, can fire rifle grenades (and unlike the Galil, and i assume the RK, does not require tools to remove the topcover), and the internals share the same idiot proof design as all the Russians.
The only bad thing about the M70 is that it needs better quality ammo than the Russians, as it is not chrome lined (i don't know if the Galil or RK are, to be honest).
 
Upvote 0
The Galil seems to be a good improvement over the AK-47/74.

The charging handle and sights are obviously better. It being 5.56 and 7.62x51 make it more accurate. I am pretty sure it is still cheap to produce as well. Reliability should be similar to the normal AK, but I am not sure.

Yep. As Xendance pointed out, Galil is actually a further modification from RK62. But ofcourse RK62 is originally based on AK47.

If anything, it is perhabs the Yugo M70's that deserve that title (the stamped reciver versions), they are light, more accurate than the russians, they come with night sigts, can fire rifle grenades (and unlike the Galil, and i assume the RK, does not require tools to remove the topcover), and the internals share the same idiot proof design as all the Russians.
.

Only tool RK needs to remove the topcover is your thumb.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Nah, the shape of the Galil handle makes it impractical to reach it from below, your finger slips off pretty easilly when you do it in a hurry (ofcourse the one i tried was Airsoft, but the shape is the same, so i don't think that makes any difference in the ergonomics of the handle).
It's definately ment to be reached from above, which is normally not a problem, thats as fast as reloading from below, but add optics and you've got a problem.

I'll take your word for it then.

I know the Galil and RKs are heavy to.

I guess there isn't much that can be done to modernize the AK. Best to just develop something new. :p

Not sure about the control layout on the SiG-550/1/2, but those seem to be very accurate while running clean and reliable. If the control layout if similar to the AR-15, I think it would be the superior assault rifle.
 
Upvote 0
I guess there isn't much that can be done to modernize the AK. Best to just develop something new. :p

Nah, as long as there exists a third world, there will be a place for the AK, they need something cheap, reliable, durrable and simple enough that you could teach an iliterate farmer to use it effectively within a week, the AK delivers that, and nobody really cares that it wont score a headshot at 700 meters, what it does do is good enough for the price and ease of use it offers, and as a bonus the ammo is dirt cheap to massproduce.

Not sure about the control layout on the SiG-550/1/2, but those seem to be very accurate while running clean and reliable. If the control layout if similar to the AR-15, I think it would be the superior assault rifle.

Eh, i'm no fan of the AR-15's ergonomics, not that the AK is better (that modeselector is not well placed), but i don't see the AR as beeing a good system worth emulating, if we're gonna make the all dansing and all singing Assault Rifle, surely we can do better! :D
 
Upvote 0
I have a question for you Finns, looking at the RK series of rifles I just can't help wondering about the placement of the rear sights. In the pictures I have seen it looks like the rear aperture sight is mounted on the receiver cover.

I can't help thinking that this should cause accuracy problems. As the RK rifles being based off of the AK have the same detachable receiver cover for disassembly. With this receiver cover being removable and not a fixed piece of the receiver it moves while the rifle is being fired. Hence your rear sight will be moving with it, even though the movements aren't huge it will still affect your zero and accuracy.

Can any of you blokes who have handled an RK series rifle shed some light on this? Cause these rifles are said to be the most accurate AK derived rifle, yet that strikes me as paradoxial considering where the rear sight is.

On the topic of assualt rifle evolution, I don't really think that they can get any better until there's a change in caliber. In today's world soldiers can find themselves in a place like Afghanistan where they experience combat in varying areas from short range urban sprawl to sweeping mountain passes and countryside. 5.56x45 just doesn't cut it when any sort of serious range becomes involved, it just does not hold it's energy well enough to seriously wound or penetrate moderate cover at any sort of range.

If you read a bit about US forces in Afghanistan you'll find many accounts of it being ineffective when trying to engage enemies at longer than average ranges in the countryside. There's actually a book by an SASR soldier who fought in Operation Anaconda where the inability of 5.56 to engage targets firing down from the mountainside 500m away is explicitly described in words I'd get banned for using. 6.8 SPC overcomes the problems of stopping power and dealing with cover to a degree, but from what I have read it doesn't perform great past 300m or so where it's trajectory and effectiveness tail off fast.

Personally I think they need to start looking at a caliber around 6.5mm, maybe even something comparable to 6.5x55 Swede which hits harder than 5.56 but also performs well at range.

That's my $3.50 anyway.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I have a question for you Finns, looking at the RK series of rifles I just can't help wondering about the placement of the rear sights. In the pictures I have seen it looks like the rear aperture sight is mounted on the receiver cover.

I can't help thinking that this should cause accuracy problems. As the RK rifles being based off of the AK have the same detachable receiver cover for disassembly. With this receiver cover being removable and not a fixed piece of the receiver it moves while the rifle is being fired. Hence your rear sight will be moving with it, even though the movements aren't huge it will still affect your zero and accuracy.

Can any of you blokes who have handled an RK series rifle shed some light on this? Cause these rifles are said to be the most accurate AK derived rifle, yet that strikes me as paradoxial considering where the rear sight is.


Well, I served in FDF as a platoon leader (2nd liutenant) of a j
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Yea, the box cover (or the rear sight) don't move at all when firing.

I bet most soldiers can't even hit targets which are 500 metres away, especially when they are moving and without optical sights. So from a theoretical point of view the discussion about the 5.56 rounds being to small gets old ...

In Finland the average engagement distance (at least in our war exercises) were about 100-50 meters. You just can't see further than that in the woods. So imo being able to hit from 500 meters is rather irrelevant :p
 
Upvote 0