Meet the AK-74 Replacement: AK-12. Again.

[HTML1]

firearmblog.com has the inside dope on the new AK-12, the ugly ass replacement for the venerable AK-74. Our competitor reveals the Russian rifle’s new features: “ambidextrous forward charging handle, smaller ejection port, new safety switch, new fire control switch with three modes of fire (single shot, 3 round burst and full auto), new hinged top cover, quad picatinny rails, folding and length adjustable stock, ergonomic pistol grip (with a decent radius between trigger guard and grip), new muzzle brake that attaches to standard NATO 22mm threading and improved barrel rifling.” What FAB didn’t mention [but en.ria.ru does] is just how well the Russian armsmaker’s doing these days . . .

Izhmash, the manufacturer of Kalashnikov AK assault rifles, said its sales were up 57.4 percent last year at 5.73 billion rubles (about $190 million).

Civilian weapon sales rose 25 percent and a similar increase is expected this year, Izhmash press secretary Yelena Filatova said.

Production is to increase 30 percent this year, to 5.1 billion rubles, she added.

Happy days, eh comrade? Well, after they shift that gigantic over-supply of AK-74s . . .

comments

  1. avatar cameron says:

    is this really a replacement, or is it similar to the SCAR or ACR, where they are saying that it will be a replacement when in reality it still has to go through trials, field testing, etc. I feel like I heard something similar about the AN-94 six months ago.

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      They should try to compete for the US carbine contract.

      1. avatar Steve says:

        Dont be silly, that would never work.

        The US military would never do anything as sensible as buy a time-tested and proven design of a durable yet reasonably priced rifle from a reputable arms maker.

        No, they will pay multiple corporations to develop near-clones of the M16/4 rifles with minor insignificant differences(they will all be 5.56×45’s with 30rd mags that shoot about 2in @ 100yds), then they will hem and haw for years and years at tax payer expense….then after they have flushed hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain, then and only then will they decide that the M4 is fine.

        After they finish that shit-show, they will move on to pistols in their never ending, yet never-sucessful quest to replace the perfectly-good M9 with some sort of .45 caliber pistol (preferably a M1911 that still only holds 8rds). This will of course cost at least 500 million dollars…to start.

        Excuse me, I need to go pound nails with my head to make it feel better.

        1. avatar NCG says:

          A lot of people make the same argument about Russian aircraft. They arguably build better combat aircraft for a fraction of the price. If Russian aerodynamic and mechanical engineering were combined with U.S. electronics, you’d really have something. Not that anyone needs such a thing.

          Military procurement and national security are, at best, remotely related issues, of course.

        2. avatar Ani says:

          A study of air combat during the various Arab-Israeli conflicts would be useful to see if your assertion is correct.

        3. avatar Ralph says:

          That might reflect more on the quality of the pilots than the planes.

        4. avatar NCG says:

          Definitely the pilots, and the maintenance of the planes. As far as we know, no Russian pilot has been in combat with an American pilot since the Korean war. Training costs a lot of money, easily $5000-$10000 for every hour in the air. Also, the Arabs in these conflicts generally had more outdated aircraft than the Israelis, who get the not-quite-spanking-new technology.

        5. avatar Tom says:

          Military procurement and national security are, at best, remotely related issues, of course.

          Beware the Military Industrial Congressional Complex.

        6. avatar Sam says:

          I didn’t know the US gov’t was paying the carbine submitters. I thought the submitters even had to provide their own ammo

  2. avatar Rabbi says:

    Looks like it may fix all the ergonomic problems with the old design. I don’t care how ugly it is if it works!

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      The only ugly thing I see about it is the stock.

  3. avatar Anthony Meruelo says:

    I will jump all over the imported surplus 74’s like a fat kid on a Twinkie.

  4. avatar O.N. says:

    Eureka! An AK with a thumb safety!

  5. avatar Johnny says:

    Another gun to salivate over but never get.

  6. avatar Richard says:

    Look like kept best thing about what ak 47 is than just up date with better sites better safty few other thing but look just like ak 47 weird new stock.

  7. avatar Bill Johnson says:

    Izsmash also makes and sells the Saiga Shotgun… which probably outsells any other Izsmash product here in the US…

  8. avatar Chris Dumm says:

    An updated and ergonomically improved AK-74? What’s not to like about that? The AK’s worst flaws are either ergonomic ones (like the safety, the short stock, the tiny pistol grip) or its lack of modularity.

    When those flaws are addressed, the venerable ‘Kalash’ moves forward into the 21st century. The action is robust and reliable (and tolerably accurate) and the 5.45×39 round has better armor penetration and wounding ability than the 5.56mm.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Yeah, the “Poison Bullet” might be better that the 5.56 Nato (or not), but neither of them compare to the 7.62X51 Nato or 7.62X39 Russian rounds — to say nothing pf the 7.62X54R. I understand that a smaller round makes for better control in full auto, and also means that a soldier can carry more rounds into battle, but for us — who are limited to semi-auto and aren’t girding up for war — both the M-16 and AK-74 rounds are underpowered.

      1. avatar NCG says:

        I’ll buy that reasoning. But those Poison Bullets are mighty cheap, at least for now. On the other hand, I shoot a few times a year, usually burning through $6.23 worth of .22s and enough -06 to make my shoulder hurt. Clearly, I need more guns, and more spare time.

        When it comes to the SHTF scenario, I hope to have my gardening skills in order, and whatever gun is handy.

  9. avatar NCG says:

    I’m hoping this will drive down prices on the -74. I need one.

    The concept of the AN-94 double-tap makes a lot of sense to me – two rounds for the recoil of one, basically.

    Will any of these new rifles fall into the hands of oppressive and corrupt regimes? Golly I hope not.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Will any of these new rifles fall into the hands of oppressive and corrupt regimes?

      It’s not nice to say that about the Obama administration.

      1. avatar NCG says:

        The Obama administration has continued the militarist policy which has existed since…well, basically forever. They’ve amped up the indefinite detentions and summary executions by drone. It’s not pretty. Romney will be about the same. Newt will likely kill us all.

    2. avatar Tom says:

      Of course, and so does our weapons. Most major military industrial nations are the Lords of War.

      1. avatar NCG says:

        +1. China is becoming the Big Dog. They don’t only make pipe wrenches for Harbor Freight.

  10. avatar Brandon says:

    So was that the Russian version of SHOT SHOW ?

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Nyet! SHOT SHOW cheap American knock-off of Russian INTERPOLITEX SHOW.

  11. avatar Will says:

    I definitely wouldn’t mind one in 7.62 NATO. It’s not that ugly, I’d give it a slight advantage over the SCAR in aesthetics.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email