Why do Russian Soldiers Use AK-12, but the Spetsnaz Hate It and Use AK-74

[@thekraken1173]

Reminds me of the fact that When AK74 was adopted, Spetsnaz continued using AKMs for some time.

[@magnusthered4973]

Well that was due to the ammo availability

[@fedrickosamuelshidarta970]

for the case of AK-74. Spetsnaz, initially did not use AK-74 for 2 reasons: 1. The AK-74 at the start of its production did not have the sub-sonic ammunition needed by special forces to carry out their missions. 2. Because the Soviet enemy, namely the Mujaheeden, used AK-47/AKM, for special forces who would carry out missions behind enemy lines, it would be better to use AKM/AKMS which use the same magazine and ammunition as the enemy, so they can use enemy ammunition, if their initial ammunition supply runs out.

[@casperarms]

Only the AK-74 didn't have such dumb flaws

[@dankim7488]

Couple reasons for that. One was so they can use the existing PBS-1 suppressor thst works well for 7.62 but not so well with 5.45. Second, Spetnaz operate covertly behind enemy lines with no guaranteed logisticsl backup for resupply. Meaning they have to scavenge the enemys weapons and ammo. The mujahadeen use 7.62 ammo for their AKMs. Spetznaz can simply pick them up from killed enemies.

[@zcutter]

it was bc the ak 74 didnt have a suppressor and akm did

[@monochromehysteria9111]

The burst mode was a ridiculous addition. I also never understood why the gas tube was permanently welded to the rifle. This is a nightmare for cleaning the rifle, especially if using corrosive ammunition.

[@CallOfCutie69]

AN-94 was better and had undergone full USSR testing, which used to be hardcore, unlike Russian. AN-94 was also ready to be produced. They added 2-burst to eliminate talk that AN-94 can do things AK-12 can’t. “See, we also have 2-burst! Your AN-94 ain’t shit”. And even if AK-12’s burst is crap, that’s how logic of Russian Corruption works.

[@matteusvirtanen392]

​@@CallOfCutie69 Honestly the an94 was just too expensive and complex for a general issue rifle.

[@CallOfCutie69]

@@matteusvirtanen392 and AK-12 is too unreliable for a general issue rifle, but here we are

[@matteusvirtanen392]

@@CallOfCutie69 Both are correct. If I was in Russian procurement and politics weren't a thing I would have just adopted something akin to an ACR or an MCX but in 5.45. The AK isn't horrible as a platform but there are many ways to improve the design.

[@y0h0p38]

@@CallOfCutie69 As an infantry rifle? Fuck nah lmao. Grunts will always find a way to break things. I don't care if they made the AN-94 never need cleaning, never jam, and never need to be taken apart, grunts will still find a way to lose half those little parts. IMO spending the money just making better triggers and just firing semi auto is far easier. Especially when it ruins the entire easy to use safety

[@beelow84]

To be such an unpopular weapon, it sure is a sexy thing.

[@mikeblair2594]

No, no it's not.

[@robuber.p]

@@mikeblair2594it is

[@The_Courier1998]

The prototype version was more sexier

[@Alpha-bo1xh]

@@The_Courier1998 finally someone has common sense

[@artyom1264]

@@The_Courier1998true

[@BadBomb555]

For instance, Finland just choose to modernize their old RK62 to RK62M. It was cheap and practical solution.

[@mikeblair2594]

@BadBomb555 to start the Finns rear sight is soldier proof, rear flip. Two ranges and a third with the night sight. Not this adjustable ranges for meat that can neither read nor count. Every country tries to make their gear soldier proof, cause if it can be broken it will be broken through sheer stupidity. Unless you're the US Marines, its just what they do. Take a Russian conscript and expect him to know how or have the capacity to learn how to work an adjustable peep sight is just asking to much.

[@djocharablaikan8601]

Thats a hell of a rifle. Not much to improve there.

[@PugilistCactus]

Yeah but what about the child of an officer that was given a job! Won't you think of the useless zits of society you could be creating nothing jobs to waste money on?!

[@C__man]

​@@PugilistCactus lol, you really think you're right.

[@soggeedoggee1351]

have you ever heard of an ak-74m?...

[@plyix]

70s-80s: army uses new ak74 while spetsnaz uses akm 2020s: army uses new ak12 while spetsnaz uses ak74

[@keeshans5768]

I think it’s just the fact that the older models already have a lot of parts kits to iron out and customize the weapon exactly to how the operator wants it. While the new guns are meant for the grunts with basic upgrades over the older standard issue rifle. The upgrade from akm to ak74 meant a lot less recoil for grunts due to the 5.45. While the upgrade from ak-74 to ak-12 meant grunts can now more easily add attachments/scopes to their rifles without having to go through the whole parts kits process. In due time the ak-12 will be completely ironed out and this early period will be regarded as the same as the problems the early ar-15 pattern of rifles had.

[@TrampMachine]

Yeah, I read a Russian soldier's opinion of the AK-12 on Telegram. He said his weapon of choice was a modernized AK-105 with zenitco handguard and red dot.

[@novak7970]

@pissedpajamas5718 On COD you will.

[@Mirage-pz]

Ah yes, The Activist. Where are you on other invasions across the globe before? No words? Hmm? A bot indeed ​@pissedpajamas5718

[@planetcaravan2925]

​@Velikan5.45x39mm slava ukraini

[@fs5866]

@Velikan5.45x39mm Slava Cocaini

[@Max_Da_G]

@@planetcaravan2925 Salo uronili! HEroyam v sralo!

[@alexeishayya-shirokov3603]

I remember examining an AK-12 at the "Army 2021" expo in Moscow a few month before the events in Ukraine unfolded. The instructor seemed to hate it; claimed the whole thing was wobbly (the stock and handguard especially) and that the picatinny mounts on the receiver cover were more of a gimmick as they weren't stable enough to reliably mount decent optics without having to readjust them after removing the cover to clean the weapon, for instance. The picatinny rails on the handguard were useless for mounting anything besides flashlights. When the gun first came out, the military hated it and called it "an attempt to turn the good old Kalashnikov into an "M-series" (slang for Western assault rifles)". I think politics were largely to blame as the Izhmash plant (now the Kalashnikov concern) faced bankruptcy in the early 2010s, and the government basically kept them afloat until they got their business model in order by ordering batches of AK-12s. To be fair though, most of the concerns voiced by soldiers were addressed in the AK-12 rifles that were produced after 2023, but I still think the MoD should go with another rifle in the future (ideally an AEK-971/Kord derivative, or the AKV-521 if they insist on sticking with the Kalashnikov pattern).

[@Imperial_Lizardgirl]

"Events in Ukraine" Yeah right...

[@alexeishayya-shirokov3603]

@@Imperial_Lizardgirl you've got a problem with the term? I mean they are called a lot of things; SMO, war, invasion, conflict, crisis... plus the virtue-signalling terms much overused by Western talking heads and MSM.

[@Max_Da_G]

It depends on which AK-12 he had experience with. For instance if he had original rifle that was introduced in 2018, then it was indeed not fully resolved. Criticism of a wobbly stock is a bit silly since it's impossible to make it perfectly stiff and at the same time easy to adjust. Handguard is only wobbly if someone had utterly destroyed the pin retention. SUre, one can DEFLECT the handguard with pressure, but how hard does one have to press? Initial top cover release was a bit of a problem since people needed to rotate the lever to be able to pull it out which wore the pin hole more, and also were not seating the cover fully forward and used the pin to "drive" it fully home, which added to the wear. Also if we look at the AK tangent sight, it also wobbles when shooting. Noone seems to complain. COncerns were about rifles made BEFORE 2023 you mean? Because 2023 rifle had made a lot of changes to address the issues you listing here. One thing about A545 KORD was that it needed a new production line set up, and rifle cost a LOT more than AK-12. In fact AK-12 uses a lot of original tooling that was used to make AK-74M. In making AK-12, they've kept manufacturing process changes to the minimum required. Just to be fair, the A545 KORD is worth 3 AK-12s, while giving a rather similar accuracy performance, both in single and in burst fire. Which is kudos to Kalashnikov. AKV_521 is a purely-civilian firearm, and it seems that Russians may not even send it into production, and Mr Vlasenko is no longer an employee of KK, so there is that.

[@alexisbierquedebirkadefauv1744]

​@@Imperial_Lizardgirlwhat's the issue with that?

[@OFfic3R1K]

​@@Imperial_Lizardgirl well, the guy worked for (or with) the Sputnik news agency. Expecting him to call this _a war_ would be too much. Doesn't make his comment wrong in any way though.

[@areus2016]

All of these short comings were fixed with the gen 3. The rough list is this. They started using glass filled nylon for the plastic, stiffened the dust cover rail, redesigned the ergonomics completely based on soldier input, removed the burst, improved qc, and fixed various little problems like the fire selector going too far. Its widely used in the spetsnaz now, given that they were the ones who test the gen 3 first of course.

[@Myemnhk]

They still prefer the ak74 because they can easily modify it with a large amount of aftermarket parts that simply does not exist for the ak12. And for the fact that the ak12 doesn't do anything better than the ak74, so it's a pointless upgrade.

[@areus2016]

@@Myemnhk It does, though. Yes, you can upgrade the ak-74 with aftermarket stuff, but a majority of soldiers won't. A vast majority will just leave it as is. There is a big difference between just screwing on a vertical grip, and sourcing aftermarket parts with your own money, getting them to you while you are on duty, taking apart and reassembling your gun in the field, and THEN screwing on a vertical grip. Realistically, that is impossible to do while you are on duty. Therefore, as various footage shows, the ak74 will remain in its stock form without so much as a paint job. The ak12 on the other hand has all the basic upgrades for you, so all you need to do is just personalize it. The ak12 is not pointless by any means, and is in fact an big upgrade for the basic soldier. The only thing it leaves to be done is a vertical grip, red dot, and a sling, which are all based on personal preference.

[@Myemnhk]

@areus2016 I'm talking about for special forces. They're going to upgrade it anyways so there is no benefit for them. The average soldier, sure. But russia also doesn't supply optics so the rails are basically useless and they don't supply foregrips either so no point in a railed handguard. If russia supplied those, yeah I'd say the ak12 was better for the average infantry unit. But for the most part they dont and spec ops still use the 105 and 74. Essentially every photo of an ak12 shows it having no accessories, so its kinda pointless. The gun isn't inherently more accurate (regardless of what russia says) and it doesn't perform any differently if the gun is naked. They modernized the ak for literally no reason if they're not going to take advantage of the rails lmfao.

[@areus2016]

@ This entire argument is really dumb. The ak12 and ak74 are literally the same gun, one is just pre upgraded from the factory. It allows the regular infantryman to have something close to the Gucci guns the spec ops use, all while being affordable and attainable for the MoD. Calling the modernization pointless makes zero sense. I'm not sure how to explain that good things are good. You say that ak-74s can be upgraded to be better, but at the same time that there is no point in using the rails because Russia does not give out optics(holosuns are everywhere btw). That is apart from fact that ak12s are used mostly by said special forces(vdv to be specific) If there were more ak12s, more optics would be in use, but since in order to use an optic on a 74 you need a side rail, regular soldiers choose to just use the irons. Your entire argument falls under the premise of "why should they get nice things if they won't use them", which just sounds like you are looking for something to whine about but can't quite find what.

[@johnthomson2377]

AK74M/AK200 just makes more sense overall.

[@yarnickgoovaerts]

But it can’t mount scopes or laser attachments like the AK-12

[@johnthomson2377]

@@yarnickgoovaerts the AK200 is optics/accessory ready and covered with picatinny that actually holds zero. The AK74M may not have accessory mounts (with exception of dovetail optics mount) in factory configuration, but it can easily be outfitted with furniture that allows it.

[@yarnickgoovaerts]

@@johnthomson2377 I thought the AK-200 was just the export version of the AK-12

[@johnthomson2377]

@@yarnickgoovaerts No. the AK200 is based on the AK74M rifle, and uses the same barrel, bolt carrier, trunnion and handguard retention system. The main difference is the hinged dust cover that holds zero and a slightly different folding stock latch.

[@NekomiyaTH]

​@@yarnickgoovaerts replace with piccaninny rail for AKM would fix that

[@schibleh531]

I heard that the older vision of the AK-12 was a lot different, but the government kept removing features until it became a normal AK with rails. But if that's the case, why don't they take the Zenitco alpha rails? It's already there, and it is high quality.

[@cherenkov_blue]

The early Zlobin prototypes were actually closer to the AK74M than the current AK12, and I would argue that's why they were better. The primary changes were in handling, like placement of the charging handle and selector switch, and rails were integrated without completely changing the handguard/gas tube/dust cover mounting. In other words, it didn't try "fixing" things that weren't broken to begin with, and focused on modernizing in ways that actually mattered. As for why they didn't just use zenitco? It's kind of a band-aid solution. It's all milled aluminum, and adding that weight on top of a rifle that's already significantly heavier than an AR adds up to a lot. This isn't just for people flexing on guntube, this is for soldiers who need to be able to walk for miles without rest carrying a full combat load.

[@briankaes1274]

@@cherenkov_bluealso costs

[@Max_Da_G]

Government didn't remove any features. AK-12 tested originally had all the good things, but only on paper. The safety-selector had too narrow a range of angles in which it worked, the position of it also was not comfortable. The charging handle was hitting peoples thumbs so they mostly left it on the right side, where it always is. Stock was weak and broke after a single GP-25 shot. Railed dust cover was full-length and had uneven thermal expansion and resultant POI shifts. Soft recoil was achieved by lightening the bolt carrier which caused it to be insufficiently robust for a service rifle. Also overall the rifle was not going to use ANY of the existing manufacturing base which would have required a full manufacturing "rearmament" of the factories which would have taken absolute ages to do and cost an utter bomb. Russian MOD simply said "NOPE" to the utterly undercooked weapon. Zenitco simply isn't big enough to make the required amounts of furniture at a sufficient speed. If you are aware of the Accuracy International rifle used by British MOD, it was designed and developed by just a 3-man workshop, which ended up having to sell the design to an established manufacturer for it to proceed: they simply didn't have the means to make them in required volume.

[@Max_Da_G]

@@cherenkov_blue Original AK-12 was FAR from AK-74. There was no ability to interchange anything, they shared no parts and required a whole new production line. That AK-12 had spectacularly failed the trials on reliability. Also all the cool things were rather poorly implemented. For the full story, google Vladimir Onokoy story on AK-12. So no, it was not better than AK-12 that Russians ended up with. AK-12 today is ACTUALLY the AK-74 with reworked mounting of dust cover, new furniture and barrel.

[@anri4774]

*Back then* Soviet Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-74’s I really love them! Soviet Spetsnaz Soldier: I hate it, prefer old AKM’s or AKMS’. *Now* Russian Army Soldier: Wow, we got those brand new AK-12’s I really love them! Russian Spetsnaz Operator: I hate it, prefer old AK-74M’s.

[@Lurk-s]

Russian army in future: wow, we got those brand new ak-28's, I rly love them Spetsnaz: Ak-12 is better

[@wound957ruralapex]

The ak 12 is not a failure, it is good for what it was designed for. It was designed to give the standard soldier an ability to mount attachments easily and cheaper, especially thermo or night sight and suppressors, ak 12 is much lighter and cheaper than ak km. Also ak 12 is still evolving and it is stupid not to agree that it is modernised and standardised old school ak and this is why it’s good. Speznaz usually prefer something more customisable, but they usually don’t use their weapon for a long period of time because old school ak in furniture are heavy, but usual grunt will gladly take ak12 and forget all of the f@ckery with attachments on old school aks. So this video is based on more of a video game logic and he does not know how and why certain weapon choices are made. For government ak 12 is a major win in terms of supplies of attachments needed, because everything is standardised and they do not need to ask the soldiers what mount they use, and grunts do not complain all good for them)

[@ZAM_B]

This is a real commentary

[@zHoody]

Ты правильно, брат 🤙🏼👌🏼🇷🇺✊🏼

[@alitix7522]

Thank you, a breath of fresh air among these armchair experts

[@jasip1000]

Nice to see someone with a common sense here.

[@QWERTY-gp8fd]

Dont ask the MOD where AK12 disappeared after kyiv failure.

[@cherenkov_blue]

Your comment about many of the AK12's "innovations" being based on video game logic is funny and accurate. There's also a large historical precedent for it, particularly in American arms development. We've tested out crazy ideas like "what if every soldier carried a high-tech grenade launcher that was integrated into their rifle?" or "What if we increase hit probability by using burst-firing hypervelocity flechette rifles?", among many other ideas that were seen as stupid by anyone with actual combat experience. I think it's rather likely that this sort of weird experimentation was a motivating factor for Project Abakan, and later Project Ratnik in the wake of the AN94's failure.

[@casperarms]

Yes, I didn't even have to think about it. I have been following the military sphere and civilian shooting fashion for quite a long time. I look at this quick-release AK-12 mount and realize that someone was literally saying "We saw American special forces quickly put suppressors on their rifles, let's do something like that" or "Oh, they have a Magpul! It's super cool, let's make the same stocks" ))

[@brainplay8060]

@@casperarmsEveryone is chasing modularity because its a force multiplier. Russia seems to have dropped the ball on field testing while the west spend loads of money on it. Magpul is popular because its good and even the no-nonsense SOF guys are using it. Yes, the west tests some weird stuff because if it works then it might be a major advantage. All rifles with a grenade launcher sounds awesome if feasible. But it wasn't feasible so the project was dropped. Flechette ammo? You mean potentially lighter ammo with similar or better ballistics than a regular bullet? Great! Except it didn't pan out. Never trust the fudds who aren't willing to test and accept new technologies. They're the same fools that think the M14 is an actual good rifle and would have us re-adopt it as a standard rifle.

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

I heard western gun experts preaching these while calling AKs "inferior". I just never understood, why one has to adapt western standards that doesn't add functionality and doesn't fits towards the objective one is pursuing.

[@cherenkov_blue]

@@aniksamiurrahman6365 to some extent it's just pressure to "keep up". The AK74M is a reliable weapon that (as shown by its use by both sides in Ukraine) is perfectly viable in modern combat. But it's not the flashy new thing.

[@cherenkov_blue]

@@brainplay8060 There has to be a balance between crazy experimental innovation and a sense of realism. I mean come on, a laser targeted grenade launcher where each individual cartridge has a microchip in it? Ridiculous, and the XM25 grenade launcher derived from the project proves that the idea is infeasible even when scaled back. It's heavy, expensive, and unable to fire if the computer in the weapon itself or the ammunition malfunctions. In the meantime, the project cost millions that ultimately went nowhere (not to mention the XM8 that also got canned). No country has an infinite defense budget, not even the US.

[@kozzy18]

All new issued rifles have growing pains when they’re first introduced.

[@rocky-zx6kq]

But this was is basically a pain, it supposed to be an improvement but they butchered it to the point the original is better

[@off6848]

@@rocky-zx6kq No like he said it was true of everything from the first ak47 to the first AR15 they were literal dogshite when first issued. The free floating barrel and optics readiness is all the AKM platform needed the selector can be easily changed out the only real problem I see with the design is that gas ring.

[@magnem1043]

This, it was basically not optimized, its kinks will be fixed in time making a cheaper but modern ak variant able to fit stuff on, it was never meant to be a elite specialized rifle

[@alexeishayya-shirokov3603]

@@magnem1043 the Ak-12 rifles manufactured after 2023 featured a number of improvements compared to the ones made before. Still far from ideal though

[@off6848]

@@Oppen1945 It had feeding and bolt carrier issues as well. Old carries would sheer on extended full auto use in fact they still do which is why no country has ever adopted an m16 LMG like they have with AK LMGs. I'm familiar with the idea that the soldiers were just too dumb to figure out how to use them correctly etc I don't buy it what we see in reality is many complaints from the era of the m16A1 its actually my favorite aesthetically but it definitely wasn't perfect on release.

[@chrisbrent7487]

The current 3rd iteration of the AK-12 and AK-15 are pretty decent and most of the kinks have been ironed out and burst is gone from the fire control. The flimsy and shaky stock is gone and a solid folding stock with adjustable length of pull is fitted to 3rd generation rifles. Parts breakage and cracking is apparently fixed too. The major reason that special forces prefer to use the AK-74M and other 100 series rifles is that there is an abundance of after market parts for them. The AK-12 can also only use the suppressor that is designed for it as it fits on the muzzle break or the mount depending on which model. There are very few of them in circulation too. The 100 series rifles do not have this issue and there is a large choice of option to suppress them which is one of the main reasons they are preferred. The fixed gas tube is not really an issue as you can clean it fitted by opening the end of it. The handguard is still a small problem as it is not as solid as something like a Zenit Co B19 or B30 handguard but really it is only a small issue. It is fine for mounting a light or even a laser. You wont get the as solid zero hold on the laser but with most of the after market handguards you cant mount a GP-25 or GP-30

[@dogsbecute]

YOu think the russians think that much about it? The simple answer is the ak 105 is cute. Burly men like cute things too!

[@Gegenfaschisten]

The left right Ak selector switch is really cool

[@giraffefactory2905]

Some of the mentioned problems were fixed in later iterations: they get rid of 2-round burst, changed plastic of handguard, changed fire selector (you showed it)

[@spoonerman]

This is what zlobin's prototype was ditched for...

[@fedrickosamuelshidarta970]

yeah, really sad reality for AK lover.

[@casperarms]

Just the prototype of Zlobin was really a well-developed model in many ways, and he impressed many. But when even the fans saw the model of the AK-12 version of Dolganov (as far as I understand, he is the lead designer of the AK-12 version after Zlobin), people were simply disappointed

[@Yevgeny_N]

@@casperarms Zlobin's project was shit, no matter how you look at it. Zlobin's team had shooting athletes who strongly influenced the development of weapons. Do I need to explain how sports weapons differ from military ones? AK zlobin did not pass the state tests, which is not surprising. Its cost was too high. The receiver cover was very difficult to manufacture and cost as a separate rifle.

[@casperarms]

@Yevgeny_N It wasn't shit, it was just expensive. These are different things, and this is a question for those who talked about "fifth-generation weapons that are 2 times more effective than the AK-74," but in the end they just released a crappy tuned AK-74

[@Yevgeny_N]

@@casperarms Zlobin's AK-12 was shit! I repeat once again, he did not pass the state tests. During the tests, his bolt carrier broke. The 2016 AK-12 was also crap. But the soldiers praise the AK-12 of 2020. The AK-12 2023 changes took into account the experience of the war in Ukraine.

[@Elefuntheelefant]

most or all of these problems have been fixed with the most recent iteration of the AK12

[@Led....]

To be fair, a free floating handguard isn't inherently bad for military use. Many militaries have shown that if you do it right it's there's pretty much no point in not having it. The Block II, URGI, MCX family, 716i, the KS1, and modern 416's that use free floated rails just to name a few have been exceptional rifles. But like you said the flexing is an issue. Any laser mounted to that will have no hope of holding a zero.

[@tylersmith3139]

I know. Better accuracy is inherently good. Kalashnikov concern was just stupid and thought that plastic was a good handguard material.

[@Led....]

@@tylersmith3139 Exactly! I wonder what drove them to use plastic. Although it probably is the simple answer, money.

[@Max_Da_G]

@@tylersmith3139 It IS a good material. The issue was that they simply didn't brace it well enough.

[@Max_Da_G]

@@Led.... They used glass-filled polyamide for decades. AK-74 from mid-80s with plum furniture for instance is that. It shown to be a good material that was sufficiently rugged. The issue was that on AK-12 they didn't brace the mounting at the front, which is why it flexed as much as it did.

[@wound957ruralapex]

1:57 oh god no-one on the internet knows that ak 12 is evolving and 2 round burst is removed for almost 2 years

[@casperarms]

Dude, when I pick up a topic, I talk about it in full. I can't just pull out individual pieces that are known to a wide range of people, understand me

[@wound957ruralapex]

@@casperarms no hate

[@y0h0p38]

A lot of AK-12s in Ukraine still have the 2 round burst. Ideal and realistic are different

[@wound957ruralapex]

@@y0h0p38 i am not talking about ideal situation, this video just trashed ak 12 and i disagree

[@StevieTheBush]

@@casperarmsBro if the information you present has been outdated for 2 YEARS IT IS NOT HATE. And it is publicly avalable. And ta "talk in full" argument is like mentionaing reliability isshues of the M16A1 when talking about the M16A4

[@AdvinKeller]

wasnt it the same thing with the AKM and the AK74?

[@casperarms]

No, the reasons are different

[@Dipsh1t]

He made a Video about it 3 months ago

[@pyeitme508]

@@casperarmsok

[@y0h0p38]

The main reason is that 5.45x39 for the AK-74 is a small round that relies on hitting super fast to penetrate armor/cause larger wounds inside the body from pressure/frag. Mainly it was Spetsnaz or whatever other SOF equivalent they put in Afghanistan who disliked the 74, as they couldn't get subsonic rounds to use with suppressors. Remember, a suppressor doesn't do much without a bullet that's subsonic. Another benefit was that they probably had situations where they couldn't resupply for a bit, so being able to use the same 7.62x39 that their enemy's used in AK-47s/Ms and SKSs was probably a lifesaver

[@Klovaneer]

AKM is flimsier than milled but is still grunt-proof, i am sure everyone was happy to drop a kilo off their shoulders. AK-74 is better across the board but 5.45 subsonic flat out sucks and would suck even if the bullet was made out of DU. AK-12 is just sheer corruption and incompetence, worse in every respect than an AKS-74N with 200$ worth of aftermarket parts. I am almost thankful MTK doesn't see this.

[@destrodevil6975]

AK-74M is good, it works perfectly. Old things are more reliable cause they stood the test of time. No one should ever think that new stuff is always better.

[@scheie5268]

Mikhail Kalashnikov is probably fuming rn looking at the ak 12

[@Max_Da_G]

He wouldn't be. It's not even his rifle any more.

[@scheie5268]

@@Max_Da_G the group is named after him, and it's a descendant of his creation

[@Max_Da_G]

@@scheie5268 He gave his blessing and the name is in his honor. Also he understands as good as anyone that when something is re-designed with new design decisions, they take time to iron out the kinks. For instance original AK-47 prototype was stamped and riveted, while what ended up being introduced to the Soviet Army was using milled receiver. AKM was a rather significant redesign of the AK. And there were many different design adjustments during the production. Same goes for AK-74. He understood that some things need to be tested in real combat to be understood that what works on paper and in peace time, is useless in war. For instance Russian military had adopted many small, at first insignificant things, while utterly removing and retiring things that appeared to be very promising as a result of experience in Syria. Generals often aren't convinced by new stuff until war happens, people die, troops crack the shits to the extent large enough for higher-ups to finally take notice, and ONLY THEN does the fat overweight machine that is military top brass gets its ass moving about changing things. And even then they don't introduce everything soldiers in the trenches ask for.

[@artstep9661]

What russian specnaz are you specifically talking about? There are at least 6 different departments that have them and some of them have different branches of specnaz, with specific tasks. And the army also has its own branch of specnaz...

[@V-95K]

Mine doesn’t use AK at all. He uses AS VAL

[@GPDAMATO]

This is why I think the ak200 series was so much better. All of the positives without any of the negatives. Between the ak74m and the ak12

[@senpalma]

1:40 this firemode was deleted in AK-12 2023

[@jabohonu]

I also hate this new "Diopter Sights", the old one where better to get a quick aim.....

[@federico9293]

Thanks for enlightening me on the subject. I am a sport shooter and if I decide to buy an AK in the future, I will probably go for the 100 series which is based on the AK-74M. Aesthetically the AK-12 is not bad, but at that point if I had to choose a modern weapon, I would consider an AR-15, SCAR, CZ Bren 2, etc. The AK platform can also be modern, but (for my personal tastes) it must not distort too much from the classic design that has distinguished them for years. I imagine that the market for spare parts for the old AK platform is greater than for the new one.

[@farrazaulia2917]

great video man, i have a question about the bayonets so the AK-74M has a standard bayonet thread or mount like those in m16s and the ak-12s has a clip on bayonet mount? like those in british rifles?

[@cinemantics231]

I believe they addressed all of the issues in the latest gen. But, are the calibers on the 12, 15 and 19 interchangeable now that they're using the same parts? That would be pretty cool.

[@liderv6220]

I think these problems have been mostly fixed in the latest version of the AK-12 though.

[@stavros6969]

they are , they just end up removing the whole burst fire mode at the end

[@fedrickosamuelshidarta970]

@@stavros6969 Russia really shot themselves in the foot with this ak-12 program. If in the end the AK-12, which they have been developing for almost 8 years (development started in 2010 & adopted in 2018), only produces an AK with burst fire which is not at all as reliable as its predecessor, the AK-74. If this is the case, it is better from the start that they just adopt the AK-KM program (AK-74, with additional Picitany rail accessories from either Zenitco or Kalashnikov Consern) and avoid failure and embarrassment.

[@y0h0p38]

@@fedrickosamuelshidarta970 Can't remember 100%, but wasn't that the project that ended up costing far more than new rifles due to corruption issues?

[@mikeblair2594]

@@y0h0p38 That's just the way things work in Russia. You figure in the graft into end total amount.

[@ironmask5308]

If the Russians really wanted to improve the AK, they'd just copy the Galil.

[@martin128]

Did I get that correctly that newer models have muzzle device non-removable? So how are they attaching suppressors?

[@casperarms]

right on top of the muzzle device

[@ShaggNasty-yk1ie]

A classic example of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

[@heyfitzpablum]

All those 'problems' are workable fixes, I don't see any show stoppers. Every new firearm is a work-in-process and will have 'bugs' they need to work out. The next version of the AK-12 will be better.

[@ghilliem.g.5824]

I mean, There's already an M (modernized) and an M-1 version, and he said they still have most of those problems. Although i don't think a non removable muzzle device would be a big problem for an avarage infantry grunt, and on the M-1 version they removed the two round burst that was causing problems. But when you compare to the fact that the first AK was immediately pretty much perfect, the AK-12 needing 2 modernizations in a single decade, or less, is pretty crazy. I blame capitalism. The original AK was designed by a working class soldier in the Soviet Union in a time when it was still a properly communist country, who was attempting to fix what he deemed a major problem in his country's military for the good of his brothers in arms in a country that was founded that way, while the AK-12 was designed by a for-profit corporation in a capitalist dictatorship

[@casperarms]

When you find out that the plastic handguard splits and the metal front sight breaks, you realize that this is not just a mistake. In a country where they learned how to make unkillable weapons half a century ago, such failures are something beyond the bounds

[@Pelmedeeznuts]

​@@ghilliem.g.5824the very first production AKs weren't perfect, suffered from fragile receivers

[@AZNinsomnia02]

​@@casperarmssame as Sig Sauer and their new pistol came out for the US, so his point still stands. Doesnt matter if you are a reknown manufacturer, errors are bound to happen

[@casperarms]

@@AZNinsomnia02 What's wrong with the new Sig?

[@interviolet6675]

The prototype AK12 like what you saw in Battlefield 4 looked so much better than the final version used today. Imo

[@manspider6574]

Unpopular opinion but I think the outdated AKs like the AK47s or AKM are the best because they’re more powerful and durable, other than the 74s and AK 100 variants.

[@LovelyHavoc]

they changed to 5.45 for a reason

[@StevieTheBush]

Objectively false. AK47 had terrible trigger reliability isshues and it was expensive to produce. The AKM solved thoes problems but it still used an unnecesarely powerfull bullet and had excessive recoil

[@StevieTheBush]

@@LovelyHavocFor the same reasons the US switched to 556 -The same amount of ammo takes less space is lighter and cheaper to make. -The bullet is faster so AP variants penetrate more easily armor and they are more accurate -The bullet has a smaller chance to kill so by shooting 1 soldier you take out of the fight 2 ore more because he will need medical attention or med evac. Wich leads me to my 4th point -Less shot soldiers will die so after the war economies will be less affected by the sharp drop in the workforce

[@LovelyHavoc]

@@StevieTheBush man, i was replying to the OP, i know why they switched 😂

[@off6848]

Its not more powerful though the 7.62 was similar ballistics to .300bo a dogshite cartridge. 5.45 is a laser under 200 yards and tumbles better than 5.56 go look at any gel wound channel demonstrations

[@sebastiantornberg5179]

You didnt eave mention the dumb short handguard, some people like to hold rifles near the end of the barrel witch is more accurate. The gun would be pretty good looking if it had a normal hand guard.

[@letucetomato]

most army do that when a new rifle is distributed the special force reject it for years

[@voldschen232]

there's so much features the ak 12 could've taken concept and design from already proven from working platform altho the reason to make more ak 12 and not modernize remaining ak 74 was due to both keeping the military industry alive and getting newer rifles they could've made it more well thought out. the dust cover could've been based on the krinkov ( even zenitco had a dust cover mount similar in concept) and the hand guard could've been torx screw mounted for extra stability, and the stock could've been any ar15 buffer tube stock that is common even in Russia.

[@Valentin_MeL]

As a tarkov guy i can agree with spetsnaz. Ak 12 is trash, espessially that dioptr sight which is useless when you shooting at moving targets. Dioptr is good for long ranges, but for long ranges you need a scope and not this shit. Standart ак 74 ironsights are perfect for close combat.

[@FlyinJMan]

All they had to do was make a RIS standard issue on the AK-74M. The original AK-200 was just an AK-74M with rails.

[@Max_Da_G]

What do you think AK-12 is? If you look at it, it's same AK-74 at the core and in principle. It was simply de-designed in different areas to be able to mount optics and accessories more securely and from the factory floor. It also had to satisfy military WEIGHT requirements. AK-200 didn't, nor did KM-AK kit which made AK-74 bloat beyond military weight requirements. Original 2016 AK-12 used the leftover KM-AK grips and stocks that military refused to use so as not to waste them.

[@csnation]

Another reason why AK74 or AKM is preferred because there are vast quantities of after market parts, some cheap, some premium but definitely better quality than the standard mil-spec. SOF units typically can buy or use their own if required. But AK12 is new and the barrel change means it is very difficult to get after market suppressors too.

[@robertlawson698]

The Russians had it right the first time! They must not be familiar with that old saying, if it ain't broke,don't fix it! Some people can't resist trying to reinvent the wheel!

[@pyeitme508]

Also wish for video about AEK-971 soon

[@jackiepwn]

Fun fact, spetsnaz are so undertrained with there rifle, there was this green beret that was in Africa with them, and had a shooting competition for fun, and they didn’t even know how to zero there rifle

[@tanaziolopez1936]

I'm no pro Russian but that seems fake, can i get a source or anything?

[@jackiepwn]

@@tanaziolopez1936 the green beret in Africa is My grand father and told me when he went to the range with them, that’s just eye witness, however you can try to find some articles but idk if there is any

[@Max_Da_G]

@@jackiepwn You are so full of shit dude lol

[@dungphamvu3463]

I'm glad that my country chose Galil Ace to make our own variation STV instead of AK 15

[@bobrobertson6514]

your video's are excellent. Very informative and your english is great.

[@bdleo300]

He sounds like AI

[@TheXtro101]

The AK12 has almost a west European or northern European rifle design.Having a front sight post like Finnish/Valmet RK62(or Israeli Galil)and rear peep sight towards the end of receiver cover.And also the side foldable stock has a western appearance.But also that new Chinese assault rifle,QBZ 191,has a US or western European appearance.

[@FST606]

The idea of improving service rifles with a small third-party parts manufacturer with low supply capacity is only useful on a small scale of use, such as for special forces. Rifles for conventional units are mass-produced and specifications must be standardized. Cost reduction is also required.

[@Nom_AnorVSJedi]

How does it compare to the QBZ191 ??

[@fedrickosamuelshidarta970]

IMHO, China actually have much better new Assault Rifle. because, you can see, the upgrade that QBZ191 bring, over it's predessor actually working, and feedback from the operator actually positive.

[@Pelmedeeznuts]

QBZ-191 did suffered some issues initially but so far it seems fine, also it's a new design and not QBZ-03 with changes rather than the AK-12 half-assed "new"

[@Nom_AnorVSJedi]

@@fedrickosamuelshidarta970 I agree. The QBZ191 is not innovative but just combines the best of all rifles into one package. Gun innovation has plateaued I think.

[@RyuTheAsian47]

I think part of the annoyance with the AK 12 comes from the fact that everything the AK 12 was hoping to do was already done by other modernization kits that could be attached to a standard AK74M, and can do them better and cheaper, with perhaps the only exception being the weight

[@user-03-gsa3]

very interesting. thank you for the vid

[@CalacaRoja]

What about the AN 94 and the newer AEK 545? Also they are developing new 6mm cartridges

[@Klovaneer]

AN-94 is an engineering masterpiece and maintenance nightmare. The AEK counter-weight recoil system just can't be made to last and it does add weight. 6mm sounds perfect before you think about it as a FOURTH assault rifle cartridge in the system. From a blank slate i'd probably nominate AM (that AR-18esque Dragunov's avtomat they dug out recently) in 6x41 and 9x39.

[@Max_Da_G]

​@@Klovaneer Who told you that A545 balanced gas system doesn't last? Who said that it can't be made to last? Does it add weight? For sure, that's how it's designed to work. If you REMOVE weight from bolt carrier you'll ruin the reliability. A545 rifle only recently entered production, and it's being made for Special Forces issue. AM-17 does exist in full-length version, but noone is going to replace AK-12 with it. 6.02x41 is a cartridge that may well replace both 5.45 and 7.62.

[@TheTeKuZa]

I wonder if the new AK-22 is an AK-12M1 with 6.02x41

[@off6848]

yeah that new 6mm is supposed to be a beast similar ballistics as 6mm arc

[@dirwanedy8919]

Same like usa army what different? 0:27

[@Callsign_J4WS]

Wut

[@MACE_HINDU]

I dont see how you can fuck up a ak but leave it to Russia they either make some of the best weapons or worst this one seems like it was made by a guy who plays cod all day

[@freedomfalcon]

What happened to "Nyet,rifle is fine"?

[@Bigeyes2]

Make NVG holder for helmets. And make separate NVG scopes

[@TakNuke]

Ak12 shouldn't exist, their is already better option than it i.e. modernized AK74M and the whole family Ak10x the final and one of the greatest homologation of AK, created by Mikhail Kalashnikov. The whole AK10x is eventually modernized like AK74M and is offered as AK20x. If they wanted to go for a new design they could have gone for AEK family, MA dragnov derivative or limited service A-91/ADS system. All three of them bring something new to the table. Even their own civilian offering AKV521 is much better.

[@FatBoy42069]

From what I understand too the ak-12 is super hard to suppress and from what I know of Russian special forces is that they love suppressed rifle. To the point where they carried ak-ms into combat with a 74 just so they could have a suppressed rifle in Afghanistan.

[@Soboba.Fett69]

Maybe they should try doing a featureless stock for the ak12

[@alexalexin9491]

Don't the spetznaz use AN-94 or AEK-971? Are you sure they are issued AK-12?

[@everybodydothatdinosaur519]

The Ak-12 was more or less the cheaper options as zennit parts are more expensive and the Ak74 is pretty worn, with worn barrels, peened bolts and worn out springs being an issue to replacement. Mass producing a new rifle makes sense, it's just they went with the Ak-12 as it was a lot cheaper than trying to mass issue Aek-971's or AN-94's or the like. Even the Ak-100 series.

[@unpeal]

If you see the word Special Forces in the title, it's safe to say that the video was made by amateurs. In the video they talk about military special forces, OMON, military swimmers, Alpha, special forces of the Airborne Forces, FSB, SOBR? They all use different equipment for different tasks and to generalise them is to sign one's own incompetence.

[@Drownedinblood]

How did they manage to fuck up the AK?

[@bigstabby]

Basically, Russians keep forgetting, "rifle is fine".

[@tineristineris1860]

Can you do a comparison with the extinct VDV gear?

[@Droid_Behaviour]

So true, even if the newest 2023 AK12 is a little bit better, this rifle is SHIT. I prefer to take a classic Plum AK74 rather than the AK12! Verygood content, as always

[@casperarms]

Thanks!) I agree with you. My preference is an AK-74 in black plastic. I had one during my service many years ago, but in wooden fittings

[@Droid_Behaviour]

@@casperarms The AK74 is a classic, i have an Izmash AK74 (with no side rail) with plum furnitures and some Molto RPK74 mags and it’s so nice to shoot with, so simple, so effective, i love it! I shoot with iron sight only, and it’s quite easy to make hits at 300m with the classic "belt buckle" method, once again it’s simple, effective nothing fancy just the essential. I have nothing agasint modernised AK’s but i don’t feel the need for a Red Dot or a PERST-4, sometimes a light installed on a barrel mount I really don’t know why Kalashnikov Concern did it, so much design flaws. I shot the AK12 civilian version (AK TR3) and i remember that the rear sight was moving side to side, (and the peep sight was too small) the fire selector was a pain to move, the stock was so big, so heavy, the handguard was moving a little bit, the quality of the polymer was poor, and clean the rifle at the end of the day...pain in the ass, especially the gas tube area. When i see the excellent quality of manufacturing on my AK's (AK74 with plum furnitures/AKS74U/AK74 with wood furnitures) which were made more than 20 years ago, i don’t understand why Kalashnikov Concern did this AK12 with this poor general quality. I had a FAMAS during my military service, not the same rifle of course because it’s a bullpup, but so accurate, compact, it had some design flaws like all assault rifles but it’s a very cool gun, more original than our new HK416F in service in the French Army now ; very effective, modular (but very heavy for what it is!) but...boring, so boring :/ I hope you enjoyed your AK during your service ;)

[@katyusha9050]

Plum is the most beautiful color for an AK-74

[@Max_Da_G]

@@Droid_Behaviour you must have been born brainless. Rifle wasn't broke, but it was no longer catering to ever-changing military requirements. AK-12 was the response to those requirements. Initially an under-developed response. War evolved it. It's good now. Oh and at the core it's still the same design: operating system was unchanged, bolt carrier, locking surfaces, gas system is still the same as it was designed in 1974. What changed was furniture and its mounting. What is being improved is manufacturing process, which is outside the design of the original weapon. AK-74M was suffering from defects in the barrel chroming process for many years, just so you know

[@murphy7801]

I mean military weapons can have a free floating barrel, but you can't do it cheap.

[@williamserasinghe9071]

some guys from Sri lanka who went to fight for Russia were all given brand new AK 12's without any optics or anything

[@archiij1707]

Kinda like spetnaz units in the afghan war. They didnt like the 74, and prefered AKMs, most likely due to blending in , but probably what theyve trained and familiarized with

[@Para_Kermit]

Simply not true. Many examples of SSO using the Ak12 in the SMO. Albeit, with some external modifications.

[@tanaziolopez1936]

The VDC Also uses the Ak-12 and Most Spetsnaz groups do use it too

[@KO3A69]

Since the 7.62x39 is outdated is like saying 300 blackouts outdated. Yeah when they both have pretty much the same ballistic patterns and the main purpose of them both on the modern combat field is suppression and brushed deflection. As the 545 and 556 can not do well with.

[@StevieTheBush]

He really said 7.62x39 is for suppresion 300blk is not for war. it is for covert ops , spec ops and police usage

[@KO3A69]

@@StevieTheBush That is why they still use the 7.62x39 for SSO work instead of 545 look it up. Being bias is not being smart.

[@KO3A69]

Not trying to be rude. But the 300 black is very close in drop speed and is better for suppressor work then 556. Same with 7.62x39 and the 545, plus the 30 cal hit harder in cqb range and goes through cover better.

[@StevieTheBush]

@@KO3A69Nor really. A 16" 556 is objectively better in every way (besides supression but that is less relevant than the round performance

[@StevieTheBush]

@@KO3A69You are biased. Look up performance charts

[@BeanMau]

Reason: Nostalgia

[@Rrgr5]

They should have done what the Soviets intended to do, plastic top cover and a rail over the top, that could've been done pinning the rail on the trunnions, other than that the Galil ACE reciprocating dust cover would be better than the old one too.

[@justabarrelbomb4472]

Also the more complex iron sights are fairly useless, most modern armies provide their soldiers with optics. The marines still train iron sight shooting as a backup, but every marine gets a sight, they don't really use the iron sights anymore. Now considering that the Spetsnaz is basically the russian equivalent of the SEALs I seriously doubt they care about the iron sights, they all use optics and in case they wan't iron sights they'll prly just mount a separate set at an angle as backup

[@plaid13]

How is the AKM outdated? Its still easy to control and carry its more powerful than the ak74 ak12 or ar15 and m4. It is more than accurate enough at combat ranges. While the US military is trying to change to a more powerful round over the 5.56 the akm already has one. Is it perfect? nope not at all but its sure as hell not outdated.

[@casperarms]

I meant rather that it is old, not outdated. I do not know English well, and I instruct the translator to translate the text, so there may be mistakes in some points

[@plaid13]

@@casperarms Ah ok. That makes sense.

[@belgianfried]

​@@casperarms Damn, where you from?

[@StevieTheBush]

It is outdated in every way bro

[@plaid13]

@@StevieTheBush Not a very good troll.

[@memphissander3512]

the special forces across the world do this, when the M9 was distributed the Special forces kept the M1911. they also dont like it when infantry uses the same guns as them.

[@kirabay1255]

Currently the AK-12 is a very good rifle that even Ukrainians seek to obtain them

[@baraka629]

I don't get why the handguard is being made such a big deal out of. It is probably the easiest part on an AK to replace besides the magazine and top cover. Rifle furniture in general are parts that are highly subjective and a matter of taste and personal ergonomics. If russian arms procurement or command, whoever is in charge of equipment over there, felt the need to, they could change all the handguards in maybe a week.

[@daniels0376]

"😠✋🏻NJET! RIFLE IS FINE" -Spetsnaz

[@thepowellfamily8430]

It’s net

[@daniels0376]

@thepowellfamily8430 Right yeah don't take it too seriously lol

[@tackytrooper]

Mom, I want AR-15! Niet Vasilly, we have AR-15 at home! AR-15 at home:

[@TechnocraticAscendance3870]

The entire advantage of the AK family of rifles is that you can put them through hell and they stay functional with interchangeable parts while the American rifles are screaming for babushka and need expensive repairs. Once you become overly complex, you've lost the plot.

[@schlangen7889]

I thought that the author understood something, but it was a mistake The first version of the AK-12 was terrible and no one hides it, but in the new version most of the errors have been corrected. It is a soldier's personal preference and matter of habit whether to use an AK-74 or an AK-12. There are many positive comments about the AK-12 and there are negative ones, but this does not mean that the AK-12 is a bad machine gun. A huge plus of the AK-12 is the built-in picatinny rails, thereby eliminating the need for various adapters. I am surprised that the author did not say that a diopter sight was installed in place of the open sight, because most people perceived the AK-12 negatively precisely because of the new sight. The AK-12 is a general-arms assault rifle, that is, an assault rifle for all types of troops in the army. No one hides that the AK-74M is no longer suitable for the realities of the modern battlefield, and the AK-12 should correct this, and again no one hides that the AK-12 is an AK-74 in a new configuration

[@Max_Da_G]

They don't "hate" AK-12. They can get a rifle to TUNE FOR THEMSELVES. They have all the expensive weapon parts on their AK-74s that they bought for own money, so they use it. They can adjust whatever they want: furniture, attachments, trigger, all for the mission they are tasked to do. AK-12 is still in need of refinement. Old Soviet-era AK-74 are actually of better quality than post-Soviet production AK-74M. The most preferred by field SF are AK(S)-74N. Soldiers get the tightest-grouping AK-74 they can find, install the updated furniture and parts, zero its irons meticulously, then zero the optics. New AK-12 actually shoots better tighter groups than AK-74M and more consistently due to better quality barrels.

[@viktorD4]

what can I say really. People who recently joined the army calmly fight with the AK12, and those who served for several years with the AK74 prefer it. A year ago, I, together with a friend who is 4 years younger than me, met the AK12, I didn’t like it much, but on the contrary, he liked the AK12 more than the AK74 and M4.

[@ashnazgthrakatulukii1165]

Addition: there isn't any clear indication that these guys aren't both regular soldiers. When spetsnaz are undercover they wear standard military uniform to blend in & not be the main target. When they are not undercover they wear chevrons or patches to indicate to other soldiers in what squad they are and thus under whose command. I don't see any chevrons or patches on these guys, so they are both in standard military uniform. Just right one in more old, Yudashkin's type, and left in more modern (looks like it's DSFO 3.0 [or even 2.0. I see no pockets, and on 3.0 there are some] from 2022 manufactured by some company under Kalashnikov. [Set called VKPO 3.0 on russian] In 2023 around 100 000 russian soldiers in Ukraine wore 3.0 from 2022. Now maybe even more, if there still this model in use [there is also 2023 model of DSFO 3.0]). (I copied text because of ýť and "it's struggle") You know that on preview there are two regular soldiers in uniforms from different time periods, right? Both of this guys aren't from spetsnaz.

[@casperarms]

No, on the left is the classic image of a Russian special forces operator. On the right is the image of a Russian soldier. It's been a long time. Now their soldiers use almost any uniform they can afford to buy, so everything is mixed up at the moment

[@ashnazgthrakatulukii1165]

@@casperarms , there isn't any clear indication of this. When these guys are undercover they wear standard military uniform to blend in & not be the main target. When they are not undercover they wear chevrons or patches to indicate to other soldiers in what squad they are and thus under whose command. I don't see any chevrons or patches on these guys, so they are both in standard military uniform. Just right one in more old, Yudashkin's type, and left in more modern (looks like it's DSFO 3.0 [or even 2.0. I see no pockets, and on 3.0 there are some] from 2022 manufactured by some company under Kalashnikov. [Set called VKPO 3.0 on russian] In 2023 around 100 000 russian soldiers in Ukraine wore 3.0 from 2022. Now maybe even more, if there still this model in use [there is also 2023 model of DSFO 3.0]).

[@AJ-xc4nm]

Why is Russia so die hard on trying to modernize the AK platform rather than just making a new modern rifle from the ground up, or outsourcing the manufacture to companies willing to bid on a service weapon contract?

[@_Jebb_]

Because the AK is adequate and cost effective.

[@ghilliem.g.5824]

Why is the US so die hard on trying to modernize the AR-15 platform all the time instead of just making a new modern rifle from the ground up? Don't fix what ain't broken

[@AJ-xc4nm]

@ghilliem.g.5824 difference is the AR takes very nicely to modernizing. The AK doesn't and they've been struggling with it since the inception of modern accessories. As it stands now the AR is a modern rifle and the AK is a gun pretending to be one.

[@BreadPittAAAAHHHH]

It’s the same reason the US just constantly uses the M16, M4 platform, it’s because they are time proven effective firearms

[@therideneverends1697]

decades of infrastructure and spare parts accumulation. Same reason the Prototype AK12 had a last round bolt hold open and release yet it was one of the first things cut, it prevented backwards compatability with the 40 years of AK74 mags that have been accumulateing in warehouses every day since the 70s

[@jakubwarenich4439]

Off topic: i can imagine that if AN-94 had somewhat simpler constructuon even with hyperburst, it would be the best rifle on the battlefield and russians would be using it from day it was released.

[@misterrobot1143]

What is Spetsnaz? What do you mean by this word?

[@boomer_31rus]

Russian "Spetsnaz" (rus. Спецназ - Специальное Назначение) means Special Forces

[@misterrobot1143]

@@boomer_31rus I mean. there's a ton of different "spetsnaz" forces) FSB, GRU, VDV, marines and so on. And everyone then again have their own preferences an weapons. So effectively there is no such thinf as "russian spetsnaz".

[@misterrobot1143]

@@boomer_31rus да и вообще, чувак, кому ты это пишешь))

[@boomer_31rus]

@@misterrobot1143 ЧУВААААААК!

[@stayhungry1503]

@@misterrobot1143 maybe he meant all of them hate the ak-12

[@Myemnhk]

Cause standard soldiers have no right to say no. And the ak74, and ak105 are objectively better, especially when they can modernize it.

[@KRawatXP2003]

This feels like someone made it in mansion not in field.

[@1111Tactical]

In the 2000's when the US Army wanted a more 'modern' rifle, we explored new guns entirely and the closest to adoption, the XM8, was deemed not worth it...but then we just got SOPMOD Block upgrades (block 1, block 2, etc...) that were basically just furniture/rail upgrades and completely succeeded in modernization. They were first used by spec ops, proven to be grunt proof, and then applied to standard rifles. Russia already got EXACTLY the same option, up to the point of years of proven use by spec ops with Zenitco's kits, and they are clearly superior to the AK12 (just like an M4 SOPMOD was superior to an XM8 for example). Should have just got Zenitco kits for everyone, no need for decades of separate R n D

[@VolkovVelikan]

Short answer: because the army gets what’s new and the grunts tested out in the fields. Special forces already know how the older models work and they don’t want to be bothered with the guess work of a new model. Same happened with the AK74 , special forces hated it and kept using AKMs while the Soviet army and the paratroopers were all given AK74s in Afghanistan

[@loyp4328]

I honestly don't get the AK-12 hate. Exchanging with people using it, they don't seem to mind it. I've myself tried the TR3 variant, which was a solid, performant rifle, on par with most rifles we can get hold in Switzerland. The only drawback from it I've experienced is its loss of the excellent balance and incredible lightness of the AK-74.

[@casperarms]

The things that I list in the video are of great importance. Moreover, I did not mention that the forearms on some AK-12s simply split, the butts cannot withstand a shot from a GP-25 / GP-34 grenade launcher, not to mention that the front sights break on some of them. This machine looks interesting and even beautiful, but it was made just disgusting (although, of all the AK, I like the Finnish Valmet Rk.95 or the classic AK-74 the most)

[@loyp4328]

​ @casperarms Thanks for your answer. Not denying one could get a monday morning rifle, nor the AK12 was devoid of youth problems (hence two subsequent generations), but most of the critics you report may be problems for a civilian target shooter, not really for the average infantryman. After the first round of AK12 hate about a year ago, and because of my relatively positive experience with the TR-3 variant, I have indeed asked people effectively using it (on both side of the Russian-Ukrainian war) - and that small batch of twenty people gave me a positive feedback of their experience with the rifle. I've got neither personal nor second-hand experience about the grenade launcher, but given how solid the stock feels when locked in place, I'm a bit surprised by the affirmation the stock could not withstand the recoil of a grenade. Because these modernization efforts are lost on me, I would still select a traditional AKM or AK 74, but it seems to me you should at least try a TR-3 before beating that dead horse.

[@Yevgeny_N]

@@casperarms The butt of the AK-12 withstands the shot of an under-barrel grenade launcher, if you do not rest it on the ground. It's a rifle, not a mortar.

[@casperarms]

@@Yevgeny_N There is a way of firing a GP-25 with an emphasis on the shoulder or on the ground. The fact that he couldn't stand it is not a problem of the method, but of the stock itself. No one made reservations that it should not rest on the ground

[@Yevgeny_N]

@@casperarms How many modern telescopic plastic butts will be able to withstand firing from a grenade launcher with an emphasis on the ground?

[@Strelokos666]

Like if they have choice or much to choose from. AK-74 still dominant by the numbers, while seeing a platoon of AK-12 riflemen would be like seeing a unicorn. SOF need fancy things and its common, infantry is not lucky in that matter. AK105, AK200 with custom modifications are likely to be operated by SOF. It's not like they can't modify the 74, but its easier with all the factory railings.

[@nhatpham2206]

funny thing is their many elite scouts still using this

[@trygveblacktiger597]

Said it before, but the AK74M could have been modernized through a upgrade package. Like something like the Polish Beryl rifle.