Gunco Forums banner

5.45x39 pistol??

7K views 74 replies 19 participants last post by  Toten Kopf 
#1 ·
I am thinking that when the AWB sunsets that a pistol in 5.45 would be sweet. Here is a pic of the barrel I am thinking of using. (the one on top, the bottom one is a krink barrel for comparison).


Now if I figure this correctly, that when the AWB ban goes away there are no weight restrictions for pistols, am I correct to assume this? Also would front handguards be a big no-no or can they be used on a pistol? Lastly I am thinking of one of these front sight combos




Would one be better than another? I figure also that if front handguards can be used - great. If not I am sure there could be found another way to help the gun to balance right (like using one hand on the magazine the other on the pistol grip). Do you all think this would be a great project or not? I'm sure others have already thought of it, but am curious.
 
See less See more
3
#52 ·
chargedmr2 said:
This is an interesting topic. Here's a few questions.


If the supply was cut off a few years ago, why has it been turned back on? Can someone fill me in on the facts here.

EDIT: I figured this part out myself. Thanks


Since when has this been the case? Most 5.45 contains a steel core?? This doesn't sound right.

How will this effect the importation of non steel core 5.45 ammunition? Is all 5.45 considered armor-piercing or only the steel core 5.45?

Thanks in advance,

chargedmr2
Charged, just want to be sure everyone is on the same page.

1. 5.56x45 SS-109 ammunition is specified as an exception, since this ammunition is not considered armor piercing although it has a steel core. Check ammo-oracle.com for more info about this particular bullet. It may exhibit armor penetrating characteristics, but it is not "built" as armor-piercing ammunition. This is relative to the standard 55-grain 5.56 bullets exhibit a "frangible" characteristic, but are not "built" as frangible/disentigrating ammo. more info on that site and elsewhere...

2. To be clear, no commercial 5.45 ammo is steel-core ammo. Most if not all is a lead ALLOY that may contain ferrous material, but not necessarily a steel core. From the very very small amount of info, I have read that this supposed "phantom" shipment of 5.45 ammunition is "military grade" and therefore may be an armor piercing bullet.

I have a Russian Military Weaponry book at home, and my read of the standard "ball" military 5.45 ammunition (designated 7N6 ammo) was that it is NOT an armor piercing bullet, but attained most of its terminal effects from the yaw inherent to the bullet's rear-heavy design, thus causing extreme tumbling behavior in soft targets (flesh). This is the standard issue round containing the open cavity in the tip of the bullet.

I remember the cover of SOF back in the 80's when the mujhadeen (sp?) in then-Soviet-occupied Afghanistan "smuggled" some of these bullets to the west. They referred to them as "poison" bullets due to the severe wounding effects. I've also seen some recent History Channel shows where "experts" corroborated the impressive performance of this round.

AFAIK, the commercial sporting ammunition you and I can buy does NOT have this cavity, and is a "standard" ball round. Can't be sure on that one...

There is no doubt that *IF* a surplus of Russian 5.45 AP ammo is in fact inbound, it will be Russian 7N22 AP ammo, if any. I am fairly certain this is the "steel core" ammo that is being talked about.

Info on this round is here and elsewhere via yahoo by searching for "7N6 and 5.45x39" etc:
http://www.world.guns.ru/ammo/am05-e.htm


3. Based on what I've seen of the 7.62 and 5.56 "ammo bans", this would apply to 5.45x39 AP ammo only... not the common sporting ammo.

hth,
- Jerry
 
#53 ·
Thanks for the info Jerry. That definately helps!

I wonder how many people have already ordered an OOW or Global receiver in 5.45 and had it registered as a pistol. As soon as this happens, which I'm sure it already has, the ATF will be aware that 5.45 pistols exist, even if they are only "just the receiver" at this point (after all, the receiver IS the firearm). I also wonder if it will take a larger company producing a 5.45 pistol to get the ATF concerned or if they will pay attention to the home builders too.

So....on one side of the scale we have a "phantom" shipment of military 5.45 ammo and on the other side we have 5.45 pistols. The question is, what side of the scale holds more weight? Does the phantom ammo outweigh the pistols or is it the other way around?
 
#54 ·
I'm afraid this is probably a lost cause - there's no doubt in my mind that there are people out there who care more about having this pistol than cheap ammo - if that ammo exists. So for now, its on the shelf for me, but if someone else builds one then I probably will too...
 
#55 ·
Thats exactly what I'm thinking. No doubt, someone has probably already built one. My question is this. If someone has bought a 5.45 blank receiver and had the dealer register it as a pistol, isn't that enough for the ATF to jump on the situation?? Or does it actually have to be built?

At least the situation isn't nearly as threatening to us as was the case with the AR pistol.
 
#56 ·
Consider this, Someone has already made a 50 cal BMG handgun, Thompson Center makes barrels in rifle calibers for there single shot hangun. This has not changed anything significantly has it?

I believe the ATF will only take action if there is a active production of AK 74 hanguns by a manufacturer.

In any case, it will be impossible to stop someone from making one of these no matter what is said here or anywhere else. Lets face it, everyone wants a one of a kind right?

I think we are in for a wild ride in the next few months , so I suggest we enjoy the view and don't sweat the small stuff.

Now I think I will go out and make a 20 mm handgun just for fun!!
 
#65 ·
chargedmr2 said:
Just a heads up as I have been following the 5.45 pistol issue. Krink pistols are being produced in 5.45 by Historic Arms and are available at the following LINK. Man, they are a rip off too, especially for screw builds.
Well you knew it had to happen. Really sucks. Let's hope that these dumasses figure out what's right. AND let's hope the feds don't use this as their excuse to put that caliber on the list.

You know, look at that pic really closely. That's a Krinkov kit, one of the K-var unfinished kits. Know anything about AK assembly? Apparently they don't... don't even have the 2nd set of upper rivets installed! This is the second time I've seen a Krink built that way. Really poor work... these guys need to read up on how to build a rifle.

And a SCREW BUILD to top it off. Man these guys are amateurs.

They can't be serious - I know that they didn't build that FAL 9mm conversion. Masterpiece Arms makes that - the MPA-971. Get it? RPBArms markets the MPA-971 BTW. Nice of them to take credit for it, however!!!

STOOPID - with "2 o's"
 
#66 ·
And if you look closely at that POS the hinge block was left unfinished. Yeah...I noticed that the third trunnion screw was missing too--they would have had to drill that hole themselves and that would be far too much work for a $1300 pistol! But I can't figure out what that little circle mark is where the third screw should be? Did they drill a hole there or is it a spot weld? WTF? I suppose if they finished the krink propperly it would be going for about $3500!!
 
#68 ·
chargedmr2 said:
And if you look closely at that POS the hinge block was left unfinished. Yeah...I noticed that the third trunnion screw was missing too--they would have had to drill that hole themselves and that would be far too much work for a $1300 pistol! But I can't figure out what that little circle mark is where the third screw should be? Did they drill a hole there or is it a spot weld? WTF? I suppose if they finished the krink propperly it would be going for about $3500!!
that looks like a Vulcan receiver and the hole is already in the receiver just not in the trunion.
 
#70 ·
And what's wrong with screws? Seems to be a lot more work and precision involved in "threading" than in just "smashing" a rivet. I can adjust the torque easily, and check it again, tighten if needed. What are you gonna do? Hammer your rivets? And with screws, if needed, I can disassemble in minutes. Can you? My point being....don't put down preferences & methods just because of one individual (or company) or if perhaps you don't understand it. I have refrained from complaining or arguing or even suggesting on this site, because I think it"s the best one out there. WITHOUT VULGARITY or CRITISISM (and this does not mean exposing bogus companies). I have (this summer) put together 10 screw builds (9 with barrels in trunnions) and am quite pleased. I also purchased 2 Russian underfolders from Sportsmans Guide (to somes dismay) and made my own receiver utilizing what was left (REAR SECTION & FRONT SECTION of MACHINED RECEIVER). Some of may be rookies to this site & or to "AK BUILDS", but this ain't our first rodeo! I thank those of you who gave freely of advise & suggestions. Let's keep it that way!!!!
 
#71 ·
Hooch said:
And what's wrong with screws? Seems to be a lot more work and precision involved in "threading" than in just "smashing" a rivet. I can adjust the torque easily, and check it again, tighten if needed. What are you gonna do? Hammer your rivets? And with screws, if needed, I can disassemble in minutes. Can you? My point being....don't put down preferences & methods just because of one individual (or company) or if perhaps you don't understand it. I have refrained from complaining or arguing or even suggesting on this site, because I think it"s the best one out there. WITHOUT VULGARITY or CRITISISM (and this does not mean exposing bogus companies). I have (this summer) put together 10 screw builds (9 with barrels in trunnions) and am quite pleased. I also purchased 2 Russian underfolders from Sportsmans Guide (to somes dismay) and made my own receiver utilizing what was left (REAR SECTION & FRONT SECTION of MACHINED RECEIVER). Some of may be rookies to this site & or to "AK BUILDS", but this ain't our first rodeo! I thank those of you who gave freely of advise & suggestions. Let's keep it that way!!!!

I don't think that anyone is critisizing a screw build, just that for that price it should be as close to looking like the real thing as possible (even if it is a pistol). I have seen screw builds that looks more realistic than the one pictured and I know that they didn't spend that kind of money to do it.

Maybe for that price it should have cyrillics for the controls.
 
#73 ·
Hooch,

The comments on screw builds were not intended to be an insult to members who produce screw builds. They are **very functional** and require less specialty tools as well. The point is that these guys are probably building Krink pistols in the easiest possible way and they don't even have, or are not taking the time to use the tools that many of us amateurs have--rivet jigs being the prime example. Also, as mentioned above, for that price one would expect a Krink pistol that looks as authentic as possible.
 
#74 ·
I disagree with "less speciality tools". Have you ever built with screws? Ever tried to remove the rivet head from between the barrel & trunnion while the barrel is still pressed in? Most have "DRILLED" out, but for those heads that only spin under the drill bit, it can be quite challenging. And for those super hard taps that break off flush or even inside the hole?? Anyway, to each his own.
 
#75 ·
Hooch said:
I disagree with "less speciality tools". Have you ever built with screws? Ever tried to remove the rivet head from between the barrel & trunnion while the barrel is still pressed in? Most have "DRILLED" out, but for those heads that only spin under the drill bit, it can be quite challenging. And for those super hard taps that break off flush or even inside the hole?? Anyway, to each his own.
I think that most us here started building AK's doing the screw method. But when the proper tools became available we started using rivets. Nothing againist screw builds, just another way to build an AK. But then if I were going to buy an AK, I would expect rivets, not screws. That is the point I think were trying to make.

I can post pictures of my work in removing the rivets from the front and rear trunnions, removing the little piece of rivet left from drilling (a real bugger) in the front trunnion. As far as taping the hole, never did break or damage the tap. As you can see in the picture I was using tape to show the depth I should drill. Now I use a special depth gauge that's connected to my drill press to show me how deep to go. Like the AK builds, same results just a different way to do it.
 

Attachments

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top