The Arsenal

ARSENAL

THE

The Enthusiast’s Guide to the Market’s Newest Products.

MULTITASKER TOOL VS. THE MUT

|

A LOOK AT THE ALL IN ONE AR-15 TOOL

NEMO ARMS

|

THE OMEN: THE FIRST .300 WIN MAG AR

SCOPE SIGHTING

|

STEP BY STEP INSTRUCTION ON PARRALAX AND WINDAGE SETUP

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

|

6 AR GRIPS COMPARED

ISSUE

1

|

THE ARSENA

|

JANURARY

2014

ISSUE

1

|

JANUARY

2014

MULTITASKER TOOL VS. THE MUT

|

A LOOK AT THE ALL IN ONE AR-15 TOOL

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

|

6 AR GRIPS COMPARED

TA

M

Enthusiast’s Product Guide

NEMO ARMS

|

SCOPE SIGHTING |

THE LONG ROAD TO THE AK-47

2

The Arsenal

|

THE OMEN THE FIRST .300 WIN. MAG. AR

STEP BY STEP INSTRUCTION ON PARRALAX AND WINDAGE SETUP

THE HISTORY OF THE AK-47 IT’S RISE TO POPULARITY AS THE WORLD’S MOST COMMON SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE

Letter from the Editor

The Arsenal is the arms enthusiast’s guide to the market’s newest products.

Ex-Military, current members and civilians alike, this magazine is aimed towards those who are looking to stay current on the new weaponry, optics, grips and tactics.

Articles beyond this page highlight the some of the most technologically advanced equipment of the field, yet. With advancements in intelligence and weaponry arriving to the market everyday, we do our best to bring you the reader, the most comprehensive articles that no one else covers. These articles can be somewhat extensive, but for detail purposes. The Arsenal has a combined team of writers who’s past lives consist of working in the fields of fashion magazines, editorials, sports and hobby magazines, newspapers and yes, even some retired military writers who really enjoy getting to cover articles that involve product testing. Here at The Arsenal, we take covering news very seriously and believe that being informed is of the utmost importance. Staying informed about the threat of tyranny, like big government and gun control and Martial Law. Keeping you the reader informed on products and your government allows you the freedom to exercise your second amendment right before slimy career politicians who believe that they are the only ones that should receive security and great health care strip it from you. But I digress, the sole point of this magazine and its content is to keep the populace informed of the latest and greatest tactical tools of the day, and up to date on the news. You may want to read the articles all at once or come back to the coach later and completely submerge yourself into some of the info graphics. However you choose to enjoy our magazine is up to you, thank you for reading The Arsenal.

Table of Contents

3

Tool fight! Leatherman MUT vs. Multitasker Series 2 By: Rob Curtis

// 07/28/2013

It

seems hard to fathom, but with all the multitools in the hands of service members, no one designed one specifically for the rifleman. Gerber, SOG, Leatherman… each sailed along passing right by this huge gap in the market.

Upstart company Multitasker Tools presaged the category and brought the original gun multitool to market in 2009.

The AR Multiasker was a hit in the black gun community. It gained a cult following and, predictably, attracted the attention of the multitool establishment.

Predictably, the category has begun to grow with the release of the Leatherman’s MUT. In stores this month, the tool has features like a bolt override tool, bronze carbon scraper, and a pin punch. These features put it in the arena with Multitasker’s gun tool lineup which includes their full size AR Multitasker, the smaller Ultralight and their previously

4

The Arsenal

reviewed YouTube.

Both being tools based around the gun toting end user, it’s easy to mistake the tools for competitors. But, looking closely at each brings an obvious distinction. The AR Multitasker Series 2 is a great tool for the “gun guy” while the MUT strikes the perfect balance between field and weapon maintenance tool for battlefield service.

“The AR Multitasker Series 2 is a great tool for the “gun guy” while the MUT strikes the perfect balance between field and weapon maintenance tool for battlefield service.”

As Leatherman was working on it’s MUT, Multitasker Tools was perfecting the design of it’s updated AR Multitasker, the Series 2.

GearScout has had a chance to use and pass around prototypes of both brand new tools

for the past few months. Both tools were abused by 0311 and 11 bravos in Afghanistan.

Combining downrange insight with our own use and observation, we bring you the tale of two tools; The AR Multitasker Series 2 vs. the Leatherman M.U.T..

JAWS: The heart of the tools are the jaws. When it all goes wrong, for better or worse, you’re going to end up yarding on something with the pliers ‘till your stuff works or it deadlines.

The MTs2’ jaws have a couple of unique features. First, they’re made from billet cut and Tufftride treated D2 tool steel making them the toughest of any multitool on the market. I’ll cover Tufftride a little later.

Second, the main pivot is a roller bearing which makes for smoother operation than the press-fit union found in it’s competitors’.

It makes the jaw travel silky smooth, but it’s a technical achievement not a major

differentiator. You’ll notice there’s no jaw cutout for grabbing bolt heads on the MTs2.

This was a calculated decision to retain uncompromised jaw strength. The only other inclusion is offset wire cutters like you’d find on a set of hardware store needlenose pliers.

Thanks to the D2 steel, these cut through nails, barbed wire and c-wire. In contrast to Multitasker’s straightforward approach, the MUT’s jaws waste no space to make sure you don’t have to reach for another tool during a job. They are made from 420 stainless, feature bolt-rounding profile cutout, are a little narrower and open a bit wider than those on the MTs2. They have field replaceable 154CM wire cutting blades with a wire stripper cutout. The sides of the jaws are threaded to accept a cleaning rod when open or closed.

Below the jaws are a small crimper.

MATERIAL:

a month of use in Afghanistan. Leatherman was forthcoming in explaining that they had to work through a mysterious corrosion issue with the MUT’s steel jaw blanks. It’s the main reason the MUT ended up a few weeks late to market.

Tools:

“The MTs2’s body tool set is focused on weapon specific tasks.”

Everywhere you look on the MUT there’s a tool. Practically every edge and surface on the tool is able to perform a task right down to the bottle opening carabiner clip. The selection of tools is wide enough to get a gun going, fix the A/C on an MRAP, build a fighting position or cut the clothes off a wounded patient. The MTs2’s body tool set is focused on weapon specific tasks.

The MTs2’s jaws are billet cut D2 tool steel. Without going into a huge steel primer, just know that D2 is the stuff anvils are made from. It’s one of the toughest steels out there. It’s not stainless, so it is susceptible to corrosion. But, it’s not going to bend or break under the most blatant forms of tool abuse. To prevent corrosion, MT is using a chemical process called Tufftride that looks like a standard black oxide treatment but is much stronger. I thought Tufftride might have been BS. But I was convinced when I put the jaws of the MTs2 in the jaws of the MUT and squeezed, twisted and scraped them for a good 5 minutes in a failed attempt to scratch the surface coating. Further, Multitasker cut the jaws from a solid block of steel. This adds to the durability by ensuring there are no voids (bubbles) in the steel that can sometimes be found in cast pieces.

In fact, the MTs2 is made almost entirely of CNC machined or wire EDM parts. There are only 4 stamped parts on the tool (the springs). Cutting their own parts with CNC allows MT the production flexibility to make weapon specific versions of the tool with implements cut to work on more esoteric weapon platforms. While the jaws are D2, the 2.5” tanto knife blade is Tufftride treated 440c stainless and the tools are black oxide coated 420 stainless. The MUT jaws are made from 420 stainless, which is plenty tough and should resist corrosion well. But, our prototype developed a lot of surface rust over

A castle nut wrench for gas tube work, onboard 3/8” wrench for LaRue mounts, Otis compatible threaded post for the included

dental pick and a sight adjustment tool are all unique to the Multitasker s2. There is a small tanto-tipped knife and a file for more general use. The MUTs toolset is a little more utilitarian, but still AR focused. There’s a removable pin punch (threaded for use with Otis cleaning tips), bronze carbon scraper, locking 3” half serrated knife, locking saw, 6 onboard driver tips, a hammer, shroud cutter and bolt override tool for remedial action.

The MUT’s wrench is useful for adjusting optic mounts, but know that the Marines I lent the MUT to lost the wrench in a week. Onboard tool storage is a critical element. Like the castle wrench on the MTs2, the bolt override tool is a marque tool on the MUT. Even if you use it once, real world, having a tool that can reach into the chamber of an M4/M16 and yank the bolt back with enough force to clear a bolt override will at least make you hero, and could save your life. Same goes for the bottle opener. The shape of the shroud cutter is updated on the production tool. The photo shows the older version. The update is less “U” and more “V”. If you can’t break it off with the pliers, Leatherman included a HAMMER end on the MUT. It’s not big enough

Tool fight! Leatherman MUT vs. Multitasker Series 2 5

for construction, but for destruction? Sure.

All the MUTs tools but the wrench are stored onboard in an easily accessible, secure and imaginative way. The driver bits all stow in slots. There are driver 6 heads –you’re stuck with using only Leatherman’s driver bits because of their non-standard, rectangular shape. No quick trips to the hardware store for replacement 1/4” hex driver bits. On the plus side, the included bits will cover 80% of the uses you’ll encounter. They have a long shank 7/64” hex and T15 Torx for scope rings, Phillips 1 & 2, and 3/16” and 1/4” flat head. If you can’t stand not having the right bit for the job, Leatherman sells a $15 accessory kit that will add every bit you’d ever need. And, it fits

6

The Arsenal

right into the MUTs sheath. The inclusion of a magnetic 1/4” hex driver on the MTs2 and 10 bits that swap places with the sight post tool adds to the value of the tool right out of the box. Included are 2 slot-head, 1 Phillips, and 5 hex-head bit tips, plus T10 and T15 Torx bits.

It’s a drag that they can’t be stored on the tool itself, though. It’s only a matter of time before you can’t find the one bit you really need.

Both tools have unique and effective carbon scrapers. The MTs2 scraper is the perfect blend of roundness and sharp edges to get into just about every crevice of an AR. The MUT’s bronze scraper is softer than your gun parts by design. It won’t mar or gouge your internals. Its a different shape than the MTs2,

but it’s just as useful. The bronze will wear, but replacement is a trivial, one-screw operation.

Conclusion:

The MUT prototype was used for 6 weeks by a group of Marines, Soldiers and Corpsmen in Afghanistan. It was used to maintain M4s, M16s, M2s, M240s and M249s.

Everyone loved the shape of the bronze carbon scraper. The punch came in handy as did the shroud cutter. One of the first guys to use the tool was a Chief corpsman that used the shroud cutter to expose a wounded Marines’s leg after an IED strike.

Soldiers commented that the tool had the tools they most used on their Gerbers while adding useful weapon maintenance tools.

Another plus is the ability to replace worn cutter blades and the bronze scraper on the spot.

The made in America MUT- Military Utility Tool – is just that, a military tool. Sure, it’s a gun tool, too. But, it’s got some serious field utility built in. It’s highly polished and useful tool that can adapt to nearly any task with the proper accessory bits. You should see the MUT in AAFES for $120-130.

On the flipside, the Multitasker Series 2 is an awesome range and armory companion. Multitasker stands its ground as the go-to tool for the gun guy. It gives up no ground to implements that can’t be used to service a rifle. It’s a unique tool that’ll probably outlast all of your guns thanks to it’s burly construction. It’s not a cool looking tool, but it’s offshore manufacture translates into a good value. You should be able to find it for $90. A soldier that used the tool commented that it felt and performed like a champ even though it he thought it looked like a $5 hadjishop multitool.

“SWAT officers that borrowed the MTs2 commented on its usefulness in the team room after training.”

SWAT officers that borrowed the MTs2 commented on its usefulness in the team room after training. They told us the MTs2 saved time because they didn’t have to fish tools out of their bag or borrow them from teammates. They could tear down and clean their carbines with just one tool which was great so long as their teammates would stop asking to borrowing it.

Tool fight! Leatherman MUT vs. Multitasker Series 2 7

6 months after vowing to leave, Magpul still in Erie Company insists plans to move its operations out of state are still moving forward

By John Aguilar

“We have to work through the move with our employees before we make any announcements,” he said. “It’s a big move, and there’s a lot going on.”

It was a high-profile announcement that generated a flurry of headlines across the state and the nation.

State Rep. Lori Saine, R-Dacono, read from the floor of the Colorado House of Representatives a message from the CEO of Magpul Industries,“The Erie-based weapons accessory maker, that his company would leave Colorado if the Legislature passed a measure banning the sale of magazines containing more than 15 rounds.”

“The Erie-based weapons accessory maker, that his company would leave Colorado if the Legislature passed a measure banning the sale of magazines containing more than 15 rounds.”

Saine gave that speech in February, the Legislature passed the magazine-limits bill in March, and Magpul announced in April that it had started making certain weapons accessories out of state.

But on Thursday, Oct. 17 -- a full six months after the company made its much-ballyhooed

8

The Arsenal

break from the Centennial State -- the parking lot at Magpul’s headquarters in Erie was filled with cars, and a receptionist greeted visitors in the front lobby.

The company’s seeming inability to once and for all pull up stakes and exit Colorado has gone from a point of curiosity among gun enthusiasts, who loudly backed the company’s decision half a year ago to move, to a source of annoyance that threatens to hurt Magpul’s reputation and business.

On the company’s Facebook page, some comments in the last few weeks have turned ugly as customers begin to question whether Magpul truly walks the walk when it comes to defending the 2nd Amendment or simply issues “empty threat(s).”

“Hmmm. I hope I am wrong, but I’m starting to feel dumb for buying a bunch of your stuff to support your company during your move and beyond,” Michael Franklin, of Arizona, wrote last week. “What happened to the principles you were passionate about?”

Steve Allen, of North Carolina, also expressed his impatience with Magpul’s lack of progress in leaving Colorado.

“Still waiting for the move. I’m a business owner -- I know how difficult a move is,” he wrote. “You drew a line and the Colorado legislature crossed it. I sure hope your line means more than Obama’s line in Syria.”Magpul says move is still on Magpul said Thursday it still has every intention to fully relocate its operations from Colorado, but moving a company of 250 employees to multiple new locations in multiple states can’t be done on the fly.

Duane Liptak, director of product management and marketing for Magpul, said the company has moved some of its capacities out of Colorado over

the last few months but hasn’t yet been able to finalize a relocation plan for its entire operation.

Not only are the logistics of moving a challenge, Liptak said, but employees and their families have to be taken into consideration when it comes to locating a new base of operations.

“We have to work through the move with our employees before we make any announcements,” he said. “It’s a big move, and there’s a lot going on.”

Liptak said Magpul should be able to shed more light on the location of its new home by the end of the year, or at the latest by the time the Shot Show

6 months after vowing to leave, Magpul still in Erie

9

is held in Las Vegas, starting Jan. 14.

“Rest assured, the move is going to take place, but we have to work through it on our own time,” he said.

Saine, who represents the district where Magpul is located, said she would be more than happy to see the company remain in Erie given the fact that it employs hundreds and pumps millions of dollars into the local economy. But Saine, who opposed the series of gun-control laws passed by her colleagues in March, she said she understands that the company had to make a stand. “I’m sure they felt that

10

The Arsenal

was the only option, based on their principles,” she said.

“I’m sure they felt that was the only option, based on their principles” Saine has no doubts that Magpul will eventually vacate its complex in Erie but that moving a company of that size takes time. “Too late for

some?”

For a couple of loyal customers reached by the Camera on Thursday, just the lack of communication

from Magpul about the move despite multiple customer inquiries has been enough to create doubts in their minds about the company’s true intentions.

“Too late for some?”

“In the beginning they would post comments and have rallies in support of the 2nd Amendment,” said Steven Power, of Texas. “As time has gone on you have heard less and less from them on the move. With the lines of communication dead, it looks like a marketing ploy.”

In fact, Magpul may have raised false hopes earlier this year when it announced on Facebook in April that it was ready to reveal information about its future plans but then put off that announcement in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, stating that the tragedy makes this “a poor time for that.”

Since then, Magpul has been circumspect about sharing anything with its customers and fans about its next move. “That has only led shooting enthusiasts like Ronny Johnson, of Texas, to lose any hope that Magpul intends to stick to its principles. He now calls himself a former

customer.”

“No need for the secrecy. If it’s true, you are still hiding it six months later?” he said on Thursday.

“They have nothing to hide at this point; they accomplished their goals with the (Colorado) Legislature. I do think they will see a loss of business. They have lost mine.”

Power said he is still hoping for the best, but bracing for the worst.

“That has only led shooting enthusiasts like Ronny Johnson, of Texas, to lose any hope that Magpul intends to stick to its principles. He now calls himself a former customer.”

“If this all turns out to be nothing but a way to sell guns and gun accessories, then I hope they go out of business,” he said.

6 months after vowing to leave, Magpul still in Erie

11

300 Win. Mag. Review by | Tom Beckstrand

Few shooters will argue that the most relevant contemporary small arm is the AR-pattern rifle. It is a wildly popular rifle that, up until recently, was readily available in everything from .22 Long Rifle to 7.62 NATO. The AR can attribute its success to its simple modular design, easy maintenance and comfortable ergonomics. The military is so enamored with it that they field numerous versions chambered in both 5.56mm and 7.62mm.

The 7.62x51mm rifles that our military uses are sniper rifles employed across both the conventional and special operations branches. The current-issued M110 weighs 10.44 pounds—that’s empty, without optics or any ancillary equipment. It has a 20-round detachable box magazine that feeds 175-grain Sierra MatchKing bullets into the chamber. They leave the muzzle at around 2,575 feet per second and, depending on which branch of service you talk to, are effective out to 800 meters (according to the U.S. Army Special Forces) or 1,000 yards (according to the Marine Corps). If we desire more ballistic horsepower than the 7.62x51mm cartridge offers, we’re forced to abandon the semi-auto AR and grab a bolt gun. I love bolt-action rifles and appreciate the many comforts they offer, but they will always be slower-shooting rifles when compared with semi-autos. Slow is a problem for a sniper or for anyone who wants to cut down his reengagement times shot-to-shot. So if you wanted the performance of a .300 Win. Mag., you had to shoot a boltaction rifle and just realize that time wasn’t going to be on your side. That is, until NEMO’s Omen showed up.

Collapsing carriers chambering the AR in .300 Winchester Magnum

12

The Arsenal

brings a whole new capability to long-range shooters. It allows long-distance shooters to deliver multiple shots without having to break our position to cycle a bolt. An entire generation of riflemen has grown up with the AR and is intimately familiar with its handling characteristics. Magazine changes are quick and easy. The modularity of the design lets the user tailor the rifle to exactly what he wants and draw from several options that already exist on the commercial market. For military and LE snipers, no rifle is more night vision friendly than an AR. Last, but not least, we get the superb external and terminal ballistics of the .300 Win. Mag., a cartridge much superior to the 7.62 NATO for long-range work.

A friend of mine in the gun business once told me that building an AR chambered in 5.56mm is fall-off-a-log easy. Building one in 7.62mm was infinitely more complicated and much more difficult to actually accomplish. When I spoke with Clint Walker, NEMO’s vice president, he agreed with that statement. When I asked him if building an AR in .300 Win. Mag. was an order of magnitude more difficult than a 7.62mm, he quickly agreed. Direct-impingement rifles have a very simple operating system. Gas from burning powder gets channeled through a port in the barrel, down a gas tube and into the upper receiver, where it pushes the bolt carrier group away from the chamber, extracting the recently fired case. As the bolt carrier group comes forward, it strips a round out of the magazine and pushes it into the chamber. This isn’t a complicated operation.

The trouble starts when we increase the size and power of the

“Upon receiving the Omen, I immediately fieldstripped it to examine each component thoroughly. I noticed...”

cartridge. More powerful cartridges require beefier bolts to handle the abuse the cartridge dishes out and heavier bolt carriers to manage the velocity at which the bolt carrier group travels rearward. If the bolt carrier group moves too fast, extractors cannot hold on to the case when they try to pull it from the chamber. The larger cases have more surface area and require more force to pull them out. Try to do it too quickly, and the extractor will pull right through the case rim, leaving the case stuck in the chamber.

Upon receiving the Omen, I immediately fieldstripped it to examine each component thoroughly. I noticed that the bolt carrier had a spring-

loaded extension that rode in the rear of the carrier. Clint explained to me that the bolt carrier extension was a crucial part of NEMO’s recoil-reduction system. The extension allows NEMO to use a standard 7.62 lower receiver extension (buffer tube) for its .300 Win. Mag. rifle, becoming one less wheel NEMO had to reinvent.

Upon firing a cartridge, the bolt carrier group travels down the receiver extension until it makes contact with the end of the tube. The carrier extension then collapses into the bolt carrier until all rearward movement stops and the carrier group begins its journey back toward the chamber. Not only does the Omen have the AR’s standard buffer and buffer spring to help retard bolt carrier velocity at the beginning of the bolt’s cycle, it has the carrier extension further dampening recoil at the end of the bolt’s cycle. The system allows NEMO to use a largeenough bolt carrier to handle the .300 Win. Mag. pressures and still use a standard, readily available 7.62x51mm lower receiver extension. It’s a simple solution to what could have been a complicated problem.

So NEMO cracked the code on the bolt carrier and lower receiver extension problem, only to be confronted with a new problem. The increased size and mass of the bolt and bolt carrier meant they needed more gas to make it move. As it stands right now, the Omen has a gas system that is approximately 14 inches long. The low-profile gas block sits just inside the forend, where it is well protected.

NEMO set the length of the rifle’s forend by mounting the longest scopes issued to our military on the Omen, then figuring out how much rail space they needed in front of these scopes to mount the most The Omen

13

popular night vision and thermal devices. This way they had all the rail space they needed without carrying anything extra. This is an excellent approach when trying to minimize the weight of the rifle (as every manufacturer should).

It looks to me like Nemo then took the forend length they adopted and put the longest gas system they could stuff under it. Also smart methodology. The longer the gas system, the lower the gas pressure at the port. Lower port pressures mean lower bolt velocity. This makes extraction easier and also prevents premature wear on bolt lugs, extractors and magazine feed lips.

The dilemma presented by the .300 Win. Mag. is that even with a 14-

rim but couldn’t. Once again, light bullets loaded to max velocity are the most problematic loads for an AR chambered in .300 Win. Mag. Hornady also has soft brass, so a few of the cases popped the primers out while firing. While the Omen was 100 percent reliable, it was hard on Hornady’s soft brass.

Being the first to produce an AR in .300 Win. Mag. meant that NEMO had to build their own upper and lower receivers, bolts, bolt carriers and barrel extensions. I weighed the Omen bolt and bolt carrier to compare them with their counterparts from an AR-15. I’ve included a table that compares their weights. There is a noticeable difference in both size and weight between the Omen components and the traditional AR-15, as you would expect when comparing a .300 Win. “I was shooting Hornady’s 150-grain Mag. with a 5.56. A component of any AR-pattern rifle that bears GMX Superformance loads If the Omen was special scrutiny is the bolt. The bolt has eight small lugs that pass into going to have a malfunction, the combination of and out of the barrel extension with each firing. The lugs on either side light bullets loaded to maximum velocity should of the extractor are only attached to the bolt on one side, and, when AR bolts fail, one of these two lugs is usually the culprit. have caused it. “ Back in 1957, Eugene Stoner chose a blend of steel known as Carpenter inch gas system, the port pressure is still high. Likewise, the heavy bolt 158 as “the standard” material from which AR bolts would be made. carrier group requires a lot of gas to get it moving, so the port has to be Only Carpenter Steel, based in Pennsylvania, makes the steel. It is big to allow enough gas to cycle the gun reliably. excellent steel, but there is nothing magical about its properties. Once A large gas port and high port pressure mean that the Omen Eugene Stoner chose Carpenter 158 as Mil-Spec, some decided that it extracts aggressively. The Omen comes with a gas port optimized was as if God himself declared it superior to any other material. This is for 150- to 190-grain bullets. I was shooting Hornady’s 150-grain GMX not the case.

Superformance loads If the Omen was going to have a malfunction, the Carpenter 158 comes from a family of tool steels. Also in this family combination of light bullets loaded to maximum velocity should have are 8620 and 9310. Because Carpenter 158 is only available from one source, the manufacturer will only sell it in very large quantities, making caused it.

On the contrary, the Omen ate every round I fired with no malfunctions. it difficult for smaller AR manufacturers to acquire. Most smaller manufacturers will buy the cheaper 8620, which really isn’t as good as I did notice that some of the fired cases showed ejector marks, and 158. However, I think the more expensive 9310 is a better bolt material I could see where the extractor was trying to pull through the case than Carpenter 158. It has a higher nickel content and is less brittle Size Comparison of Bolt & Bolt Carriers

.300 Win. Mag.

5.56 NATO

(.300 Win. Mag. & 5.56 NATO)

14

The Arsenal

Bolt

2.6 ounces

1.5 ounces

Bolt Carrier

15.2 ounces

9.5 ounces

than 158. For a part that has eight small lugs that slam into the barrel extension and rotate into and out of battery every time we fire the rifle, less brittle seems like a wonderful idea.

NEMO, in their quest to bring a premium product to the market, chose to make their bolts out of 9310. They also thought it prudent to coat both the bolt and bolt carrier in nickel boron. This is an excellent choice and not a cheap one. Not only is NEMO willing to be the first to manufacture an AR in .300 Win. Mag., they choose to use only the best materials and coatings while doing so.

Experiencing the Omen My time on the range with the rifle was considerably more pleasant than I imagined. When I received the rifle, I took it out of the case and noticed that it had a flash hider and not a muzzlebrake. I thought it a mistake not to put a muzzlebrake on a 10½-pound semi-auto .300 Win. Mag. and figured I would be paying for NEMO’s choice in the very near future.

I quickly learned that the rifle is incredibly soft-shooting, caliber notwithstanding. The stock that came on the rifle wasn’t the most comfortable (it’s easily changed out for whatever the shooter prefers), and the rifle was still pleasant for the duration of the range session.

The Omen’s accuracy was also better than I initially imagined. I saw the lightly contoured fluted barrel and thought it would have a tough time maintaining tight groups as the session wore on. The .300 Win. Mag. generates a lot of heat that murders skinny barrels. Shooting Hornady’s

Nemo Arms Omen watchman .300 win. Mag.

150-grain GMX loads, my best five-shot group at 100 yards measured .88 inch center-to-center. The largest group was 1.4 inches, and the average was 1.2.

My range session was a bit unfair for the Omen, in that I didn’t stop for long to let the barrel cool even when it got really hot. However, I helped out the rifle by loading six rounds in the magazine for each group and fired the first shot into the backstop. That’s a little trick I learned from David Tubb. The first round chambers differently because it’s frequently loaded by releasing a bolt that’s been locked to the rear. When we fire, the rifle cycles and loads at a different bolt speed. The difference causes that first round to chamber slightly differently than the rest. Any difference, no matter how small, affects accuracy.

Overall, I’m excited to see what NEMO can accomplish with their Omen. I think it’s an excellent rifle made from quality materials. I don’t love the FAB Defense stock that came on the rifle, but it’s easily replaced. I’m also suspicious of the magazines NEMO has to manufacture. I’m not convinced they’ll handle abuse well. If you buy the Omen, get some spare mags.

The Omen is a great choice for anyone interested in long-range shooting. With the superior ballistics of the .300 Win. Mag. matched with the ergonomics of the AR, it makes for a rifle that’s fun to shoot for hours at a time. For hunters and tactical shooters alike, the Omen is an exciting development and one that I’ll watch closely.

SPECIFICATIONS:

» 7075 Billet Aluminum Machined Receiver with Custom Tiger Stripe Hard Anodize Finish » 16” NEMO 416 Stainless Steel 5.56 NATO Caliber Barrel with Black Nitride Finish » Geissele SSA-E 2-stage Trigger » Free Float Customizable Handguard With Removable Rail System In Black » Low Profile Gas Block » Troy Micro Sights » Nickel Boron Bolt Carrier Assembly » Charging Handle with Tactical Latch » NEMO Flash Hider » NEMO Adjustable Buttstock Assembly With Battery Storage In Black » Hogue Overmolded Pistol Grip, Black » 1 Magazine » Owners Manual » Foam Lined Case » Length: 34” Collapsed » Weight: 7 pounds

Nemo Arms SPECIFICATIONS: » 7075 Billet Aluminum Machined Receivers with Custom Tiger Stripe Hard Anodize Finish » 22” .300 Win Mag Fluted 416 Stainless Steel Barrel with Nitride Finish with 1:8 Twist » Nickel Boron Barrel Extension and Feed Ramp » Nickel Boron Bolt Carrier Group with Recoil Reduction System » Billet Machined High-strength Steel Side Charge Handle » Nickel Boron Bolt Release » Geissele SSA-E 2-stage Trigger » MAKO Adjustable SSR-25 Sniper Stock, Black » Hogue Overmolded Pistol Grip, Black » NEMO Integrated Free Floated Customizable Handguard with Hard Black Anodiz Finish » 2 Detachable Handguard Accessory Rails with Built-in QD mounts » NEMO Adjustable Gas Block » NEMO A-10 Muzzle Brake with Nitride Finish » 2 NEMO 14 Round Polymer Magazines » Custom Drag Bag » Length: 45.5” » Weight: 10.9 pounds

Tango 2 5.56/.223

The Omen

15

By Chuck Hawks

How to Sight-In Your Optic

After you have firmly mounted a scope on your rifle and focused it to your eye, bore sight the rifle. Use a bore collimator or do it the old fashioned way, but get it done before you fire the first shot from your rifle. See my article «How to Bore Sight A Rifle» for further details.

I am assuming a telescopic sight because this article is about sighting-in a hunting rifle and all game animals, small or large, deserve your best shot, which cannot be delivered with iron sights. In any case, the iron sights typically supplied with new factory made rifles are so crude that you would probably spend more money on ammunition attempting to sight them in than you would on an economical scope. If you are reading this article in hopes of learning how to hammer the factory rear sight to and fro in its dovetail slot to adjust for windage, you are going to be disappointed.

Once your scoped rifle has been bore sighted for 100 yards it is time to go to the rifle range, which should offer at least 25 yard and 100 yard (or 100 meter) firing positions. If your local range doesn’t, find one that does or head for the hills with your portable shooting bench and measure the required ranges as accurately as possible.

16

The Arsenal

Start at the 25 yard position. Put up a large paper target. I usually use an NRA 100 yard small bore rifle target, which has a large black bulls-eye. Get really comfortable on the shooting bench, so that none of your muscles are cramped or in tension. Bring a pillow or a folded-up blanket to sit on (as required) to get your head and shoulders at a comfortable height at the bench rest.

When you are seated and comfortable, position one or more sandbags on the table so that you can comfortably rest the forearm of your rifle (or the hand holding the forearm of your rifle) on them. If you don’t have real sandbags, an 8-10 pound bag (or two) of kitty litter works well. (I duct tape the ends of “Jonny Cat” brand bags of kitty litter and they last for many trips to the range.) I cover the Jonny Cat bag(s) with an old blanket for comfort, and to protect them.

A commercial rifle rest (I have heard that Outers makes a good one) is probably better than sandbags, but sandbags (or kitty litter) are cheaper. Never rest any part of a rifle, and particularly the barrel, on a hard surface.

On recoil the rifle will jump away from a hard surface, giving you a false point of impact.

Because I will be holding the forearm of my rifle in my hand in the field, I do the same at the range. I rest my hand over the

sandbag and grip the forearm of my rifle in my hand, just as I would in the field. Try to hold the rifle as firmly as you would in the field.

Changing the way you hold a rifle will change its point of impact, so I try to hold my rifle at the range as much as possible as I will be holding it in the field.

Remember that you are sightingin a hunting rifle. You could probably get somewhat smaller groups by minimizing all human contact with the rifle, especially by letting the sandbags or rifle rest entirely support the forearm. Small groups are desirable, but in this case getting the point of impact correct is even more important. You can always shoot for the smallest possible group size later.

Anyway, by now you should be in a steady position at the shooting bench with the rifle pointed at the 25 yard target. If you are using a variable power scope, set it to the highest practical power. In other words, the highest power that delivers a sharp, clear image. This may not be the maximum power.

Many scopes look better slightly below their maximum magnification. For example, the view through a 3-9x scope may look better at 7x or 8x than it does at 9x.

Now load one round into the chamber and prepare to shoot. Put the crosshairs directly on the center of that big, black bull. Before you shoot, close your eyes for 10 seconds and then open them. Did the crosshair drift off the center of the target while your shooting eye was closed? If it did it means that your muscles are under tension trying to keep the rifle on target. Shift your position slightly until you can close your eyes and find that the rifle is still aimed directly at the point of aim when you open them. Now your muscles are properly relaxed and you are in a position to do your best shooting. Go through this little routine before you fire every shot.

Carefully fire one round.

Call the shot. If the crosshair was on the center of the target when the gun fired, you don’t need to shoot again. If it wasn’t, mark that hole as a flyer and shoot again. Get a perfect surprise break.

Okay, examine the target and find the bullet hole. You can probably see it through your rifle scope, and certainly through your spotting scope. (You did bring a spotting scope, didn’t you?) Even though you bore sighted your rifle the bullet hole is probably not going to be in the center of the target at 25 yards, but at least it should be somewhere on the paper. Measure (or at least accurately estimate) its distance from the “X” in the center of the bull. Let’s say, for example, that single perfect shot hit 3 inches high and 2 inches to the left of the center of the target.

Adjust your scope the number of clicks or increments required to move the point of impact to the center of the target. For example, let’s say the instructions that came with your scope advise that each click moves the point of impact 1/4 MOA, which is 1/4 inch at 100 yards. Fine, but since we are shooting at only 25 yards, we will need to multiply the number of clicks by 4.

To move the point of impact down the required 3” at 100 yards would require 12 clicks (four clicks per inch). At 25 yards,

remember, we will have to multiply the number of clicks by 4, so turn the elevation adjustment in the down direction 48 clicks (12 x 4 = 48). It is a good idea to go a little past the new setting and then come back whenever adjusting a scope. I’d turn, say, 50 clicks and then come back 2 clicks for a total of 48 clicks down. This helps settle the adjustments of many scopes. I also tap the adjustment dials after setting them, for the same reason.

Now adjust the windage. You need to move the point of impact 2 inches to the right, which at 100 yards would require 8

No need to waste ammunition getting it perfect. You will do that at 100 yards.

If the second shot is not within an inch of the center of the target, you will have to adjust the scope again. By the third or fourth shot and adjustment of the scope the bullet should be landing inside of the 10-ring.

If it isn’t, something may be wrong. Check the scope mount screws for tightness. They must allow absolutely no movement of the scope under recoil.

“You can use the 100 yard small bore rifle target, but I prefer the Outers “Score Keeper” target.”

clicks. At 25 yards that means 32 clicks (8 x 4 = 32). Turn the windage adjustment a total of 32 clicks to the right (usually marked “R” on most scopes).

Okay, now get back into that comfortable position and fire one more perfect shot at the 25 yard target. Ideally, if the scope’s adjustments are accurate, it should hit inside the “10-ring” of a 100 yard small bore rifle target. If it does, your preliminary 25 yard sighting is close enough.

Let’s assume that your rifle is now hitting within an inch or less of the point of aim at 25 yards. Great, now it will at least be on the paper at 100 yards. Hopefully, it has only taken 2 or 3 shots to achieve this.

The rifle’s barrel is probably not too hot, your shoulder is still in good shape, and you haven’t wasted a lot of ammunition.

Now put up a 100 yard target. You can use the 100 yard small bore rifle target, but I prefer the Outers “Score Keeper” target. It has a central bull’s-eye and 4 smaller bulls, one in each corner (which I ignore). Best of all, it is overlaid with 1 inch grid lines, making it easy to see how far your bullet holes are from the point of aim using only your spotting scope--no need to measure. This saves a lot of steps when shooting at 100 yards.

Wait until your rifle barrel has cooled to the ambient temperature (keep it out of the sun), and then get back into your comfortable bench rest shooting position. Remember to close your eyes before you shoot to check for a perfect, tension free hold. This time you will fire 3 shots, slowly and very carefully, at the exact center of the 100 yard target. Take your time and make each shot a perfect surprise break. Call your shots and check each one through your spotting scope. That way, if you call a flyer, you will know which bullet hole to disregard. Re-shoot any flyers so that you have 3 good shots on the target.

Now estimate the center point of How to Sight-In a Hunting Rifle

17

impact for the three bullet holes. If you have an accurate rifle and shot it well, they should be within about a 3 inch (or smaller) circle somewhere on the 100 yard target, so this should not be too difficult.

Now is the time to use what you learned by studying the “Expanded Rifle Trajectory Table” on the Tables, Charts and Lists Page. If you did your home work before leaving for the range you should know where you want your bullets to hit at 100 yards to take full advantage of your rifle›s maximum point blank range (MPBR).

For many typical long range rifle calibers, such as the .243 Winchester with a 95 grain bullet, 6mm Remington with a 100 grain bullet, .25-06 with 100-125 grain bullets, .270 Winchester with 130-140 grain bullets, 7mm Magnum with 140-160 grain bullets, .300 Magnum with 165-180 grain bullets, or .338 Magnum with a 200 grain bullet, the rifle should be sighted to put the point of impact approximately 2.5 inches above the point of aim at 100 yards. In other words, you should aim exactly at the center of the bulls-eye and the bullets should land about 2.5 inches directly above the center of the bulls-eye. Get it? That maximizes the point blank range of your rifle, eliminating the need to hold over any big game animal from the muzzle out to a distance of about 300 yards (or more) with the cartridges and loads mentioned above.

Check the Rifle Trajectory Table for the exact 100 yard point of impact and MPBR for your cartridge and load.

If you are sighting-in a medium range rifle like a .30-30 with 150-170 grain bullets, .300 Savage with 165-180 grain bullets, .30-06 with a 220 grain bullet, .32 Winchester Special with a 170 grain bullet, .338-57 O’Connor with 200-225 grain bullets, .35 Remington with a 200 grain bullet, .358 Winchester with a 200 grain bullet, .416 Rigby with a 400 grain bullet, .444 Marlin with 240-300 grain bullets, or .450 Marlin with a 350 grain bullet, you will want your bullets to hit about 3 inches high with a center hold at 100 yards. This will give you a MPBR of about 200-250 yards, depending on the individual caliber and load. Once again, you will aim at the center of the bull’s eye, and adjust the actual point of the bullet’s impact to be about 3 inches directly above your point of aim.

18

The Arsenal

“For serious sighting-in it is best to adjust the scope in only one direction at a time.“

Let’s say, for example, that your are sighting-in a .270 Winchester rifle using a load that drives a 130 grain bullet at a MV of 3100 fps, and your first 100 yard 3-shot group landed in a 2 inch circle centered 3.5 inches above the center of the target and 1.5 inches to the right. With that load you want the bullets to hit exactly 2.5” above the point of aim (the center of the bull’s-eye) at 100 yards, so you need to move the point of impact 1 inch down and 1.5 inches to the left.

For serious sighting-in it is best to adjust the scope in only one direction at a time. Scope adjustments frequently interact with each other (they should not, but in the real world they may); so by changing only one at a time the effect is minimized. Move the elevation adjustment 4 clicks in the “down” direction. That should be 1 inch at 100 yards for the scope in our example.

Now shoot another careful 3-shot group, making sure that the barrel has time to cool between shots. Take your time and do it right. Did the center of the group move so that it is now 2.5 inches over the point of aim?

If it did, good enough; if not, you will have to make another elevation adjustment and shoot another 3-shot group. This is where a good scope with precise adjustments really justifies its higher price.

Once the elevation is correct and the center of your group is the necessary 2.5” above the point of aim, go on to the windage adjustment. The rifle in our example is hitting 1.5 inches to the right, so we need to move the center of the group 1.5 inches, or 6 clicks, to the left. Go ahead and make the required adjustment. After the barrel has again cooled to the ambient temperature, fire three more careful shots, always holding on the exact center of the bull’s-eye. If all went well, the rifle should now be putting its bullets 2.5 inches directly over the center of the bullseye, the point of aim.

How to Sight-In a Hunting Rifle

19

THE LONG ROAD OF THE AK-47 Victor Davis Hanson

No firearm in history has enjoyed the fame or popularity of the assault rifle known as the AK-47, or Kalashnikov. Created by a Soviet weapons designer at the dawn of the Cold War, it was mass-produced and distributed worldwide in the millions, leading to its canonization in the revolutionary Third World of the 1950s and 1960s. Indeed, far beyond its utility, the AK-47 became a Cold War icon, appearing on revolutionary flags, in songs and poems, and in televised insurgencies as proof of communist fervor and supposed martial superiority. And it continues to play a major role in warfare today, most visibly in guerrilla conflicts in Africa and the Middle East.

The AK-47 has succeeded so wildly because it is almost an ideal realization of the personal firearm: where most weapons have had to contend with tradeoffs between accuracy, lethality, speed of fire, reliability, cost of production, and ease of carrying and use, the AK-47 managed to find a sweet spot maximizing these traits. In fact, the weapon is so reliable, effective, and easy to use by untrained operators that its advent made it widely possible for just about any group, even with little money, modern technology, or formal military training, to mount significant, deadly assaults against a much larger and more advanced force — a fact that has transformed the face of warfare and created a revolutionary romance that still surrounds the weapon.

Since gunpowder is not static in power in the way that human muscle is, once fiery arms were invented in the fourteenth century, they would in theory constantly improve in a way that bows, slings, and swords could not. But in reality, centuries of technological stagnation followed the invention of the first gun: for example, the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century “Brown Bess” flintlock musket remained almost unchanged during its use by the British Empire over the course of more than a century. Early muskets and their predecessors had slow rates of fire

20

The Arsenal

and poor accuracy and reliability, and thus did not always ensure battlefield superiority over arrows, edged weapons, and handlaunched missiles. Benjamin Franklin famously advocated the use of bows by the cashstrapped Continental Army, arguing that they were cheaper, easier to use, and could send more arrows per minute than the musket could fire balls.

The problem was that the various qualities of a good handheld weapon were often mutually exclusive. Increased lethality, for instance, was usually attained by increasing the weight of the firearm and bullets, which often reduced reliability and mobility, and made weapons too expensive to outfit an entire army. So the development of personal firearms was often haphazard, especially during periods of general peace. Black-powder, muzzleloading, smoothbore (unrifled) firearms were the norm for centuries. Only in the mid-nineteenth century did sophisticated metallurgy and techniques of mass production at last begin to usher in rear-loading models, cartridge ammunition, more powerful and smokeless gunpowder, rifled barrels, and interchangeable, machined parts. The result was a giant leap in the ability of soldiers to kill one another on a mass scale, as the ancient science of effective body armor was unable to keep pace. By the nineteenth century, the personal arms race was on.

The watershed years were those of the American Civil War, which created a race for more rapidly firing and lethal arms. The war that began with the use of muskets and Minié balls ended with the Henry repeating rifle, which allowed a skilled single shooter to load and fire up to twenty-eight times per minute. The war also saw the development of the Gatling machine gun, and, somewhat later, the Maxim, the first fully automatic weapon. The more advanced models of these machines could in theory spit out six hundred rounds per minute, allowing two-man teams to lay down a volume of fire greater than

what was possible from a whole company of riflemen. The new machine guns proved revolutionary, especially in the colonial wars in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, in which small numbers of Westerners could trump numerically superior foes, sending a chilling message of technological superiority. The venerable traditions of the mounted lancer, the cavalryman, and the skilled swordsman slipped into decline with the advent of the machine gun.

But the early machine guns, though rapid-fire and quite lethal, were heavy and they often jammed, leaving their operators defenseless.

And they were costly and difficult to move and maneuver. Nevertheless, during World War I, improved mobile Maxim, Vickers, and Colt-Browning machine guns reigned supreme across the trenches, overpowering the firing rates of bolt-action, clip-fed rifles. In response to the machine gun’s lethal tyranny on the battlefield, early twentieth-century tacticians began dreaming of an everyman’s mini-machine gun that would diffuse such killing power into the hands of millions of combatants.

The result was the generation of the socalled submachine gun, most prominently the German MP-18, the Italian Villar Perosa and Beretta Model 1918, and the American Thompson (or Tommy Gun). These weapons fired pistol cartridges, allowing for the employment of existing stocks; they were relatively light at around ten pounds; and they could in theory be shot at astounding rates of fire of well over 400 rounds per minute.

Whereas World War I was defined by heavy machine guns battling each other in antipodal fashion across clearly defined fields of fire, battles of World War II were frequently fought in jungles, forests, and urban streets, in which the enemy was typically near and highly mobile. Submachine guns proved popular during this war — and spawned a number of cheaper imitations — thanks to their adaptability to a situation in which

constant streams of bullets were directed at soldiers from every direction by constantly moving enemies, and enemies were more likely to be stopped by sudden, rapid fire than by precisely aimed shots from small, longerbarrel weapons.

Yet, for a variety of reasons, the new submachine guns could still not entirely replace clip-fed repeating rifles. While they delivered far more bullets per minute, their short barrels allowed only for poor accuracy and limited range. The less powerful pistol cartridges and greater recoil from near-continuous fire also meant that few submachine guns were deadly beyond two hundred yards — a potentially fatal limitation at the times when rifle sharpshooters had clear fields of fire at over a thousand yards.

The constant rapid firing, together with the grime, heat, and filthy conditions of battle, made the submachine guns jam far too frequently. And another problem developed during the war that transcended the weapons’ advantage of rapid firing: heavily-laden soldiers simply could not carry enough additional bullets — often larger-caliber .30 and .45 ammunition — to take advantage of their guns’ voracious appetites.

On the other hand, repeating rifles, even when semi-automatic and equipped with enlarged clips and improved barrel and stock designs that allowed a good chance of hits at great distances, did not allow enough shots per minute for the increasingly close-order combat in which enemy soldiers might appear suddenly en masse, and in all conceivable landscapes. Their longer barrels and clumsy shoulder stocks certainly proved a hindrance during close-in fighting. Other tradeoffs arose as millions of combatants joined the Allies or Axis powers in a global war, allowing little time to ensure traditional marksmanship training for men from such widely disparate backgrounds. The advantages that could be gained from employing a more accurate, slower-firing, traditional semi-automatic rifle were often lost by the inexperience of the users. There had been design attempts during World War I to bridge these differences, the most successful of which was the American Browning Automatic Rifle. It was almost as accurate as a rifle, but with a weight of over fifteen pounds and a small magazine of just twenty rounds, riflemen often had to shoot

from a prone position, with a barrel tripod and plenty of available magazines nearby.

But in the post-World War II era, a true breakthrough addressed the apparently irreconcilable advantages of submachine guns and repeating, clip-fed rifles. The brilliant compromise became known as the “assault rifle,” the most prominent of which was the Russian Mikhail Kalashnikov’s AK-47 (for automatic Kalashnikov, model 1947), which came into wide use in the early 1950s. Kalashnikov, who benefited from the designs of earlier German and Russian prototypes, seemingly at last solved the six-hundred-year-long dilemma of providing an accurate rifle that was not only capable of firing hundreds of rounds per minute, but was still deadly at ranges of 300-400 yards and beyond. And at under ten pounds, the AK-47 was easy to carry, simple to operate, and highly dependable. Moreover, by using a medium-sized bullet (the 7.62x39mm cartridge,

equivalent to about .31 caliber) rather than larger .40 caliber rounds, the AK-47 achieved a deadly muzzle velocity of over 2,300 feet per second. In short, Kalashnikov seemed to have squared the circle by creating a light, cheap, rapid-firing, accurate, reliable, and lethal weapon that was neither rifle nor submachine gun. The gun proved perfect for revolutionaries in Third World countries, and the Kremlin would gleefully reward its new friends with mass deliveries of their wondrous weapon.

The sudden ubiquity of the AK-47 stunned the United States and Europe, and seemed to turn the so-called First World’s advantages in marksmanship and weapon craftsmanship on their heads. Illiterate insurgents, amply equipped with cheap AK-47s — now produced even more inexpensively by an array of Soviet satellite countries — suddenly had at their disposal more firepower than American soldiers. And what did it matter if Western The Long Road to the AK-47

21

riflemen were in theory better trained or shot a better calibrated and more accurate weapon, when mere teenagers in the tens of thousands could pepper Western troops with bullets?

The widespread export of the AK-47 marked yet another Sputnik-like moment in which state communism seemed to outpace Western entrepreneurialism. And just as the Soviets’ Sputnik success would set off the space race, and as there were other rivalries between the Soviet T-34 tank and its American counterparts, and between MiG-15 and F-86 jet fighters in the skies of Korea, so too was there a competition in assault rifle technology. Not until the early 1960s did the Americans accept that their old reliable M1 and its replacement M14 were woefully wrong for the new non-traditional theaters of the Cold War. If a new American assault weapon were to follow in the Kalashnikov model, it would have to trump its Russian competitor with greater accuracy and lethality.

This goal was seemingly accomplished with the M16 rifle, invented in the 1950s by the legendary arms designer Eugene Stoner. The sleek black assault rifle employed plastic and aluminum alloys to reduce the weight to two pounds less than the rival AK-47. And it used even smaller ammunition — the 5.56x45mm high-velocity bullet that was to become the standard NATO rounds.

The result was that, by all accounts, the M16 proved to be an exceptionally reliable and accurate assault rifle. Its smaller-caliber bullet was in some ways as lethal as the AK-47’s larger ammunition, as it had a muzzle velocity of over 3,000 feet per second, and the bullet tended to break up after penetrating flesh.

The M16 also proved somewhat easier to handle and had less recoil than the AK-47.

And soldiers could carry far more of the lighter-weight ammunition. The ensuing shoot-off between the two weapons in the Vietnam War was supposed to make clear the

22

The Arsenal

American gun’s advantages in rates of fire, accuracy, and lethality. But just the opposite proved to be true — at least in the first four years of the M16’s wide use. Jamming was chronic, apparently due to initial design flaws in the gun, manufacturing problems with the gunpowder, and soldiers’ frequent failure to clean the weapon regularly amid the humidity and dirt of the jungle. In contrast, the AK-47 seemed nearly indestructible, in part due to its simpler construction and greater tolerances. In Vietnam, at least, the verdict favored the notion of an uncomplicated assault rifle that compensated for lost accuracy by achieving greater reliability, simplicity of use, and a larger bullet.

The AK-47 further exasperated Westerners by its cheap fabrication from stamped metals and its brilliant operation with just a few working parts. By the late 1960s, soldiers were taking apart, cleaning, and reassembling the weapon in about half the time required for the M16. Something that felt and looked so “cheap,” and that was produced by the Communist Bloc notorious for its shoddily manufactured products, surely, it seemed, could not be comparable to a rifle designed by the Americans, the British, or the Germans, with their far more distinguished firearms pedigree.

Yet the Communist Bloc continued to meet world demand with millions of AK-47s.

And when the Soviet Union collapsed, its

former republics and clients often sought to unload their stockpiles at discounted prices. Ironically, the United States eventually became the largest purchaser of the AK-47 in its efforts to supply poorer allies — such as some areas of the former-Yugoslavia, post-Saddam Iraq, and Afghanistan — with cheap, reliable assault rifles without its own large fingerprints on the arm sales. The result today is that some 75 million AK-47s have been produced, with most still in circulation, making it the most ubiquitous weapon in the history of firearms — dwarfing the M16’s eight million.

The debate between exponents of the AK-47 and the M16 has never been resolved, in part because both guns continued to evolve with subsequent improved models and have now both been superseded by more recent designs; in part because ideology and national chauvinism were inseparable from dispassionate analysis; and in part because the relative value of accuracy versus reliability is so subjective.

In any case, NATO troops in general felt that their improved models of M16s by the 1980s had proved superior, even as some of the old problems of jamming and insufficient stopping power sometimes reappeared during the harsh conditions of sand and heat during the most recent Iraq War. “The story of the AK-47, amid the ongoing saga of rifle evolution, has in recent years spawned a number of popular books.”

The best is C. J. Chivers’s scholarly The Gun. Chivers takes a properly skeptical view of many of the claims by Mikhail Kalashnikov surrounding the birth of AK-47, and offers a sober and fair account of the acrimonious rivalry between the M16 and AK-47. In dispassionate fashion, Chivers concludes that few inventions of the twentieth century have done so much to kill so many through

“war, terror, atrocity, and crime.” But after such a clear-headed analysis of the AK-47, he surprisingly offers the emotional hope that eventually the seasons, aging, and wear and tear will finally rid the world of this nearly indestructible menace — and with it the bestowing into the hands of untrained near-children the world over the power to kill indiscriminately and en masse. To this hope, one might rejoin that the fault is not in our stars, but in our selves.

Larry Kahaner’s book AK-47: The Weapon that Changed the Face of War is a lighter but nevertheless engaging story of the contemporary AK-47 as a cultural phenomenon. He too reminds us that many of the terrorist movements and insurgencies in Asia, Latin America, and especially Africa would have been impossible without the widespread dispersion of the AK-47, the ideal weapon for impoverished, poorly trained mercenaries.

He points out that the acrimonious controversy between the AK-47 and the M16 resurfaced again forty years after Vietnam during the post-Saddam Hussein insurgency, when improved versions of both assault rifles collided in the streets of urban Iraq. And the verdict was again ambiguous, as U.S. troops still largely preferred their own weapons but developed a grudging respect for the insurgents’ “bullet hoses,” which shot streams of deadly largecaliber bullets at close ranges and seemed impervious to the sand and heat of the Iraqi landscape.

Then there is the book by Mikhail Kalashnikov himself. Now a nonagenarian, Kalashnikov was presented in 2009 with the title Hero of the Russian Federation, the country’s highest honor. With the help of his daughter Elena Joly, Kalashnikov wrote an autobiography, first published in French in 2003 and available in a 2006 English translation. Kalashnikov fought during the worst months of the German invasion of Russia; in 1941, in a failed counter-offensive, he was almost killed when his Red Army tank regiment was cut off and

overwhelmed.

During a long subsequent illness and recovery, Kalashnikov’s innate gun-making talents were noticed. And so, despite his lack of formal design training, he was soon promoted to work with a team of Soviet engineers, quickly emerged as a senior designer, and was mostly responsible for the AK-47. The most fascinating chapters in Kalashnikov’s story are about the nightmare of life in Stalin’s Soviet Union, in which any achievement, commercial or intellectual, earned envy that in turn might translate into accusations of being a counterrevolutionary, would-be elite, often with deadly repercussions.

As Chivers and Kahaner point out, and as

is discernible in Kalashnikov’s memoir, his relationship with his own deadly invention over the last two-thirds of a century has proved erratic. Kalashnikov is proud of his promotion to the rank of lieutenant general in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, and under Communist rule he was twice honored as a Hero of Socialist Labor. Yet even as Kalashnikov details the horrors of Stalinist Russia that resulted in his own family’s brutal exile, he concludes, “I consider Stalin as one of the great national leaders of the twentieth century, and as a great army leader.”

million weapons that bear his name (including variants on the AK-47). And yet Kalashnikov seems almost longingly to note the millions of dollars in profits that came to Eugene Stoner from his M16, even as he ostensibly prefers the public acclaim in Russia that was never accorded to Stoner in the United States. That same paradox characterizes Kalashnikov’s occasional regret that his invention became the signature weapon among terrorists and bandits — many of them now deadly enemies of Russia itself — juxtaposed with his pride in the astounding success of a supposedly defensive AK-47. Speaking at a ceremony honoring the sixtieth anniversary of the weapon, he claimed, “I sleep well. It’s the politicians who are to blame for failing to come to an agreement and resorting to violence.”

So what in the end are we to make of the AK-47, given that people ultimately kill one another and design weapons that do it so effectively?

A perfect storm of events explains the gun’s lethal role in eroding civilization over the last six decades. The impoverished post-colonial world was eager for the sort of advanced weapons that had characterized a near-century of endemic warfare in the more advanced West, and the Soviet Union was eager to fan liberationist movements against the West. It took the postwar glamour of international communism, the industrial muscle of the Soviet Union, and a Russian genius with no higher education but great practical savvy to at last provide millions with such parity, meeting the requirements of a new arms lethality at very little cost. The result was the tragedy of a global assault rifle that has been crucial to self-described liberationists in furthering so often the cause of tyranny.

Kalashnikov takes great trouble to note that the AK-47 grew out of an effort to protect his homeland from a repeat of the sort of barbaric invasion that Hitler unleashed, adding that he did not profit, at least in Western style, from the sales of some 100

The Long Road to the AK-47

23