I think if you do little research you will actually find several major operational differances, including the Safety system, locking mechanisms and the design of the receiver system, The Kalashnikov team had access to the weapons, but that is common to all design teams, look at the competition decide what works and and redesign that which doesn't.
The Russians also pioneered the mass use of chromium plating certain key components to increase the survivability of the weapon, alongside keeping the tolerances loose to increase it's hardiness, the opposite of the stg44 which was produced to high tolerances.
The move for the russians into the assault rifle field was inevitable as they were already using the submachine gun in vast quantities, particulalry in their motorised infantry units leading to a problem that is as old as the use of firearms, the more differant calibres you use the harder resuppy is going to be, so the logical plan would be combine the two types of infantry weapon. Most of the confusion comes from the physical similarities, particularly the "banana Magazine" but look at most assault rifle mags and when you start to get to thirty round capacity virtually all have that shape as it has to accommodate the rim on the cartridge casing.

Anyone familiar with firearms knows that a StG 44 is not an AK.

They are totally two different weapons. The internals are very different.

The AK is closer in design to the SKS (a Soviet weapon) than the StG 44.

The StG 44 was very expensive to produce and that is why the Germans never massed produced them. They were also prone to jams and were not that good of a weapon at the end of the day.

The AK on the other hand is a much simpler design and is very reliable.

The only thing similar about them is the way they look on the outside.

I suspect the Soviets copied the idea of an assault weapon from the StG 44 but it is a far stretch to claim that the AK is a copy.

I have an AK and I have shot and closely examined one of the few StG 44s on the American Class III Registry. There are night and day differences.

This type of story is just another example of historical myths.

As far as Von Braun goes it is common historical knowledge that both the Americans and the Soviets raided the German V-2 rocket scientist after WWII. That is hardly a secret. The Brits even got a couple of them. So what else is new?

Originally Posted by flash

The StG 44 was very expensive to produce and that is why the Germans never massed produced them.

The only thing similar about them is the way they look on the outside.

Never massed produced them... ??!! 400 000!

"Germans turned it out experimentally already in 1943 but up to 1944 more than 400 000 were made. None of famous Soviet designers – Shpagin nor Degatjarov wanted to put their names on the plagiarism and thus, a new Russian constructor Mikhail Kalashnikov was chosen for it."

- Boris Sokolov (Russian: Борис Вадимович Соколов) is a historian (he has Candidate of Science degree in History) From the 1990s onwards, he has turned to subjects on Russian 20th century history, publishing studies on Beria, Stalin, Molotov and Brezhnev. He is one of the Russian historians alongside those who are critically reviewing the part of the Soviet Union in the Second World War.

Originally Posted by Paul Lasaro

Never massed produced them... ??!! 400 000!

"Germans turned it out experimentally already in 1943 but up to 1944 more than 400 000 were made. None of famous Soviet designers – Shpagin nor Degatjarov wanted to put their names on the plagiarism and thus, a new Russian constructor Mikhail Kalashnikov was chosen for it."

- Boris Sokolov (Russian: Борис Вадимович Соколов) is a historian (he has Candidate of Science degree in History) From the 1990s onwards, he has turned to subjects on Russian 20th century history, publishing studies on Beria, Stalin, Molotov and Brezhnev. He is one of the Russian historians alongside those who are critically reviewing the part of the Soviet Union in the Second World War.

The AK is what you called "mass produced" with about 60 million made.

400,000 was actually a small number for a WWII production run of any weapon. For instance, the US produced about 6 million M1 Carbines.

Instead of quoting something off the Internet I would strongly suggest that you get an AK and StG 44 and look at them like I have. You will see that the similarities are only in outward appearances.

The failure of the StG 44 came with the close machine tolerances and complicated design. The AK is as simple as it gets.

The StG 44 that I got to shoot was owned by a gunsmith and he could hardly keep it functioning properly. You can hardly get an AK not to function.

By the way, nowadays ammo for the StG 44 is almost impossible to find. The ammo for the AK is probably the cheapest ammo on the world market.

Originally Posted by flash

The AK is what you called "mass produced" with about 60 million made.
400,000 was actually a small number for a WWII production run of any weapon. For instance, the US produced about 6 million M1 Carbines.

Please time period and possibilities for Soviet Union and nazi Germany?
Or You saying - 60 mil AK was produced during WW2 ?

Of course it's hard to compare german weapon 1943 with latest AK. Russians have litle bit more time than nazis after May '45. It's like comparison - Opel 1943 vs. Opel 1953. Sure - You will fine lot of differences. Especially if Opela'53 *made in USSR*

And remember - in that time Bil Gate was very young and option "copy+paste" not so developt.

Originally Posted by Paul Lasaro

Please time period and possibilities for Soviet Union and nazi Germany?
Or You saying - 60 mil AK was produced during WW2 ?

Of course it's hard to compare german weapon 1943 with latest AK. Russians have litle bit more time than nazis after May '45. It's like comparison - Opel 1943 vs. Opel 1953. Sure - You will fine lot of differences. Especially if Opela'53 *made in USSR*

And remember - in that time Bil Gate was very young and option "copy+paste" not so developt.

Since the AK was first fielded in 1947 of course I was not referring to WWII.

60 million refers to number produced for all commie nations and exported.

The designed of the AK was basically the same from 1947 until 1974 when the Soviets switched to a .223 caliber but the mechanism is the same.

If you put an AK-47 and StG 44 side by side you will see major differences in almost every aspect except the outward appearances. The bolt is different, the trigger mechanism is different and the gas system is different.

The AK is not a copy of the StG 44. The only thing copied is that both are magazine fed, gas operated, small caliber and full auto.

I think the Soviets liked the idea of the Sturmgewehr but they did not copy the design and use it as the AK 47.

I suspect you article refers to the stealing of the concept of an assault weapon and not the stealing of the actual mechanism because that simply did not happen.

I think the Soviets would have gone bankrupted trying to mass produce the very complicated Sturmgewehr. The AK was a much better design.

Of course the better weapon has always been the M-16.

Where's Tantal when you need him; he's our resident Kalashnikov expert with quite a collection of them.


Just in case there's anyone in the world who doesn't know what an AK-47 looks like.

Originally Posted by flash

Of course the better weapon has always been the M-16.

Dammit, Flash! You were SO close! I was in absolute agreement until the statement above. It's easy to knock the AK in terms of accuracy, but remember, most of the AK's failures in that area are more related to the ammunition than the rifle itself. Given the same sights and ammunition, the VEPR in .223 or Valmet will run all day long with the AR-15/M-16 in accuracy.......and will still be running strong long after the AR-15/M-16's direct impingement system is inducing failures from heat and/or carbon buildup. In fact, I've run my VEPR II in 7.62x39 with good brass-cased hunting ammo against my M4gery. The only way to tell the groups apart was the size of the holes.

Now, back on topic. The Stg44 and AK-47 have f@*%all to do with each other besides the concept. The AK was designed by tanker Mikhail T. Kalashnikov to be fielded, operated, and maintained by uneducated peasants. The Germans OTOH, although fine weapon-makers, could never do anything simple. If you want proof, feel free to inspect any of the Heckler and Koch weapons.......oh wait, nevermind.

Their only similarities are, as Flash has previously stated, piston-driven gas system, full-auto function, and the general shape of the buttstock. The similarities pretty-much stop there.

Originally Posted by Tantal

Dammit, Flash! You were SO close! I was in absolute agreement until the statement above. It's easy to knock the AK in terms of accuracy, but remember, most of the AK's failures in that area are more related to the ammunition than the rifle itself. Given the same sights and ammunition, the VEPR in .223 or Valmet will run all day long with the AR-15/M-16 in accuracy.......and will still be running strong long after the AR-15/M-16's direct impingement system is inducing failures from heat and/or carbon buildup. In fact, I've run my VEPR II in 7.62x39 with good brass-cased hunting ammo against my M4gery. The only way to tell the groups apart was the size of the holes.

Do you know how heavy a Valmet is?

The AK is a good weapon but it has its weak points. It really heats up fast, even on semi auto. You can hardly shoot more than three or four 30 mags on full auto without the thing being almost out of control. The more it heats up the more erratic the shot group.

The sights on it are terrible.

Contrary to myth it does need cleaning every once in awhile. The feeding mechanism may work but once that barrel gets dirty good luck in hitting anything.

I use to own several AKs but I am down to only one now. It is an Arsenal with a milled receiver. It has the Styr barrel and is the Cadillac of AKs.

If SHTF I would take one of my ARs or M1As before the AK. I even like the SKS better than the AK.

There is a reason why the AK is always on the losing side of every war. It was designed for peasants and they really can't hit anything with it. It fires every time but is not that an effective MBR.

Originally Posted by flash

Do you know how heavy a Valmet is?

Yes. I have a M71S

The sights on it are terrible.

True, but those can be corrected.

Contrary to myth it does need cleaning every once in awhile. The feeding mechanism may work but once that barrel gets dirty good luck in hitting anything.

Still lower maintenance than the M-16. I'd still take my chances with it.

I use to own several AKs but I am down to only one now. It is an Arsenal with a milled receiver. It has the Styr barrel and is the Cadillac of AKs.

Very nice, but still not a VEPR.

If SHTF I would take one of my ARs or M1As before the AK. I even like the SKS better than the AK.

Still not bad choices, but I'd still go woth the AK.

There is a reason why the AK is always on the losing side of every war. It was designed for peasants and they really can't hit anything with it.

Blasphemy!!!

Originally Posted by Tantal

Yes. I have a M71S

I am impressed.

Here are pictures of some of my ARs (not all of them):

Originally Posted by flash

I am impressed.

The M71S



The wz.88 Tantal



My CQB AR. My only other ARs are a Colt LEO from the bad old days of the AWB and one I'm piecing together from a Stag lower and Rock River upper. I would have fininshed it already, but I lost the damned pivot pin detent trying to get it together. I have to go to the fun show Saturday to get another one. I've still got 3 lowers to build out. I'm thinking about one more M4gery, a basic 20" A2 rifle, and a piston-drven P.O.F. 18" SPR.

Originally Posted by Tantal

My CQB AR. My only other ARs are a Colt LEO from the bad old days of the AWB and one I'm piecing together from a Stag lower and Rock River upper. I would have fininshed it already, but I lost the damned pivot pin detent trying to get it together. I have to go to the fun show Saturday to get another one. I've still got 3 lowers to build out. I'm thinking about one more M4gery, a basic 20" A2 rifle, and a piston-drven P.O.F. 18" SPR.

Those pivot detent pins have a way of disappearing.

I am all built out on my lowers right now with the exception of one I am putting together for my neighbor's son.

I am saving a CavalryArms lower to build an AR for my Cav Scout son when he returns from deployment.

I can't stand to have one extra AR part lying around or else I feel compelled to build it out.

I think with 14 ARs I don't need any more.

I have several retros. Being a Vietnam vet I love retros. In addition to the two already pictured below I also have these three with scopes. Two of the scopes are Colts. One is US made and the other is Japan made. The third scope is a Nightforce. They only made 100 of them back in the late 1980s.

Interesting - no one have any ideas about this secret. BTW - based on real facts and this is only small list of full influnce in XX century...

Originally Posted by Paul Lasaro

Nevertheless, one of the most concealed myths is connected with the most powerful spy nation in the world. Even Dan Brown couldn’t take a notice of their secret. There is a small nation that at the beginning of the 20th century developed two the most powerful spy organizations in the world that still are working. They shot at Winston Churchill, they were closely connected with communist leaders Lenin and Stalin, caused big trouble for Spanish dictator Franco, made Hitler be careful, they actually were the last ones who left Hitler’s bunker at the end of the II World War. Later they were seen in a prison cell of U2 pilot, in the last overturn of the USSR in 1991 and in many other places. But who are they? It is still a secret.
Paul Lasaro (www.paullasaro.com)

Originally Posted by Paul Lasaro

Interesting - no one have any ideas about this secret. BTW - based on real facts and this is only small list of full influnce in XX century...

The Vatican.