Is the AK-47 louder than the M4 carbine?

[DemonSlayer]

Many people say the ak-47 is louder than the m4 is this true? Or do they make the same noise?

 

[Grim901]

The Ak fires a larger round, so I presume so.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The Ak fires a larger round, so I presume so.

I don't think it has anything to do with the size of the bullet, probably more about how much gun powder there is.

 

[gf0012-aust]

influences on acoustic impact of a weapon:

• type of propellant
• volume of propellant (hence short round will be acoustically quieter than an equiv calibre long round)
• design of crown
• length of barrel
• weight of barrel
• barrel properties
• design of muzzle brake and/or flash suppressor
• recoil mitigation design issues (exhaust management in the mechanism, breech design etc...)
• furniture design (it does even in very small terms act as a transducer)

This my recollection anyway from when I worked on ballistics program on recoil mitigation.

"gunpowder" or "blackpowder" is basically restricted to antique weapons. either is not used in modern weapon systems

 

[F-15 Eagle]

influences on acoustic impact of a weapon:

• type of propellant
• volume of propellant (hence short round will be acoustically quieter than an equiv calibre long round)
• design of crown
• length of barrel
• weight of barrel
• barrel properties
• design of muzzle brake and/or flash suppressor
• recoil mitigation design issues (exhaust management in the mechanism, breech design etc...)
• furniture design (it does even in very small terms act as a transducer)

This my recollection anyway from when I worked on ballistics program on recoil mitigation.

"gunpowder" or "blackpowder" is basically restricted to antique weapons. either is not used in modern weapon systems

From what I have read the AK-47 is slightly louder than the M4 but not by much. The M16 does around 155-157 dB and the AK-47 does 159 dB I think. The M249 SAW does 160 dB.

The M16 has a higher pitched noise like a sharp loud crack while the AK-47 is a lower frequency like a boom. You can tell the difference cause they have a different type of noise.

I don't know if someone can tell a 2-5 dB difference with just their own ears but I presume so cause the M16 and AK have their own type of noise.

But I only say this because what I have read from other people on the internet. I have never seen someone shoot a M4 or AK-47 in person nor I have ever fired one in real life so I could be wrong. Maybe someone of these forums know more about this than I do?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I don't know if someone can tell a 2-5 dB difference with just their own ears but I presume so cause the M16 and AK have their own type of noise.

It's not people being able to detect them that is the issue. It's sensor systems. You can however pick up the differences in weapons types if you are familiar. acoustically they are different.

We developed (and we aren't the only ones) sniper detection systems which can be calibrated to specific weapons types. We ran any number of tests where the sensors would detect and track red systems over blue systems. the issue of course is that just because someone has a red or blue weapons system doesn't mean that they are a red or blue shooter.

thats why blue force tracking is a critical supplementary system tool.

right gun, wrong place, no BFT = dead person against the right SDS

 

[F-15 Eagle]

It's not people being able to detect them that is the issue. It's sensor systems. You can however pick up the differences in weapons types if you are familiar. acoustically they are different.

We developed (and we aren't the only ones) sniper detection systems which can be calibrated to specific weapons types. We ran any number of tests where the sensors would detect and track red systems over blue systems. the issue of course is that just because someone has a red or blue weapons system doesn't mean that they are a red or blue shooter.

thats why blue force tracking is a critical supplementary system tool.

right gun, wrong place, no BFT = dead person against the right SDS

You may have answered this before so if you have I'm sorry but have you ever fired an M16/M4 or any weapon in 5.56 NATO or an AK-47 or both? If so would you say there is any noise difference between the two?

I would love to fire these weapons but I can just go out and buy them because I don't have the money unfortunately.

 

[OPSSG]

You may have answered this before so if you have I'm sorry but have you ever fired an M16/M4 or any weapon in 5.56 NATO or an AK-47 or both? If so would you say there is any noise difference between the two?

I would love to fire these weapons but I can just go out and buy them because I don't have the money unfortunately.

I have fired some 5.56mm calibre weapons (including the M16 & the Ultimax 100) and the 7.62mm general purpose machine gun (GPMG). From my subjective experience, the 7.62mm GPMG is noticeably louder and deeper/richer sounding. I can always tell when a GPMG is firing in support, even when I don't see it because of vegetation blocking my view.

Maybe someone else who has tried both the M16 and the AK-47 can confirm this for you (or Tony who is a guns & ammo expert). By way of clarification, I not have fired an AK-47 before.

BTW 5.56mm live rounds are significantly louder than 5.56mm blanks (and I find that I need to wear ear plugs for live rounds). Even where you fire your weapon affects the perceived volume. When I do live firing in a room clearing exercise (in a confined space), with 2 weapons firing at the same time, it seems much, much louder, as compared to firing in the open, during say a section live firing exercise (with 7 to 9 weapons firing, at the same time). Writing about these weapons certainly brings back memories.

 

[Firn]

BTW 5.56mm live rounds are significantly louder than 5.56mm blanks (and I find that I need to wear ear plugs for live rounds). Even where you fire your weapon affects the perceived volume. When I do live firing in a room clearing exercise (in a confined space), with 2 weapons firing at the same time, it seems much, much louder, as compared to firing in the open, during say a section live firing exercise (with 7 to 9 weapons firing, at the same time). Writing about these weapons certainly brings back memories.

The day I fired my first weapon in an enclosed space I became a fan of sound suppressors, I will never understand why it isn't issued to every soldier. Already out there in the open it is bad, but in a room...

All the advantages of a compact one are well worth the weight. According to a Finnish proverb it doesn't make a soldier silent, but invisible. I'm also pretty sure it partly messes up SDS, blurring the sound signature of the rifle. The bulletpath of a near supersonic bullet should still be trackable, though.

Googled now this report, it gives a better picture than I can give. Suppressors greatly increase also the case for bullpups...

Anyway, as OPSSG said.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

T
Googled now this report, it gives a better picture than I can give. Suppressors greatly increase also the case for bullpups...

Anyway, as OPSSG said.

It says page load error when I tried to go the the site. I don't know the the issue is.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I found this youtube video I know is just some rednecks in the woodsnfloorl: but anyway they are shooting an AK-47 and an AR-15 and there is no noise difference between the 2.

So is the 7.62 NATO louder yes, is the AK-47? No if there is a difference its not enough to tell.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi6NGNKiCo0&feature=related"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]

 

[gf0012-aust]

I found this youtube video I know is just some rednecks in the woodsnfloorl: but anyway they are shooting an AK-47 and an AR-15 and there is no noise difference between the 2.

So is the 7.62 NATO louder yes, is the AK-47? No if there is a difference its not enough to tell.

I can assure you that in "real life", the report differences between an AK-47 and an M16 family are noticeable.

different tone, duration, db. you can tell straight away that there are mutiple types of weapons being used.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I can assure you that in "real life", the report differences between an AK-47 and an M16 family are noticeable.

different tone, duration, db. you can tell straight away that there are mutiple types of weapons being used.

So would you say one is louder than the other? If so which one is it?

I did not think there would be a difference.

I don't see how a 7.62X39 can be any louder than a 5.56 NATO. Maybe they are equally loud but just a different type of noise? Like a crack and a pop?

 

[Gremlin29]

I own 4 semi auto AK types in 7.62x39. 1 Russian with stamped receiver standard barrel, 2 Bulgarians both of which have standard barrel, one has stamped receiver and one has a milled receiver. I also have a Chinese RPK which has a heavy receiver, trunnion and heavy long barrel. The AK's have threaded muzzles with a spring loaded plunger so I've also tried a variety of the various flash suppresor type devices including the classic slant cut, nut, etc. Aside from some odd mil surp rounds I generally use Wolf steel cased 122 grain ammo and I've pumped quite a few rounds through these weapons.

I've also fired many thousands of rounds through AR type weapons from the standard A1/A2 throught the various M4 types with short, standard, heavy and light barrels.

To me, both weapons are about as loud as the other from the shooters perspective, down range and from afar. The AK is a bit throatier than the AR and I would guesstimate is about 1/2 to one full octave lower. I searched around You Tube and there are plenty of vids of both weapons firing but none of them sound even close to how they sound in person. Both weapons have a very distinctive sound and while firing automatic they are easily distinguishable with a different bark and rate of fire. In auto the AK seems louder to me probably because of the slower cyclic rate. If you ever get a chance to fire an auto with a cyclic rate as high as the AR you will notice that the 1st round seems normal but subsequent rounds seem not nearly as loud. I think this is probably just a trick of the ear, but I don't recall ever reading about why this is.

As for muzzle devices for either weapon I haven't noticed any real appreciable difference in the types I've got experience with.

Problem with silencers is that they shoot out fast and lose their silencing ability with each round fired. They are an expensive expendable if equipping all the grunts with them. I do recall the Army issuing a Request For Proposal for what would essentially be disposable silencers with an initial purchase of 50,000 units but haven't followed what become of it. Lastly, and this may be well known but silencers work best with subsonic munitions which of course limits range, accuracy and power. That's not to say you can't use standard ammo, but the silencing effect is really just noise reduction by about 10db. Not sure that a 10db reduction is a good trade to marginalize the marginal 5.56.

 

[Firn]

As for muzzle devices for either weapon I haven't noticed any real appreciable difference in the types I've got experience with.

Problem with silencers is that they shoot out fast and lose their silencing ability with each round fired. They are an expensive expendable if equipping all the grunts with them. I do recall the Army issuing a Request For Proposal for what would essentially be disposable silencers with an initial purchase of 50,000 units but haven't followed what become of it. Lastly, and this may be well known but silencers work best with subsonic munitions which of course limits range, accuracy and power. That's not to say you can't use standard ammo, but the silencing effect is really just noise reduction by about 10db. Not sure that a 10db reduction is a good trade to marginalize the marginal 5.56.

I disagree completely

Read this Report from Iraq, the large Finnish Suppressor Project, this report from Afghanistan and this summary. Thanks Google

So to sum it up it can make a huge amount of sense...

 

[Gremlin29]

Firn, what part do you disagree with? The articles you posted reinforce what I've said. I'm not knocking suppressors because they are useful tool, just saying they aren't practical for every line dog to have AND they degrade the performance of the 5.56. If I was in a fire fight, I wouldn't want one on my weapon.

 

[Firn]

Firn, what part do you disagree with? The articles you posted reinforce what I've said. I'm not knocking suppressors because they are useful tool, just saying they aren't practical for every line dog to have AND they degrade the performance of the 5.56. If I was in a fire fight, I wouldn't want one on my weapon.

You can have any weapon without a suppressor you want, as long as you don't fire near me

On a serious note: Where did you find all the reinforcing parts of your argument


Take the conclusion of the Captain Dale MacPherson (an officer in the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry), 2IC B Coy deployed on Op Athena Roto 2 to Afghanistan.

Small Arms – Suppression – Silencing the Sturm und Drang


Canadian small arms have seen tremendous advances in the last few years, but one last hurdle remains. Firing both rifles and machineguns produce an enormous amount of blast and sound. Such firing will often deafen the shooter (especially in complex terrain). It also clearly gives away the position of both the shooter and his weapon. ‘Suppressing’ muzzle flash and firing noise from all small arms (from 5.56mm to 7.62mm) should be the next major priority for infantry weapon systems improvements.

While an infantryman can remain nearly invisible at night (fighting in the thermal or IR spectrum), as soon as he starts firing, his muzzle blast will quickly draw the attention of the enemy (and undoubtedly counter-fire). But suppression systems exist today that can be quickly attached to various barrels, making weapons both harder to locate during engagements and preserving the hearing of the shooter.

The utility of suppressed systems was proven in Afghanistan with the C7CT silenced rifle (right). Although adding six inches (1.5cm) to the overall length of the rifle (there are shorter models of suppressor available), B Coy was still very impressed by the numerous advantages supressed weapons offer. Easy to mount, modern suppressors can remain in a soldier’s pack, to be added or removed depending upon mission type. Such an inexpensive system would greatly increase the capabilities of the Canadian infantry. Supressors should be purchased en masse at once

Or the piece with a certain title by Marine CWO3 Michael Musselman:

The Need for Suppressors A simple piece of technology that provides long-term benefit


We can look at the suppressor as a materialsolution to hearing conservation, and we can benefit greatly from its ability to enhance the Marine’s combat effectiveness. The following are some of the many benefits in using a suppressor on an assault rifle like an M16A4 or an M4:

• Hearing conservation.
• Concealment of shooter location thereby increasing survivability.
• Increased situational awareness from ability to hear adjacent forces.
• Better command and control.
• Reduced muzzle flash.
• Reduced recoil.
• Durable/Long service life.
• Quick attachment and removal.
​

With current technology we can even look at the capability of suppressing our M249 squad automatic rifle and M240B/G machinegun. When looking at the M16/M4 weapons, the suppressor reduces recoil significantly as it traps the escaping gas. The gas weighs almost as much as the round itself (approximately 4 grams), thus giving an approximately 50 percent reduction in the recoil.

The few negatives in using a suppressed weapon are:

• Further imbalance of weapon forward of the center point - except bullpups
• Increased cost per weapon.
• Increased overall length.
​

As a Marine Corps we can’t afford to overlook this simple technology when we are actively looking for ways to increase the lethality of the Marine rifleman. This solution is at our doorstep and would take little effort to acquire.

There is no degrading of the 5.56mm in there, as they continue to use supersonic rounds. Did you even read the articles or glanced over them a bit too fast?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

To me, both weapons are about as loud as the other from the shooters perspective, down range and from afar. The AK is a bit throatier than the AR and I would guesstimate is about 1/2 to one full octave lower. I searched around You Tube and there are plenty of vids of both weapons firing but none of them sound even close to how they sound in person. Both weapons have a very distinctive sound and while firing automatic they are easily distinguishable with a different bark and rate of fire. In auto the AK seems louder to me probably because of the slower cyclic rate. If you ever get a chance to fire an auto with a cyclic rate as high as the AR you will notice that the 1st round seems normal but subsequent rounds seem not nearly as loud. I think this is probably just a trick of the ear, but I don't recall ever reading about why this is.

Thats what I thought their both loud but just have different types of noise and rate of fire.

As for the trick of the ear thing I think I know why that is. I think your ears are not letting as much sound in to protect your hearing which is why it does not sound as loud. The higher rate of fire the more noise there will be but I heard about the human ear not letting as much noise in the protect the ear drums. I hope this helped.

 

[gf0012-aust]

As for the trick of the ear thing I think I know why that is. I think your ears are not letting as much sound in to protect your hearing which is why it does not sound as loud. The higher rate of fire the more noise there will be but I heard about the human ear not letting as much noise in the protect the ear drums. I hope this helped.

They are VERY different.

ballistic detection systems are setup to ID and reference within "nn" % of a weapons report characteristics. ie they can and are tuned for weapons such as AK-47's rather than just a generic auto/semi-auto or long arm. There is a reason for that kind of selectivity.

Thats why we use acoustic and digital sensors rather than rely on the lack of discrimination that the human ear generates.

the sensor systems "know" clearly that there is an Ak-47 and not an AR-15/M16/M4 in that area. It gets reported as an AK47-SKS even though thouse weapons use a variety of round and propellant mix types.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

They are VERY different.

ballistic detection systems are setup to ID and reference within "nn" % of a weapons report characteristics. ie they can and are tuned for weapons such as AK-47's rather than just a generic auto/semi-auto or long arm. There is a reason for that kind of selectivity.

Thats why we use acoustic and digital sensors rather than rely on the lack of discrimination that the human ear generates.

the sensor systems "know" clearly that there is an Ak-47 and not an AR-15/M16/M4 in that area. It gets reported as an AK47-SKS even though thouse weapons use a variety of round and propellant mix types.

Yeah but what about the unaided human ear? I highly doubt someone will be able to tell the difference between an M16 an AK if they don't not see the gun that is firing, they will just hear a loud crack or pop off in the distance. Especially if its just a single shot.

If its full auto than they can tell by the rate of fire. AK-47 RoF=600 RPM and M4 RoF=750 RPM.

But I have to agree with Gremlin29, both the AK-47 and M16/M4 are equally loud. But they have a distinctive sound, as all weapons do, even in the same caliber. The AK-47 has a slightly lower pitched sound while the M16/M4 has a higher pitched sound to it and they have different rates of fire. But their both pretty loud.

Now that I think on it I have never fired ether but I do go hunting and I have fired rifles in 30-06, 7mm Rem. and .300WM. I live in Oregon and most hunters there use bolt-action rifles. But I bring this up because one time I went hunting and I heard a loud gunshot. It sounded like it was almost as loud as a .308 but with a higher pitched and sharper sound to it. Plus whoever shot it fired one round and than another round right after it so they fired it too fast for it to be a normal hunting rifle. It could have been an AR-15 or AK but it was off in the distance so I don't know, I just know it startled me because I was not expecting it.

I also know someone who owns a rifle in .338LM but it has a muzzle brake on it and it makes a very very loud high pitched crack but its so loud and uncomfortable to shoot that he sold it....it was just too loud with that muzzle brake on it.