Valmet designed the M78 hoping to sell it to the Finnish military as an equivalent to the RPK, but it was not adopted. Instead, they were old a semiautos on the commercial market. Because this was before 1986, new machine guns could still be registered in the US. While the guns were all imported as semiautos, some were converted to fully automatic and registered as such, making them fully transferrable today.
Submachine Guns
Suomi M31: Finland’s Famous Submachine Gun
Designed by Finland’s most notable arms inventor, Aimo Lahti, the m/31 Suomi submachine gun is an iconic weapon of the Winter War and the Continuation War. It is a first-generation submachine gun with a […]
Antiques
Finland Salvages a “Tragic Boating Accident”: Grafton Vetterli Rifles
During the Russo-Japanese War, the Japanese government helped smuggle arms to potential revolutionaries in Russia, in hopes of provoking a domestic crisis that would divert Russia military force form the war. This included a plot […]
Select-fire Rifles
RK95: Finland’s Ultimate AK
Finland adopted the AK in 7.62x39mm after World War Two, and continues to use the AK to this day. The standard pattern RK62 was starting to fall a bit short, and so in the late […]
I don’t know if I wouldn’t rather have that chincom topfed bren conversion x39. heavier. ok. but the topfed…
If you need 7,62 intermediate cartridge top-feed weapon then use АБ-44 see 1st photo from top https://war-time.ru/item/opytnyj-avtomat-bulkina-ab-44
The real plus of this caliber over 7.62×51 is obviously the availablity,cost and capacity of the magazines compared to the proprietary Valmet mags which if you can find them will set you back over $200 each. I had the semi auto version some years ago and quite frankly I’d rather have the range and accuracy the 7.62 NATO provides.
If you believe in the Automatic Rifle concept, then the RPK class is a decent solution for your needs. Valmet produced what were some of the best examples of the AK ever made, surpassing even the most diligently-produced versions built by the Soviets.
I don’t know how the hell they managed it, but the little Valmet M76 I once owned was actually way more accurate than my issued M16A1 that I had around the time I owned that rifle. Barrel was a lot shorter; the AK action should have been inherently less accurate, and the furniture wasn’t anywhere near as ergonomic as the M16A1, but… That sucker made it astonishingly easy to hit the 300m targets on the Army qualification range. I still don’t know why, but both myself and the other guy who shot that rifle with me both hit 40/40 whenever we snuck that beast onto the qual range to fire up excess ammo. Same day, I’d usually have had problems managing to get 35/40 with my issued weapon…
Dunno what the Finns do, but their rifles are seemingly at least somewhat magical.
I also had an M76 side tube folder in 5.56 that was as accurate as my HK 93s and better than my SP1 with m193. I feel the length Ed sight radius plays a small part as well.
“(…)AK action should have been inherently less accurate(…)”
Actually testing spread of AK-74 compared to M16 shows that it is greater but not as much as one might think, see 1st image from top
https://mpopenker.livejournal.com/2381896.html
At least if it uses milliradian unit as understand by French artillery in Great War (1/6400 of whole circle)
“Dunno what the Finns do, but their rifles are seemingly at least somewhat magical.”
Firstly, according to writer of screenplay for 2001: A Space Odyssey Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Regarding Rk 62, according to https://guns.fandom.com/wiki/Rk_62
Barrel(…)match-grade, cold hammer forged chrome-moly barrel, and has a thinner barrel profile than the AK.(…)barrels are known to be very accurate, more so than normal AK barrels.
Whilst AKM got cold hammer-forged late in production according to https://modernfirearms.net/en/assault-rifles/russia-assault-rifles/akm-2/
Late production guns also featured cold hammer-forged barrels, manufactured on Austrian-made GFM machines, purchased during the early 1970s.
Automatic rifles (more correctly, magazine-fed squad automatic weapons) are fine for dealing with small patrol skirmishes. But they’re no match for proper machine guns.
Gun Jesus casting shade on the M14….without even saying the words. LOL!
But the fact is, if the M14 hadn’t been in 7.62×51, but in an intermediate cartridge like this Valmet, with 30 round mags and the ability to shoot “accurately” or at least controllably on full auto while standing…it would have been a far better general issue infantry rifle, and the AR pattern may have never been anything but an Air Force Security Police issue weapon.
Ruger AC-556?
Nah. Still 5.56. By the time it was a thing, the AR pattern was well established and in most ways superior. Ian looked at them. Not a winner.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Dcys50K80
AFAIK the French Gendarmerie as well as the Royal Bermuda Regiment have removed the fun switches form their AC-556 rifles, beacuse they proved to be useless and a source of mechanical troubles with its complicated clockwork. So a Mini-14 in fully automatic fire does not seem like a good idea.
There have been Mini-14 rifles been made in various calibers. 6.8*43 mm SPCII, .300 Blackout or named Mini-30 in 7,62*39 mm. So you mean something like these models making the M16 unnecessary? In personally doubt this idea, becuase an M16 shoots much better than a Mini-14 and handles easier. Is more reliable. Is easier to clean etc. etc. All reasons to replace the hypothetical Mini-14 with another rifle.
“(…)AR pattern may have never been anything but an Air Force Security Police issue weapon.”
Uhm, AR-15 is generally scaled down version of AR-10.
https://modernfirearms.net/en/assault-rifles/u-s-a-assault-rifles/armalite-ar-10-eng/
This weapon was bought in substantial quantity by Portugal and Sudan.
So while AR pattern might become less widespread it would not be limited to Air Force Security Police.
As regard AR-15 itself I think it could find niche in competitive shooting – in-axis layout and low recoil should be welcomed.
Old comment but “But the fact is, if the M14 hadn’t been in 7.62×51, but in an intermediate cartridge like this Valmet,” you need to check again, the M78 in fact IS in 7.62×51, exact same caliber as the M14. The RK-62 SA issue is in 7.62×39 but we don’t use them as RPK’s, we had the KVKK-62 for that which is a belt fed gun in no way really related to an AK other than by being in the same caliber. But in general it would have made more sense for the M14 to be in an intermediate caliber, but if it was then the M16/M4 etc might not have come about, and it’s quite definite that it is a much more advanced rifle, well, modern might be the better word for it. Most of the time a gun is not being shot when in military service, and if you can make a lighter and handier rifle that lasts longer too, that is already a gigantic win on many fronts, irrespective of what other merits it may or not have. Personally I think the M16/AR15/M4 etc platform is an excellent one and it has been maligned undeservedly, provided it is fed the right kind of ammo, and made to proper spec and has a chrome lined barrel – it’s top tier. The only contenders at that level I think are the Valmet, SIG, H&K, Steyr, FN etc – and their perfomance difference is single digit stuff. Except in edge cases.
Full auto weapons are without doubt suitable for militia use. How the GCA 1968 and the Hughes Amendment can still be law is a mystery to me.