Here is the new updated battlerifle of the Finnish Defense Force

Im pretty sure green paint isnt uniqe to us. Any sane military who mainly operates in green forrests would have green rifles.

Attached: IMG_3409_PS.jpg (1920x1080, 251K)

This. But they have been modernising the rk62's for a while now so it's not that far fetched. This is the same thing, not a new rifle but improved 62

>tfw completed conscription with a 40+ year old rifle
>tfw FDF either too poor or too cheap to design a brand new rifle, that is not a variant of 62 or 95

Attached: aamuja.jpg (480x640, 57K)

Or that side rail mounting is still a better option for mounting optics than "the tightest fitting AK dust covers with irons"

Is there currently an infantry rifle out there that would justify the cost of switching all the spare ammunition, the 300k+ new weapons and replacement parts when the conscripts inevitably break them? It has to increase combat capabilities more than things such as modernizing artillery, radar, SAM systems and implementing squad level drones because those will justifiably always be a higher priority. Also, if the gun and ammunition are not manufactured in Finland, Sweden or Germany you can forget about it too.

They posted a promotional video about it on instagram

instagram.com/p/BwrbvZQlDXb/

That's just a modernisation of the RK 62, not a new production rifle. The RK 95 production was stopped because the parliament cut funding for buying new rifles, because reasons (and bought a shitload of Chinese crap instead).

They tested a cover mounted sight setup, but it just aggravated the issues you face with the rifles being abused for decades by concripts. There's an issue of the rear cover becoming loose over some years/decades, and FDF armories have to press them back to form to prevent issues with the RK 62 sights.

Sort of, however this is Cerakote.

A locally made flash hider, which has threads on the outer surface for a silencer. In the picture there's a protective shroud over the threads.
It's manufactured by Ase Utra, which also makes the silencer for the M2/M3.

>and bought a shitload of Chinese crap instead
Buying a fuckton of chink/german slavshit surplus was pretty cool tho.

Here's an earlier conversion of the RK 62, an RPK-style prototype by FDF small arms office from the 1970's.

Especially the East German surplus, mainly the MPi-KM/MPi-KMS-72 rifles are cool. But the Norinco Type 56-2 are something I'd trust less than a Russian smuggler.

Attached: rkk74.jpg (3948x1256, 2.19M)

Here's the M2 with a different muzzle brake

Attached: RK-62M2.jpg (1920x1280, 183K)

Attached: RK-62M3-2.jpg (1280x1920, 282K)

Heavy as fuck.

That's actually a breaching device attached to the flash hider.

It looks like a cheap civilian tacticool rail set.

Literally bubba'd AK.

Post the .webm.

It's not. my friend tried it when he was serving, and he said that it was solid and comfortable with the grip it was issued with.

It's so fugly. I want my Kekkonen-era commieslayer-62. You can even grate cheese with it.

Attached: Maneesi_univormunäyttely_26_kokelas_1960-luku.jpg (2615x4822, 3.87M)

Heavy as fuck, ugly as hell. But likely the least of problems.

Perfect for killing niggers and refugees.

Hella cute I'll take two please.

Attached: 1469320088132.jpg (228x345, 39K)

M1, the general standard issue variant.

Attached: 163A9315 RK62 M 1.jpg (2048x1365, 586K)

M2, the urban warfare variant

Attached: 163A9465 RK62 M2.jpg (2048x1365, 570K)

M3, same as M2 but with new coating and silencer and something

Attached: 163A9355 RK62 M3.jpg (1365x2048, 912K)

Short M3 variant video trailer, if you like some gun pr0n instagram.com/p/BwrbvZQlDXb/

Looks like polish Berilium rifle.

>Ase Utra S-series SL5i-BL 7.62 Low Pressure
>18-23 dB sound suppression (7.62 NATO)
>specifically developed to have significantly less back pressure
Nice

Why do Finns use the AK? They didn't join
the WP and I thought the Winter War just meant Karelian and some other teritories got Sovieted

Back in the old days our enemy used the same caliber, so it was purely for that you could get your ammo resupply from dead russkie.

Attached: ba66a6d8.jpg (762x1066, 205K)

would've been ebin ammo supply if gommies didn't got full 5.45 retard

Attached: rk neekeri malli.jpg (1440x1920, 341K)

Because finns were soviet bitches
If war broke out finns would probably fight for USSR

Irrelevant. AK-based design just was the best at the time to base finnish own rifle on

It was the best rifle on the market in the early 60's

Bullshit. WW2 tought that to us, so it is true.

Attached: ärkoo.jpg (1006x628, 288K)

Do they plan to equip everyone with these or are they only for operating forces?

Slowly rotate the old ones out by the year 2030

Would a brand new rifle actually make any significant difference to infantry performance?

>Throw a rail on it
>Call it a new gun
I mean I wasn't expecting some brand new SIG 550-tier gun but I figured they'd do something a little more substantial, better controls and shit like that, kinda like the Galil ACE.
Also, why the fuck did they switch from the tilted charging handle to a normal one?

Attached: 12412342314.jpg (610x407, 180K)

M1 for everyone, M2 for cityjägers and MP's and M3 for special people.

Attached: special forces.jpg (435x344, 62K)

>they fell for meme-lok

Attached: nope.jpg (613x531, 36K)

Delicate appeasement politics and cheapness. Government didn't want to look too western for sovs and not too eastern for merica.

Only 95 has tilted handle and it is actually pretty annoying if you have aimpoint in front and night vision device behind it.

>magpul mags

Those can't be standard issue.

Attached: 1365573656195.png (363x475, 89K)

We bought 12k aimpoints so at least that amount gets modernized to M1 model.

I needs pictures of M3 with acog.

Attached: RK95TP_1.jpg (1079x1920, 229K)

They aren't. The guys who get to dick around new rifles just are really big gearqueers.

>milled receiver
>longer sight radius
>AR furniture
>same gun

Very good, actually. Too bad we don't have a Salad Day type market for this, like we do for ARs.

Attached: 1551713829973.png (307x312, 81K)

NEEDS A FUEL FILTER

I want an AK Alpha

it's not a "new gun". It's literally just an upgrade-kit to the oldass RK62 rifles, that we have millions lying around the country.
And like said, only RK95 ever had titled handle.

Attached: 7,62_RK_62M_Kokonaisturvallisuus_2015_03.jpg (3456x5184, 1.93M)

Don't milled AK receivers produce worse accuracy than stamped ones? What is the advantage of using milled?

Those aren't at all since they were deemed shit with RK.

Attached: 1546792866804.jpg (736x718, 39K)

What cartridges are those? They don't look like 7.62x39, seems like too little angle in the case

More like 500 000 RK's.

Lapua 7,62x39 tracers.

Hm ok. Is all your 7.62x39 brass cased or just the tracers? If the former, why?

Our standard issue ammo is match grade ammo.

Attached: 18252998_1799704067024466_4730871098898382848_n.jpg (1080x1080, 133K)

All of it is brass cased, match grade stuff, made by Lapua.

Attached: Photo-0018 - Copy.jpg (1200x1600, 329K)

>It looks like a cheap civilian tacticool rail set.
>Literally bubba'd AK.
If it is done by military weapons depot, it isn't bubba'd by definition. Also given the nature of military procurement system, it probably isn't cheap either.

Attached: 746.jpg (896x722, 33K)

>26.5-86
old

Because the AK-47 won FDF trials held in 1956-1958. It excelled in reliability, where the other competitors either failed, or in the case of the SIG, were too expensive.

>Why do Finns use the AK?
We don't use the "AK".
We use THE "RK".

This too. And the handful of AKs that FDF acquired were first smuggled in to the country, and they were used as the base for building the perfected AK designs we know now.
Only later on did AKs started appear in the arsenal for reals.

Attached: 1498577835901.jpg (1280x960, 275K)

The tilted charging handle is actually pretty bad with optics. It's not as bad as the Galil vertical handle, but you'll scrape your knuckles trying to rack it. The horizontal charging handle is easier for racking it from the underside, which is the preferred method when using optics.

The Soviets didn't initially want to sell AKs to us, FDF smuggled the first pieces through Poland, and the blueprints for the RK were reverse engineered from those smuggled rifles.

Nope, milled is more accurate but also heavier and a lot more expensive to manufacture.

Correct. They were tested with the RK but since the RK has an unique bolt carrier design (to prevent the two group issue caused by the early AK bolt carrier design), the RK rips the Magpul feeding lips to shreds. They cease to feed correctly at all around the 8th fill.

There's a reason why all good AK magazines have reinforced feeding lips.

Just the contrary. The milled receivers provide a more stable platform, which means less flexing and such, and the barrel mounts directly to the receiver (and in the case of the RK, it is threaded into it unlike the Bloc/Chinese AKs).

The stamped receiver has a front trunnion, which is spot welded and riveted onto the stamped receiver body, and those rivetings tend to bend over time. FDF and Valmet experimented with stamped designs, but after 7 years of production of the RK 62 76 (Valmet M76), they switched back to the milled receiver, as it had been proved that the stamped receiver rifles lose their accuracy faster, due to the receiver flexing and bending in use.

However the Soviets had tested that exactly thanks to the flexibility of the stamped receiver, it is actually able to withstand a shot count of minimum of 150k rounds, while the milled receivers are rated just at 100k rounds. Apparently the milled receivers tend to start cracking earlier.

Both Lapua and Sako manufacture (7.62 x 39) assault rifle ammunition for FDF. Actually 41287943 shows ammuntion box with Sako-made ammo.

Finnish factory codes for military ammunition:
- Lapua: VPT
- Sako: SO

A nice little detail that hasn't been mentioned yet:
>Free-floating barrel

>M2 for cityjägers and MP's
Spears would be more appropriate armament for guards nigger regiment.

>Don't milled AK receivers produce worse accuracy than stamped ones? What is the advantage of using milled?
More rigid receiver generally makes rifle more accurate. If Soviet stamped ones are more accurate than milled ones, it due to shitty quality control vodkaniggers had when they made milled ones. Milled receiver is also more durable.

There has been Soviet and Russian ammo with steel cases. Mostly tracers. Cheap and comes with corrosive primers. When it comes to Lapua and Sako ammo being match grade. It isn't there just isn't any difference between match grade and standard grade ammo when it is made by Finnish autists.

ITT: Tornareita.

Attached: kaartin_neekerit.jpg (600x450, 75K)

>ITT: Tornareita.
Nope, you can read the history of the RK from the book "Sotilaskäsiaseet Suomessa 1918-1988. II osa: suomalaiset aseet" by FDF officer Markku Palokangas.

>Tornareita.
Nyet.
The ruskies were very protective of their "new" secret weapon during the 50s.

Valmet made this thing in the 80's. What do you think, Jow Forums?

Attached: valmetshorty.jpg (700x529, 67K)

Soviet armor usually came with the associated crew small arms. Even if client told that those need to be changed. Finland purchased first batch of T-54's in 1957 and those were delivered couple years later. Same thing with BTR-50's and BTR-60's. Those came with small arms for the squads riding 'em. Same thing with BMP's in late 70's and 80's. There is a reason why armored brigade used PKM's much earlier on than rest of Finnish army and why PKM was the original MG on Sisu Pasi, prior to arming those with 12.7mm MG's. Rest of Finnish army used 7.62kvkk62 until dept of SU/Russia was paid with things like Buk-M1, NSV's, PKM's, oil and natural gas.

Only in first part of 50's. They ceased to be extremely secretive about AK after the first pictures of it came out from Hungarian uprising.

Attached: ak hungary.jpg (412x500, 48K)

It's actually RK-62M3

It's not fucking free floated, what the tits are you talking about?

They're easier to put together, if the manufacturer knows absolutely nothing about metallurgy or stampings.

Ok. Finn here. Here's some points. This is going to be a multi-post, so stay tuned.

Before you think of _anything else_, remember that Finland is comparatively a "small" country. We have only 5,5M people. There is that amount of people in cities like St. Petersburg alone. But we have landmass about the same size of California... or the entire UK.
Fucking New York City has more people than we do, but we have more than 6x the size of whole State of New York!

So it's a fairly big country with very few people, spread thin. Small population means small economy, even if it's quite advanced and modern. And that translates to "We don't have money to spend on fancy toys." This is the main point that dictates EVERYTHING ELSE!
The entire Finnish military is build around the idea "Everyone fights, no-one quits". Military conscription is mandatory (optional for women), and even those who don't want to play war-games will be herded to useful-to-society non-warlike training like public works, taking care of wounded, elderly, clergical work and generally to keep the wheels of society spinning in the case of war. If you go full "fuck the system, I won't serve the Babylon!" you will do jail time.
This way we can have the maximum amount of soldiers with minimum amount of military budget. And as all those trained can be recalled to duty, this means whe have a reserve of potentially MILLIONS of people. Finland has only 5,5M people, but using this conscription system if can field an army of about 300,000 soldiers. That's 1/4 of active personel in US military! From a tiny nation of god-forsaken Finland!

Attached: Finland_climate_change.jpg (477x363, 65K)

So while we can muster some guys (we don't really have to pay them as it is considered citizenship duty), we have a _very_ limited military budget. We don't even pay real salaries to those conscripted to our military. If you are a grunt, you are given a daily "day fee" for your service. Which is pretty much exactly the same amount of money that it takes to buy a pack of cigarettes and a cup of coffee at military base cafeteria. That's about 6-7 Euros (~8 USD) per day.
The whole idea of Finnish Military is "Most Bang for Buck". Maximize military effectiveness with minimal budgetary costs and societal friction.

Now, to the issue of this new iteration of RK-62!
The RK-62 in itself is a GOOD GUN. In comparison to pretty much any AK-variant, it is top notch. And as such... it's kinda hard to improve upon it.

It fires 7,62x39mm standard AK ammo which has ENDLESS supply worldwide, especially if you plan on stealing ammo from russian attackers. Yes, Finland considers that the "potential attacker" will ALWAYS come from east. This ammo is especially suited to Finnish geography, which is thick-branched sub-arctic woodlands. All that foliage will affect bullet trajectories, but beefy 7,62 will just punch through it. And it will perform fine in urban environment, where some penetration might be needed to puncture walls.

Finnish RK-variant is made with milled receiver which gives durability, stability and accuracy. Finns are kinda big on the whole accuracy thing. They have a saying "laaki ja vainaa" which translates to roughly "one shot, one kill". Obviously we understand the benefits of suppressive fire (and units are trained to use this), but there is this sort of mentality that "best suppressive effect is when the enemy sees his mate's head BLOWN THE FUCK OFF! That'll keep HIS head down."

Attached: finn.jpg (800x547, 67K)

So the whole "spray and pray" thing is frowned upon here. Individual soldier is expected to score 10 out of 12 shots with "lethal effect" on man-sized target 150m away. If you can not achieve this, you are considered "a poor shot" and that kinda translates to mine-trodder-class. "When clearing minefields, send in this guy first. He isn't much of a shot anyways."

The RK-62 performs all these tasks. VERY WELL. The gun is fine.

However, time passes on and new ideas, fads and fashions do appear even in military setting.
The idea of improving upon RK-62 has been around for quite a while. There are several small issues which COULD be improved upon, but none of them have been game-breakers.
The whole beef of the argument has been, "If we upgrade the RK, it means we also have to upgrade the supply and maintenance network too!" This has usually been the killer of any modernisation initiatives.

We finns don't even give our soldiers a secondary gun! You don't get a pistol! Only specialist like Mp's tank crews and special forces get a pistol!
Why? it would DRASTICLY increase the need for supply, re-supply, spare parts and maintenance network needed to keep all those guns operational. One assault rifle for one guy keeps the supply&maintenance network streamlined. Only one set of standard-issue parts! Remember: Finland has a small economy to pay for all that shit.

Attached: finnish helmet.jpg (700x467, 31K)

talking points:
1) "It doesn't have a rail for scope"
- Just fucking teach the grunts to AIM! In Finnish woodlands the visibility is going to be 100-200m at most. You don't need a fancy, expensive red-dot on that range! Anything beyond that will be dealt with snipers.

2) "It doesn't have a rail for flash-light/laser-pointer/rangefinder"
-See the above! If it's dark, just use flare-guns and spotters with NVG's! No need to create a massive expenditure for fancy gear and all the bells and whistle to keep all that functioning, if low-light can be solved with flares and night-time training. Only snipers need range-finders.

3) "the one-size-fits-all fixed metallic stock might not be suited for manlets or ogryns."
-Just fucking drill them until they become accustomed to using them!

4) "It could use a forward handle to keep the recoil down"
-Shoot individual, aimed shots! Don't spray and pray!

...as you can see, many of the arguments FOR modernisation of RK's have a fairly simple and clear counter-argument. However, over the years these nagging complaints have grown into a big murmur of discontent within the military personel.
And so, now it seems that the military big-wigs have finally given in and have accepted to modernize the good-old RK. However, all those limitations of small budget and small GDP still apply. Finland needs to keep the costs down.

Attached: Finnish military_basic day.jpg (685x971, 345K)

As far as I see, this modernisation (biggest differences to old ones are adjustable stock, standard scope-rail, standard-issue red-dot scope and a new forward handle which can be fitted with rail-mounted addons like flashlights, bi-pods, laser-pointers and rangefinders etc. ...I bet NONE of the grunts will EVER see these!) is the one that has been carefully calculated within Ministery of Defense to pass the legislation while having minimal impact on the whole budget issue thing.

This new modernisation WILL improve on the functionality of the RK, it will bring it up-to-date with competetors like AK's newest models, while it won't require major retooling of any main components of RK platform. The ammo will remain the same, the barrel will remain the same, the trigger group will remain the same, the gas-operated system will remain the same... all the GOOD parts of AK will still be there. So it's kinda like buying a new set of clothes for your Barbie-doll. It'll look fancy, but you don't need to buy a new doll.

One eye-sore point that I do see is that this new update seems to remove the bayonet attachement on the old flash suppressor. Do they plan to remove the bayonet altogether?

Attached: finnish military1.jpg (640x401, 73K)

.
>We finns don't even give our soldiers a secondary gun! You don't get a pistol! Only specialist like Mp's tank crews and special forces get a pistol!

No military gives everyone a secrondary gun. Thats hust a CoD meme. Our tank crews doesnt even get pistols.

Not at the peace time anyway...

So... yeah.

Finnish military is ALWAYS under EXTREME budgetary limitations. Even this modernisation of General Infantry Rifles is on the scale of "should we just re-tool our whole air force?".

I'm not joking. Infantry is the drill-bit of the military. Just retooling/refurbishing all the guns of the basic grunts is on the same level of "should US military just dump the AR-15/M-16 platform and have a PROPER gun instead?"

Even if EVERYONE agrees it would be for the best, it might be too expensive. And US government just loans money like it's "electricity coming out of a socket".

Finnish military does NOT have an inexhausting credit card.

Attached: finnish women11.jpg (2048x1295, 179K)

The combar gear and armament of a finnish tank crew is very limited. Only the loader gets an assault rifle, everyone else just pistols.

Attached: IMG-20180507.jpg (1599x1599, 741K)

When I was conscripted we shot FN Browning Hi-Powers and just before I was "released" the P99 came to service. These days we use Glock 17's mostly, but P99's are still in service too.

Attached: FRDF.jpg (636x600, 53K)

But that loader got some sexy ass gucci krautshit

that is very true

Attached: IMG_20180111_190611.jpg (3888x3888, 2.61M)

I wish Finland would export us their old shit.

> kangasnauha
Eissaa

The problem is that they are the masters of hoarding. Those smug bastards has millions of old kits in their reserve storages, and probably wont get rid of them until ghey have compleatly rotten away or been eaten by rats.

Yes we are and we are not geting rid of them any time soon, coz we're moderizing them up to date. Didn't you 'muricafags have the inport arms ban anyway?

Not going to happen chief, we got us some 7 million Finns and we need to arm every single one at least twice, hide spares for them for the guerrilla phase and store some real gucci silver plated gold trimmed weapons for the inevitable victory parade

Unless you can give us top of the line modern real fucking NATO gear, git out