Why no AK-74s in western film armories?

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

You mean no AK 74s in movies filmed in like the US? Or "Western movies".

Now who wouldn't wanna see the Duke dual-wielding a Single Action Army and an AK-74?

In all seriousness, I should have said "American film armories" instead of "western film armories" (by "western", I meant our side of the former Iron Curtain, not the wild west), as that's what I was asking about. But Nyles and MT make a good point about 5.45mm blanks and the reason why they wouldn't be used as often. I've never actually sought out to buy any 5.45mm ammo, so I wasn't aware it's hard to find in the States.

I also read MPM's post on the GoldenEye talk page and it made a lot of sense. I wish there were more directors that cared about the guns.

[predator20]

It's also likely because most American armories have a stockpile of AKM's and Type 56's from the 80s. Why spend the time and money buying 74's, when most directors aren't going to know enough or care enough whether a 47 or 74 is being used as long as it's an AK.

[Excalibur]

I just never understand the inaccuracies of the modern Russian military in varies films still using AK47 variants when they should be using the 74. We know there are plenty of armories that have the 74 models.

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I just never understand the inaccuracies of the modern Russian military in varies films still using AK47 variants when they should be using the 74. We know there are plenty of armories that have the 74 models.

Believe me, I'd love to see Russian soldiers in movies just as accurately depicted as American troops are. But as has been said, it's a matter of most directors not caring as well as the economics of procuring the weapons and enough blanks. Though I'd still be hard pressed to deny that mock-ups like this are convincing enough to convey the illusion for me. Same goes for an "M4" with an SP1 or A1 lower, since most viewers only pay attention to the upper receiver unit and accessories attached to it.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Though I'd still be hard pressed to deny that mock-ups like this are convincing enough to convey the illusion for me.

Yeah, true. I don't know how many times I saw "GoldenEye" over the years (and since it was one of my favorite James Bond movies, I saw it quite often on VHS) before I realized that the "AK-74s" in the movie were mostly visually modified Type 56s. To someone with only a casual interest in firearms, the difference will not be apparent at all.

Originally Posted by Spartan198

I also read MPM's post on the GoldenEye talk page and it made a lot of sense. I wish there were more directors that cared about the guns.

Retrospectively, I think that the theory I've articulated in this topic is more likely than his explanation (keep in mind that he and I both posted on that talk page more than four years ago), but his explanation is certainly not implausible.

[SPEMack618]

Originally Posted by MT2008

To someone with only a casual interest in firearms, the difference will not be apparent at all.

Heck, I've got more than a casual interest in guns, and have fired both a -74 and -47 in familirization and didn't realize that the Goldeneye guns were modified Type 56s until coming here.

And Goldeneye is probably my favorite James Bond movie. it is also the first one I ever saw in theaters.

[Excalibur]

I think nowadays, western armories can supplement their lack of AK74s with replicas like Airsoft if they are for non firing scenes.