Ok, this should get this section going AR-15 VS AK-47

[81911SC]

I'm an Ak man myself. Lets hear what IA likes. :D

[Master Shake]

ar-15.
more accurate than the ak.

[EJ25RUN]

I'm Russian. You know my answer.

[white24d]

AK more reliable. Those things are like rocks

[_Christian_]

ar-15.
more accurate than the ak.
AR will give you better accuracy at 200+ yards. How many targets do you ever plan to engage at that distance? The AR-15 jams way too often and is too picky when it comes to ammo/cleaning. The ak will eat up anything you feed it. The newer Ak variants are more accurate and can also be chambered in 7.62x39, 5.45x39, and 5.56.

[Vteckidd]

AR it looks cooler

[ranger250x]

voted ak... reason being is simply reliabilty and full auto compared to three round burst on military issued weapon. bigger round as well;)

[KPowerEP3]

both.

But, I voted AK for one reason, and one reason only: knockdown power. For the record, I want ZERO of the shot placement BS. Shot for shot, a 7.62 is tearing shit up and the 5.56 is just cutting a nice little hole.

[Frög]

ar-15.
more accurate than the ak.

That is the only argument for the AR, but it isn't even valid..

At 30 yards, I can shoot the head of the silhouette at least 29 times out of my 30rd mag (at very worst).. But I usually do it 30/30.. The accuracy argument is really weak because the difference can only be seen after 150+ yards..

Now, when am I going to need to shoot further than that? Most combat, especially in gorilla warfare, is done well within that range..

The AR will not shoot if it gets near sand, water, etc.. My AK will shoot, every time I pull my trigger.. Whether I am in water, in a sand storm, crawling in mud, and etc.. The same cannot be said about the AR..

The AK also performs way better than the AR in all aspects in full auto..

AK-47 #1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvrG4T2K4sE)

[Frög]

AR it looks cooler

Can't argue with that!

If you watch the video I posted, at 7min, they mention how ugly the AK is..

But I like the way it looks..

[Danny]

since its shtf scenario i would say its a tie, maybe leaning towards AR due to the possibility of more ammo being available (police stations, military bases ect).

Both are great weapons, but the AR in general is better. Which is better in SHFT???? Which ever you can get parts and ammo for. Thats why everyone should own both ...even though i dont :(


The ultimate SHTF (non-zombie) is the handgun of course! High cap, with tons of spare mags. AND CONCEALABLE!!!!!!!!!!

[Blitanicle99]

Gas system of an AK, the rest AR.

Enough said.

[Jaimecbr900]

I have both and like both. It really is a toss up for me in the SHTF general scenario. I'm accurate with both, but the AR is more manueverable (sp?) IMO.

The 7.62 steel core is a punch load, but 5.56 can be had hot too. In trajectory, the AR would likely get the nod. Capacity, the AR would get the nod only because the mags take up less space than banana AK's would. Reliability, the nod would likely go to the AK simply because it will shoot a rock if you file it down to fit in the barrel. Most modern AR's are more than reliable, but even cheapo AK copies are reliable, so the nod in that category would likely go to the AK. Accessories, the clear winner is the AR since you can get some nice rails and have USEFUL accessories mounted and you would be covered in 99% of scenarios.

It's a toss up for me. :goodjob:

That's why you should own BOTH.....:D

[Vteckidd]

okokok

Chuck Norris with an AK

versus

Jack Bauer with an AR






gogogogogo

[81911SC]

Chuck, all day.

[Frög]

AK, all day.

[Danny]

Chuck, all day.


Ur crazy. Bauer all the way. Chuck is a joke (yes i said it)!!!!!!!

[.::UNKNOWN::.]

i like both but like vteckidd said the ar does look cooler and has many fun attachments like the 40mm grenade launcher (autrey's armory has one) but i like the ak just bc what frog said it is more reliable.... i want both but dont have the extra money for both lol

[KPowerEP3]

i like both but like vteckidd said the ar does look cooler and has many fun attachments like the 40mm grenade launcher (autrey's armory has one) but i like the ak just bc what frog said it is more reliable.... i want both but dont have the extra money for both lol

You know, if you look hard enough, you get a 40mm launcher for an AK, :boobies: too. With all the aftermarket stocks and accessories available these days, anything you can put on an AR, you can put on an AK.

I, like Jaime, personally own both (looking for pics on old comp/PB account to post) and wouldn't trade either one. My AR is a little finky when it comes to ammo, though, andd Failure to Feeds are a little too common for me to consider it a first choice in a SHTF scenario, when my ammo choices would be eventually limited to whatever i can scavenge.

[Frög]

x2


i like both but like vteckidd said the ar does look cooler and has many fun attachments like the 40mm grenade launcher (autrey's armory has one) but i like the ak just bc what frog said it is more reliable.... i want both but dont have the extra money for both lol

this is a 74, but the 47 has the same:
http://www.dreadgazebo.com/gunporn/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/gunporn-74-and-launcher.jpg

[DieselNuts]

x2



this is a 74, but the 47 has the same:
http://www.dreadgazebo.com/gunporn/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/gunporn-74-and-launcher.jpg
nice, I was about to look for a pic of a tac'd out AK, but you did the leg work for me :goodjob: I vote AK.

[Danny]

a full review of the ar vs ak was a couple months ago in Combat Tactics magazine. The AR won hands down. 95% of people just vote on what they hear on the internet, and read on gun forums.

Both are great guns and have thier own purpose and place but the AR is the superior weapon, no doubt. Now if you ask which is the best for YOU and YOUR purpose, thats a WHOLE NOTHER TOPIC.

But the OP didnt ask a question that everyone is giving him answers for. He asked which is the better SHTF gun, and my answer remains which ever one you can get parts and ammo for.

[Frög]

a full review of the ar vs ak was a couple months ago in Combat Tactics magazine. The AR won hands down. 95% of people just vote on what they hear on the internet, and read on gun forums.

Both are great guns and have thier own purpose and place but the AR is the superior weapon, no doubt. Now if you ask which is the best for YOU and YOUR purpose, thats a WHOLE NOTHER TOPIC.

But the OP didnt ask a question that everyone is giving him answers for. He asked which is the better SHTF gun, and my answer remains which ever one you can get parts and ammo for.

I have talked to many people that have owned AR's and switched to AK.. So many issues with jamming, and common multiple fires with one pull of the trigger..

The AK is a superior weapon, that cannot be argued.. Combat tactics magazine is bias for the AR if they said it was better.. It out performs the AR in every aspect except accuracy but only past 150+ yards.. The AK variants with the 5.45 is MORE accurate that the AR..

Also talking to marines who were in the gulf war, they told me about horror stories about the AR in desserts.. In windy situations, the AR was so unreliable that they had to put their rifle in trash bags to avoid any sand getting in it.. Only when they were getting shot at, they would open the bag and STILL couldn't shoot a full clip because it would jam..

Last time I was at the range, some guy had an AR.. Every pull of the trigger, it would shoot 3 and jam.. His gun was barely used.. His buddy told me that the happiest two days of his life where when he bought an AR and when he sold it..

Now, ammo for the AK is so hard to find(for the 7.62), and in a SHFT situation, I would like an AR.. But for combat, in a war, AK..

I like AR's, I would love to have one, but to say it is a superior weapon? I remember watching a documentary where designers and engineers of the AR where admitting that the AK was a better weapon overall.. The simplicity and ruggedness of the AK is what makes is superior..

Here, /discussion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h08NtNOLYuo

AK is also FAR superior in AUTO..

AK, Hands down..

[Frög]

AHHH its coming! lol :goodjob:

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (2 members and 0 guests)
Frög, Danny

[Danny]

That video seemed pretty biased. I know gun magazines are 100% biased. But i will summerize the article i mentioned. They compared the two guns on 10 topics, one point for each topic for the winner. Here ya go. let me know what you think. My opinions stands: both weapons have a place and purpose and they dont neccesarily overlap.

RECEIVER VERSATILITY: 1point AR 1 point AK

BUTTSTOCK ERGONOMICS: AR 1 point

OPTICAL SIGHT SUITABILITY: AR 1 point

RAIL ACCESSORY INTERFACE: AR 1 point

STANDARD BALLISTICS: AK 1 point

COMBAT RELIABILITY: AK 1 point

LONG RANGE ACCURACY: AR 1 point

GRENADE LAUCHING: AR 1 point

ERGONOMIC FACTORS: AR 1 point

REMEDIAL ACTION DRILLS: AR 1 point AK 1 point

FINAL SCORE: 8 to 4, AR Winner.

I found these hard to argue with. If you have some more topics to add we can debate those but these 10 are basically set in stone and i think most would agree to that.

[81911SC]

Exactly why I started this thread. Lol

[Danny]

Looks like we should give the AK another point (tieing in the Grenade catagory). Even though i have yet to see any insurgents running around with this varient.. blehhh

QUOTE:
AK-74M. The latest variant, issued to the Russian troops since early 1990s. Key differences from the earlier AK-74 rifles are the side-folding plastic buttstock and the scope mounting rail on the left side of the receiver.


AK-74M with GP-30 40mm grenade launcher installed

http://world.guns.ru/assault/ak74m-gp30.jpg

[Danny]

Come on fooo... its bed time :D

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (2 members and 0 guests)
Danny, Frög

[Frög]

That video seemed pretty biased. I know gun magazines are 100% biased. But i will summerize the article i mentioned. They compared the two guns on 10 topics, one point for each topic for the winner. Here ya go. let me know what you think. My opinions stands: both weapons have a place and purpose and they dont neccesarily overlap.

RECEIVER VERSATILITY: 1point AR 1 point AK

BUTTSTOCK ERGONOMICS: AR 1 point

OPTICAL SIGHT SUITABILITY: AR 1 point

RAIL ACCESSORY INTERFACE: AR 1 point

STANDARD BALLISTICS: AK 1 point

COMBAT RELIABILITY: AK 1 point

LONG RANGE ACCURACY: AR 1 point

GRENADE LAUCHING: AR 1 point

ERGONOMIC FACTORS: AR 1 point

REMEDIAL ACTION DRILLS: AR 1 point AK 1 point

FINAL SCORE: 8 to 4, AR Winner.

I found these hard to argue with. If you have some more topics to add we can debate those but these 10 are basically set in stone and i think most would agree to that.

Agreed, you can't argue with those being true.. But those don't mean anything! Stock ergonomics? Who cares?

The red ones really don't matter in combat.. The fact that they added those comparing factors was to give points to the AR and an unfair advantage.. I mean, why didn't they add EASE OF DISASSEMBLY(sp?), DURABILITY/RUGGEDNESS, MAINTENANCE etc.. Things that matter! If they did, the AK would be the winner..

Also, isn't OPTICAL SIGHT SUITABILITY an added BS criteria when they already gave a point for the AR for RAIL ACCESSORY INTERFACE? That comes hand and hand! Thats a free point for the AR!?!?!

The Orange ones are also somewhat stupid.. In combat, most of it is done well within 200 yards which accuracy is the same.. Beyond that, use a sniper.. The AK's accuracy is more than enough.. Grenade launching? Sure, but we are comparing the rifle!

About the video, I don't see how it can be biased.. Some fact can be, but the main message of comparing the AR and the AK isn't.. The co-designer is saying HIS gun that he designed isn't as good as the AK.. Shouldn't he be biased the other way? :cheers:

Edit:

If you have some more topics to add we can debate those but these 10 are basically set in stone and i think most would agree to that.

Ahh I think I might of missed that..

[Frög]

Come on fooo... its bed time :D

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (2 members and 0 guests)
Danny, Frög

I tried! But you can take your time, I have work until 6am, so I got all night! :lmfao:

[Danny]

Agreed, you can't argue with those being true.. But those don't mean anything! Stock ergonomics? Who cares?
The people carrying them are all different sizes. You really going to argue that an adjustable stock is not a factor of combat effectivness? I would tend to think most CQB guys would say it helps alot, since they are all different sizes.

I may be willing to take a half point vs a full point for this one. :D



The red ones really don't matter in combat.. The fact that they added those comparing factors was to give points to the AR and an unfair advantage.. I mean, why didn't they add EASE OF DISASSEMBLY(sp?), DURABILITY/RUGGEDNESS, MAINTENANCE etc.. Things that matter! If they did, the AK would be the winner..

I disagree that they dont matter, but agree that the should have added maintenance in there. Durability goes under reliability in my opinion.



Also, isn't OPTICAL SIGHT SUITABILITY an added BS criteria when they already gave a point for the AR for RAIL ACCESSORY INTERFACE? That comes hand and hand! Thats a free point for the AR!?!?!

Disagree. Our rail system is seperate from the standard issue top rail for optics. Our rails let mounting and dismounting (just as easily) tac lights, ir lasers and a host of other things that give us an INCREDIBLE advantage, and advantage that is worth at LEAST 3 points lol. Optics is one thing, but accesories that make locating, IDing a potential threat and then sharing that information with others is a whole seperate ball game. IMO of course.



The Orange ones are also somewhat stupid.. In combat, most of it is done well within 200 yards which accuracy is the same.. Beyond that, use a sniper.. The AK's accuracy is more than enough.. Grenade launching? Sure, but we are comparing the rifle!

agreed somewhat.


About the video, I don't see how it can be biased.. Some fact can be, but the main message of comparing the AR and the AK isn't.. The co-designer is saying HIS gun that he designed isn't as good as the AK.. Shouldn't he be biased the other way? :cheers:

He is just mad becuase his last name is sullivan. Not Stoner. Thats sad he is admitting that a Russian tank commander that had no engineering education out engineered him. I think Mr Sullivan and his son just wanted some attention :D


ok dammit, im biased. im going to bed. AR is still better for our military and the AK is still better for those miltarys/terrorists who cant afford ARs. :D

Ok u want the real winner here? HK416, no stfu ;)

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/c/c9/Hk416-1.jpg/500px-Hk416-1.jpg

[Frög]

The people carrying them are all different sizes. You really going to argue that an adjustable stock is not a factor of combat effectivness? I would tend to think most CQB guys would say it helps alot, since they are all different sizes.

I may be willing to take a half point vs a full point for this one. :D

I disagree that they dont matter, but agree that the should have added maintenance in there. Durability goes under reliability in my opinion.

Disagree. Our rail system is seperate from the standard issue top rail for optics. Our rails let mounting and dismounting (just as easily) tac lights, ir lasers and a host of other things that give us an INCREDIBLE advantage, and advantage that is worth at LEAST 3 points lol. Optics is one thing, but accesories that make locating, IDing a potential threat and then sharing that information with others is a whole seperate ball game. IMO of course.

agreed somewhat.

He is just mad becuase his last name is sullivan. Not Stoner. Thats sad he is admitting that a Russian tank commander that had no engineering education out engineered him. I think Mr Sullivan and his son just wanted some attention :D

ok dammit, im biased. im going to bed. AR is still better for our military and the AK is still better for those miltarys/terrorists who cant afford ARs. :D

Ok u want the real winner here? HK416, no stfu ;)

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/c/c9/Hk416-1.jpg/500px-Hk416-1.jpg

Good points.. Glad we can have a civilized debate! :D

I do want to say that to me, Reliability isn't the same as Durability..

Article I found interesting. Nuances between the two:

One measure of durability is represented by the duration of product ownership. Reliability, on the other hand, represents interruptions in usage during that ownership. The ownership of any product or system cannot be enjoyed if it is continually interrupted and the desired functions lost for even a brief time. This means reliability takes precedence over durability even though both are desired in most applications.

Not saying that the AK is more durable, I would think so but I don't know for sure..

[Danny]

Good points.. Glad we can have a civilized debate! :D

I do want to say that to me, Reliability isn't the same as Durability..

Article I found interesting. Nuances between the two:

One measure of durability is represented by the duration of product ownership. Reliability, on the other hand, represents interruptions in usage during that ownership. The ownership of any product or system cannot be enjoyed if it is continually interrupted and the desired functions lost for even a brief time. This means reliability takes precedence over durability even though both are desired in most applications.

Not saying that the AK is more durable, I would think so but I don't know for sure..


good point on the durability vs reliability (i forgot about that topic in my operations managment course lol).

I would say they are both durable considering thier intended uses. Which one would be more durable if put in a dirt hole for 20 years? I think we know the answer for that. But i would say for combat purposes they are both pretty dang durable.. But then again i havent gone to war with either.

[green91]

This thread really interests me, not for arguments sake but more of WHY lol.

I think that tac'd out ARs and AKs are kind of like a honda with a body kit. 99% of people have them soley to floss with. IF someone breaks into your home, who thinks to grab their tactical AK, unfold the stock, blah blah. I think i'll grab my .45 or 9mm.

That being said, i love the rifles and have a Colt ar-15. Ive used the rifle to shoot 100 & 300yd matches. I don't have a folding stock or laser sights or even a grenade launcher.

[Danny]

This thread really interests me, not for arguments sake but more of WHY lol.

I think that tac'd out ARs and AKs are kind of like a honda with a body kit. 99% of people have them soley to floss with. IF someone breaks into your home, who thinks to grab their tactical AK, unfold the stock, blah blah. I think i'll grab my .45 or 9mm.

That being said, i love the rifles and have a Colt ar-15. Ive used the rifle to shoot 100 & 300yd matches. I don't have a folding stock or laser sights or even a grenade launcher.


Your sounding pretty close minded. Sure, alot of people build thier guns with all kinds of mall ninja shit on them. But then there are tons of people that build them with the basics: aimpoints, tac latch, sling and a vert grip and then train with them like crazy. Just look at the training offered by Bob Rodger and the like, there are waiting lists for it. Point is there are the car show people and there are the people who take thier cars to track and beat the hell outa their cars and themselves. You seem to be forgetting about the second group.

And i am not sure where you assumed people use ar's as their HD guns, i would say that's largely a false assumption.

[green91]

I can see your point, and I haven't forgotten about the second group. I just happen to believe that Group #1 (aka the flossers) grossly outnumber the amount of legitimate shooters. Not necessarily here, but ive heard several people talk mindlessly about buying an assault rifle for home defense which is why i said that.

[Danny]

I can see your point, and I haven't forgotten about the second group. I just happen to believe that Group #1 (aka the flossers) grossly outnumber the amount of legitimate shooters. Not necessarily here, but ive heard several people talk mindlessly about buying an assault rifle for home defense which is why i said that.


ok ill agree there. Your first post just came across like we were all getting thrown into the mall ninja/ricer group just because we own an ar or ak, at least that was the impression i got.

Yes those who speak of using thier ar as home defense is mindless mostly. Allthough i wouldnt hesitate to grab my ar if for some reason my handgun wasnt around.

That kind of goes with those people that say "my pistol is for fighting my way back to my AR". Although macho sounding, its total BS in 99.999% of civilian cases :D IMO

[green91]

Ah well i wasn't trying to lump everyone into that category. Sorry if i came across that way. Its just aggravating every time i try to have an intelligent conversation with someone about guns and all they can ramble on about is modifying/buying an AK or AR yet they don't know the first thing about gun handling safety or even a proper stance. They are often times more of a catch phrase to the ignorant rather than a respected gun.

[Danny]

Ah well i wasn't trying to lump everyone into that category. Sorry if i came across that way. Its just aggravating every time i try to have an intelligent conversation with someone about guns and all they can ramble on about is modifying/buying an AK or AR yet they don't know the first thing about gun handling safety or even a proper stance. They are often times more of a catch phrase to the ignorant rather than a respected gun.


know the feeling. i prefer to spend money on training rather than "upgrades" to my guns. I dont claim to be some sort of tactical wizard or anything, but I do enjoy learning the proper techniques more than i enjoy telling people which guns I own. Id assume go to a 3 day class for a grand, rather than buy a new gun as the skills are farrrr more valuable than the gun itself.

green, i cant remember... your mil or leo arnt you?

[green91]

green, i cant remember... your mil or leo arnt you?



Actually neither. My dad was a competitive shooter for many years and so ive been exposed to guns my entire life.

[Truegiant]

Ok.. I just voted. Shit I just hoped on to ia for the first time and found this forum. I read the whole thread and will hit a few key notes tomorrow. I am about to head to bed.

- stock ergonomics is a big factor because when I wear my gear my stock is in a different location then when i am not.

- Rail Accessory interface is a huge factor. On my weapon at work I have a PAQ2 / mars / flashlight / pen flare adaptor/ buis/ fufis. All are necessary for any mission you go on when deployed

- ergonomics is a huge factor. not only when you have to carry it for 8-10 hours a day on patrol but when doing things like slicing the pie, over unders, mout, ebcr, you want the most compact weapon platform.

To hit on the reliability point here. Most people that own ar's and have ftf/fte problems are shooting cheap ammo, using shit magazines, and have not lubbed up there weapon. I am not saying the ar is better here. I will be the first to admit that an ak is more reliable. We had back up "truck" guns in iraq that we had captured from insurgents. They were ak's. At any point in time you could pick one up and it would fire. But do no be mistaken when i say that i have come across my fare share of shit ak's.

I have shot several variations of ar's. SBR, SDM, 6.5, 6.8, 308, etc.. I would love for my team leaders to carry atleast a 6.8 for there room brooms and my rifleman the standard 5.56 , the only problem with that is if one runs out of ammo they dont interchange. I feel both are compatible in there own right. I have three ar's in my gun cabinet as we speak. I do not currently own an ak because i am in the process of having some of my own custom peices machined for public sale on the ar platform and i needed some test beds.

You all have a good night.

[Truegiant]

Oh incase anyone cares.

US ARMY Infantry. I have many more schools both in the military and out involving weapons if anyone is wondering where I have formed my opinions from.

[VTECking]

Shot for shot, a 7.62 is tearing shit up and the 5.56 is just cutting a nice little hole.
Not necessarly true, when the 5.56 penetrates its target it tumbles and shatters leaving the target with a shit load of lead throughout the point of impact and around it. So dont completely bag on the 5.56 saying that its small and wouldnt do anything, thats the mistake that the vietcong made in the Vietnam conflict when the M16 A1 first came out, and they obvioulsy thought wrong. So essencially the 5.56 is tearing shit up, and the 7.62 is knocking shit down and punching a decent sized hole in its target.

[Frög]

Not necessarly true, when the 5.56 penetrates its target it tumbles and shatters leaving the target with a shit load of lead throughout the point of impact and around it. So dont completely bag on the 5.56 saying that its small and wouldnt do anything, thats the mistake that the vietcong made in the Vietnam conflict when the M16 A1 first came out, and they obvioulsy thought wrong. So essencially the 5.56 is tearing shit up, and the 7.62 is knocking shit down and punching a decent sized hole in its target.

AK-47 won the war.. Swamp, mud, rice fields, we couldn't shoot.. They could.. Maybe if we had a better gun, we wouldn't have lost that war..

[Danny]

the ar platform has changed alot since vietnam, its a whole new weapon in terms of reliability compared to back then.

[VTECking]

AK-47 won the war.. Swamp, mud, rice fields, we couldn't shoot.. They could.. Maybe if we had a better gun, we wouldn't have lost that war..
If we had a foward assist on the M16A1 for the first half of the conflict, the gun would have been alot more deadly too. But I do agree with you, the AK is definatley more durable gun. But Id still take a AR over an AK any day just because of the accuracy, and you can carry more ammo on you because the 5.56 is alot smaller than the 7.62, and all you have to do is clean it and the gun will be just as good durability wise as the AK.

[Frög]

1st, the AK is just as accurate up to 200yards.. So really the accuracy argument isn't valid.. And comabt is done well withing 200 yards.. 2nd you are comparing later AR versions to the AK 47, the first version.. You should be comparing it to the later AK 47 variants like the AK 74 which is more accurate..

LOL the AR is NEVER and will never be as reliable as an AK no matter what.. Clean it? Well the mere fact that you have to clean it every time you shoot a bullet makes it inferior and a bad design.. An assault rifle used in war shouldn't be something you baby and clean all the time.. It should be something you throw around, drop in the sand, never clean, but will ALWAYS shoot no matter what.. :cheers:


If we had a foward assist on the M16A1 for the first half of the conflict, the gun would have been alot more deadly too. But I do agree with you, the AK is definatley more durable gun. But Id still take a AR over an AK any day just because of the accuracy, and you can carry more ammo, all you have to do is clean it and the gun will be just as good durability wise as the AK.

[Frög]

the ar platform has changed alot since vietnam, its a whole new weapon in terms of reliability compared to back then.

The AK 47 was made in 47, and we are comparing it to the latest model AR's? We should be comparing it to later AK variants then..

[_Christian_]

Not necessarly true, when the 5.56 penetrates its target it tumbles and shatters leaving the target with a shit load of lead throughout the point of impact and around it. So dont completely bag on the 5.56 saying that its small and wouldnt do anything, thats the mistake that the vietcong made in the Vietnam conflict when the M16 A1 first came out, and they obvioulsy thought wrong. So essencially the 5.56 is tearing shit up, and the 7.62 is knocking shit down and punching a decent sized hole in its target.
You can get the 5.56 in the ak100 series. The even smaller 5.45 round found in the ak-74 tumbles as well.


The AK 47 was made in 47, and we are comparing it to the latest model AR's? We should be comparing it to later AK variants then..
x2 on that.

[Danny]

1st, the AK is just as accurate up to 200yards.. So really the accuracy argument isn't valid.. And combat is done well withing 200 yards..

Marines and soldiers can and do engage at ranges around and over 200m. Marines somewhat prefer this and it shows, just look at how the equip their typical squad (lots of full length M16s). And accuracy has way more to it than the where the first shot lands, follow up shots are just as important (if not more important) and the m16/m4 has the upper hand here. Giving it the upper hand in both CQB and medium range.

I am not saying the ak cant hit the broad side of a barn, but for you to say accuracy makes no difference in the argument is pure bs.

And for the varient argument, i wasnt saying the ak hasnt changed over the years. But a typical ak fanboy argues using the veitnam war as support, and suggests or flat out lies about those problems not being addressed.

[SiRed94]

I own both. Personally I like the AK better. They are both equally accurate at sub-200 yard shots. Anything more than that, I'm going to be using my hunting rifles anyways. I have never had my AK jam once, even when I am shooting the shit out of it. My AK looks just as cool as my AR. AK variants are way cheaper than AR's and I can find parts for them cheaper than the AR. Stock for stock, I like the lighter weight of the AR, especially if I were going to be lugging it around all day. But both have their pros and both are great guns overall.

[eraser4g63]

Sorry to do this but im gonna come in from left field here with he M14 or the Mini14
M14=
http://www.shootershaven.net/MarkPic/m14/M14Norinco06.jpg
Mini14=
http://www.tacord.com/images/pimped_mini14_1.jpg
Sorry just personal preference. Though if i had to pick between the two i would go AR.

[green91]

For accuracy ill buy a walther wa2000 :ninja:

[Truegiant]

Sorry to do this but im gonna come in from left field here with he M14 or the Mini14
M14=
http://www.shootershaven.net/MarkPic/m14/M14Norinco06.jpg
Mini14=
http://www.tacord.com/images/pimped_mini14_1.jpg
Sorry just personal preference. Though if i had to pick between the two i would go AR.

i just sold one of these. there def. bad!

[Frög]

WHY THE FUCK ARE WE POSTING ANYTHING OTHER THAN AK's AND AR's?


SHOULD I POST A PIC OF A FAMAS? Fuck this is a AK vs. AR thread, is this topic/concept really too complicated?



http://www.wallpapergate.com/data/media/2175/Civilian%20Gunner%20FAMAS.jpg

[Truegiant]

I guess its as complicated as you being french. Anywho.. more ar porn is on the way.

[81911SC]

Eraser, get that gay shit out of here.

[VTECking]

1st, the AK is just as accurate up to 200yards.. So really the accuracy argument isn't valid.. And comabt is done well withing 200 yards.. 2nd you are comparing later AR versions to the AK 47, the first version.. You should be comparing it to the later AK 47 variants like the AK 74 which is more accurate..

LOL the AR is NEVER and will never be as reliable as an AK no matter what.. Clean it? Well the mere fact that you have to clean it every time you shoot a bullet makes it inferior and a bad design.. An assault rifle used in war shouldn't be something you baby and clean all the time.. It should be something you throw around, drop in the sand, never clean, but will ALWAYS shoot no matter what.. :cheers:
Okay, actually we can compare the AK-47 with the best varients of the AR's because the AK has pretty much not changed since '47, but the latest and greatest AR's are still AR's, they have just evolved from its more primitive state. But you cant compare the AK-74 with the AR in this debate because the AK-74 is a completely different rifle than the AK-47, the AK-74 shoots a round thats even smaller than the 5.56, it shoots a 5.45. Sure the AK-74 vs. the AR would be a better debate than the AK-47 vs AR "because of accuracy and round similarities of the AK-74 and AR", but this gun is still not the AK-47 even though its similar to it. That would be like me bringing up a HK-416 vs the AK, sure the 416 is similar to the AR, but it's also completely different. Heres a vid of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZpZryZEiY4

[koukis14]

Sig 556

[Frög]

I guess its as complicated as you being french. Anywho.. more ar porn is on the way.

Wow, good one.. I mean really? Not so bright I see.. :stupid:

[Frög]

Okay, actually we can compare the AK-47 with the best varients of the AR's because the AK has pretty much not changed since '47, but the latest and greatest AR's are still AR's, they have just evolved from its more primitive state. But you cant compare the AK-74 with the AR in this debate because the AK-74 is a completely different rifle than the AK-47, the AK-74 shoots a round thats even smaller than the 5.56, it shoots a 5.45. Sure the AK-74 vs. the AR would be a better debate than the AK-47 vs AR "because of accuracy and round similarities of the AK-74 and AR", but this gun is still not the AK-47 even though its similar to it. That would be like me bringing up a HK-416 vs the AK, sure the 416 is similar to the AR, but it's also completely different. Heres a vid of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZpZryZEiY4

Same can be said otherwise! AK has evolved from its primitive state..

The AR was improved where it needed to.. It didn't need or couldn't really change the round..

The AK had nothing to fix except their slight accuracy.. To improve this, (and improvement, just like the AR's) they went with a smaller round.. Still the same gun..

AR still today has major reliability issues especially in deserts.. The gun has to be cleaned, can't touch sand, can't get a grain of sand anywhere near the rifle..

The AK is dropped in sand and never cleaned.. Yet, it will shoot, every time.. A luxury AR owner cannot share..

The AK-47 should be compared to early version AR's.. AK-74 to later versions.. Of course, AR fan boys will disagree because the AK is better in both comparisons.. Saying that you can't compare them is preposterous..

AK-47 = AK
Ak-74 = AK

[Truegiant]

Wow, good one.. I mean really? Not so bright I see.. :stupid:

Ouch.. Someone isnt feeling the sarcasm I take it. Stupid, huh. I guess a Civil Engineering degree from Georgia Tech is stupid. Hmm.. Not sure I see your point nor do I care. I am glad that you feel it necessary to degrade people over the internet. Anywho.. You wanted more ar porn.. here it is.

[Truegiant]

Same can be said otherwise! AR still today has major reliability issues especially in deserts.. The gun has to be cleaned, can't touch sand, can't get a grain of sand anywhere near the rifle..

Do you have any first hand experience with this? I do. ALOT! I never had a problem with the m4 platform during my entire deployment.

[BB4_to_DC2]

Same can be said otherwise! AK has evolved from its primitive state..

The AR was improved where it needed to.. It didn't need or couldn't really change the round..

The AK had nothing to fix except their slight accuracy.. To improve this, (and improvement, just like the AR's) they went with a smaller round.. Still the same gun..

AR still today has major reliability issues especially in deserts.. The gun has to be cleaned, can't touch sand, can't get a grain of sand anywhere near the rifle..

The AK is dropped in sand and never cleaned.. Yet, it will shoot, every time.. A luxury AR owner cannot share..

The AK-47 should be compared to early version AR's.. AK-74 to later versions.. Of course, AR fan boys will disagree because the AK is better in both comparisons.. Saying that you can't compare them is preposterous..

AK-47 = AK
Ak-74 = AK
The AR is by Far the better over all weapon i have both so i am not a fan boy of the black rifle or the AK but if you compare the early ARs to the Ak you might be surprised. the early models were given to us military advisers in Vietnam (Green Berets) the loved them they and they told the military the top brass thought that the 223 was to small but a lot of lobbing got them to get the ar a test run but the brass was not done the fucked the rifle all up when they issiued it to our troops saying it never had to to be cleaned bull shit every gun has to be cleaned even your ak
also the tolerance to sand is not as bad FROG says i served in Iraq and i can say i hardly had a problem with dust and sand yes the ak is very great for reliability but the accurcy sucks the only poeple i have meat that can shoot the rifle good are Special Forces Operators but that comes from years of training and E36_ACE is right about 47/74 they are completly different. AK stands for Avtomat Kalashnikova thats it bumb ass they are to different weapons so i can say the AR 6.8 piston drivin system is the the same as the AR15 because it is an AR and any way Frog how do you know any thing about AR/AK your French the only thing you guys are good for is surrendering and wiping the UNs ASS

[SiRed94]

Fuck this debate, no matter what the outcome, I win because I own both. MUAHAHAHA

[Truegiant]

Fuck this debate, no matter what the outcome, I win because I own both. MUAHAHAHA

I concur.. Its another debate where one person feels there opinion is superior and everyone else is wrong. Anywho.. I am just in this thread for the gun porn.

[Frög]

Ouch.. Someone isnt feeling the sarcasm I take it. Stupid, huh. I guess a Civil Engineering degree from Georgia Tech is stupid. Hmm.. Not sure I see your point nor do I care. I am glad that you feel it necessary to degrade people over the internet. Anywho.. You wanted more ar porn.. here it is.

Then you should know that what you say is a direct indaction of how people percieve you.. And you tell me this, how smart do you think this comment makes you look:


I guess its as complicated as you being french. Anywho.. more ar porn is on the way.

If you can't figure out with your GT degree that this is a dumb comment, and an extremely dumb/weak response to my post, regardless how smart you are, you must be slow after all.. Do I feel it necessary to degrade people over the internet? No, just keep your ignorant comments out.. Sarcasm not found..

I mean, I was right.. The guy posts pics of a m-14 in an AR vs. AK thread.. :goodjob:

[Frög]

The AR is by Far the better over all weapon i have both so i am not a fan boy of the black rifle or the AK but if you compare the early ARs to the Ak you might be surprised. the early models were given to us military advisers in Vietnam (Green Berets) the loved them they and they told the military the top brass thought that the 223 was to small but a lot of lobbing got them to get the ar a test run but the brass was not done the fucked the rifle all up when they issiued it to our troops saying it never had to to be cleaned bull shit every gun has to be cleaned even your ak
also the tolerance to sand is not as bad FROG says i served in Iraq and i can say i hardly had a problem with dust and sand yes the ak is very great for reliability but the accurcy sucks the only poeple i have meat that can shoot the rifle good are Special Forces Operators but that comes from years of training and E36_ACE is right about 47/74 they are completly different. AK stands for Avtomat Kalashnikova thats it bumb ass they are to different weapons so i can say the AR 6.8 piston drivin system is the the same as the AR15 because it is an AR

PUBLIC EDUCATION = FAIL..

You claim to be American and can't even write a full sentence.. Just for example, you can't tell the difference between "meet" and "meat".. You are an idiot.. Seriously, reading this gives me a headache..


and any way Frog how do you know any thing about AR/AK your French the only thing you guys are good for is surrendering and wiping the UNs ASS

LOL we will see how good you do in this war buddy.. Maybe it would of been a better idea to follow the French's advice here about Iraq don't you think cowboy?

[Truegiant]

PUBLIC EDUCTION = FAIL..

You claim to be American and can't even write a full sentence.. Just for example, you can't tell the difference between "meet" and "meat".. You are an idiot.. Seriously, reading this gives me a headache..



LOL we will see how good you do in this war buddy.. Maybe it would of been a better idea to follow the French's advice here about Iraq don't you think cowboy?

I think its public education.. but I am slow remember.

I am pretty sure your sentence should be as follows:

You claim to be an American but you cannot even write a full sentence.

[Truegiant]

Anywho.. Enough of the BS.. Lets keep this on point!!

[Frög]

I think its public education.. but I am slow remember.

I am pretty sure your sentence should be as follows:

You claim to be an American but you cannot even write a full sentence.

That was not directed to you.. Was it? It was to BB4_to_DC2..

BTW if you correct me, please do so correctly.. You can use either, "but" is better, but "and" isn't grammatically wrong..

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conjunctions.htm


Anywho.. Enough of the BS.. Lets keep this on point!!

Just like I have been saying..

[Truegiant]

That was not directed to you.. Was it? It was to BB4_to_DC2..

BTW if you correct me, please do so correctly.. You can use either, "but" is better, but "and" isn't grammatically wrong..

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conjunctions.htm



Just like I have been saying..

PM inbound.. thread on track!

Couple of my photos from my playtime in the sandbox.
I am trying to find my sniper/counter sniper photos!
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc75/truegiant/Guns/DSCN0177.jpg
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc75/truegiant/Guns/DSCN0277.jpg
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc75/truegiant/Guns/100_0385.jpg

[Frög]

PM inbound.. thread on track!

Couple of my photos from my playtime in the sandbox.
I am trying to find my sniper/counter sniper photos!

BTW, thank you for the AR porn.. Because I do love AR's, I just happen to like AK's a tad more.. :D

[Danny]

more sandbox photos ASAP!!!!

[Truegiant]

most of them are on my other laptop and external. i have to be up at 0430 and i will do it when i get off tomorrow.

[Danny]

dam thats early. hit the rack dude.

[Truegiant]

I just got out of the shower. 0430 isnt early. Its when the alarm goes off everyday for me.

[Danny]

well if your used to it, thats a different story. Me, im not so used to it lol.

when we gonna do some training?

[twinj]

AK more reliable. Those things are like rocks

Exactly. AR's are delicate compared to to AK's.

[Frög]

Exactly. AR's are delicate compared to to AK's.

Which would be a favorable characteristic in a woman.. Not an assault rifle.. :D

[DevilK9]

I'm pretty biased towards the AR platform (from vast experience) and also cuz it puts the roof over my head and bread on the table.

[SL65AMG]

i cannot answer that question really.... ive got both. ive shot both. on the basis of reliability i would go with an AK.....


coolness and looks, AR.

[ShooterMcGavin]

diff strokes for diff folks

/thread

[SL65AMG]

i had to even up the poll.... lol

[Danny]

i had to even up the poll.... lol


one more for the good team!

[Truegiant]

guess who was looking for ar parts as of late....


THE FRENCH FROG!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

I had to call you out

[Danny]

Ohh french frog, you have some hidden ar love! hahahaha. You a closet ar lover, just come out allready..... lol

[Truegiant]

i am going to have to hire someone to help me with my books here soon. i just got another order for 5 more lowers today. wow.. its getting busy.. now i just need the cash.

[Danny]

ill help u, but with the books... ehhhhh.....

[Truegiant]

why.. the lowers arent hard to build.

[Danny]

didnt say they were lol.

do u have supply to build 5 lowers?

[Truegiant]

3 yes.. 5 no.. i am waiting on an order to come in.

[allmotoronly]

neither... AR10 FTW!!!!!

[ttman]

same dirty crap-in-the-chamber gas system.

the ar platform has changed alot since vietnam, its a whole new weapon in terms of reliability compared to back then.

[DaX]

neither... AR10 FTW!!!!!

So you know.... :D

[ttman]

for plinking, AR15
for SHTF, AK

sorry an AR will not ever have the durability of an AK, period.

[DaX]

Yeah, I really like both platforms. I'm not a big fan of .223, but it is plentiful so for SHTF, it would be a good choice. Really, my AK-47 is my zombie assault weapon. .308 is my SHTF long range weapon, and my Taurus 9mm my zombie pistol.

[DUBSf22c]

for plinking, AR15
for SHTF, AK


QFT

but i have something better..

IF SHTF I would go with the Saiga 12

Sorry.. but pretty much on point....

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/9882/saiga12sisp3009ak8.jpg

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/111/saigataktika18mi8.jpg

[DaX]

^^^^I love the Saiga 12. My next gun purchase will probably either be a Romanian PSL or a Saiga 12 and get all the Tromix goodies for it.

[VTECking]

sorry an AR will not ever have the durability of an AK, period.
Uhh, actually it can and is because now they make piston operation kits for the AR which makes it just as reliable, if not more reliable than an AK.

[81911SC]

Uhh, actually it can and is because now they make piston operation kits for the AR which makes it just as reliable, if not more reliable than an AK.I'd have to see it to possibly believe it.

[VTECking]

I'd have to see it to possibly believe it.
This is HK's version of an m4 that's piston operated. Its called the HK 416. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZpZryZEiY4

[ttman]

TOTALLY WRONG.

piston ARs are very problematic and UNproven. look up CARRIER TILT + AR15 newbie. a piston AR will NEVER EVER have the reliability of an AK, period. I also remember reading (@ arfcom) about the HK416s having defects with cracking.


Uhh, actually it can and is because now they make piston operation kits for the AR which makes it just as reliable, if not more reliable than an AK.

[SuzukiLMRacer]

I voted AK, mainly for reliabilty and punch.
The AR is kickass, but takes a lot of maintenance.
The AK can be tossed in the mud for a year, given a quick cleaning and goes to town, it just lacks the accuracy.
I guess it just comes to preference.

BTW the Ak with the 203 is just awesome.

[SiRed94]

AR's are no where near as unreliable as ppl make them out to be. Just putting that out there. 1 grain of sand will not cause a malfunction, contrary to popular belief. They do need to be lubed to function at 100%, but I lube and clean all my guns regularly, so that's not really an issue. And AK's are not inaccurate, they just don't have very good ballistics due to their heavy bullet. The 7.62 will have more drop and be affected by wind way more than the .223/5.56 round, especially at +200 yards. Both have their ups and downs and this debate will never be ended. It's like the 9mm/40/45 debate, or the 1911 vs. 45 long colt debate.

[HEATON]

GAU 5.. Had to throw it in the race. It's the weapon we are issued.. Basically a M4, but has AUTO capability.

[SuzukiLMRacer]

SiRed,
I did not mean the AR's are unreliable, just not as reliable as an AK, IMO.
I did have the chance to test a Russian full auto AK and a full auto M16 in the same day, both military versions.
My response was based on that test.
Both are kick ass, but I don't have much experience with the semi auto version of each.
I do plan on buying one of each though, sometime this year.

[SL65AMG]

This is HK's version of an m4 that's piston operated. Its called the HK 416. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZpZryZEiY4

If it's made by H&K, its bad ass. Period.

[sleepy240sx]

ak47 ftw

[RandomGuy]

ak fo lyfe
AK is more than a weapon, its a symbol of various rebel factions around the world.

heres some of my collection: pardon the dirty carpet
http://www.g54b.com/random/dondh.jpg