Military Channel


PDA






selector67
October 3, 2006, 04:58 AM
If you get the Military Channel, there going to show the top 10 combat rifles tonight, lets see if our favorites make the cut.:rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "Military Channel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
High Planes Drifter
October 3, 2006, 09:21 AM
I've been waiting for weeks. Any picks for #1? :) :)

marshall3
October 3, 2006, 09:36 AM
Here's my MAK-90...

http://www.mouseguns.com/mak90.jpg

More of these have been made, and equipped more armies than any other rifle in the history of the world. Must be something good about it.
:)

Bigfoot
October 3, 2006, 09:52 AM
Thanks for the heads up. Hopefully someone else will respond to this thread and THR will send me a reminder in my email for when I get home tonight.:)

45Guy
October 3, 2006, 10:05 AM
$5 says the M-1 Garand is #1. It's US, it revolutionized warfare, and it's beautiful to look at.

busterbrown
October 3, 2006, 11:47 AM
garand- hands down #1

there may be a hint in the previews- a narrator describes the greatest battle implement ever designed and there is a momentary view of a garand with a bayonet- coincidence?

Byron
October 3, 2006, 12:15 PM
What time will this be on(CST)? Byron

selector67
October 3, 2006, 12:30 PM
The show times are 7.00pm,10.00pm and again at 1.00am CST.

ocabj
October 3, 2006, 12:35 PM
They already had a show similar to this on either History, Discovery, or the Military Channel a couple years ago. Garand was #1.

DFW1911
October 3, 2006, 12:40 PM
Garand was #1

I'm going with the Garand...let's see!

Take Care,
DFW1911

dm1333
October 3, 2006, 03:32 PM
Stgw 44

MikeH
October 3, 2006, 03:45 PM
Military Channel has turned into the Pentagon's 24-hour recruitment show since it was renamed from Discovery Wings. No way an infantry weapon made by enemies of the US, either past or present, will take the honor of #1.

My guess is M16, even if just to show that US troops are armed with the best as always.

Limeyfellow
October 3, 2006, 04:15 PM
My guess is the top 4 will contain the M16, M1 Garand and the M14. If the Springfield is also up there I'll cry. The lists they produce are quite easy to figure out.

Especially the helecopter special... I guessed the top of the list easily would be Apache, Huey and Cobra.

selector67
October 3, 2006, 04:20 PM
The rifles I seen in the advertisement for it showed the M1 Garand,the FAL,the 1903 springfield, AK-47 and the M-16.

The Deer Hunter
October 3, 2006, 05:21 PM
Anyone else ever notice the only thing on the Military channel is like, airforce stuff?

RiverwinoIA
October 3, 2006, 05:29 PM
on the Military channels top 10 tank show, the #1 tank was Russian.

So they dont always favor American stuff, just when its the best

ocabj
October 3, 2006, 05:32 PM
The Military Channel isn't just aviation. They do a lot of stuff on there including the Navy Seal reality series, Battlefield Vietnam, WWII Battlefront, specials like Kill Box, Operation Anaconda, etc.

The Military Channel used to be Discovery Wings, but they started showing a lot of non aviation related stuff so they switch over.

The Deer Hunter
October 3, 2006, 06:17 PM
Whenever i turn on the Military channel its about aviation

ocabj
October 3, 2006, 06:35 PM
You must be watching it at the wrong times.

http://military.discovery.com/tvlistings/schedule.jsp?mm=10&dd=3&yyyy=2006&channel=MIL

In the entire 24 hour period for Oct 3, I see only 6 or so aviation related programs. Couple of them are 30 hour segments, too.

jagdpanzer347
October 3, 2006, 09:03 PM
I predict M16 and AK47 will take the top two spots. The AK for it's legendary reliabilty and vast numbers produced. The M16 for it's long service with the US and for it's technological innovations.

-jagdpanzer

soul_rapier
October 3, 2006, 10:12 PM
well you are right on the money ak #1 AND M16 #2

RNB65
October 3, 2006, 10:18 PM
They top 10 were:

1. AK
2. AR/M16
3. Lee Enfield
4. M1 Garand
5. FN FAL
6. Mauser K98
7. Springfield 1903
8. Steyr AUG
9. Sturmgewehr 44
10. M14

SigfanUSAF
October 3, 2006, 10:20 PM
I don't get the military channel, what points did they compare to rate these top 10? Or, should I say, whose opinion(s) persuaded the Military Channels decision?

RNB65
October 3, 2006, 10:24 PM
There were 5 ranking criteria:

Innovation
Handling
Service Life
Accuracy
Combat Effectiveness

longhorngunman
October 3, 2006, 10:24 PM
I'd say they did pretty well, nice to see the FAL get the props it deserves. I'm surprised that the Enfield jumped the Garand, but there seemed to be a bunch of British arms experts on the show:p . Don't know why the 03 was in there, let's face it we ripped Mauser off, it is a Mauser. And I'd had the Russian Mosin-Nagant in place of the Steyr. This must be based on just 20th century arms or the Brown Bess would have to be in there somewhere.:)

The Grand Inquisitor
October 3, 2006, 10:25 PM
The AK is right on the money, and the Ar is right behind it.

Truth be told, even with the new designs that started with the AUG, the AK and the AR are going to be the predominate rifles going into the next generation, and will likely continue until a time in which we either learn to put away our rifles (however unlikely that situation...) or when we move beyond normal cartridge ammunition and current gas driven mechanics to move our rifles internally.


The M16/M4 and the AK47/AK74 are two brilliant expressions of two different schools of firearm design, and amazingly enough, both have proven to be remarkably effective (although unfortunately that effectiveness translates in an ability to better kill human beings...).

The AR/AK will still be issued when the dust is thick on the AUG's/F2000's/SCAR/XM8, etc, etc, etc...

longhorngunman
October 3, 2006, 10:30 PM
They did have a couple of discrepencies though. The narrator said bullets instead of cartridges:rolleyes: , the Mauser is a tackdriver, some are accurate but no better than the Garand or Lee Enfield and the part about the AK47 killing more human beings than any other rifle. I'd still say that the 8mm Mauser due to it's mass numbers and various uses in wars all over the world from the late 1800's up into even the 1990's would take that prize. Talking cartridges the 8mm is easily number 1 when talking about it's use with the Maxim machineguns in WW1 and lot's of skirmishes in Africa.

The Grand Inquisitor
October 3, 2006, 10:36 PM
I might be wrong, but the 7.62x54R might have killed the most people only because it has been in service far, FAR longer than any other cartirdge.


Also, what kind of wretched, ghoulish person is really attracted to the statisic of which cartridge has snuffed out the most living people?

KUJO2388
October 3, 2006, 10:40 PM
I am going to watch it later on. So I didn't read any of the previous posts. But I think these guns should be on there the AK, AR, FAL, SKS, And the M1. Not in that order. But I will see tonight.

selector67
October 3, 2006, 10:44 PM
I think the German G3 rifle should have made the list, at least it should have taken the 1903 position since the 1903 was based on the mauser action. A lot of countries still use the G3.:D

SigfanUSAF
October 3, 2006, 10:44 PM
I might be wrong, but the 7.62x54R might have killed the most people only because it has been in service far, FAR longer than any other cartirdge.

Actually, I believe the first 7.92x57 Mauser cartridges were adopted in 1888, with the Gewehr 88 commision rifle, while the MNs 7.62x54r wasn't adopted untill 1891. IIRC, that is

Terrierman
October 3, 2006, 10:55 PM
How in the world does M-14 rank in the top ten? What conflict was it used in where it made a difference and how long did it last as an issue weapon and how widely was it distributed around the world to even get a mention? I know a lot of people today think its civilian successor the M-1A is the nuts but really, top ten? Over Brown Bess and a host of other more historically significant predecessors? Top ten? Not in my book, not now and not ever.

RNB65
October 3, 2006, 11:01 PM
How in the world does M-14 rank in the top ten?

I agree. I would of had the Mosin-Nagant as #10 and left the M14 off the list.

FTF
October 3, 2006, 11:20 PM
I only get to watch it on weekends at my gf's and I missed this episode :(

I too, think the M14 should be gone. Hell, replace that with the Thompson. It saw more service I bet, and was probably more innovative given the time it was developed.

Mosin for number 10 at least. Move the Sturmgewehr 44 down since it's service life was about a year. M1 over Enfield. I'm torn on the Steyr AUG, it's not "combat" proven IMHO as some of the others below it on the list. AK definite winner though.

jagdpanzer347
October 4, 2006, 01:33 AM
I must say, I enjoyed this show very much. Some really cool footage of these rifles in action. Personally, I would have chosen the CETME/G3 and Mosin-Nagant instead of the M14 and Springfield. Would have rated the STG44 at third place. It did introduce and validate the whole assault rifle concept after all.

jagdpanzer

Spencer
October 4, 2006, 01:42 AM
1. AK
2. AR/M16
3. Lee Enfield
4. M1 Garand
5. FN FAL
6. Mauser K98
7. Springfield 1903
8. Steyr AUG
9. Sturmgewehr 44
10. M14

Who couldn't have predicted the AK was the winner?
Duh.

More of them were produced than any other firearm in the history of the world. Hell, some countries have it on their national flags.

In my opinion, it was the most revolutionary firearm ever made.

EvisceratorSrB
October 4, 2006, 01:51 AM
I don't get the Lee Enfield....at all. Can anyone explain? I'm baffled. Every rifle ranked lower on that list to me beats the Enfield. Enlighten me.

Glockensig
October 4, 2006, 02:08 AM
Two things bother me..... 1.) I didn't see the show and 2.) I don't have any of these rifles!!!!!!http://www.redtailboa.net/forums/images/smilies/icon_sniper.gif

toivo
October 4, 2006, 02:31 AM
I don't get the Lee Enfield....at all. Can anyone explain? I'm baffled. Every rifle ranked lower on that list to me beats the Enfield. Enlighten me.
They rated its effectiveness highly: Claimed that a trained soldier could hit a 200-yd. target with 30 rounds in a minute. The referred to a battle in WWI (sorry, can't remember the name) where this firepower was decisive. Also, they rated active service life, and the Enfield was in service somewhere in the world from before WWI until the 1960's--they had a some footage of Indian Army, and so on.

swingset
October 4, 2006, 03:35 AM
I don't get the Lee Enfield....at all. Can anyone explain? I'm baffled. Every rifle ranked lower on that list to me beats the Enfield. Enlighten me.

Incredibly long service life, utterly dependable, rugged, fast and accurate, 10 round magazine, plenty of lethality, in service in almost every British protecorate, still in limited use today, 100 years after it's adoption. In 1914 a Sgt. in the British army put 38 aimed shots into a 12" bullseye at 300 yards in 1 minute using a No1mkIII Enfield (Sgt. Snoxall if memory serves). Few people can do that with a semi-automatic, making the Enfield's rate of fire and accuracy stuff of legend.

What's to get?

It certainly deserves to be in the top 10, moreso than the M14 IMHO.

Don't Tread On Me
October 4, 2006, 05:07 AM
Agreed with a few of the posters above. The Mosin Nagant should have been on the list, with the M14 off the list.


Careful though! Speaking ill of the M14 is blasphemous to all the "MBR" freaks. They'll all swarm in and call us heathens for dissing their supreme rifle. They feel that the M14 is the pinnacle of MBR evolution and that modern rifle doctrine has gone downhill since.


1903 shouldn't be on that list either imo. It's a copy of the Mauser but with better sights. No innovation there. And didn't see combat except for WWI...compare that to the other bolt guns that served multiple wars.


AK being ontop sounds right ok to me. I like it. It really comes down to how you define "best" or "better." If you chose the x39 AK's, it could be argued that they were made obsolete by the Russians in the 1970's in favor of the 5.45. But enough nations and non-nation entities use it to qualify it as still in service.

The AR has kept the same cartridge and has had very minor modifications. You can swap bolts, buffers, barrels, carriers, receivers across all the revisions. So it *will* serve, in my opinion, longer than any other rifle in history. It's already on 40 years, with at least another 10 to go.

Someone made the point that the AK is the most used and most widespread. That's true. However, when militaries or fighters have the CHOICE or the MONEY, they always choose the AR. Example - Chavez. He bought 100,000 AK's from Russia. Why? Well, 1] we as well as the rest of the West probably wouldn't have sold him AR's 2] he hates the U.S. and doesn't want U.S. arms as it makes him look hypocritical, in fact, he's looking to replace his F-16's for this very (silly) reason. 3] He can probably get 3x more AK's for the same money than he could AR's, thus arming more people. If these issues didn't stand in the way, and his generals could make the decision as to what's the ideal rifle for their army, I'd bet 10 to 1 they'd choose the AR. Everyone else has. Who uses the AK by choice?

The Russians with the 5.45 version.

Poland, Albania, Yugoslavia (before it shattered), Bulgaria, Egypt, Hungary, China (although they've dumped it or are dumping it now), Iraq and Romania.

Maybe a couple others at most. The Finns have a close copy. Sig550 doesn't count, so no Swiss.


These nations use the M16:

Argentina, Australia,Bahrain, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Fiji, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Haiti, Honduras, Ireland, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Liberia, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Norway, Indonesia, Jordan, Jamaica, Laos, Nigeria, Netherlands, Oman, Panama, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, and Vietnam.

And maybe a couple others.


You also see this when you see insurgents, palastinians, african militiamen etc...carrying captured AR's. I don't mind AR-haters, but you must admit that the AR is one smooth and easy to shoot rifle. It doesn't get any easier than that.

If the AK were "better," then looking at the list of nations, there's a lot of countries that are wrong, and they're paying 2-3x more to be wrong. I guess it all comes down to how you define "better"...

Anyway, there's still a spot left after you take out the M14 and the 1903. Since it says rifles (not submachine guns), probably the G3. Way more use than the M14.

Steyr AUG? Gimme a break. I don't think ANY rifle should qualify for this list unless it has served in warfare. Everything on that list has been involved in serious combat across the globe except for the AUG. Nice rifle, but it seems out of place to me. G3 isn't a rifle with a huge service record, but it's more than the AUG.

They put it in because that rifle gets oohs and ahhhs and has a tacticool cult following.

EvisceratorSrB
October 4, 2006, 06:15 AM
Agreed, the M14 should not have been on the list. I really didn't know the Enfield was that reputable. Maybe I should pick one up then :)

_N4Z_
October 4, 2006, 09:18 AM
Actually, I believe the first 7.92x57 Mauser cartridges were adopted in 1888, with the Gewehr 88 commision rifle, while the MNs 7.62x54r wasn't adopted untill 1891. IIRC, that is

Maybe so, but the 54r is still in use worldwide, in various weapon systems right now, which gives it a far longer service life than the 57 Mauser. Mmmmmk. :p

KUJO2388
October 4, 2006, 09:42 AM
I liked the show a lot. Didnt agree with all of the guns on the list. I already have one of the ones on the list. And plan on having two more in about 2 months though. And I think the Mosin Nagant should have replaced the 1903.

High Planes Drifter
October 4, 2006, 09:59 AM
Late to the party as usual:D .

I love my M1A, but I'll go with the flow, the M14 shouldnt be on the list. I would have guessed the Nagant would have been ahead of the Mauser, Im surprised it didnt make the list at all.

MechAg94
October 4, 2006, 10:24 AM
Two things bother me..... 1.) I didn't see the show and 2.) I don't have any of these rifles!!!!!!
Well, NOW you have a goal in life! :D


I think the M14 is a great rifle, but I agree that it may not be a top ten combat rifle candidate. The short service life really hurts it.

The 1903 saw service in WWI, WWII, and lots of little skirmishes before and between those wars. How can you NOT count Sgt. York's rifle? :)

I like my Ishapore Enfield. I wouldn't mind picking up a good SMLE, but I would hate to invest in a whole nother cartridge right now. I do like the 10+ round capacity of my Ishapore. Great for an all around utility rifle.

I am almost a little surprised the FAL wasn't higher in the list.
I guess the SKS didn't even get an honorable mention. I guess it was always the stepchild of the AK.

MechAg94
October 4, 2006, 10:31 AM
One other thing: I didn't notice that they included production and cost into their consideration. That may or may not have changed things. The AK would still win.

HorseSoldier
October 4, 2006, 10:42 AM
Careful though! Speaking ill of the M14 is blasphemous to all the "MBR" freaks. They'll all swarm in and call us heathens for dissing their supreme rifle. They feel that the M14 is the pinnacle of MBR evolution and that modern rifle doctrine has gone downhill since.


They'd tend to be right, since "battle rifle" was a term made up to explain away the fact that the M14 (and it's western European counterparts) were such sad excuses for assault rifles.

hksw
October 4, 2006, 02:10 PM
How in the heck did the M14 and Steyr AUG get above the G3?! The L85 and FAMAS even got honorable mentions without the G3 anywhere to be seen. What's up with that?

All of the times the Discovery (including Military) and History shows have a spot on the M16, they always accurately bring up the stick/ball powder issue but not in this episode. :confused:

That guy they had doing live fire is not well versed in the quipment it looked like. He was trying to insert the FAL mag in straight instead of pivoting it in. Hehehe.

And I hate every time they dub in the sounds in all of the educational shows, particularly the WWII ones.

Spencer
October 4, 2006, 03:14 PM
Someone made the point that the AK is the most used and most widespread. That's true. However, when militaries or fighters have the CHOICE or the MONEY, they always choose the AR. Example - Chavez. He bought 100,000 AK's from Russia. Why? Well, 1] we as well as the rest of the West probably wouldn't have sold him AR's 2] he hates the U.S. and doesn't want U.S. arms as it makes him look hypocritical, in fact, he's looking to replace his F-16's for this very (silly) reason. 3] He can probably get 3x more AK's for the same money than he could AR's, thus arming more people. If these issues didn't stand in the way, and his generals could make the decision as to what's the ideal rifle for their army, I'd bet 10 to 1 they'd choose the AR. Everyone else has. Who uses the AK by choice?

Dude the AR-15 isn't well suited at all for many other parts of the world. It's high tolerance doesn't allow any and I mean absolutely anything to be in the action or it will jam.

Why the do you think Israel came up with the Galil? Because they were unsatisfied by the way the AR performed!

A good quality AK costs just as much as a reasonably priced AR, so I wonder why people are still buying them all the freakin time?

Everyone else has chosen the AR? Oh, that's news to me. I guess that's why several countries have it on their flag, right?

How in the heck did the M14 and Steyr AUG get above the G3?! The L85 and FAMAS even got honorable mentions without the G3 anywhere to be seen. What's up with that?

Because they did more than the G3 ever did.

And Heckler and Koch are anti-american.

High Planes Drifter
October 4, 2006, 03:56 PM
Spencer wrote:
Why the do you think Israel came up with the Galil? Because they were unsatisfied by the way the AR performed!

-------------------------------------------------

No sir. Israel replaced the FN FAL (not M16) with the Galil, :

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/small_arms/galil/Galil.html

First sentence.

HorseSoldier
October 4, 2006, 04:05 PM
Dude the AR-15 isn't well suited at all for many other parts of the world. It's high tolerance doesn't allow any and I mean absolutely anything to be in the action or it will jam.

Why the do you think Israel came up with the Galil? Because they were unsatisfied by the way the AR performed!


Galil was essentially replaced by the AR, not the other way around.

You're rather overstating the AR's pickiness about being clean as well, at least in my personal experience with both issue M16s/M4s and privately owned AR-15s.

A good quality AK costs just as much as a reasonably priced AR, so I wonder why people are still buying them all the freakin time?

AR's a gunfighter's long gun. AK's an illiterate and disposable peasant's weapon (not the AK, the peasant).

Everyone else has chosen the AR? Oh, that's news to me. I guess that's why several countries have it on their flag, right?

I have a general rule, maybe "guideline" is a better term, that I only take weapons advice from national flags belonging to nations that can feed their population. Post-colonial African nations with AKs on their flag don't tend to meet this guideline.

Besides, they only have the AK on the flag because that's what they dropped while running when the guys with the FALs (and G3s and even occasional ARs) lit them up. :)

GungHo
October 4, 2006, 05:57 PM
1903 shouldn't be on that list either imo. It's a copy of the Mauser but with better sights. No innovation there. And didn't see combat except for WWI
It served as a precision rifle for a very long time.

I rolled my eyes a bit when Fathead McGee went over Garand "pinging" as a tactical nuisance/advantage.

Spencer
October 4, 2006, 05:57 PM
Galil was essentially replaced by the AR, not the other way around

Wrong.

"The development of the new assault rifle, that should eventually replace in service the ageing M16A1, CAR-15 and IMI Galil assault rifles, began in Israel in the 1991. The new rifle was developed by the Israel Military Industries (IMI, now TAAS) company, in close cooperation with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). This new rifle received the name of "Tavor" and the designation of TAR-21 (Tavor Assault Rifle, for 21st century). The new rifle first appeared on public in the 1998, and it had been tested by the IDF during 1999-2002. At the moment of writing (spring of 2003) there were no large purchases of the Tavor by the IDF, because of low funding, but late in the 2002 India signed an US $20M contract with IMI for undisclosed number of TAR-21 assault rifles and Galatz sniper rifles."

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/small_arms/tavor/Tavor.html

AR's a gunfighter's long gun. AK's an illiterate and disposable peasant's weapon (not the AK, the peasant).

Well, yeah, the AR is a good gunfighters gun if you don't care about clearing several jams during a gunfight.

Go to arsenalinc.com and see if these are 'disposable peasant's weapons'. Better built than any AR.

Several parts of an AR are made of aluminum, including the magazines (so easily bent, can anyone say bad idea?). Even though aluminum costs more than steel, whats the point, because aluminum is not anywhere near as durable as steel. That's why ARs have problems with wolf ammo, the steel cases are always wearing out the aluminum extractors. Not to mention the rest of the gun is plastic. Bad durability.

You're rather overstating the AR's pickiness about being clean as well, at least in my personal experience with both issue M16s/M4s and privately owned AR-15s.

Not at all.

Now, I'm all for America, and don't get me wrong, the AK is not my favorite gun. But I'm giving it props where its props are due, and that is in reliability and durability. The only thing you can give to the AR is accuracy.

ny32182
October 4, 2006, 06:18 PM
The AR extractor is made out of steel, which is much, much... much harder than the steel used in Wolf ammo, which is so mild that it can be easily scratched with a bullet tip. The only major aluminum parts of an AR that I'm aware of are the upper and lower, both of which will long outlast the barrel or bolt... both of which are steel. The only plastic parts on an AR are the outer part of the handguards, the pistol grip, and the stock, none of which are known to break. :scrutiny:

As far as jamming all the time, I doubt I'm the only one here starting to think you've never fired one.

Spencer
October 4, 2006, 06:23 PM
The AR extractor is made out of steel, which is much, much... much harder than the steel used in Wolf ammo, which is so mild that it can be easily scratched with a bullet tip. The only major aluminum parts of an AR that I'm aware of are the upper and lower, both of which will long outlast the barrel or bolt... both of which are steel. The only plastic parts on an AR are the outer part of the handguards, the pistol grip, and the stock, none of which are known to break.

As far as jamming all the time, I doubt I'm the only one here starting to think you've never fired one.

Yes, I have fired an AR-15. We used to own 3. The times I shot, it didn't jam on me but I recall it jamming a few times on my dad. Then again, I didn't shoot it that much because I wasn't into guns.

It felt like a toy.

Have you ever fired or owned an AK-47? I doubt you have, most people are too biased to try one.

ny32182
October 4, 2006, 06:25 PM
Two dozen would be a conservative estimate.:uhoh:

Spencer
October 4, 2006, 06:29 PM
The number of AK-47s you've either shot or owned tells me you bought a lot of Chinese junk and that's why you weren't satisfied with it.

ny32182
October 4, 2006, 06:34 PM
My last AK was a VEPR K, an outstanding rifle.

I'm not bashing AK's at all, but I won't be the only one calling you out on the monumental pile of outright incorrect information you just posted about the AR. Time to do some reading.

U.S.SFC_RET
October 4, 2006, 07:04 PM
Try carrying an AR and 210 rounds for a year, that will convince you to use one. Shots hitting center of mass are all too common at 450 to 500 yards. Actions always speak louder than words. The AR platform came a long way since it's induction into the Army and of all of my years of firing this platform I can count on my fingers the FTFs I've had. The M16A2 is even more reliable.

toivo
October 4, 2006, 07:54 PM
AR's a gunfighter's long gun. AK's an illiterate and disposable peasant's weapon (not the AK, the peasant).
Change "disposable" to "indestructible" and I'll agree. And I can't figure out why you want your gun to be able to read.

selector67
October 4, 2006, 08:31 PM
I have every gun on that list with the exception of the MP44 and the AUG.:D

HorseSoldier
October 4, 2006, 08:40 PM
Galil was essentially replaced by the AR, not the other way around

Wrong.

Sorry, you're still wrong. Note the use of the word "essentially."

The first M16s entered IDF service around the same time as the first Galils. Since that time it has entirely replaced the Galil as a front line rifle. Galil only remains in service as a personal defense weapon for AFV crews and the like. M16/M4/CAR-15 is the preferred, and pretty much exclusive, rifle for use by troops with actual job descriptions carrying the word "shooter."

Well, yeah, the AR is a good gunfighters gun if you don't care about clearing several jams during a gunfight.

Just for the purposes of clarification, how much experience do you have with the AR? I'm just wondering, since I'm not sure you're actually familiar with the same weapon system I've been issued in one form or another for the last 13 years.

Go to arsenalinc.com and see if these are 'disposable peasant's weapons'. Better built than any AR.


So you don't really know what makes a good CQB gun versus a bad one, then?

Yes, I have fired an AR-15. We used to own 3. The times I shot, it didn't jam on me but I recall it jamming a few times on my dad. Then again, I didn't shoot it that much because I wasn't into guns.


So you've fired an AR a couple times? Never carried one day in and day out, etc? I must defer to your exhaustive knowledge of the weapon system :rolleyes:

Have you ever fired or owned an AK-47? I doubt you have, most people are too biased to try one.

Got about a dozen in my unit's arms room, various manufacturers, get a decent amount of ammo each year for foreign weapons familiarization and training. Wooden furniture might make them seem more solid. It does not, unfortunately, put the controls in the right place for use as a combat long gun, etc.

HorseSoldier
October 4, 2006, 08:46 PM
AR's a gunfighter's long gun. AK's an illiterate and disposable peasant's weapon (not the AK, the peasant).

Change "disposable" to "indestructible" and I'll agree. And I can't figure out why you want your gun to be able to read.

AK indestructible, yes.

But it's a weapon built for disposable troops, which is why it's popular (in certain circles) despite being poorly designed from an ergonomic standpoint. Speed is survival in gunfights, and AKs don't do a good job providing it.

soul_rapier
October 4, 2006, 09:03 PM
arsenal is a over price ak i own 1 a real 1 not made in the usa dont get me wrong i love my ak , and my ar .but that is an ak not worth $600 + dollars and any gun that is gas operated needs cleaning or it will jam i had AR's and ak's jam they all will and if you say they dont you havent shot them enough ......this is my opinion alot of people dont shoot enough and say stuff thats incorrect .i got 2 m14's and i listened to poeple saying how great they are and there not. jam and mag picky

Metapotent
October 4, 2006, 09:04 PM
Everyone else has chosen the AR? Oh, that's news to me. I guess that's why several countries have it on their flag, right?

Yeah all the poor, third-world countries that still use Soviet-era weapons...

Quote:
How in the heck did the M14 and Steyr AUG get above the G3?! The L85 and FAMAS even got honorable mentions without the G3 anywhere to be seen. What's up with that?


Because they did more than the G3 ever did.

And Heckler and Koch are anti-american.

Heckler and Koch are anti-American??? Thats funny, considering the extensive contracts they have with US military and law-enforcement agencies. Kind of odd for an anti-american company to do that... Also when you consider that many of their subsiaries are in the US and a large percentage of their employees in general are American.

Spencer, I think you're just pulling stuff out your you-know-what.

Especially when you come to the broad conclusion that all AR's jam all the time even though you have very little experience with them, and then you try and negate the experience people have with AKs saying that they just have "Chinese Junk" especially considering that most people say that the Chinese Ak-47s are of the best quality.

I had a Romanian and Yugoslavian AK. I sold them because they were innaccurate and ACTUALLY they jammed more than any of my 4 seperate ARs did. Also, my Bushmaster xm15 has been dropped in mud, rocks, water and sand and I've never had it jam due to 'dirt in the action' and its never froze up when shooting in cold weather or broken or anything like that.

So personally, I think you don't know *** you are talking about!

Bigfoot
October 4, 2006, 09:55 PM
I have no problem with them choosing the AK over the AR for the reasons they stated. Peasants shooting neglected firearms. But I did laugh when they said the lessor accuracy of the AK was offset by its ability to shoot lots of bullets. That's right loosers go ahead and spray and pray, makes it a little easier for our guys can aim and drop ya.

Steyr AUG? Gimme a break. I don't think ANY rifle should qualify for this list unless it has served in warfare. Everything on that list has been involved in serious combat across the globe except for the AUG. Nice rifle, but it seems out of place to me. G3 isn't a rifle with a huge service record, but it's more than the AUG.

The Austrailians kicked butt with the AUG in East Timor (no picnic there) and Iraq. And the AUG bullpup has shown us the future for military rifles like it or not. Not trying to nit-pic your designation of serious combat, I just like giving an attaboy to my pals the Aussies. :)

benelli12
October 4, 2006, 10:00 PM
**** I dont have the military channel:cuss: :banghead:

Creeping Incrementalism
October 4, 2006, 10:09 PM
AUG in East Timor (no picnic there) and Iraq.

East Timor was a peacekeeping operation, so I don't know if you can call that "kicking butt", and the commandos who went into Iraq carried ARs, I believe. Though I have seem some photos of follow-on soldiers with AUGs.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the AUG, but you can't call it thoroughly combat proven.

jjohnson
October 5, 2006, 12:18 AM
Yeah, pretty sure it was the battle of Verdun.... the Germans whined about all of the machineguns they were facing. It was a bunch of Tommies with SMLEs who knew how to work the bolt with their pinky (it can be done) for high rate of fire.

Ugly is as ugly does, I guess.

toivo
October 5, 2006, 03:53 AM
Yeah, pretty sure it was the battle of Verdun.... the Germans whined about all of the machineguns they were facing. It was a bunch of Tommies with SMLEs who knew how to work the bolt with their pinky (it can be done) for high rate of fire.
Thanks. IIRC, they called it "the magic minute"--30 aimed shots at 200 yds. in one minute.

HorseSoldier
October 5, 2006, 11:57 AM
East Timor was a peacekeeping operation, so I don't know if you can call that "kicking butt", and the commandos who went into Iraq carried ARs, I believe. Though I have seem some photos of follow-on soldiers with AUGs.


Yep. The SASR and the commando-role infantry battalion in the Australian Army use weapons from the AR-15 family. The SAS types because it's pretty much the industry standard for special operations units in the English speaking world (and many other parts as well). Interestingly enough in light of the current round of "AR-15s are jam-prone and picky" claims, I've been told by Australian military personnel that the infantry use of the AR is because it's been found to be more rugged and dependable than the AUG used by the majority of the Australian military (not sure if that's official reasoning, popular belief, or whatever though).

RNB65
October 5, 2006, 11:59 AM
The only people I've ever met who believed that AR's are jam-o-matics are people who either don't own one or don't know how to clean and maintain a rifle.

hksw
October 5, 2006, 01:37 PM
Because they did more than the G3 ever did.

And Heckler and Koch are anti-american.

HAHAHAHA. Are you serious?

GungHo
October 5, 2006, 04:50 PM
Go to arsenalinc.com and see if these are 'disposable peasant's weapons'. Better built than any AR.
Really? I'll go check and be right back.

... Those are nice AKs. I've handled a few. Even shot one. But, I still think my buddy's White Oak space gun may have a slight leg up in quality. But, thanks for playing!

Several parts of an AR are made of aluminum, including the magazines
Only if you buy aluminum magazines!

the steel cases are always wearing out the aluminum extractors
Wow, this just just plain wrong.

My last AK was a VEPR K, an outstanding rifle.
They are great little rifles, aren't they?

AR's a gunfighter's long gun. AK's an illiterate and disposable peasant's weapon (not the AK, the peasant).Change "disposable" to "indestructible" and I'll agree. And I can't figure out why you want your gun to be able to read.
Wow. I've read this like 15 times and I'm still in awe.

However, going with the "theme", it's sure nice of them to give those indestructable peasants the AKs, but I'm not sure they'll need them... after all, you'd figure it'd all be over with these supermen keeping their pimp hands strong.

Cosmoline
October 5, 2006, 05:05 PM
It's jingoistic BS

Whether or not the Springfield was a Mauser clone, it's not an influential rifle at all. The M14? Why was that innovative? They just had to include as many US service arms as possible, even though we were FOLLOWING European innovations in most cases.

It served as a precision rifle for a very long time.

Nowhere near as long as the Mosin-Nagant, which has over a century of active service under its belt.

Don't Tread On Me
October 5, 2006, 05:18 PM
I had a Romanian and Yugoslavian AK. I sold them because they were inaccurate and ACTUALLY they jammed more than any of my 4 separate ARs did.


This brings up an interesting point. Now, I don't want to turn this into AK vs. AR...but,


What if the AK's reliability factor was de-emphasized? Say it wasn't as reliable as people thought, or it's superb ability to sustain massive abuse and dirt/mud wasn't as important?

It all comes down to - what is good enough? When the rifles are clean...which is more reliable? Each has been torture tested 1,000's of rounds. When the rifles are soaked in pure mud and sand, which one is better? Probably the AK. But, there are two things to note. 1] the AK isn't unstoppable, dirt and grit can prevent the bolt from closing 2] such tests are meaningless, since when will you subject your rifle to the equivalent of opening the action, and intentionally throwing a handful of sand and grit in there? If you did, whether intentional or unintentional - your firearm handling is irresponsible and dangerous. These are fantasy tests. Is it worth giving up accuracy and ergonomics to have a rifle that *might* not choke just in case someday you're in a firefight and you just happen to accidentally fill the action with mud and sand? Jeesh!

Another thing to note is combat loud out. How many rounds and how many magazines can you carry? If a rifle platform can shoot the full load out, take a 2nd load out, and shoot that without requiring cleaning and without jamming - that's good enough. If you're going to reload or "find" another X number of magazines, chances are you have time to clean your weapon.


Also, you have to compare apples to apples. Most AK's are not anywhere near mil-spec. The better AK's are the Arsenals, the Chinese, and of course, the Russian (saiga or vepr). These have superior fit, and construction. The guns built by kits are not as good. Polish, Yugo etc...mostly came over as kits, and were built by monkeys over here. I'm sure a well-built, close to milspec as possible AK is a damn fine reliable rifle. Those Romanian rifles are ROUGH. Even the best ones are pretty rough. A MAK-90 (which was criticized as being the junk AK back in the day) is like Cadillac compared to the Romanian AK's. People on the Internet CONFUSE bad construction, with wear and tear. When you see a beat-up AK on the news in the hands of some insurgent, it has wear and tear - but chances are, it was a well-built mil-spec AK. When you see a rough commercial AK, that's because it is probably a factory 2nd. There's no excuse for canted sights, bent piston tubes, mangled magazine wells, crooked catches and trigger guards ...etc.


Same goes with AR's. There's about a bajillion makes out there these days. Tons of generic parts. Lots of junk. The closest to milspec is Colt. AR's are a whole lot more reliable when they are assembled correctly. Gas tubes need to be indexed correctly, same with gas blocks. The quality of the bolt and the carrier is a huge factor. Even the trigger control and small parts are totally different from a top grade AR to a generic junk AR. The better ones have heat treated hardened steel, where others have pot-metal.


The only negatives of the AR comes with the carbines. They are over-gassed. This puts more stress on the bolt than was originally intended. So, rather than having a bolt that could survive 20,000rds or more, carbine bolts usually give up the ghost around 6,000rds +/- a few thousand. AR magazines are a little cheesy too. But, they're a compromise. It's much lighter than an AK mag. The only problem is that most AR mags are quite stiff on 30rds, and cycling that first round into the chamber you'll notice a really slow carrier going into battery.


That's about it. I've seen AK's jam. They aren't immune. Nothing is. Which is why people should get away from this mentality that they can just buy reliability. It is better to learn to clear a jam, and it is better to not be lazy and to clean your rifle, regardless of what it is, after every single shooting session.


A well oiled machine will treat you better.

Metapotent
October 5, 2006, 06:11 PM
Quote:
Because they did more than the G3 ever did.

And Heckler and Koch are anti-american.


HAHAHAHA. Are you serious?

Yeah I already mentioned how incredibly ridiculous that statement by spencer was. I think thats about number 15 in the list of completely wrong and silly things he has said.

When he says stuff like that, it kind of takes away his credibility in general when he claims that the AR is a horrible weapon, while the AK is flawless. Especially when he said he has almost no experience with an AR.

soul_rapier
October 5, 2006, 08:32 PM
:D just buy a G3 its blow back operated better chance of not jamming but it would jam to if not cleaned ...

If you enjoyed reading about "Military Channel" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!