Semiauto Carbine Poll


PDA






Isher
December 28, 2009, 10:17 PM
All -

OK, three common but very dissimilar firearms when you get right down to it. Two you have heard about till you are probably sick to death of it. AR variants. AK variants. Then there's the redhaired stepchild the Czech VZ58. The VZ, as its name implies, hit the assembly lines in 1958 and I think I read somewhere that slightly over a million of them are out in the world somewhere. Personally, I think they are a superior weapon. I'm just curious to see what will show up in a poll of the combination of the three, rather than the two.

isher

If you enjoyed reading about "Semiauto Carbine Poll" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Almond27
December 28, 2009, 10:23 PM
I chose AR because the AK is reliable to boot but ergonomics and accuracy are generally poor. I'd still own an AK over an AR though just my own personal preference.

happygeek
December 28, 2009, 10:27 PM
To be honest, I chose the AR because it's the only one I have any experience with. I did field strip an AK once, and want to buy one eventually just to have one, and because the ammo is cheap.

DoubleTapDrew
December 28, 2009, 10:54 PM
I chose AR because the poll had the words "accuracy" and "ergonomics" thrown in with reliability. To be fair I haven't shot or held a VZ58, but aren't they basically the same as an AK in your 3 categories?

Isher
December 28, 2009, 11:03 PM
Ummmm......

Not really at all, in my opinion. Run through this comparison. http://50ae.net/VZ-vs-AK/ VZ and AK can both take an extreme beating and be run dirty unlike the AR which is infamous for being a "sensitive" beast. In my experience, VZ is way more accurate, much softer recoil, better handling characteristics. And by the way I am comparing out of box guns here, not tricked out bling guns.

isher

taliv
December 28, 2009, 11:09 PM
if it quacks like an AK...

Moose458
December 29, 2009, 09:06 AM
Personally I really like my AR, but I not as much as my AKs, and I really love my VZ 58. If I could only have one, without a doubt it would be the CZ VZ 58. To vote for the AR, having never shot a VZ or an AK, doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and doesn't carry much weight.

Tirod
December 29, 2009, 11:47 AM
I choose the AR because you can get the caliber you need for the job to be done. There are very limited choices for the other two.

It's not the bullet launcher that decides the down range result as much as the bullet/cartridge/rifling and shooter accuracy. Use the platform that delivers the goods. Like in fishing, the bass could care less what reel is on your rod if he can bend the hook.

Repeating internet nonsense about which gun is more reliable just introduces confusion. There are lots of posts about defective AK's, and lots of buyers of cheap kit AR's not built to milspec. Both are subject to user error, bad magazines, or military reject ammo, and both have a street reputation not based on the user's experience at all.

I would ask the AK aficianados to consider which rifle was built for use by a modern army with high school graduates as soldiers, and which was designed for use by farming peasants with barely an 8th grade education?

That is still the criteria of the issuing governments today.

Quentin
December 29, 2009, 01:21 PM
Well as you said there's the redhaired stepchild. Fine for you but I have enough oddballs in my life already so no vote from me. Not that I dislike the Czech VZ58 but it just hasn't clawed its way to the top like the AK and AR.

Now the AK, it's everywhere and parts/magazines are plentiful, it's extremely reliable and well worth having so I do.

Same for the AR but reliability may fall short under harsh conditions. As far as which is best overall regarding ergonomics, reliability, accuracy the AR takes two out of three by a large margin so got my vote.

fugi
December 29, 2009, 01:33 PM
Israel has some of the brightest minds in the world, they're well funded and have fielded an AK variant for quite some time. They've been fighting their neighbors in a sandy environment, and winning. Yes. they do have M16s, but because they're free. A certain percent of the military aid the US gives them must go back to American companies. The Tavor came into favor because of the size, not the difference in engineering, as the Tavor also has a long-stroke rotating locking bolt. I don't know if the audience the weapon was designed for is necessarily an accurate barometer of its accuracy and reliability. If anything, I would tend to agree that a rifle operable by someone with an IQ below 70 is a better engineered machine.

All that said, I'd go with a VZ because of the short-stroke piston which mitigates fouling in the receiver, being 7.62 it delivers more energy, the tilting locking breech block for its simplicity and large lugs and recesses that are not as sensitive as closed end small AR lugs in the barrel extension or larger, still closed end in the AK. As far as ergonomics go, the VZ and AK both have a folding stock instead of a telescoping thing stock around a silly buffer tube. The AK's selector sucks, and has no native bolt hold open, while the VZ and AR have a nice selector and bolt hold open. A lot of people go on about how the AR has low felt recoil and no muzzle rise because the bore is in line with the stock. Right, it sure is, but nobody fires with the stock on their shoulder, they fire with the bottom tip of it shouldered, making the bore quite a bit out of line with their shoulder. An A for effort though.

dom1104
December 29, 2009, 01:45 PM
A lot of people go on about how the AR has low felt recoil and no muzzle rise because the bore is in line with the stock. Right, it sure is, but nobody fires with the stock on their shoulder, they fire with the bottom tip of it shouldered, making the bore quite a bit out of line with their shoulder. An A for effort though.

uh... I fire my AR with the bottom tip of it shouldered, and it still has low muzzle rise and very little felt recoil... not sure what your point is. If it has those charecteristics, no matter how you hold it, the issue is... what?

I love my AR, and a AK is on the buy list, as to the VZ, I think its a great rifle, but part of the attraction of an AK is that , its an AK. its ubiquitous. Its everywhere. its warty and nasty. to kinda sissify that and make it a caddillac AK like the VZ, not sure.

AK = a military Humvee
VZ 58 = A Hummer H2

in my mind. the parts dont interchange, the ride is a lot nicer, and it sure looks better.

If I wanted a NICE gun, I would go to my AR. If I wanted a cheap beater gun I would reach for the AK.

The VZ is somewhere in the middle.

seanie!
December 29, 2009, 02:16 PM
I voted AK, but if somebody out there wants to donate an AR to my collection to help sway my opinion, I'm all for it.

Seriously though, apples to oranges. The AK is reliable, and with ergonomics and accuracy, it's got a case of the "enoughs". It's accurate enough to hit a man sized target and 300 meters. It's ergonomic enough to let you shoot a few hundred rounds out of it without cramping.

The AR is, of course, accurate and ergonomic, and just so happens to be reliable enough to be a go to battle rifle for some of the most civilized and technologically advanced countries armed forces.

Apples to oranges. Both always bring a smile to my face when I hit the go button though. :)

fugi
December 29, 2009, 03:36 PM
AK = a military Humvee
VZ 58 = A Hummer H2

maybe it's my contempt for the H2, but that seems to imply that the VZ doesn't work as well. I mean if the bumper of the HMMWV can clear something, the rest of it can. the H2, however, you can bottom yourself out on a speed bump. VZs go for $600 now, compared to the $800 previously. About on par with a milled receiver AK.

better or not, they're all well worth having though. I would advocate having at least one of each.

NWCP
December 29, 2009, 04:31 PM
Most folks haven't had the pleasure of shooting much less owning the CZ VZ58 so your poll will be skewed. I own the VZ58. It is hands down better than the AK platform and more robust than the AR. It is overlooked by many shooters because it is more expensive than the myriad of AKs on the market. The VZ58 is very reliable and quite accurate as battle rifles go. At 200 yards it is well within MOM which is what it was made for.

LiquidTension
December 29, 2009, 04:46 PM
I chose AR. My SAR-1 and my M&P15 both have somewhere between 3 and 4,000 rounds through them. Neither one of them has ever had a malfunction. The AR runs dirty just fine, and it gets dirtier than the AK because I only shoot it suppressed. Ergos are better on the AR, accuracy and sights are better, and it has less recoil.

I didn't address the VZ because it's so...fugly. Besides, if I want a modified AK action the Sig is quite nice. After handling the VZ I was somewhat underwhelmed.

malix
December 29, 2009, 05:01 PM
I choose the AR because you can get the caliber you need for the job to be done. There are very limited choices for the other two.

I have AKs in 5.45, 7.62, .308, and they are also available in 5.56 too. Im not really sure what kind of jobs couldn't be done with a selection like that.


Never fired the VZ before, but between the other two choices i prefer the AK.

fugi
December 29, 2009, 05:36 PM
I didn't address the VZ because it's so...fugly. Besides, if I want a modified AK action the Sig is quite nice. After handling the VZ I was somewhat underwhelmed.


http://50ae.net/VZ-vs-AK/

not so much.

rogertc1
December 29, 2009, 05:49 PM
I have 5 AK's, 4 AR's, 1 AR reciever, 1 VZ, 2 VZ kits and 1 VZ reciever. All semi auto. I voted and the best ergonomics, reliability, accuracy is the AR.

BTW the VZ is not a modified AK.

RX-178
December 29, 2009, 06:12 PM
Voted AK... when I really meant to vote AR.

Serves me right for THR'ing without my glasses on.

With just those three factors to consider, it's just about impossible to beat an AR.

If you bring PRICE into the equation, it evens the playing field a little more, although now that companies like DoubleStar are producing ARs for between $600-$700, I'd probably still vote AR.

DoubleTapDrew
December 29, 2009, 06:26 PM
To vote for the AR, having never shot a VZ or an AK, doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and doesn't carry much weight.
Dunno if that was meant for me but I have an AR and an AK (but haven't shot a CZ). I like the ergonomics of the AR over my AK but that could be due to the amount of trigger time on each, and the fact my AK still has the teeny commie factory pistol grip.
All 3 are charming in their own EBR way :)

happygeek
December 29, 2009, 09:18 PM
LiquidTension wrote:

Besides, if I want a modified AK action the Sig is quite nice.


I agree. The wife gave me a Sig 556 SWAT model for Christmas. I was eyeing the SCAR-L (well, whatever FNH is calling the semi-auto version of the SCAR-L) at the store, but the Sig was half the price.

BurningSaviour
December 29, 2009, 09:28 PM
I'd probably go with the AR, but it's also the most familiar platform to me. I own an AK and a Vz. 58, as well. I like the Vz. 58 better of the two. Nothing against my AK, but, three tours later, I've grown a little bit of a distaste for them.
A little bit of filing on the feed ramps, and the Vz. ate up hollow point Wolf ammo just as well as my AK.
I'm going to go null vote on this one. I see ups and downs with all three.

YaNi
December 29, 2009, 10:17 PM
I would discount the CZ VZ58 since it doesn't use standard AK mags or parts. Everything is higher quality than a run of the mill AK, but if you need something will you be able to easily find it? A quick search on google and the price of 30 round mags start at $38! You may also get nightmares if you have to deal with 922r compliance.

Accuracy - AR
Ergonomics - AR
Reliability - AK (as a mud gun)

fugi
December 29, 2009, 10:48 PM
I would discount the CZ VZ58 since it doesn't use standard AK mags or parts. Everything is higher quality than a run of the mill AK, but if you need something will you be able to easily find it? A quick search on google and the price of 30 round mags start at $38! You may also get nightmares if you have to deal with 922r compliance.

http://www.czechpoint-usa.com/products/spare-parts-and-accessories/vz-58-parts-and-accessories/30-round-magazine-complete-surplus/

$13 for a VZ mag

everything isn't "higher quality", it's entirely different. you're still comparing it to an AK like it's an AK model. it is not. Why would you complain that it doesn't use AK parts or mags? That's like me complaining that a CETME won't use FAL parts or mags. "but it's the same caliber and looks kind of the same!" there are no 922(r) nightmares, they make kits. same with AKs, and that only applies if you assemble it yourself.

Isher
December 29, 2009, 11:00 PM
fugi -

+1

Beat me to it.............

That's the reason I've always hated Chevys;

Ford parts didn't fit!

isher

RockyMtnTactical
December 30, 2009, 02:21 AM
AR15 is what I choose.

RP88
December 30, 2009, 02:43 AM
AR. If you can't stand DI, then just add a gas piston and you're set.

wojownik
December 30, 2009, 12:25 PM
ergonomics - AR over AK, by a hair. The most ergonomic carbine to me is still the good old M1 Carbine. :D

reliability - a dead heat to me, as long as both rifles are maintained properly. But in bad conditions (I'm not thinking about SHTF, but the more likely case where I was just too busy/lazy to properly clean/lube the rifle), the AK will just keep going, and going, and going....

accuracy - AR, by far

possum
December 30, 2009, 01:31 PM
i have trained more on the ar platform, and I am more confident with it, therefore it is my first choice.

happygeek
December 30, 2009, 06:32 PM
Maybe somebody should start a poll on if you prefer 5.56, 7.62x39, 7.62x51, or something odd like 6.8, 6.5, or whatever in your carbine ...

jeepguy
December 30, 2009, 08:26 PM
out of these i would pick vz 58. i havent shot one yet but i did handle one at a gun show & i was very impressed, milled reciever very smoth not clunky. the only thig i did not like is that the stocks are a little short for me, but that is the same with the ak as well.

Bohemus
January 8, 2010, 11:25 AM
That was easy decision - as I hate both AR's nad AK's ergonomics - not sure which is worse..
If you include e.g. Steir AUG and other good rifles it would by more intresting poll.

AK103K
January 8, 2010, 12:06 PM
i have trained more on the "fill in the blank" platform, and I am more confident with it, therefore it is my first choice.
That would realistically be the correct answer to any of them.

The better answer would be, I have experience with all of them and all will suffice since I know them all well enough to pick any of them up and put them to work.


I have multiples of both AR's and AK's. I chose the AK because I like the AK better. For me its handier, shoulders and shoots more naturally, and I think the 7.62x39 is a more useful caliber. I wouldnt hesitate to pick up an AR either though, they work well too. To me, both are basically 300 yards rifles. That 300 yards being a useful range with a realistic outlook on things. I'm not talking about "target" shooting here, just what is more realistic overall.

The reliability/accuracy things are pretty much BS and just over repeated (to the umpteenth power) internet ramblings by people who have chosen a "side", for whatever reason, instead of bothering to expand their horizons and knowledge base. Those who have AR's made by a good maker know that they are reliable, and those who have AK's know that if they can shoot, the AK will also shoot.

Wanta B
January 8, 2010, 12:22 PM
I do not understand why folks say the milled reciever Ak is better...My experience,and I have read reports to back it up,is that it has a shorter service life than the typical stamped versions.:confused:Please post references to the contrary so that I might read them.I apologize for not being able to site any,as I am not at home (10,000+ mls away)and can not get to the references at this time.:)

I have 0=NO tigger time with the VZ58...So I shall not vote,also If given the choice I would,and do,go with the FN-FAL:DYa' can change uppers with it too:cool:...Perhaps the Sig556 maybe even Dawoo.:uhoh:

The AR,as a few others have mentioned has a HUDGE advantage of being able to quickly convert from one chambering to another and back again with the upper swaps. It is hands down more accurate,currently,HOWEVER with a custom barrel,good sights and quality ammunition the AK can acheive 1/2" 100m 3shot groups.Lets face it...the AR has had VASTLY superior R&D and has moved ahead from it's inception were the AK has mostly stagnated. That is until recently,so those two gaps along with the ergonomics with come to pass I am quite sure.

In this pole,in STOCK form I have to go AR at this time however...Currently the M16/AR15 is just far ahead of the curve.Withthe after market support it's short comings canbe easily overcome and it can be accessorised into an outstanding swiss army knife so to speak...The AK is quickly closing the gap tho'...:uhoh::D

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 06:33 PM
It's not the bullet launcher that decides the down range result as much as the bullet/cartridge/rifling and shooter accuracy. Use the platform that delivers the goods. Like in fishing, the bass could care less what reel is on your rod if he can bend the hook.

I would ask the AK aficianados to consider which rifle was built for use by a modern army with high school graduates as soldiers, and which was designed for use by farming peasants with barely an 8th grade education?

To use your analogy, the bass could care less if it's a 35yr old with a PHD or a 10yr old who skipped school and caught him...he's still caught.

Besides, if the rifle is simple enough to be used by uneducated masses, then that's a huge plus for it. Less parts to worry with, less switches, releases and handles to master and remember to flick, tap and pull, respectively, in a time of crisis or stress. Kalishnikov's adhear to the KISS theory...lots to be said for that. It's obvious from your posts that you vehmently dislike AK's and their users. That's fine, but don't make us seem unwashed because we have a different point of view, or deride the AK as little more than a club because you don't like it.

And if you really really want to get into bullet/cartridge/rifling issues...the AK is a clear winner. How many times have we changed all of those criterion with the AR to produce a better platform? How many different rifle/carbine types have a different rifling pattern and won't stabalize certain rounds as well? The 7.62x39 performs very well out of a 16" barreled platform, and was designed with such a platform. The 5.56x45 performs best out of a 18-20" barreled platform, but these 16" (and shorter) systems are sacrificing so much in the name of maneuverability and HSLD capability that they don't need. I've room cleared with a full-stocked A3 variant with a 20" barrel...it's not as hard as they would have you believe...and then, I can go set up on the roof and confidently take long shots with it, because I have the barrel length to do so. I made that choice because I understand my weapon system and have learned to operate with it.

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