Kalashnikov Himself Says AK Works With Sand


PDA






The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 12:13 AM
Just wanted to put this out where everyone could see it, and not get lost in the convoluted bickering of others.

The History Channel did an episode of Tales of the Gun on the AK-47 near the turn of the millennium.

In the second segment, in an interview with Mikhail Kalashnikov himself, he says and I quote:

"Reliability depends on a variety of factors. First: A short locking distance of the firing chamber. Second: All moving parts are installed with more space between them. All designers sought to tighten them up, while I, on the contrary, let them hang with absolute freedom. You take a handful of sand, throw it in the rifle, retract the bolt and fire! These factors, the simplicity and the reliability allowed this weapon to march around the globe."

One video of one guy in the desert with one rifle does not sum up 60 years of service and over 60 million guns worldwide. 45 nations can't be wrong.

Watch the entire thing yourself on youtube (5 segments, 9 minutes each) It is a fantastic piece for gun enthusiasts, especially AK fans.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68HSnr69sPw&feature=related
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6c3DLlM9KA&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFLHCenoi0w&feature=related
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-FRXN-kKbs&feature=related
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=075YUx2ujK4&feature=related

And before any AR fanboys pipe up, segments 3-4 speak well of the M16/AR, and show how its initial reliability had issues not from a design standpoint, but from an operations standpoint.

Buy both rifles and stop trying to make everyone else agree with you.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kalashnikov Himself Says AK Works With Sand" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 12:14 AM
The interview in which he says that starts at 8:30 in segment 2. I think I would like to be able to take the word of the man that invented it.

Enjoy this now before it gets locked or deleted. :D

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 12:50 AM
And before any AR fanboys pipe up, segments 3-4 speak well of the M16/AR, and show how its initial reliability had issues not from a design standpoint, but from an operations standpoint.

The AR15 of today is not the AR15 that was initially created. It's come a long way. Chrome lining was probably the biggest design flaw in the AR15. Obviously it is not a perfect system though. My AK thread was not intended as an AK vs AR thread or as an AK bash thread.

I think I would like to be able to take the word of the man that invented it.

I agree. No inventor would ever exaggerate or straight up lie about their invention. He made it, it must be perfect, right?

Seriously though, do you really think that this is a good argument for your claim?

The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 12:53 AM
I think he has far more experience with testing it, using it, designing it more so than you or I ever will.

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 12:54 AM
Seriously though, do you really think that this is a good argument for your claim?+1; I designed a perpetual motion machine that works...do you believe me? :rolleyes:

The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 12:56 AM
Pics or it didn't happen.

...

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 12:59 AM
Pics or it didn't happen.

How about a Youtube video?

I think he has far more experience with testing it, using it, designing it more so than you or I ever will.

With all the testing he did, he missed any test similar to that of the ones in question on Youtube? Hard to believe.

The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 12:59 AM
No wait. No. You're absolutely right.

We have proof that there is an inherit failure waiting to happen in all 60 million plus rifles because it worked with one. I mean, come on dude. If 600,000 of them all had that same problem, that is still only 1%.

All I meant was that there is a reason it is said. It isn't some internet myth. A lot of people relied on that thing in sour conditions and it held up.

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 01:02 AM
Pics or it didn't happen.No problem...the video is...umm, unavailable right now, I need to restart the machine for power to make the video. :uhoh:
http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/escher/waterfall.jpg

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 01:04 AM
+1; I designed a perpetual motion machine that works...do you believe me?

Of course Professor! Of course I do... :D

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 01:09 AM
Of course Professor! Of course I do...Honest, it worked...as long as I used this energy formula: KE=MV. :uhoh:

Yeah, I know it still wouldn't work...even in theory; but seriously you are going to believe something because the designer tells you it is true...there might be the small issue of profit and/or pride that gets in the way of the truth from time to time. :scrutiny:

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 01:15 AM
No wait. No. You're absolutely right.

We have proof that there is an inherit failure waiting to happen in all 60 million plus rifles because it worked with one. I mean, come on dude. If 600,000 of them all had that same problem, that is still only 1%.

All I meant was that there is a reason it is said. It isn't some internet myth. A lot of people relied on that thing in sour conditions and it held up.

Do it with your AK and post it on Youtube if you are so sure that most AK's can do it.

The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 01:19 AM
Sigh. Look. All I wanted to get through to you is that you can't go off of one or two experiments. We can find examples to support any cause we'd like, however, when you do many, many tests you start to see patterns in the results. No different than me flipping one coin 10 times, getting 8 heads, 2 tails, and saying if you flip a coin you're going to get heads 80% of the time. We know it's 50/50 in the long run.

This thing had been building its reputation for many years, long before internet myths and lore.

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 01:21 AM
I seriously doubt you can find ANY AK in the world that would do a whole lot better in those same test as those AK's. I challenge you to prove me wrong.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 01:22 AM
Do it with your AK and post it on Youtube if you are so sure that most AK's can do it.

I'd prefer to not treat my tools in such a fasion. My Grandfather always taught me to treat my tools well, and they will treat me well. I try to abide by that.

However; the thing here, is that if I do take a nosedive into a sand dune while carrying my AK, one of two things will happen: Either it will work, and I am happy, or it won't, and I then fix it, because I have trained with my tool, understand its function and ability, and use it within my capabilities and its design parameters.

Honest, it worked...as long as I used this energy formula: KE=MV.

Whatever gets those numbers to work ;)

The_Pretender
January 8, 2010, 01:44 AM
I had originally been looking for this video on youtube because I know I had seen it before. I see now that it had been removed for copyright infringement.

http://www.myvideo.de/watch/3318560/AK_47

Anyways... he leaves the safety on while burying it, but this thing does take a beating.

(new soundtrack may be better anyway.)

And the thing to remember: Just think of how many other rifles would be screwed in these situations. It's not supposed to be directly compared and proclaimed superior to the AR. If someone ran over my 30-30 with a truck I'd cry.

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 02:04 AM
Anyways... he leaves the safety on while burying it, but this thing does take a beating.Big difference there, considering that the safety=ejection port cover. I still want to see the "handful of sand test"...heck I may even give it a shot in my AK, but I don't expect it to work either. That is not to say that the design is inferior or that it isn't more tolerant to dust, sand, et al than other designs, in general it is, but I can't think of any shoulder fired small arms that would have the clearances to accept a "handful of sand" and still operate properly whilst maintaining reliability and safety.

:)

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 02:20 AM
Here is a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bOf2fq3myk&feature=fvw") that proves it will work fine. :uhoh:

car15bill
January 8, 2010, 02:28 AM
why do all ak owners want to discredit this video, but then don't want to subject their rifle to the same test to prove it wrong? If i had an AK available in Dork York right now i would do it, why not, its just sand, it can be cleaned out.

There is no one else out there with an AK that will do this test? there has to be someone.

I'll pay for any damage done to your rifle if you do this test and it messes it up, how about that? whatever is messed up, if anything at all, i will buy you a new part, or parts, depending on what happens.

Does that make the deal a little sweeter?

Jaws
January 8, 2010, 02:29 AM
I like Kalashnikov's take on the cartridge in part #4.:D

"It is you Americans that are to be blamed for our switch to 5.45x39mm cartridge. The soviet "experts" saw you using 5.56mm in Vietnam and didn't want to miss on something. :D :evil:
I was all for modernizing the 7.62mm cartridge" "

Smart man.:D

Yial
January 8, 2010, 03:28 AM
Here is a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bOf2fq3myk&feature=fvw") that proves it will work fine. :uhoh:
Here is a video that proves it will work fine.

The video is of airsoft guns...

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 06:37 AM
The video is of airsoft guns...

Pretty sure he was joking.

earlthegoat2
January 8, 2010, 08:41 AM
might be the small issue of profit and/or pride that gets in the way of the truth from time to time.

Maybe pride. In Mikhail's case though he did not make a penny off the AK-47 or any variants no matter what lies or truths he told.

Yay communism.

dom1104
January 8, 2010, 08:46 AM
good grief people, try it with your OWN rifle and see if its true. ar or ak. if you truly care.

19-3Ben
January 8, 2010, 08:53 AM
Well... never thought I'd see an M.C. Escher work on a gunboard. Hrm...

zstephens13
January 8, 2010, 09:37 AM
Wow. Great video series. Very informative.

Justin
January 8, 2010, 12:06 PM
This thing had been building its reputation for many years, long before internet myths and lore.

The reputation has been built over years due to propaganda, the opinions and beliefs of 3rd world conscripts and their commanders, and the fact that the early incarnations of the M16 were prone malfunctions.

However, the fact remains that a half-century on, the AK is not the platform it's cracked up to be, and the reliability issues with the AR platform are blown completely out of proportion.

I've owned and shot plenty of rifles in both configurations, and my experience has lead me to conclude that AK reliability is incredibly overrated, and that in modern AR's, malfunctions are rare. From there, it's only a hop, skip, and a jump to realize that the AR's modularity, ergonomics, and accuracy are far and away superior to the AK platform.

Ultimately, though, it's not about defending the AR as "the one true sword" out of some infantile form of brand worship. Show me a rifle that does what the AR15 does, but better, and at a comparable or even slightly higher cost, and I'll dump the platform completely and utterly.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 12:35 PM
Show me a rifle that does what the AR15 does, but better, and at a comparable or even slightly higher cost, and I'll dump the platform completely and utterly.


So I take it you are not jumping on the SCAR bandwagon anytime soon, Justin?

Jaws
January 8, 2010, 01:10 PM
The AR15 landed on the second or third place the day it was isued first time. As time passed, and newer rifles came in service, it only went down on the combat rifle's food chain.

rcmodel
January 8, 2010, 02:14 PM
Good grief!

We now have two threads running concurrently, covering AK's and sand, with 157 total posts.

Surely anything worth saying has already been said!
Several times!

rc

Yo Mama
January 8, 2010, 02:22 PM
The reputation has been built over years due to propaganda, the opinions and beliefs of 3rd world conscripts and their commanders, and the fact that the early incarnations of the M16 were prone malfunctions.

However, the fact remains that a half-century on, the AK is not the platform it's cracked up to be, and the reliability issues with the AR platform are blown completely out of proportion.


They are both great battle rifles designed to do what they were designed to do. Everyone is guilty of propegating at one time or another, me I'm guilty with my 1911s.

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 03:18 PM
Good grief!

We now have two threads running concurrently, covering AK's and sand, with 157 total posts.

Surely anything worth saying has already been said!
Several times!

Several of my postings in both threads have been essentially the same things directed to different people (and in some cases the same people). The AK is a good platform. It's reliability has been highly exaggerated for years on gun boards, specifically in regards to the whole "dumping sand in the action and it will still work" part. This doesn't mean it is a bad platform. Kind of starting to feel like this... :banghead:

Internet gun myths die hard...

At least I know who started the "myth". It was Kalashnikov himself...

ArmedBear
January 8, 2010, 03:22 PM
At least I know who started the "myth". It was Kalashnikov himself...

One need not be a capitalist to spout marketing BS, apparently.

I wonder if he moonlights for Remington, writing the text in their catalogs.

RockyMtnTactical
January 8, 2010, 03:24 PM
Could also just be his ego speaking.

RedRocket556
January 8, 2010, 03:33 PM
AK47 Dirt/ Dust Reliability Test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtJ4mI0Hhro

fireside44
January 8, 2010, 03:36 PM
Show me a rifle that does what the AR15 does, but better, and at a comparable or even slightly higher cost, and I'll dump the platform completely and utterly.

FAL, unless of course you need a rail full of lasers and flashlights.

Adopted by 90 countries vs how many for an AR? A couple?

Sounds like you have a few rifles for sale.:)

Justin
January 8, 2010, 03:37 PM
So I take it you are not jumping on the SCAR bandwagon anytime soon, Justin?

I've handled the SCAR, but not shot one. My initial impression was overwhelmingly "meh."

Several of my postings in both threads have been essentially the same things directed to different people (and in some cases the same people). The AK is a good platform. It's reliability has been highly exaggerated for years on gun boards, specifically in regards to the whole "dumping sand in the action and it will still work" part. This doesn't mean it is a bad platform.

Within the limitations of the round(s) the design is chambered for, as a simply-designed firearm for engaging human-sized targets to about 200ish yards, the AK fills the role with a workmanlike competency.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 03:38 PM
FAL, unless of course you need a rail full of lasers and flashlights.

Good luck mounting optics on an FAL. It can be done, but nowhere near as easily as on an AR.

My initial impression was overwhelmingly "meh."

That makes two of us then, sir.

fireside44
January 8, 2010, 03:42 PM
Good luck mounting optics on an FAL. It can be done, but nowhere near as easily as on an AR.

??

Railed top covers are easy to come by. Quad rails as well. Quad rail is pretty heavy for an FAL though. Didn't care for it on mine and stuck with the top cover rail and Bushnell trophy optic.

Only drawback to mounting optics is that the carry handle is rendered useless. Hardly a drawback.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 03:45 PM
Railed top covers are easy to come by. Quad rails as well.

Oh. Well, that must be a new development...I was unaware. I stand (sit) corrected.

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 03:53 PM
Pretty sure he was joking [regarding the video].Pretty sure you are right RMT. :)

JLtZD
January 8, 2010, 04:08 PM
at least this thread has humor in it...tempted to start one titled 'Who is the best at taking a joke; AK or AR fanboys'.

Although I think the answer would be C, those that own both.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 04:38 PM
Although I think the answer would be C, those that own both.

A wise conclusion sir.

Wanta B
January 8, 2010, 07:23 PM
Thats what happens when I try and get some rack time...

Fireside44 beat me to it...FN-FAL.

One of mine,not four feet from me has a butt stock adaptor on it and now wears a MagPul PRS,she has a Free Float Forearm that is ventilated and has multiple Picatinny mounts,Bipod,the front sight/gas block is picatinny,dust cover is picatinny,the lower receiver has picatinny instead of rear sight,she has sweet tiritium BUIS,upper receiver is a type 1, WITHOUT carry handle cut,a 24" stainless fluted and threaded barrel and she is topped off with a custom Leupold...It is capable of 1/2" groups@200yrds.Back home I match up against my buddies tricked out M1A...Its a toss up.(Plan on trying a nightforce once back home.)

The other one sitting right next to me is a converted PARA model with MagPul PRS tele-folder,picatinny rear,dust cover and gas block,Quad rail forearm,Type 1 Upper no carry handle cut, 16" medium fluted barrel threaded(usualy has phantom brake...),Bla,bla,bla...ya' get the picture,your "mall ninja" only they are working.

Both are coated inside and out appropriately(no lube and FDE),have ambi-safties and feed from 30rnd mags,well mostly the shorty...

If needed/wanted uppers can be changed like an M16/AR15 for multi cal. uses.

The FAL "platform" still kicks it hard!!:D

Other than passing the time,one GOOD thing I see from these type of threads is that folks can begin to see how these weapons have and are evolving...the true pros and consand how to fix them...problem is it takes SO MUCH SIFTING...uhga!!

Sorry for the OT.

sachmo
January 8, 2010, 08:10 PM
Didn't the military recently test a bunch of rifles and the latest and greatest M4 incarnation come in last in reliability again.Of course its an American designed and until recently fully manufactured weapon. Got to be good right. Don t worry the Chinese will be making them soon anyway.

Maverick223
January 8, 2010, 08:17 PM
Didn't the military recently test a bunch of rifles and the latest and greatest M4 incarnation come in last in reliability again.I believe that is right (the others were HK-416, FNH SCAR, and Magpul Masada), but there are numerous rifles that will do just as well and better than the AR and the AK as far as reliability, none of which will reliably operate with a "handful of sand" in the action. That is not to say that the AR (or rather the M16/M4) is not the unreliable carbine of yesterday, it is very reliable, and very much combat proven. You can do a whole lot worse than the AR platform (and this is coming from someone that doesn't really like the rifle system, at least in DI form).

:)

navyretired 1
January 8, 2010, 08:32 PM
A few days ago I watch a short piece on military channel were it was run over by a truck in a mud puddle picked up and had the 30 rd magazine emptyed then reloaded and emptyed again, now I love all my AR's but you can't run over them with a truck or a Geo Metro as far as that goes.
Seems all Viet Cong AK's were cleaned ever 10 years weather needed or not. Maybe the rain kept them clean but the ones we had captured normally were shot till cosmolene turned to pure carbon and the gas pistons refused to come out without vice grips and hammer. Straight pull bolt actions? I never saw any tire tracks on them but I saw one with bullet sticking out of rear of lower receiver and it still fired

Hammerhead6814
January 8, 2010, 09:10 PM
Don't worry about that video from RockyMtnTactical The Pretender. They gave all favor to the AR in it and purposely left the AK they tested exposed.

Fair testing would have been an open AR and an open AK. Instead they closed the AR and left the AK open. Advantage AR.

Let's see them do the same test but this time throw dirt into each of them. One handful into each receiver.

elmerfudd
January 8, 2010, 09:43 PM
My thoughts on watching the AK dirt video were that they had found a rather small weakness in the design, (how many times do you bury your AK, ejection port up with the dust cover open?), and exploited it to make a point. Still, I'm not sure that's a bad thing. It helps to be aware of any weaknesses or deficiencies a weapon might have and those videos demonstrated that one particular deficiency extremely well.

As to it's reliability vs. AR's, I don't really care that much. I've shot both extensively and for simplicity, ruggedness and reliability I prefer the AK. For precision I'd rather have an AR or a bolt gun. As a civilian shooter however, accuracy is generally more important to me than which gun might be better suited to surviving the zombie apocalypse.

Hatterasguy
January 8, 2010, 10:09 PM
The AK marched around the world because the Soviets gave them out to anyone who said they were communist. The Soviets also gave away the blueprints and tooling so country's that excel at mass production like China could crank them out on the cheap, and sell them for a huge profit.


Most of the world thats poor uses AK's because they are simple and cheap, mostly cheap. When it comes down to it its money. I don't know what an export M16 goes for if say I wanted to buy 50k. But lets say its $750, which probably isn't far off. I could go pick up 50k AK's for probably $200 a pop from China.


This is also why every country we fight has mostly old Russian junk as equipment, they simply can't afford better. On the flip side the drug cartels are quite well armed, they can afford the good stuff.

Shadow Man
January 8, 2010, 10:41 PM
Damn Wanta B...that's some good kit. I may have to drop by and take a peak :evil:

Wanta B
January 8, 2010, 11:54 PM
:eek::what::uhoh::scrutiny::scrutiny::neener:.....;).

Wanta B
January 9, 2010, 12:01 AM
To The Pretender,thanks for the video links.

Jaws
January 9, 2010, 12:02 AM
Most of the world thats poor uses AK's because they are simple and cheap, mostly cheap. When it comes down to it its money. I don't know what an export M16 goes for

Lately it goes for free, paid by US tax payers as "helping the allies", just like the AK. :D

This is also why every country we fight has mostly old Russian junk as equipment, they simply can't afford better.

The Russians are making cheap firearms, but they aren't playing cheap on the parts that are the most vital for the function and reliability. Since WW2, starting with the PPsh, every Russian combat rifle and machine gun had chrome lined barrel and chamber. Lately they use only hammer forged barrels. That's not cheap in my book.
Their military firearms are not junk. Their general purpose machine gun is still more reliable and much lighter than ours, so is their fifty cal. They make a lot of junk, but their combat firearms are not junk.

RockyMtnTactical
January 9, 2010, 05:30 AM
Don't worry about that video from RockyMtnTactical The Pretender. They gave all favor to the AR in it and purposely left the AK they tested exposed.

Fair testing would have been an open AR and an open AK. Instead they closed the AR and left the AK open. Advantage AR.

Let's see them do the same test but this time throw dirt into each of them. One handful into each receiver.

Fella, it was the exact same test for both guns. The AK failed because of it's weakness or flaw or whatever you want to call it in the design. If the AR15 had a huge gaping hole in the side of it under those same test conditions it would have failed just as hard.

Like I have stated, the test is completely unrealistic. All it does is shatter the dreams of wannabe internet commandos who pretend that the AK is too good to ever fail because Kalashnikov himself said that it wouldn't under those conditions.

black_powder_Rob
January 9, 2010, 11:10 AM
I don't think Kalashnikov said you could bury it under sand and it would still work. What he said was you could take a handful of sand and through it in to the receiver and it would still work. (not bury it) And yes no rifle is infallible and all have their flaws. This thread reminded me of a weaponology episode about the spatznaz. Check it out, there are other parts but watch the first few minutes and they address the myth about the ak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7H0Pj-LhVE&feature=related

hope you enjoy the clip.

sachmo
January 9, 2010, 04:00 PM
Gotta love the line from the former Spetnaz regarding the AK as he says with a smile, " it isn't a prom queen more like a biker chick". A wonderfully simple and elegant statement that sums it up perfectly much like the AK.

Wanta B
January 9, 2010, 04:50 PM
Quite! That was my favorite part of the whole video! Realy does say it all.:D A true no nonsence aprouch to function.Tho' I dig the form too.:)

lopezni
January 10, 2010, 10:16 PM
So what. Why do you need a gun that shoots after being covered in sand? Do you plan on burying your guns at the beach?

briansmithwins
January 10, 2010, 10:51 PM
So what. Why do you need a gun that shoots after being covered in sand? Do you plan on burying your guns at the beach?

There is more to shooting than sunny summer days and a bench...

BSW

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y3/briansmithwins/IMG_1002Medium.jpg

Big Bill
January 10, 2010, 11:14 PM
AK vs AR - Who cares?

Shadow Man
January 11, 2010, 12:00 AM
Why do you need a gun that shoots after being covered in sand?

One word: Shamal.

Wanta B
January 11, 2010, 08:46 PM
Suppose I'll play to...Harmattan.:p:D

Wanta B
January 11, 2010, 08:49 PM
More to shooting than sunny summer days and a bench?!:what::evil:

So true tho'.:)

Shadow Man
January 11, 2010, 10:14 PM
New thread Wanta B: Harmattan vs. Shamal :D

I jest, though.

Maverick223
January 12, 2010, 12:08 AM
New thread Wanta B: Harmattan vs. ShamalThat thread would blow (pun not intended...ok...yeah it is). :D

Shadow Man
January 12, 2010, 12:20 AM
You owe me a new keyboard Maverick :D

Maverick223
January 12, 2010, 12:28 AM
You owe me a new keyboard Maverickhttp://forums.nitroexpress.com/images/graemlins/smilies/general/lol_sign.gif

Wanta B
January 12, 2010, 01:14 PM
Nothing like a bunch of hot air...Gritty subject matter...And sore ribs!:neener:

Shadow Man
January 12, 2010, 01:46 PM
Nothin like sitting through one in a stripped down 998...no comfy AC equipped 1114 for us.

fireside44
January 12, 2010, 02:35 PM
AK vs AR - Who cares?

More than likely this would be the guy who has spent two or three times the amount of the other guy for greatly diminishing or no returns.:)

I think it's great because I don't have a horse in this race. Don't really get excited about shooting either of them as I believe there are better choices.

Then again, I am probably one of those diminishing returns guys too..lol

christcorp
January 12, 2010, 03:05 PM
I have plenty of time shooting the M-16; and not too long ago that I retired from the military. I've also had quite a bit of time shooting AK's and variants. Including a couple of true military AK-47 select fire full auto. Both weapons have their pros and cons. Both weapons; especially for the civilian who will not be in the same environment as our service men and women; are a good choice. I think very highly of the M-16/AR-15. But I have to give the dependability and reliability to the AK. AR/M16 definitely has better accuracy and quality. But when it comes to: "If I came across one of each; an AK and AR; in the middle of a swamp; and the bad guys were within shooting range; and only had enough time to grab 1 of the 2 rifles and open fire; which of the 2 would I grab??? Well, from personal experience, I would grab the AK-47. I wouldn't even think about it. Now remember; even for the paranoid, zombie believing, DieHard movies are real life, gun owners out there; they aren't going to have the same environmental impacts to deal with concerning their rifles that the military does. As such; they can probably keep either rifle they choose, operating with complete confidence and reliability.

Art Eatman
January 12, 2010, 07:57 PM
Good closing summary, cristcorp, particularly after the many pages of that other thread about sand and AKs...

If you enjoyed reading about "Kalashnikov Himself Says AK Works With Sand" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!