Ar 15 & ak 47

[jackdanson]

I have yet to encounter any AK that is capable of a consistent 2.5 MOA at 100 yards, much less 200 or 300 yards. More like 3.5-4.0 MOA given commonly available ammunition.

My saiga 7.62x39 gets 2 moa at 100 yards using "bear" russian ammunition and a 3-9x scope. My sw m&p 15 gets 1.5-ish moa using the same scope and m193 ammo. If I was using brass case handloads I can easily see the saiga performance becoming even more impressive.

That being said, saigas do tend to perform better than most other AK's. My wasr gets the 3-4 moa you quote.

 

[wyocarp]

I wouldn't use either an AR in .223 or an AK in 7.62 x 39 to make 400 - 500 yard shoots if I was serious about killing something at that distance. At distances out to 300 yards, I doubt that I would do any better at killing something with one or the other, but if I wanted to pick up a gun and dispatch numerous magazines of ammo without a problem, I'll pick up an AK and leave the AR in the safe.

 

[benEzra]

enEzra,

I would no sooner try to engage 7" diameter plates at 400yds with 55gr Winchester white box, than I would throw the bullets at it by hand. However I would wager than the 55gr bulk ammo in 5.56mm (US made) will be more accurate on average than 7.62X39 bulk ammo at the 400yd line. Even better if you could find some bulk 62gr 5.56mm ammo, in my experience it is more accurate in 1-7 twist barrels than the 55gr stuff.

I totally agree. The AK is a 300-yard rifle at best, and is most comfortable inside 200. If you are shooting at 400 yards, 7.62x39mm is not a good cartridge to do it with, regardless of platform (if you are sighted in at 200 yards with an optic, you are already 4 feet low at 400 and only barely supersonic). Stepping up to higher-BC, 154-grain bullets will help you some, but at the cost of an even lower starting velocity.

Having said that, a civilian AK is a very good civilian rifle inside 200 yards, and will let you hit out to 300 if you need to.

 

[Izaak Walton]

Whipper-Snappers.


I’m glad I don’t put sugar in my coffee. It makes monitor cleaning easier when I read a post like this.

 

[camslam]

BenEzra wrote:

If you need to be shooting further than 300, you would probably be wanting something larger caliber than .223 or 7.62x39mm anyway.

I think those are the most wise comments of this thread.

I'll agree that both the AR in the .223 and the AK in the 7.62 are both useful tools for certain jobs, but I believe the vast majority of conflicts that civilians would be engaged in would be well within 300 yards. If you are engaging multiple targets past that, you are telling me that you don't want something with more punch than the .223?

That is the primary reason I went with an AK over an AR. When I looked at how far 300 yards actually is, I didn't see myself engaging in lots of combat past that range.

If I do have situations requiring gun fire past that, I DEFINITELY want something that is heavier hitting than the .223.

If money wasn't an issue, I would have outfitted myself with a battle rifle/assault rifle that shoots a .308, probably in an M1A, or DSA Arms Fal. The AR-10's have a reputation of being even more finicky than the AR-15's, especially when it comes to ammo. (Not owning one, I don't know that to be true) Based on the cost of rifle, ammo, and mags; reliability and ease of use, size of caliber, and overall effectiveness, the AK was the choice for me.

I think it is all relative as to what you use or shoot. There is no question the 7.62x39 is a more damaging round within 200 to 300 yards, than the .223. I'll repeat, if you are shooting past 300 yards, go with BenEzra's advice and get a bigger caliber.

 

[regal]

I'm not sure with the current "situation" so someone correct me if I'm wrong. Generally a decent AK can be found in the $400-$600 range, some cheaper some more expensive. AR's range from $600-$2500+ with rifles in the $800-$1000 range being the best quality/price compromise

Basically double your prices, WASR's are selling for over $800.

 

[expvideo]

First of all, Google is your friend. That being said, let's break this down.

What is each mainly used for?

They are both used as the main battle rifle for infantry forces in several countries.

What caliber is each?

The M16/M4/AR-15 is 5.56/.223, but it is available in just about any caliber you would like from .22 to single shot .50BMG.

The AK47/AKM/AK74 is 7.62x39, but is also available in 5.45x39 and 5.56/.223

What are the price range on these?

Currently civilian models of the M16 (AR-15) can be had for anywhere between $800 and $2500 for standard models, depending on brand and features. There are cheaper and more expensive, but the majority will fall between these price ranges. As for the actual M16, the sky is the limit. You're probably looking somewhere between $15000 and $20000.

The civilian variations of the AK47 can be had for anywhere from $400-1500 depending on model and brand. Again, there are exceptions to the rule, but these are the average prices. A real AK47 is going to run you a lot more, but I assume you are talking about the civilian models that are semi-automatic only.

Do certain manufacturers make each?

Yes, there are countless manufacturers of each.

When ppl think there may soon be restriction on guns these 2 gain popularity at local gun shops here,why is that?

People want to own them, and if it looks like they won't be sold in the future, they want to own them before that is the case. It is argued as hysteria and as preparation. Many people believe that the next president will ban them, and that unless you already own one, you will never be able to get them again. That is why they are flying off of the shelves and the prices have gone up 10-100% depending on location. There are also many people who believe that the ban will not happen or that it will not happen in the near future. The people in this camp beleive that by spring or summer of next year, there will be a surplus of so-called assault rifles, and that the prices will have dropped significantly. Obviously, neither group has been proven right or wrong, so you can make your best judgement as to whether it is worth investing in a rifle now.

Thanks

Don't mention it.

 

[KBintheSLC]

If you can consistently (as in 90-100%) hit a 7" diameter or 7" wide steel plate at an honest 400 yards with your AK, then you should take it to Camp Perry as you have an extremely unusual AK. You must also have access to some very outstanding ammo to do that.

To be honest I view your claims with quite a little bit of skepticism.

Coal Dragger

Weather you believe it or not is of no concern to me. I have nothing to gain from making false claims. If I have a gun that is a piece of crap, I'll be the first to tell you.

I love hearing all of the ignorant claims about how the AK is "worthless" and "inaccurate". I say let people think that if they want to. I don't want these people to know what an awesome weapon it really is.

If you are shooting at 400 yards, 7.62x39mm is not a good cartridge to do it with

Again... not true. Yes there is quite a bit of drop at that range, however, a simple ballistic calculator and a decent scope will help you compensate for that. Also, the 7.62 round will have more energy at that range than M193.

Anyway, you folks keep on believing what you want. I am all for it. I love seeing the look on peoples face at the range when I keep tagging the 400 yard steel.

 

[benEzra]

Again... not true. Yes there is quite a bit of drop at that range, however, a simple ballistic calculator and a decent scope will help you compensate for that. Also, the 7.62 round will have more energy at that range than M193.

Agreed, for known-distance shooting. For shooting other than at measured distances, the cartridge is much less forgiving than higher-velocity, higher-BC choices, though.

Anyway, you folks keep on believing what you want. I am all for it. I love seeing the look on peoples face at the range when I keep tagging the 400 yard steel.

That is awesome, and more power to you. A lot of people badly underestimate AK's, but they are great little rifles.

 

[expvideo]

Regardless of how well an AK can shoot precision groupings at 400yds, it was designed as a medium range rifle, and performs outstandingly within 300 yards, as designed. If you rifle makes it to 400yds, great. If it doesn't, who cares. The fact of the matter is that it was designed for combat within 300 yds, and for that it is an exceptional weapon.


Back to the OP's questions, another important thing to note about the M16 and the AK47 is that they were designed with different ideas in mind.

The AK is designed for use in cold weather by poorly trained soldiers. That means that it is reliable and durable, while being simple to use. It also means that you can easily operate any of the AKs controls with thick gloves on.

The M16 was designed to be used by professionals in medium-low to high temperature climates. If taken care of and cleaned, it is also very reliable. Unlike the AK, it does require proper maintenance and cleaning to function properly. Remember, this rifle was designed for use by well trained professionals, so this should not be a problem. The M16 only slightly sacrifices stopping power for a significant increase in accuracy. This is because the operator is expected, again, to be a professional soldier who would rely on accuracy more than stopping power. And finally, the M16's controls are designed to be operated quickly and easily, but sacrifices the large controls that are easier to use with thick gloves.

So again, the AK was designed to be rather maintenance free and easy to use in every climate, while the M16 was designed to be used by professional soldiers. Both have distinct advantages and shortcomings, but they are both very capable medium range combat rifles.

 

[phoglund]

I have both and love to shoot both. I also have an AR in 9mm which is great for short range shooting for fun and practice. Lots cheaper!

I also have a Saiga with a 16" barrel in .308 that is a 1.5MOA shooter with Australian Ball Ammo. (The only ammo I've grouped with it.) I bought it when prices on them were far less than they are now. ($279) I put a PSOP 8X42 side mount scope on it. I'd consider it deadly out to 500 yards and perhaps farther if I do my part better than I usually do. I also picked up 3-20 magazines for it. Short range or long range it would be a pretty effective battle implement.

I'd suggest picking up one of each if possible. They are both fun to shoot and might end up a good investment in the long run. That being said, they are pretty hard to find right now.

 

[WardenWolf]

As a general rule of thumb, it's better to pick up the AK before you get the AR. Why? Because the AK is a better survival tool and a lot more dependable in an emergency situation. The AR is a toy. A cool toy, but a toy nonetheless. It's got great accuracy, and is great for competitions and light hunting, but when it all comes down to it I'd trust my life to an AK long before an AR. Separate an AR from its cleaning kit, and see how long it stays working.

 

[ZeBool]

I would much rather have a weapon that is a little less accurate, but fires every time I pull the trigger. Also, AKs are far less expensive than ARs.