Iknow this has been done before, but AK or AR?

Really it's up to you, buy whichever fits your needs better.

BTW you do not need to clean an AR "religiously to keep it in good working order" and your assumptions of the AR are not correct.

dcarch said:

Hey all! I haven't really been on the rifle side of this forum much, but I'm ready to ask my first rifle related question. I have about a $700 to a $750 budget set aside for a battle rifle. I can't decide as to whether I should get an AR-15 variant, or an Arsenal SGL-21. My question is, with my budget, can I get a good AR, one that I know I can count on, or would an AK be better? My problems with each design are as follows: With the AR, I can't get over the gas-impingement system. My buddy has an AR, and he has to clean his religiously to keep it in good working order. Also, I'm a little uncomfortable with the 5.56 round. To me, it seems a little worrisome to use a round for personal defense that is intended for use on P-dogs and coyotes. On the AK side of things, I dislike the safety location on the AK. I don't like having to shift my hand to disengage it. I also know that the AK isn't quite as accurate as the AR (although I've heard the SGL is very accurate). And yes, I'm sure the AK vs AR debate has happened before, but I really would like some input. Thanks in advance!
Dave

Click to expand...

If you want a battle rifle, why not get a FAL?

Also, aren't AKs and ARs assault rifles not battle rifles?

Your friend's cleaning schedule is not a reliable indicator of what an AR actually needs. A quality AR with reasonable care is as reliable as an AK. If you bury it in sand for 3 months and then shoot it without cleaning? No. So don't do that.

An AR is more ergonomic, accurate and adaptable than an AK. The one thing an AK does better than an AR is penetrate cover. You have to decide if that's worth the tradeoffs.

As said above, you don't have to clean AR religiously. I clean mine every week or 2 but not because i have to. I do it because it is easy. I shoot several hundred rounds each shot. I may go 2 or 3 shoots between a good cleaning. I always clean before a match.

The AK is a great weapon, less expensive, reliable and the ammo is cheaper.

But if you want to do more with it, the AR is more versatile. More accurate, longer range, more options, more ergonomic and more. You can start with a $700 AR and build it over time the way you want it for the way you use it.

People make over much of an AR's necessary maintenance, all the guys I have seen gripe about their rifle malfunctioning either had a bad magazine or not enough lube. An old argument but one I'll keep defending is: dirty and wet always beats dirty and dry when it comes to autoloaders.

dcarch in your price range you can also look at the cetme, you should be able to find one for $500 or so.

A quality AR with reasonable care is as reliable as an AK.

Click to expand...

That's just it -- the AR is less reliable than the AK because it requires "reasonable care" to run well; whereas with an AK, it can be used and abused almost indefinitely without any cleaning and still run like a clock. Even the best AR needs to be cleaned every 1 or 2 thousand rounds or so to ensure reliable function.

I wouldn't say AR's have to be "cleaned religiously" to run well... instead I would say they have to be lubricated religiously.

There is no doubt that the AK is the more reliable of the two... but an AR is plenty reliable for most folks' purposes. Reliability would become an issue only if you are in the field for a long period of time, firing a lot of rounds, and are unable to clean the rifle.

Personally for my battle rifle, I don't like either the AK or the AR. Neither one's cartridge is very well suited for shooting past 300 yards, and I like to have a little more reach than that. I like the M-14, myself.

henschman said:

That's just it -- the AR is less reliable than the AK because it requires "reasonable care" to run well; whereas with an AK, it can be used and abused almost indefinitely without any cleaning and still run like a clock. Even the best AR needs to be cleaned every 1 or 2 thousand rounds or so to ensure reliable function.

I wouldn't say AR's have to be "cleaned religiously" to run well... instead I would say they have to be lubricated religiously.

There is no doubt that the AK is the more reliable of the two... but an AR is plenty reliable for most folks' purposes. Reliability would become an issue only if you are in the field for a long period of time, firing a lot of rounds, and are unable to clean the rifle.

Personally for my battle rifle, I don't like either the AK or the AR. Neither one's cartridge is very well suited for shooting past 300 yards, and I like to have a little more reach than that. I like the M-14, myself.

Click to expand...

Ditto for me... I like the AR, but my M1A is my favorite rifle at the moment.

"Also, I'm a little uncomfortable with the 5.56 round. To me, it seems a little worrisome to use a round for personal defense that is intended for use on P-dogs and coyotes."

You just answered your question. Get over the goofy AK saftey and you'll be a happy camper.

If you don't like the DI system, do some research. I think one of the mods recently wrote in a thread that the H&K G3 (I think) actually put more fouling in to chamber/receiver area than a DI system. Yes its dirty, but it is reliable when made out of quality parts.
5.56 is a good round depending on what you're going to be using it for. A soft point 5.56 is nothing to sneeze at for example.

The arsenal is also a very nice rifle as well.

Get which ever one you feel comfortable with.

I've switched back and forth going from a crappy ar, to a crappy ak, to an xcr, back to an AR (although this one is a lot better quality).
Point being, choose wisely. If it comes down between an arsenal and a low budget ar though, I'd get the arsenal.

I'd go with an AR. They are very versatile, have lots of addons and mods, so as you gain experience you could tweak it to whatever it is you find you like.
Actually, my first choice would be to get both, because they both do what they do well. But, if you only get one, an AR is good for the above reasons.

Sounds like you already prefer the AK so get one. I have both but prefer the AR. How about a Saiga .308.

I'm not a big fan of the AKs ergonomics. My brother in law has one and it also has a bad case of trigger slap. Your finger is very sore after shooting 50 rounds.

Another option in your price range is a VZ58. My father in law has one and loves it.

Personally, I would go for the AR but a decent AR might be outside of your $800 price range.

Build your own AR I did and I'm in it for way less than $800.00 and it's built the way I wanted it, not some cookie cutter model that was sitting on the shelf. I'm into this one for about $725.00 complete. And yes I plan on building another.

GF

If you're budget is $750 then buy an AK and lots of ammo. IMO you will find a better AK for around that price than you will an AR.

If you increase your budget by $150-200 then you can get yourself into a very nice decent quality AR.

Get the Arsenal AK if that is your price range. Save up more money later and get a premium AR. The Arsenal is the primo AK, so don't bother getting a cheap AR.

I own an AK and an AR. Here's my views:

AR:
Pros -
One of the most ergonomical guns made
Infinite number of ways to accessorize the gun
Proven in combat
Accurate
Low recoil allows for extremely quick follow up shots

Cons -
Less powerful than AK round
Needs to be cleaned regularly (compared to an AK)
Expensive ammo (compared to an AK)

AK:
Pros -
Shoot it, put it away, shoot it, put it away, shoot it, put it away............clean it, and then repeat
Extremely cheap ammo
Powerful round
Can accessorize it to fit your needs (not as much as an AR, but enough to satisfy your tastes)
Proven in combat

Cons -
Accuracy concerns
Extremely un-ergonomical
More recoil than AR


After comparing the guns, my recommendation would be to go with what you like better. I like both guns, and would have a hard time choosing either one. Both have been proven in combat. Both, for the purposes they were made for, are comparably accurate (both will shoot minute of man out to 300 yards assuming the shooter does his/her part). The AR does have a slight edge in accuracy. You can add whatever you want to both in terms of optics, grips, lights, etc.

If you are concerned about the 5.56 round being inadequate for self defense, why would the US military have used the round for the past 50 years?

Again, I would shoot both, and see which one you like the best. You can't go wrong with either one.

Both rifles are proven and worthy opponents! The guys have pretty much covered some good points on both systems.

I take shots at 250 to 350 Yards and like to hit what I am aiming at. If most of my shots were 150 or less I would certainly consider the AK.

You can get a Bargain Bin AR CMMG for $599 and $650 if chrome lined barrel. There are always a few who will knock a product but most think they have a great gun if it is CMMG. A 223/556 round in the last few years has matured and now is offered for just about all purposes. From 40gr to 80+

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?81462-So-you-want-to-buy-an-AR-15-huh

I know of ARs that are rented out and have not been cleaned in at least 2.5 Years. They are rented and when they come in they get a few squirts of Breakfree CLP if they are lucky. Check on THR and you will find many threads of lubing/cleaning the AR.

I like a Saiga or just a plain old Ak and the Saiga in 308 is accurate if set up right. Ammo is expensive. 223/5.56 is much more reasonable on the price. Rounds for an AK are even a better price. SKS is liked by many too.

Either will be a good choice if you understand their limitations.

I'm an AR man but given your budget I would pick up a WASR, mags and ammo and call it a day.
I would rather buy a cheap AK for 450 than a cheap AR for 700. Then you have money left for mags and ammo.

As for this:

Also, aren't AKs and ARs assault rifles not battle rifles?

Click to expand...

NO!

With Arsenal, you're paying a lot just for the name.

You can buy a factory Saiga, convert it yourself and have the same quality of firearm for hundreds of dollars less.

Since you "know very little about rifles", the cosmetic differences in the factory Saiga and Arsenal imported Saigas shouldn't make any difference.

Going with the factory Saiga and converting it will get you a brand new gun, as opposed to the recycled parts used in the WASR (and WASRs cost more).

Have you tried an SKS, maybe the classic Russian? It is nice to look down onto the bolt, and all types have the bolt hold-open (BHO) feature.

Stripper clips are fast to load with a little practice. If ten rds. are not enough, you might need armed air support within one-two minutes.
Tech Sights sells aperture sights for $45-75 or so, even for the AK clones, and these sights provide a much longer sight distance.

The Russian-made 7.62x39 ammo is non-corrosive (unlike old Yugo), and much cheaper than .308/NATO 7.62.

Did anybody mention the AK-74? Beware of Century's many large "keyhole" bores, which they acknowledge they are aware of.
Look up "Sturmgewehr's" experience and "Aufklarung".