Best in All-Around Combat Role: AR vs AK vs Battle Rifle?

Best in All-Around Combat Role: AR vs AK vs Battle Rifle???

  • Total voters
    191
Status
Not open for further replies.
I voted Ar-15. It does everything a battle rifle will do in the terrain I'm in. But it's lighter, faster, and has way lighter ammo. The 70+gn ammo reaches out plenty far.

I can swap optics from my 20x Trijicon scope to an Aimpoint or vice versa depending on terrain without losing zero, carry 8 pmags, and shoot ambi. Whats not to love?


The Ar-10 is my second choice, but it's unlikely that it's greater range will be useful for much. Too slow and heavy. It's just not as nice for guerrilla warfare as my Ar-15's. Those are what I'm the most effective with.

I can't stand old M1's and AK's. Those relics just don't work well for me at all.
 
i love my mini 14 but for this one rifle scenario it would be my m1a. you can punch through cover. probably take out a car/truck and reach out & touch someone with authority. im guessing (imo) the average m1a/m14 is probably more accurate then the average ar15.(just guessing) i know high end ar15's are very accurate but im talking about off the shelf ar. i know my m1a is more accurate then my bushmaster m4. please im not trying to start a war, its just my opinion.
 
i said sniper, because my cartridge is typically bigger, my rifle is typically more accurate, and i typically have a further range, and i also can be more effective for a militia. providing lookout, and sentry with a high power can be effective, and im confident that i can nail man sized targets out to 600 yards, even though i've never tried shooting that far.
 
@ future army ranger: Your "sniper" rifle might be based on a regular old main battle rifle (M1, M14, 03A3/A4). Learn the main battle rifle first. Learn the irons. Learn 'BRASS'. Learn how to shoot. Lastly, think about the Marines instead of the army for chrissakes..................
 
I own both. I can field strip and maintain an AK easier, and my AK's sure look a lot cleaner inside after shooting than my AR does. For that reason, if in a situation where soldiers have pretty much no logistics (just a gun and a bunch of ammo), I'd say an AK. Otherwise, the AR for accuracy.
 
"Marines instead of the army"

no thanks, im pretty set on that, and i know irons, i dont own a "sniper"
i own a minute accurate rifle. and it's a bolt action. i dont like iron sights much anymore.
i can use them, and will, being 14. i just prefer to shoot rifles at a bit of a distance, i'd feel a waste not hitting well.
 
You should be able to knock the boogers out of any man size target at ranges of up to 500 meters with irons. They teach you that in the Marines. For longer ranges, naturally, you'd need optics, but for 500 or less, you should hit center mass 8 out of 10 (at least).
 
Last edited:
What kind of "minute accurate bolt action" do you have? Chances are, that's the rifle you should be bonding with, day and night. Speaking of bolt actions, look for a book about Carlos Hathcock. I think it's called "white feather". He wiped out an entire NVA company with a bolt action rifle in Vietnam.

Never overlook the gear you already have. Dreaming of ultra powerful long range sniper setups (Barrett 50 cal, 408 cheytac, and so forth) is fine, but true skill with your everyday weapon is what sets apart a rifle expert, versus just some doofus with a gun.
 
Last edited:
* most logistical support in these United States
* relatively cheaper to become proficient with
* better in the CQB role
* best accuracy
* effective out to 250+yrds
* reliable enough
Click to expand...

Sounds tailor made for a Mosin M-44, with stripper clips and that great folding pigsticker for CQB. :) Lots of cheap ammo available now, snap it up.

Honestly, I will go with my vz-58. Why? Because I have it, and I don't have an AR or an AK, or a "battle rifle". I can hit a man sized target at 200 yards, and when it comes to ammo costs, I don't just reload for it, I cast my own bullets for it. That's cheap. As long as I can get powder and primers in bulk, and keep the gas checks stocked up, I'm good. :D What would a 129grain cast slug do to a meat target? Don't know, probably wouldn't be good. Hopefully I'll never have to find out.
I don't plan on getting into any high volume firefights, as my enemies I will most likely face, (or read the least unlikely), would be the drug cartels doing their drug and human trafficking near my home...as they are doing right now. Other than that unlikely chance, it's a great range rifle and HD firearm
 
World dominance was achieved via the M1 Garand and thereafter the M14. Since then, we have devolved into the "spray and pray" mentality with the M16/M4. For the Soviets, their world dominance was achieved via the Mosin-Nagant. Since then, they too have fallen into the "spray and pray" trap.

Not coincidentally, since we've both abandoned legitimate battle rifles in favor of glorified varmint guns, the USSR has collapsed, and America is on it's way to collapse. (Speaking as a United States Marine).
Click to expand...

If history serves me correctly, the sun began to set on the British Empire after WWII. So much for those SMLEs and L1A1s. Perhaps we should just go back to the muzzle loaders, Sniders, and Martinis that the Brits conqured the world with.

Seriously though, WWI was won by the Tank which broke the stalemate of trench warfare. WWII was won by Radar, Strategic Bombers, and a force using semi-auto rifles against an enemy using turn bolt repeaters.
 
For all you AK Fan Bois out there, have you noticed what weapon is most commonly found in serious shooting classes?
 
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 million people were killed on the eastern front in WWII, and the weapons used were bolt action rifles. Very little strategic bombing, very little finesse, just masses of troops with T-34's, Panthers, Tigers, Mausers, and Mosin-Nagants.

Our bombing was great, but the fate of the world was decided on the eastern front.

As far as WWI goes, the deciding factor was the entry of the USA on the side of the Allied Powers in numbers sufficient to overcome German superiority in weapons, tactics, and numbers. Remember that after the Russians capitulated, all those troops transfered to the western front. Had the USA stayed out, Britain and France surely would have lost.

And the SMLE.......I should have added that to my list. In it's day, the British Empire must have been quite a site. They got there with the Brown Bess, and stayed there all the way through the SMLE. So there have been three world dominating powers (in the last hundred or so years) and they all got there through the use of full power battle rifles. All have gone down hill after they adopted much less powerful "assault rifles". My point remains more or less intact............
 
M14 (nowadays variants) powerful caliber, range, accurate,dependaple after all these years... <deleted -- Sam>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm gonna be the odd ball and say I'd want an AR style weapon with a piston.

Now, go ahead and tear me apart with ridicule.


If I were a a guerilla force I'd probably choose an AK.
If I were in the military I'd be ISSUED an AR.
If I'm not really going to be traveling alot I'll take a battle rifle.

For a compromise between the first two I'll take a piston driven AR. One that was designed and built for a piston, not a slapped on POS.
I'll let a bigger guy carry the battle rifle for miles.
 
Has anyone run a shooting contest on here for military rifles? You know, military barrels, no optics, no trigger jobs, 200, 300, and 500 yards and so forth? I wish I knew how to run one, I think some folks might be surprised by the results. Just an idea....
 
I can see the use of intermediate rounds in strictly urban warfare by our military. Within their range, and within arenas like this where compactness and speed are at a premium, they are in their element. But even in a military where heavier support weapons are usually available, any time the fight heads to "the hills," the intermediate rounds always seem to have enough difficulty with medium and long range accuracy or lethality that the demand for longer range capabilities becomes noticeable even at the squad and platoon level. Witness the requests for more M16s and longer range 7.62mm support weapons in Afghanistan.

And for the civilian, as has been brought up, I am a firm believer that the semi-automatic battle rifle clone is the most firepower commonly available. Civilian application neither bears the use of military tactics, nor provides for the use of heavier support weapons to provide for heavier tasks. Most civilians in any sort of social disorder would be well advised to post up and minimize movement. Here the size and weight of the battle rifles and their ammo is of little consequence as vast number of rounds can be stockpiled. Even if you have to move, however, there will be very few practical applications of normal infantry doctrine applied. You will probably be required to account for every round you fire. There will be little suppressive fire. You will be required to do your job quickly and efficiently with as few rounds as possible. Here, the added effectiveness of the full power rounds, I believe, will be appreciated more than their weight. If you have to shoot through cover in normal urban terrain, the heavier wound will accomplish this is fewer rounds.

The MBR also allows you to hunt easier, if the fight heads to the hills. And if you bring an M1A or a FAL with, you won't be one of the ones asking for one we you get there.
 
For a compromise between the first two I'll take a piston driven AR. One that was designed and built for a piston, not a slapped on POS.
Click to expand...
As long you're using an AR-15/M16 derived bolt carrier group it's not designed for a piston. The weapon you seek is called the AR-180 - also reencarnated with plastic housings as the HK G36/SL8 and KelTec SU16.

Johnny V, I could go into economics (British debt to the US, Soviet Communist economic model, and US debt to the Chinese), but that isn't for THR.
 
Has anyone run a shooting contest on here for military rifles? You know, military barrels, no optics, no trigger jobs, 200, 300, and 500 yards and so forth? I wish I knew how to run one, I think some folks might be surprised by the results. Just an idea....
Click to expand...
You might also be surprised. Your USMC still trains its Marines to hit targets at 500 yards with the irons on their M16A2s & A4s. You've probably already seen that the sight picture from M16A2 style sights is nearly identical to that of M1 Garand / M14 sights. IIRC, those A2 sights were largely developed by the AMU for service rifle competition.

I'm not saying I could do it, but the USAF SSgt who taught me to handload was equally capable with his A2 style AR, and his CMP Garand. Observing skilled riflemen with A2/A4 style AR-15s, M14s/M1As, or M1 Garands, plus decent ammo for each, I just haven't seen a difference in performance at ranges out to 500 or 600 yards.

I truly believe your software is much more of an issue than your hardware.
 
Bushmaster ACR would be the best rifle for accuracy and reliabilty it has bolt action accuracy and Ak reliability.

I live and breathe Bushmaster so my hard head says the AR would be the best choice due to better longer range accuracy then the AK.
 
Depends. I'd vote for an AK.

First and foremost, I want a gun that will work. I doubt everyone in a conflict/social disorder/Meth head in the living room takes a 20-45 minute synchronized "Timeout" to clean their rifles. A "Maintenance is optional" gun like an AK seems to hold an edge here.
Point goes to the AK

Effectiveness: 7.62x39 and x51 will punch through a lot of material to ruin someone's day on the other side, neither of them will punch through a ceramic plate except with special ammunition, and even then, its iffy. 5.56 is great for unarmored targets, but intermediate cover (also known as concealment to the .30 cal rounds) will deflect/stop the .22.
Point to the Battle Rifle and AK

Accuracy: 3 MOA will let you easily land head-shots out to 300 yards (thats 9" diameter circle, easy enough to put 8-9/10 in a head) and dead's dead. AK Accuracy ranges from 2-4 MOA. My SGL-21 is closer to that 2 MOA range, especially with good ammo. x39 starts to drop around 250 yards, so shots to 300 can be easily made with a 100-yard zero or the "P" setting.

Also, as the many conflicts dating back to the 1800's (Civil War, Boer War) to present shows, its not about carefully picking out a target and shooting at it, like bulls-eye, its about throwing enough lead in the direction of contact to cause them to either break off or perish. Considering this reality, the individual accuracy of a rifle doesn't matter much, since you may not even see your attacker. Shoot first, shoot more, scootch, and ask questions later.

It is highly unlikely your enemy will expose himself. Waiting for a clean shot at the enemy will likely result in you getting shot first.
All-around Tie

Range: Again, depends on your terrain. In the foothills and forest region, shots over 150 yards are rare. Being able to see more than 150 yards is rare. A rifle that is effective to 1200 yards wastes 1050 yards of range in my area. If you live in the rockies, or great plains, where shots to 1200 - 1400 can and do get made, then pick a rifle that can do that.
All-around tie

Weight: A Loaded 7.62x51 mag (20 rounds) weighs more than a loaded 7.62x39 mag (30 rounds), weighs more than a loaded 5.56x45 mag (30 rounds).
Point to the AR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
AR vs. AK, when they cost the same
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
priler
P
T
  • Locked
Cheapest AR (Oly) vs. mid-range AK? (Vector)
Replies
15
Views
1K
The_Shootist
The_Shootist
3
  • Locked
Getting precision hits out of an AK and my personal theories
2 3
Replies
70
Views
2K
hps1
hps1
whatnickname
  • Locked
The quest for an accurate 7.62X39 (Ruger Mini 30 VS the AR 15 platform)
Replies
20
Views
3K
brnmuenchow
B
1stmarine
  • Locked
AR-15 .223REM vs 6.8SPC vs 300AAC Blackout vs 6x45 vs 6.5Grendel vs 7.62x39...
2 3 4 5
Replies
117
Views
12K
jason41987
J
Back
Top