compromise: ar-15 vs ak 47

ak vs ar

  • ak using ar components

    Votes: 13 40.6%
  • ar using 7.62x39

    Votes: 19 59.4%

  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
1,470
I want one of these 2 iconic rifles but I can't just bring myself to settle on one and leave out the benifits of the other. so which is a better compromise, a ak that accepts ar components or an ar that fire 7.62x39?
 
Why not just an AK? Pretty cheap to shoot, and suitable for medium hunting. If its the "tacticool" issue, you can spiff up a AK very well.
 
How about just a regular AK?

You could probably buy a nice Arsenal for the amount of money you'd spend building one.
 
AR in 7.62 all the way. Then, you get the accuracy of the AR, with the more potent (but shorter-range) round of the AK.

Nothing wrong with ARs in 5.56 either. ;)
 
You're aiming at an AR between the two anyways, when you look at the options you have listed. You don't like the AK's components, for whatever reason, and prefer AR components.

The heart and soul of an AK its it's low-tolerance, clunky, but dead-reliable "shoot the dam thing" style. It's built to be run in the harshest conditions, and with MINIMAL assistance, by the worlds most illiterate, gun-abusing conscripts.

Adding smaller clearances and a more sophisticated-style to the weapon defeats the purpose. Granted, improves accuracy and other features, but still defeats the point of going for an "AK".

That said, your poll has pretty much said you want an AR in 7.62x39mm. Which is not only marginally popular, but also effective.

Like the 6.5x55 being accused of being "weak" because of low chamber pressures, when in fact it's capable of much more, the x39 is accused of inaccuracy because of the AK platform. It should do very well in the AR platform, and will be fun and CHEAP to shoot... ;)
 
I bought a Bushmaster AR in 2004 when the ban was lifted. I think the best Bushmasters were made then. It is a top quality gun.

In 2008 I bought an AK, Romanian G model, to literally treat as a beater gun. You know, hammer on it, don't clean it, shoot rediculous amounts of stinky dirty com-bloc ammo through etc.

The AK has steadily earned my complete respect and has always performed perfectly. It's now one of my favorite rifles.

....never have not atleast ran a bore snake though it after shooting though...:)

I say get the AK.

Then if you really want a AR later get one.

Fooon
 
if you're looking for something in 5.56, I would say get a 5.56 AK and put an AR magwell adapter on it. Modern AR mags are every bit as reliable as AK mags and easier to find in 5.56.

While you're at it, add some better irons. This could be a Mojo sight, the A1 style from Tech Sights, a dustcover mounted HK rear drum, or the Krebs top rail with rear sight (budget and personal preferences depending).

7.62x39 AR mags are not nearly as easy to find. I suppose if you could get an AR lower that takes AK mags then it makes more sense to me but I generally prefer a piston system anyway.
 
An AR in 7.62x39 only needs a barrel, bolt, and the most important part, a magazine that accepts a tapered case, with curved body, that feeds the top ten rounds in a straight magazine well.

Lots of x39 in an AR enthusiasts would like that magazine, and have a few that work, but find a lot of others that simply can't negotiate the crooked path of feeding.

Just because either works well doesn't mean a hybrid will, ask folks who have a crossbreed dachshund-German Shepherd mix. I haven't seen a good looking one yet.

AK's shooting 5.56 have been around since the '70s - Valmet offered them. Nothing special there, they shot ok.

What makes the AK reliable is the superior curved magazine - which is deadnuts reliable, heavy, and issued to the Combloc soldier in limited quantities for the duration of his service. What makes the AR a great weapon is the superior lightweight design of the gas operated bolt carrier group, a barrel mounted to an extension that locks the bolt, and the light aluminum receiver.

What's good in one doesn't necessarily work with the other.
 
I would recommend getting an AK and adding a folding buttstock and forend rail. If you want to shoot the 7.62x39, do it out of the proper platform. The ARs loaded in 7.62x39 have reliability issues related directly to the design of said round. The primary issue is with the magazine. The 7.62x39 (and the 5.45 also) are designed with a tapered cartridge. This design requires a constant curvature of the magazine. This constant curvature is reduced in the upper portion of the magazine due to the mag well being straight. You can get around this for 5.56 by using internal curvature, but the 5.56 is a much less dramatic curve than the Soviet rounds. The 7.62x39 requires a much more dramatic curvature, and lack of it can cause binding in the magazine and reduced feed rate, which can cause loading malfunctions, or bolt over-run (bolt closing on an empty chamber because the magazine can't feed fast enough to keep up). The other problem is with bolt-thrust issues, which are created by the power of the 7.62x39 round. The AK round is much heavier and creates high pressures while also having high inertial recoil onto the bolt. As a result, this causes a larger issue of the bolt unlocking early and throwing off the timing of the BCG and gas system. As a result, you'll have increased instances of failure to extract/eject and get a double-feed, or you'll have failures to feed. The backward bolt-thrust of a 5.56 is around 6,833ft-lbs, while the 7.62x39 is 7,918ft-lbs. There isn't a heavy-enough buffer or recoil spring to eliminate this issue, unfortunately.
The final problem is with the design of the rear case head and the rim of the AK round, which is just not conducive with the design of the AR bolt.

So, just eliminate the problem and get the rifle that the round was designed to be shot out of. If you want a .223/5.56, get the appropriate weapon system and get an AR or similar combat carbine like a SCAR, ACR, or Sig556. Don't get AKs loaded in 5.56. If you want a light AK, get the AKM variant with the 5.45x39 chamber.

Trying to mix rounds is just problematic. Don't compromise. It's not a compromise to get an AK with some AR furniture. That's just changing the ergos to fit you. Getting an AR in the 7.62x39 is a compromise, and one that usually does not pay off well. If your issue is with cost, then the AK is going to be a better option. The maintenance required on an AR is pretty minimal (if taken care of and lubed properly with good lube), but the AKs tend to have a lower cost of ownership due to less accessories and stuff being available.
 
Last edited:
I would not try and make one of them be like the other. It ruins everything.

Just get one or the other. You will like either, I promise.
 
I see no purpose for this thread. :rolleyes: I mean, really, how could you handicap an AK like that? Maybe it would be good for the ARs as they would then have fewer parts and added reliability when dirty. :neener: I guess I shall vote AR with AK components, although it won't be as purty a gun. :scrutiny:
 
If you want the 7.62x39 chambering, it's gotta be an AK. If you get a quality AK it should be accurate enough for the round's effective range so I wouldn't worry too much about that. You can get an AR-style stock and handguard if you want.

For the stock, you just need a buffer tube that can mate to the AK receiver, then you can pick any AR collapsable stock you like. This is the one I'm planning to install:
http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=145115
 
I think components was the wrong choice of words, attachments or accessories would have been better. If I got an ak I would get the necissary accessories to alow ar-15 stocks and such to work. I had also considered an ar that fires the ak round but I heard they had reliability issues.

Mags, I have looked at the krebs site and like their offerings but I haven't seen any with a integral optics rail like that, where did you get it?
 
Attaching AR parts to the AK isn't quite all that. They aren't really AR parts - to work correctly, they are AK specific. Like the case of the buttstock, you don't just screw on a buffer tube - and I don't really think that was meant. What's used is an AK specific adapter that mates with the receiver to accept the tube. It works, but what's really happening is grafting on a part with no real sense of being engineered to properly fit. An AK specific stock doesn't use an AR buffer tube, it's built right, not adapted.

Doesn't mean it won't work, the AK vendor market is full of AR modified or adapted parts to trick out a decent KISS gun into an innerdweeb fantasy fighting firearm. That's exactly the problem with all that bling, it's not the optimum configuration. Even Knights Armament has said there's no point putting a quad rail on the AR for most common sense civilian guns. It's an institutional compromise to accommodate different users in the military with just one overwieght, bulky, and user unfriendly part that mounts old school uberhardened military optics and lights already obsolete on the open market.

The new designs are all about mounting rail strips only where needed, when needed. The AK suffers from a lot of niche marketers trying to stretch the life of a stale AR accessory and get a few more sales. Dumping a lot of cash into modernizing one will result in the same excess we already see in the AR market - new furniture and clamp on bottle openers tricking out a closet queen gun that is never even used on live targets.

None of it adds accuracy, aids in improving hits (other than an optic,) and will serious deplete cash flow proving you can't buy skill or proficiency.
 
Mags, I have looked at the krebs site and like their offerings but I haven't seen any with a integral optics rail like that, where did you get it?
It's the older model that is no longer made, called the KTR03s "03" meaning 2003. The KTR08 is the newer model that you can get NIB from RGuns.net.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top