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

[Maverick223]

there is a reason terrorists use AK's.

Are we really going there? Is that really a selling point? I don't know about you folks, but I would rather have a rifle/carbine that was used to protect my freedom, or wander the plains of this great nation than one that was used by those seeking to destroy my freedom and roam the vile slums of the Earth...just my thoughts.

 

[nalioth]

there is a reason terrorists use AK's.

Are we really going there? Is that really a selling point? I don't know about you folks, but I would rather have a rifle/carbine that was used to protect my freedom, or wander the plains of this great nation than one that was used by those seeking to destroy my freedom and roam the vile slums of the Earth...just my thoughts.

I guess someone hasn't done their homework.

Terrorists also use the M16 rifle.

The media hides a lot of things, but just because they're hidden doesn't mean they aren't happening.

 

[Tirod]

"Worldwide popularity" is myth. Most nations worldwide don't allow open possession of firearms by civilians like we do, uprisings and coups would be even more common than they are. Government controlledl access to firearms practically requires being in the armed forces, and having a paycheck helps ensure loyalty.

What firearm that government chooses to distribute has nothing to do with popularity,a lot more political polarity. The AK is a weapon distributed by the Soviets and their related allies, and when given to actual freedom loving patriots, used to overthrow an monarchy and institute what quickly becomes a People's Republic. It's a nasty, notorious fact a lot of freedom fighters are quickly executed in the dawning days of a new regime to consolidate a Communist victory.

Once properly aligned, the new government accepts shipments of even newer models of AK's, and may even get it's own factory. Hence, the widely varying patterns and standards that make even interchangeable mags problematic.

Note, none of what happens is due to marketing or consumer demand choosing a "superior" weapons platform. The 50 year track record of the AK is to overthrow governments and institute even more oppressive ones. None of that is due to any superior design characteristics other than being the only gun provided.

"Popular" is a stretch - handing out AK's like candy at a orphan's ranch to third world citizens with no training and little education is all about empowerment, not an educated discretionary choice when perusing the market bazaar for a HD/zombie/SHTF recreational firearm.

AK's actually SELL for money in the US because they can, are cheap, and that's all the discretion a buyer needs to have, too. When free world defense experts can exercise choice, the AK is notoriously absent in the lineup. Choices become competitive, and the experts don't choose AK's.

I note the Saiga shotgun had gas residue buildup enough at 1,000+ rounds to cause the piston to stick when disassembling it. Point made, they are not impervious to neglect. NO gun is, it's marketing hype disguised as a "word of mouth" recommendation.

 

[JustinJ]

"When free world defense experts can exercise choice, the AK is notoriously absent in the lineup. Choices become competitive, and the experts don't choose AK's"

The "free world" did not choose against the ak because of its merits but because it was of soviet design. And many nations that were relatively neutral selected the ak hands.

There is no perfect gun for all situations. No guerilla with limited time and resources to maintain a firearm, who is sleeping out in the jungle or desert, would select an ar over ak if given the choice. ARs may arguably be a better weapon over the ak for large mechanized armies with abundant resources but if the world ends tommorow i'm grabbing my arsenal ak74 first.

 

[Sky]

Many have posted about the cleaning fetish some think is necessary with the AR platform.

http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=121...//www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=548338

 

[40nascar]

If moa groups are not a major concern, get a mini-14. It is a better more reliable design than the old direct impingement AR/M-16 design. The gas piston AR's and are an improvement. If economics are the major consideration, then the ranking is AK, Mini, AR. If accuracy is primary, then reverse the order. The mini is good middling compromise, with great reliability.

 

[Ithaca37]

If moa groups are not a major concern, get a mini-14. It is a better more reliable design than the old direct impingement AR/M-16 design. The gas piston AR's and are an improvement. If economics are the major consideration, then the ranking is AK, Mini, AR. If accuracy is primary, then reverse the order. The mini is good middling compromise, with great reliability.

Care to provide some proof of your claim? The AR platform is more than sufficiently reliable (see any of the recent tests conducted by the military). Read about pat rogers filthy 14.

The mini offers no advantage (and a number of disadvantages such as magazine selection) and at nearly the same price point.

 

[TylerPearce]

"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 don't know about you, but I have never went that long without cleaning any of my guns. Not because they need it, but because I treat mine better than that. I even cleaned my AK after every time I shot it. We don't live in a 3rd world country that is war torn, and we don't need to treat our weapons like we do. So why would you?

 

[Art Eatman]

Enough wandering...