'Iraq shows Kalashnikovs are still the best'

[Lonestar.45]

I think those quotes by him are pretty old, I saw them circulating shortly after the war in Iraq started.

He's just an old man proud of his invention is all, marketing it like anyone would who invented such a popular weapon. I don't put any stock in it. The M-16 is a fine platform.

That said, I bet the guys in Jessica Lynch's convoy early in the war wouldn've given their left, er, arm for an AK when they were ambushed. If you ever read the full account you'll know why.

 

[longhorngunman]

I've owned and shot both. Respect the heck outta both types and they do what they were designed to very well. Basically the Ak is a little more reliable but even a good AK is not quite as accurate as a AR. At 100 yards and Iron sights I will hit you in the chest with the Ak, with the AR I'm aiming for the pumpkin . Still ole Kalishnikov did something right, they've made over a BILLION of the things , I've read elsewhere closer to 2 billion. Even at 1 billion thats an incredible number of rifles: enough for 1 out of 6 people on the planet. I don't think Winchester ever made that many Model 70's .

 

[Carl N. Brown]

"you can't hit anyting with an AK"

Last time I shot my AK from sand bags at the range, I got
a goup 3.25 inch high by 2.5 wide at seventy five yards.
And it went bang, eject and feed for every shot so far, with every
thing from Sako 1973 to Wolf 2005 ammo.

 

[Foxtrot427]

I must say though, Id take a VEPR over a few ARs.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

There is the occassional AK that can't do better than 9 inches at 100 yards. More often than not, it is the user and accuracy can be greatly increased by simply adding a $40 Mojo ghost ring sight. If you add a red dot, such as the Russian PK-AS-V, you might be surprised what your AK is capable of. Even my cheap WASR is capable of hitting a peice of firewood at 300 yards 2 out of 3 times and it wasn't even properly sighted in when I did that.

How common it is for an American to ditch his M16 for an AK, I don't know. But my brother has expressed the desire to do so if he was permitted to.

 

[SnakeEater]

What's all this talk of the U.S. military promoting riflemen? Giving a guy a varmint rifle and having him hit man size targets out to 300m is not breeding riflemen. A man with a major caliber rifle, who can engage targets out to 800m or so reliably, is a rifleman.

 

[taliv]

Not too many of course, but the broad generalizations about how you can't hit anyting with an AK get really old.

how about a compromise? the AK people will stop positing the ridiculous notion that all AKs are utterly reliable and the AR people will stop with the cheap, communist, innacurate crap

 

[ghost squire]

Yep, those crappy AKs. Can't hit anything.

You guys do realize that modern Russian AKs are 2moa or better guns right? Just because your WASR shoots 9 inch groups, don't assume that there aren't good AKs out there.

And how many modern Russian AK-47's are there? If you were referring to what I said, which I think you were since my post was directly above yours.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I've seen AK's fail. It does happen. They are no where near as utterly reliable as people make them out to be, they are just more reliable as a whole over other platforms.


What good is an AK, when a piece of junk steel case round gets its case head ripped off? The super reliable rifle is reduced to a clubbing weapon because of a steel case that's not even worth $0.01. They sell broken shell extractors in 7.62x39 for a reason. Not to attack the AK, but this happens to all rifles. So you can't think like many AK owners think.


Every system is vulnerable to the weakest component. Like a chain, it is only as strong as its weakest link. This can be anything, from the user, rifle, ammo, magazine...This can be any part at any time for any reason.


As a shooter, you must acknowledge that nothing is perfect, and take the proper precautions. Make sure that your rifle is clean as much as possible. This means clean it after every use, or even when not used, clean it periodically. Keep it well oiled. This serves more than just cleaning, it serves as a time when you can inspect the weapon and its parts for damage or wear. Always carry more than 1 magazine. When a rifle has a problem during use, it is most likely the magazine. No matter what the cause, you don't have time for trouble shooting, and you should expel that magazine and clear the weapon. By doing so, you eliminate a possible varible or source of the problem. It is a good idea (in SHTF scenarios) to carry a side arm. If the rifle jams or has an issue...transition to the side arm and keep delivering firepower. Survive the day or the situation. Buy time till you can fix your rifle. Get training.


Don't sit there and indoctrinate yourself with years of internet forum mythology about a particular firearms' super-duper reliability whether it be an AK, a Glock or whatever else. Because Murphy is around the corner, and when you need it most is when things might go wrong. Certainly seek the best tools for the job as this helps minimize the variables for failure. A quality AK is an excellent choice. But it is just a tool and proper mindset is critical.


Common sense.

 

[Outlaws]

how about a compromise? the AK people will stop positing the ridiculous notion that all AKs are utterly reliable and the AR people will stop with the cheap, communist, innacurate crap

That wouldn't be fun though.

I personally don't like either gun. But given the choice I would take the AR simply out of patriotism.

I have a friend that doesn't even shoot guns except in video games and he is so damn convinced that the greatest firearm in the world is the AK simpley because the people that make video games always make it more powerful. While that may be true, its irritating because I personall have never run, the jumped around a corning, and the second I land on my feet...pop off a head shot. (but I still love the games too lol.)

But back to the AK vs AR, when is the XM8 gonna become the M8? or did we already scratch that weapon? Seemed interesting. Not my bag of chips, but from what I saw on MailCall a year or so ago, it looked like a very adaptable weapon.

 

[Ezekiel]

how about a compromise? the AK people will stop positing the ridiculous notion that all AKs are utterly reliable and the AR people will stop with the cheap, communist, innacurate crap

"General theories become such because they are generally true." The word "always" blows everything out of proportion.

1. In general, an AK is more reliable -- on many fronts -- then an AR.
2. In general, an AR is more accurate -- in many environments -- then an AK.

Someone mentioned the difference between shooting for the head verses center of mass depending upon what they were carrying. In practice, they cause the same thing (ugly).

Combat accuracy is WAY more important then ten-ring crap, and reliability, with combat accuracy, tops all. Inside 150 yards, this is an EASY choice. Outside of 150 yards, I want a "true" rifle, which neither of these weapons are.

"Just an opinion."

 

[possum]

great design and awesome weapon systems, i have seen their devistation first hand, i do respect them, especially when they are in the hands of a well trained solider, i never carried an ak, one guy in our unit lost a rank and lots of pay because he had one on his bradley and he was the bc so he got hammered pretty hard so the rest of us turned the weapons over as soon as we captured them.

 

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

Nothing we say here is going to change anyone's opinions. Unfortunately, everyone pretty much has their minds made up about the m16 and the AK... After all, 20 million internet users cant be wrong right?
But a billion AK's? Thats a ridiculous number. Even the Russians say closer to 50 million. There probably arent a billion guns on planet earth.

You know... the funny thing is... everyone talks about how great the M16 shoots... But I attended Gunsite with an SAR-2. Most of the other people there had M4's or M16A2's in the regular configuration. At 300 meters, my groups were just as tight as any of the others and tighter then quite a few. We were shooting prone, kneeling, and standing.

Just a couple of weeks ago I was participating at a National Guard Rifle and Pistol combat match. We fired at 300 meters prone, 200 meters kneeling, 100 meters standing... then walked in firing on targets as they popped up with the M16A2. From armpit to armpit, the human chest is about 20" wide. Clearly, if you have a rifle that groups 2 MOA, you should be able to put all of your rounds in that torso in at least a 12 inch circle at 300 meters. Yet, that wasnt happening. The average score was around a 180 out of 300. Why? Because most people THINK they can shoot better then they actually can. Because a rifle is capable of 2 MOA doesnt mean that person can actually get that accuracy out of it....

When you take a rifle off of the bench and employ it in field positions... I think you'll find the M16 and the AK to be closer in parity. One definite advantage the AK has over the M16A2 is the shorter buttstock. While wearing body armor and web gear, the A2 buttstock is way too long to get a good seating. You see people craning their shoulders way back to try to compensate, or mounting the buttstock so high on the shoulder that only the very bottom of the toe is touching the shoulder. I also see a lot of people trying to shoot with the buttstock rammed into the bicep. The problem with this is, you have to crane your neck way down to get a cheek weld and then your kevlar helmet slides down over your eyes, occluding your field of view.

We'd all be better served talking less and shooting more.

 

[silliman89]

What good is an AK, when a piece of junk steel case round gets its case head ripped off? The super reliable rifle is reduced to a clubbing weapon because of a steel case that's not even worth $0.01.

That's when I just put it down and pick up my second AK and continue firing. Why do I have 2 AK's? Because I can buy two for less than your AR, and I still have money left over for ammo.

 

[Outlaws]

Because a rifle is capable of 2 MOA doesnt mean that person can actually get that accuracy out of it....

True. However, it would be nice to know right before you die that it wasn't the rifles fault for missing.

 

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

If you need a 2MOA or better rifle and you are reaching for an assault rifle... you deserve to die :B We have sniper rifles for a reason.

What good is an AK, when a piece of junk steel case round gets its case head ripped off? The super reliable rifle is reduced to a clubbing weapon because of a steel case that's not even worth $0.01.

So... a much softer brass case would not do the same? I dont know about you, but I've never seen a steel case shear off in the chamber. I've seen a few brass cases do it though. An AR would be no better off in this situation.

 

[model 649]

Blah, blah, blah, ad infinitum.............Were it not for the two Generals and the Secretary, Stoner and the AR would be just another footnote in engineering history. Kalashnikov apparently was more interested in building a better lawn mower and wound up creating the AK? The truth is stranger than fiction. Interesting to note, however, the depth and intricacy of the politics that beget military firearms never ceases to amaze me. I'm still impressed anything functions as well it does in the field. Kalash speaks! Ahhh, let him go on.

Josh

 

[White Horseradish]

What good is an AK, when a piece of junk steel case round gets its case head ripped off? The super reliable rifle is reduced to a clubbing weapon because of a steel case that's not even worth $0.01. They sell broken shell extractors in 7.62x39 for a reason. Not to attack the AK, but this happens to all rifles. So you can't think like many AK owners think.

Yeah, but what a clubbing weapon it is! Vastly superior to the lightweight AR.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I own and like neither platform but I've shot both so I'm in a unique position of offering some prespective on this debate.

AR people: your gripe against the AK is not being able to hit your target with one.

AK people: your gripe against the AR is being able to hit someone but then being let down by the 5.56 round

Sounds pretty even to me

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Yeah, but what a clubbing weapon it is! Vastly superior to the lightweight AR.

Back about 1970, we had a colonel at the Infantry School who invented "Instinctive Bayonet Fighting." He got some virgins (men who had never held a rifle or bayonet before), gave them rubber M16s with bayonets attached and had them attack dummies, while someone filmed it. His idea was then to teach everyone else to attack them that way (why would you need to teach something that's instinctive?)

We used to joke that if he gave them real M16s the attack would go like this -- the kid would go "Hooah!", smack the dummy, then look down at the pieces of his M16 and go "What a cheap POS!"

The colonel got promoted to brigadier general.

 

[longhorngunman]

There were probably only 50 million Russian Ak's ever made but every third world ****hole and even a lot of more modern countries "Israel" , Finland, have used a version of Kalishnikov's baby. Think of the revolutions in South America over the years, the constant fights and butchery in Africa, all over Asia, and have a good following here and in Europe. Maybe not a billion but there are a bunch of em! BTW for my intended uses I'll stick with my RRA. Besides when stocking up with Military spec ammo the AR can be much more devastating at close range.

 

[possum]

just get one of each, that's my plan.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

That's when I just put it down and pick up my second AK and continue firing. Why do I have 2 AK's? Because I can buy two for less than your AR, and I still have money left over for ammo.

That's fine, and by that rationale, I can carry 2 AR's also, or 3 FALs. Price isn't a question in this "debate"...

Truth is, most gun nuts will outfit themselves with 1 primary long arm, (carbine or rifle) and a sidearm. That's the best choice. If you want to sling multiple rifles and hump them around, go for it.

But when the primary goes down, it is quicker to transition to a sidearm than it is to let go of the primary rifle and get a hold of and shoot a secondary rifle. Takes more time. Try it for yourself.

So... a much softer brass case would not do the same? I dont know about you, but I've never seen a steel case shear off in the chamber. I've seen a few brass cases do it though. An AR would be no better off in this situation.

The super reliable rifle is reduced to a clubbing weapon because of a steel case that's not even worth $0.01. They sell broken shell extractors in 7.62x39 for a reason. Not to attack the AK, but this happens to all rifles. So you can't think like many AK owners think.

Context. Reading the whole statement helps.

Yeah, but what a clubbing weapon it is! Vastly superior to the lightweight AR.

True. But honestly, I don't plan on using any rifle as a clubbing weapon. If it fails, I drop it and go to the pistol. Pistol > club. I don't plan on getting that close the threat.

 

[AndyC]

just get one of each, that's my plan.

"But, honey, Possum from the forum's a really wise man and he says we need one of each..."

 

[MechAg94]

I doubt an AK would survive use as a club very well. The weights are pretty close anyway. It really depends on the build.

If AK's were all made in the US instead of coming in as cheap former commie import parts, they wouldn't be nearly so cheap even if the same manufacturing was used. Since we don't have cheap commie AR imports, AK fanatics get to make ignorant cracks about the AR's price.

Guess what, my Vepr had a FTF a couple weeks ago. I tagged the magazine and kept going.

I like the "buy both idea though since I have done so.