When do you deem an AR-15 reliable?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In my actual experience they've been more reliable than the "legendary" AK's. What gives?

I gota ask for some elaboration. For those claiming that they've found AR's to be more reliable than AKs please explain in what way. Whose AKs? Which models and calibers? In what conditions of operation? Any mods? What types of failures? With which mags? How many different AKs? Given the amount of low quality builds made from used parts kits on questionable american made receivers by companies such as Century these may not be very fair comparisons. The only AK issues i've ever seen were as a result of a bad build with a receiver out of spec or holes out of place. My Yugo ak kept jamming because the bolt was just barely touching the top of the next round on the return motion causing it to feed at a funky angle. Upon replacing the bolt with a romanian bolt it ran great. The problem was with the receiver specs causing the carrier to ride too high. The fault was in the american receiver being out of spec. Thanks century.

My Colt AR runs great and has yet to have a single failure but neither has my russian arsenal AK74 and i have no doubt it would keep running in conditions that an AR would have little hope. If both were select fire the gap in reliability i'm sure would be all the greater.
 
Given the amount of low quality builds made from used parts kits on questionable American made receivers by companies such as Century these may not be very fair comparisons.

Quite true. I have a Maadi that is very reliable. Suspect if an American company made an AK to the same standards as an AR, both would have similar reliability.

IMHO, both platforms (and most all other semi-automatic firearms) need to heed at least certain parts of Pat Rogers acronym MEAL. Simply put, it's get good Magazines, use properly tensioned Extractors (sort of AR specific), good Ammunition and Lubricate your firearm.
 
I gota ask for some elaboration. For those claiming that they've found AR's to be more reliable than AKs please explain in what way. Whose AKs? Which models and calibers? In what conditions of operation? Any mods? What types of failures? With which mags? How many different AKs? Given the amount of low quality builds made from used parts kits on questionable american made receivers by companies such as Century these may not be very fair comparisons. The only AK issues i've ever seen were as a result of a bad build with a receiver out of spec or holes out of place. My Yugo ak kept jamming because the bolt was just barely touching the top of the next round on the return motion causing it to feed at a funky angle. Upon replacing the bolt with a romanian bolt it ran great. The problem was with the receiver specs causing the carrier to ride too high. The fault was in the american receiver being out of spec. Thanks century.

My Colt AR runs great and has yet to have a single failure but neither has my russian arsenal AK74 and i have no doubt it would keep running in conditions that an AR would have little hope. If both were select fire the gap in reliability i'm sure would be all the greater.

It's hard for me to make a fair comparison. I can spot a questionable quality AR a mile away. But I really can't tell an Arsenal AK from a Century AK without finding the brandname etched somewhere.

Half the problem AK's I got to play with were probally rubbish and not a good example of an AK. Unfortunately I can say the same about M1's as well. :banghead:
 
I've only been able to choke an AR with odd ammo loads. Only subsonic loads have done it. They caused a lock up that I posted about recently, but I think I've been able to figure out exactly what takes place each time and I've even been able to prevent it from one round to the next. Other than that, they are ridiculously reliable. The one and only AK that I've ever fired was a single shot due to a very bad magazine problem.
 
I gota ask for some elaboration. For those claiming that they've found AR's to be more reliable than AKs please explain in what way.

ive spent a reasonable amount of time shooting with a brother-in-law that has a VIPR, and one nephew that has a norinco ak47, and another nephew that has one that i'm not sure of except that it was made in israel.

all have been reasonably maintained/cleaned/lubed.

i wouldnt say any of them have been problematic, but ive seen all of them have stops here and there, and when they do, they are proficient in clearing their rifles and getting back under way.

seems like more often than not its an issue with extraction/ejection. not what i would consider common, but certainly not non existant.

out of the three my youngest nephew, with the israel made ak has had the fewest stops. i think ive actually only seen his have one, which was definitly a "stove-pipe" fte.

none of them are what i would consider unreliable, but if comparing to a rifle with 10,000rds with never so much as a hiccup, then yes, they have been less reliable.

(i would not throw any of the three in the trash.)
 
Shoot though all the mags you have and some others you can find, any ammo, any position up side down, wet and dry, let it get dirty for a while, shoot a bit more, take it hunting if you can and let it get wet, very cold, and do over again. Take it to the beach and dig holes with it, build a castle, then come back and shoot it again. LOL.
There is no rule. Shot it regularly, keep it clean and wet (that is the AR) and you know when you can rely on your carbine.
The most single critical component is anything around the BCG with a well gassed AR. everything else is less important. Obviously whit exceptions, if your trigger group doesn't work properly then this needs to be addressed first.
 
Last edited:
Good&Fruity Not at all.
I think you just need to go shoot it - a lot. Then shoot it some more.Soon enough you will know if it reliable for you.
Unless you’re normal shooting involves shooting 1000 rounds at a time you might want to clean it now and then.
You also might want to run some failure drills. No matter how well your gun runs, it can screw up.
Bad rounds happen. :(
 
I used to bump-fire my semi-auto which is rapid-firing by letting the last stage of recoil -- the rifle going forward after the initial recoil -- while holding an index finger stiff to allow the moving gun to actuate the trigger.

I haven't done that in over 20 years and will never do it again after I had thought about what could possibly happen if, for some reason, a cartridge would not fully detonate, leaving a bullet lodged in the barrel. If someone is pulling the trigger faster than they can process in their mind what they heard which was not quite right, and pulling the trigger faster than they can suddenly stop pulling the trigger after any given round fired then there is a possible kaboom in the making!

If you are rapid-firing faster than you can stop after each and every single 'Bang', you are firing too rapidly which can eventually lead to a blown gun, should a bullet not exit the barrel then another cartridge becomes quickly loaded and fired before the brain has a chance to recognize that one round didn't sound quite right!

As others mentioned, if I can shoot and it works, without a lot of fail-to-fires, then the gun is fine for my personal defence.
 
I had a bushmaster fullsize that wasn't reliable. I have a Stag that is.

The Bushmaster would short stroke and fail to lock back and sometimes fail to strip a new round. This problem seemed to exacerbated by cold weather.

It got sent back to Bushmaster and was better but still not perfect. To the point, problems with reliability will show up pretty quick. Parts failure is something you probably won't see coming.

My Stag carbine has been so far 100%. I am a believer that that carbines being a little bit over-gassed isn't necessarily a bad thing. I also believe that keeping an eye on the gas key bolts (or just staking properly) and the black extractor insert with a proper spring is also cheap insurance.
 
I agree that the best way to test the rifle is to take it to a shooting school and run about 2,000 rounds in 3-4 days.
One thing I have seen at shooting schools are people who bring rifles that they have only fired at the range where rifles were never fired to the point of heating up. They work okay when cool and shot slowly but when the pace picks up and rifles heat up they sometimes start to fail.
 
I shoot a few hundred rounds through it, and if it works, I consider it reliable.

I haven't done that in over 20 years and will never do it again after I had thought about what could possibly happen if, for some reason, a cartridge would not fully detonate, leaving a bullet lodged in the barrel. If someone is pulling the trigger faster than they can process in their mind what they heard which was not quite right, and pulling the trigger faster than they can suddenly stop pulling the trigger after any given round fired then there is a possible kaboom in the making!

If you have a squib, the action won't cycle anyway, so the gun will stop on its own.
 
In my actual experience they've been more reliable than the "legendary" AK's.

I've shot and observed a few folks shooting various brands. I own a Century. It has been assembled well, other than they did not drift the front sight properly. And if you know what you are watching for Centurys can be a good buy. However I think most of this is like anything else out there. A hodge podge of parts can be a deal breaker if just one is out of spec. The reason I trust a hodge podge of AR part kids over AK is the ease of correction at least for me if something is off, or at least the ability to see what is wrong. Now I'm not starting a flame war here just stating my own observation. And years of experience with the AR platform in repairing and servicing them. Of tens of thousands handled, gauged and a few hundred brought in for repair only a handful if that many had legitimate issues that were not caused by excessive abuse and planned damage

As others have stated if you have properly functioning magazines I would consider the rifle broke in at about 100 rounds, and that would be my start mark for reliability. Any problems are likely to show themselves by that point in time. However for peace of mind I would go up to 500 rounds with whatever likely sort of ammunition the rifle will consume, in earnest practice. I say this because more practice is good, not to say a rifle is reliable.

Those that shoot with semi auto shotguns, deer rifles don't test a rifle generally for hundreds of rounds. They fire a few boxes though it if they really are diligent and call it reliable. Why treat the AR any different?
 
My AR's are ultra reliable but I won't shoot more than 10 or 15 times at once. I take that back I did shoot one 20 times once. Last week I took my "hunting" AR out and shot it 5 times and put it back in the case. Unless I see a coyote or deer it won't be shot the rest of the year.

My other AR hasn't been out of the safe since June of 2010... :(
 
I think the carbine course is a bit excessive for my purposes. I don't intend to go to Afghanistan with mine...

I think for my purposes (SHTF, SD) they have proven reliable. I guess it comes down to shooting it in the conditions, under conditions you intend to rely on it in.
 
My DPMS (yeah that's right DPMS) Panther bull 20" has been 100% reliable from day 1. 100's of rounds a day in the hot, dirty and nasty prairie dog towns without cleaning and it still runs like a champ.

As others have stated if the rifle works consistently for it's intended purpose then it's good to go. I'm a hunter not a tactical shooter so my experience is a reflection of that. My guess is that not many of us are out there clearing rooms or mowing down zombies so don't get too caught up in that hype.....

DPMS1of1.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top