The age-old AR vs. AK topic, reviewed very intelligently by"nutnfancy" on Youtube.
Guy on video must get paid by the word.
In my country Pakistan law enforcement agencies uses AK, They comments its
long life,easy to assemble and disassemble,cheaper and low easy maintenence
There is no comparing. They are two completely different pieces, designed for different jobs, that serve there objective well. Long range effectiveness, expense, and ease & importance of maintainence are some for the differences.
Personally I would choose the AK bc to me you can't beat that 7.62 round. Just my 2 cents
Try and hit a 4oo yard TGT with an AK.LOL!
Even at 1000 yards I would not
want it fired in my direction,
even the worst guns make contact
BTW, can't beat the 7.62X39?
.308 any place, any time, any job.
Hate to sound like an ass, but the 308=7.62x51.LOL!
a little off the details but not
an ass by a long shot.
The simple view is 7.62X39 has a .311
projectile, .308 diameter is , surprise, .308.
7.62X39 FMJ 124gr velocity @ 100yds 2030, ftlb energy 1135.
.308 FMJ 150gr Velocity @ 100yds 2620, ftlb energy 2285
There you have it Ladies & Gentlemen, Though a nice
cartridge for some uses the 7.62X39 is a whole
shitload short of being what the .308 is.
7.62x54r for the win!!!
ballistically similar to the 308...been around alot longer
you are correct, but so am I. LOL! the diamater of the .308 is .....SUPRISE, .308 and 7.62 is .311. Case length of the .308 is 51mm though. BUT, once again, I'm not trying to start an argument. However I do know that US spec 7.62 rounds will fire through a .308... But thank you for the information, this site is a great source of it......if you can filter through the B.S. LOL!
Now, ya gotta understand, I've only had
one cup of coffee so some of the cobwebs
are still in place:<)
.308 is commercial & 7.62X51 is NATO talk.
Aside from a minor POTENTIAL headspace
difference they are one in the same.
I just realized I left off 7.62X39 can
be loaded with .308 bullets but .308 SHOULD
NOT be loaded with .311.
Ak is 7.62x39
AR is 5.56x45?
AK has the punch but AR has the Speed.
CASE CLOSED. They cannot be compared.
your logic sounds correct to me, but when it comes to reloading, I am not ANYWHERE near an expert. I'll stick with .308 in my .308 and .311 on my ak. :)
Over the past few years
I have become forgetful, can't remember
where I left my glasses. Can't remember if
I took my medicine.
As A result of that I stopped reloading before
I made a serious mistake. I gave away 20 pounds
of powder. Thousands of bullets and primers
and I have no idea of how much empty brass.
old timers must know when to stop.
Over the years I loaded gazillions of Rds.
Saved tons of $$ especially with the Arg. 7.65
It's a great hobby.
I do reload my own ammo, and your right, you can save tons! But i only know the specs on the rounds I reload( which osn't my ak), and I only reload to spec....Let the experts or the stupid push the limits. I love my life and my guns to much.:)
M16s and AKs are compared all the time, in what is called "kinetic engagements". That's nice talk for shootouts. The AK was designed with the "walking fire" principle that we pioneered in WW1 with the BAR. The AK was designed so that you could put it in the hands of a farmer conscript, give him 15 minutes' instruction, and have him get online and run toward the enemy, firing until they could overwhelm the enemy's line and breach it. The AK's reputation for being a tough, reliable gun is well-founded, but the M16's reputation for being finicky and unreliable is not. The M16/M4 is a very reliable, very good weapon system. As for the effectiveness of the round, the 5.56 hits fuckers like a sledgehammer at "CQB" distances and the differences between the two rounds are minimal. At longer ranges, the AK round retains more of it's energy, but you have to hit the enemy for the energy to do anything. 400 yards is a bit far to try to compare the rounds, as it's further than most soldiers actually engage bad guys. I prefer the M4 over the AK due to the higher number of rounds I can carry and the ergonomics of the gun. That's my buck seventy-five
came from when it first entered service.
Thanks to the democrats that started the
VN war the M16 was got on the cheap and
as a result had serious flaws causing
malfunctions. AK was far superior field weapon.
After the problems were cleaned up the gun
became first rate.
I've carried an M16 or M4 for the past 14 years and have owned a civilian version for close to half that time and while i can't say I've never had any problems, I've also never had the trigger mechanism fall apart during automatic firing like I have with two AKs.
Well to compare the two is like comparing a scalpel to a sword the M16 or M4 is designed to be a riffle first and a machine gun seconded and the AK is designed to be a machine gun first and a riffle seconded
Accurate like AR.
Mind-numbingly reliable, like AK.
Adjustable Gas, like FAL
Repair parts not nearly as easy to get as either the AR or AK
Manual of arms is different from what millions are already used to,
A flop on the US market.
Not so good.
I don't know...
I bet AZEX's house is a lot cleaner and he probably doesn't live with his mother.
Spare parts solved.
optics mounts, railed handguards, spare FPs, extractors, 90 degree selectors, oversized charging handles, extended gas plugs.
Manual of Arms no different than FNC, SIG 550, or Beretta AR70. In select-fire no different than any burst firing M16.
Plus it doesn't choke when you need it most.
Just cause the rest of the Dbags HAVE to use something, does not negate my choice of a superior firearm. If gas pistons weren't necessary for reliable function, why are dozens of companies now marketing them?
ROK had this well in mind 25 years ago. When your hated enemy is across a small DMZ, political favoritism goes out the window for something that WORKS all the time.
Gas pistons may be great for those who don't maintain their weapons, but I've had AKs fail just as I've had M4s fail, M60s fail, M240s fail, M2s fail, MK19s fail, the list goes on. All weapons will fail at some point. Take care of your weapon and it will take care of you. The AKvsAR debate ultimately comes down to personal preference. I like the ergonomics, accuracy, rapid follow-ups possible, and the fact that the AR platform has as many aftermarket options than the Chevy 350 engine, others have different preferences.
I have never had an ak or ar fail...........having said that I never left with either or any weapon not having cleaned it. only one weapon has ever failed me, testing a Ruger 10/22 after 3 bricks thats 1500 rounds and not cleaning, it started to jam.............other that a test never had any rifle fail. Just clean your weapon very well and add Synthetic Water Resistant Lithium Complex Grease. debate if you want but I have had the best luck with this style grease.
Because I love them so.
However, I watched a guy at an ACTS match toss a handful of desert sand into the action of his Daewoo.
Then he shot a match with it. I have been a devotee for years and I was duly impressed.
The indisputeable facts are thus. ARs do not like dirt. We had personnel (yes they were REMFs) killed and unable to defend themselves because of this poor design. That fact that it CAN be diligently cleaned and doted over to provide acceptable reliability is irrelevant. SHOULD our people have a finicky, prone to jamming weapon at all? My answer is No. However, I'm not a politician beholden to contributors who think that .mil lives are expendable as long as my cronies get the contracts. I'm not a .mil who has been brainwashed, for lack of a better term, to believe that there's nothing better. I like what WORKS. EVERYTIME. Without the pampering required for some high-maintenance supermodel or a friggin' Ferrari.
The Woo works. Always. No matter what. 5 years and tens of thousands of rounds without cleaning, WITH a can affixed, have proven that the design is superior to anything I've ever bought, sold, fired extensively or BUILT.
The BUILDING is a perspective that few of you possess.
I'm here to light a candle, not curse your darkness. I'm the smirking, laughing, kind-hearted, benevolent, Dear Leader of the Daewoo Cult. Nothing but love in my heart knowing that someday, you'll experience the joy that I know every time I go to the range.
PS check out the 5 new videos I uploaded today.
Sounds like a diaper advertisement.....any info will be appreciated.
try one who has fired thousands upon thousands of rounds through the AR platform in jungles, snow, rain, and deserts. I am not brainwashed. I am willing to bet my intelligence level rivals the vast majority of the people you know. The AR is not prone to jamming. A dry, poorly maintained AR is prone to jamming. The direct impingement system does have its flaws, of course. But I can assure you, brainwashed is not a good word to describe my reasons for loving the system.
sounds like lawyer-speak for "jams" unless you pamper it.
Intelligence has nothing to do with mental conditioning. If you have no choice, you have no choice. Then you've got to be mentally conditioned as to why what you are forced to use is the best available.
ARs are NOT the best available. And I'll put my brainpan full of knowledge about how all the various types work against yours anyday, Sir. No disrespect intended. I've BUILT and unfucked about every type there is.
Before politics got involved we put the BEST in the hands of our troopies. THE BEST. Not "works good if you clean it often". FUCK THAT.
I've got an old greasegun, that's just clock reliable with any crappy old ammo. I mean you can't GET this thing to not work. Sadly, we don't make arms like this for our people any longer.
and well-founded, but politics actually worked against the AR system. The big army didn't want it. For the modern battlefield, the AR is a better weapon system than its predecessors. Engagement distances are shorter, high round-count urban areas are the rule rather than the exception, and there are fewer month-long periods of movement to contact missions. The original M16s had their share of problems, one of the biggest of which was it was advertised as a gun that never needed to be cleaned. I will grant that a gas piston system is inherently more reliable, but to say the Daewoo, or Galil, or any other gas piston system is even nearly as accurate as the AR is simply false. And the AR is plenty reliable for the modern battlefield. I have had the opportunity so far to fire six select fire AKs, and of those six, two of them had receiver pins walk out under automatic fire. Now I'm sure these were simply bad examples, and surely 30+ percent of all AKs don't suffer this issue, but I've had catastorphic failures from a hell of a lot fewer M16/M4 than that. None, in fact. Your Daewoo may be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but my Bushmaster, in my hands against your Daewoo, in your hands, and Ant's AK, in his hands, I'm betting my Bushmaster will come out on top. Not saying anything against anyone else, and I certainly don't think I'm high-speed, low-drag, air-cooled, teflon-coated, and laser-guided, but my life for the past 14 years and tens of thousands of rounds has been the AR/M16 system and it's safe to say I'm pretty adept at it. Of course that's what it all comes down to, is the eyeballs behind the sights. I know that sounds like a cop-out, but the vaunted AK has fallen short of glory when it's encountered my coworkers and I. (Course, we had a whole lot more than just M4s for the majority of it, too. But I digress). Having said that, I would LOOOOOVE a Springfield Armory Squad Scout rifle.