Survivalist Forum banner
27K views 117 replies 48 participants last post by  Pinhead 
#1 ·
Just a few things that I notice keep getting posted about AKs around here and frankly I am tired of addressing them individually.

ACCURACY:
"AKs are inaccurate!"
This claim gets passed around the internet faster than a crotch shot of Brittany... I believe this is more Cold-War dogma that just keeps circulating because most people either accept it or they just don't know any better. Are AKs as accurate as a sniper rifle, no, of course not, are they as accurate as an M-16, they very well could be. M-16s are rated as a 2 MOA rifle, most quality AKs are also 2 MOA rifles. In addition to being about the same relative accuracy, AKs also have a longer effective range.

So can we please lay the accuracy myth to rest, please?


MILLED VERSUS STAMPED:
"The only AK worth owning is a milled one because they are better quality!"
Never in the history of firearms has a more untrue statement been made... The idea that a stamped AK is inferior to a milled is completely ignorant of the history and development of the firearm. The AK was not designed to be on a machined receiver, it was originally intended to be on a stamped receiver. The fact of the matter is that the Russian welding and pressing technology was unable to mass produce effectively a stamped AK when they were first made, so as a result in order to mass produce the first runs of AK were produced on a machined receiver. After applying technology from German factories the Russians were able to adapt the machinery to produce stamped AK receivers.

Americans have always viewed stamped receivers in a negative fashion. In fact, American engineers didn't even bother spending much time examining the Stg. 44 following the end of WWII as they viewed it as a 'last ditch' weapon and noted that it looked cheap as it was produced on a stamped receiver. This has been the case in US small arms designs and still is, as M16/4 receivers are forged. The fact is that there is absolutely NO science or evidence to prove that a weapon based on a stamped receiver is somehow less accurate, reliable, or in any other way inferior to a milled weapon. It just simply is not true...

So the nest time someone posts something about the milled receivers being better, you will KNOW better...


Now I know, there will be some out there that will disagree with the above, but I would suggest not getting your information (or at least your primary source) off of the internet as there is oodles of misinformation out there. I have learned more about firearms from books than I have ever from the net.

later-- gofo'
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I'm glad you posted this. Let's be honest, any and all weapons can be a big pile of fecal matter. The fact of the matter is this, unless you buy quality, then your not getting anything good. I myself like the ar vs ak platform. As for the accuracy of the ak, well.... alot of ak's ARE inaccurate, I know, i've had more than a few, BUT this can be somewhat quickly resolved. All you need is the front sight aligned and then zero'd in. Alot of ak's that were put together with "parts kits" were done wrong.

IS an ak worth buying? Not at todays prices, but they are worth having and if you can find a good quality one for under $900, get it. Trust me, those $450 ones are junk. An ak is VERY reliable and Very user friendly, it was meant to be.
 
#3 ·
Excellent post but to many it'll just be ignored, for instance an idiot on another survival forum posted just yesterday that he carries an ar because it's a "good guys" wep, the ak is a "bad guy" wep. Is that not just the dumbest arsed thing you've ever heard? I have no place for ar's, I was shooting them before it was trendy to have them and frankly they do not impress me at all, the AK is a much more solid design provided you get a QUALITY AK not some century modded junk. And don't get me started on the almighty 223, I've seen it fail to kill a groundhog with 1 shot. In the end carry what you want but I believe in having every edge I can over a potential opponent, the x39 offers such an edge over ar worshippers and their 223. Alas that's another topic though.
 
#4 ·
i was recently reminded that quality ammunition yeilds quality results,kalashnikovs basicly get fed the cheapest imported surplus ammo available and mass produced from plants that dont resemble anything we may have here...as an example:
many years ago when russian primers were first being imported i had the privlage to inspect an intire pallet of cases of boxed primers,to my astonishment every case had dead flies in them........

my point is that most of the reports of AK inaccuracy can be due to 20-30+ year old infantry grade soviet block combat ammunition......
 
#18 ·
I have a question based off of a WAR-10/63 that I recently picked up for the wife.
1st off, a little back ground info about me concerning the AK design.
I have always liked the simplicity of this type of rifle, and me and my clan used to use the Chicom versions as our primary shtf choice. ( Norinco AK47S, MAK90,MAK91,NHM90,NHM91) Note that back then, the Chicom models were very economical (along with Norinco 7.62x39mm steel core ammunition in the bright yellow 20rd boxes running at around 70 bucks per 1200rd wooden case)
Another neat little feature was the very economical SKS, which shared the same ammo, and allowed members of my group options concerning financial constraints at any one time, to " move up" into the AK if desired. The high dollar " best of the best" AK design back then was the Valmet family of rifles, along with the Galil. I could not afford any of the "higher echolon" AK types at the time, but a few group members could, so I did get the oppurtunity to handle/fire them all. While I considered them nice overall, they did not seem all that better in any way to the "cheap" Chicoms, and most were better off equiping thier immediate family's with the Chicom rifles instead. Longer range rifles were bolt action rifles/ motley horde of different calibers, but most chambered in 30-06. Our " poor man's DMR" back then was the longer,heavy bbl versions of the AK. (91 series)
Later in life after we had chosen to move into 7.62x51mm with the M14/M1A.... the internet was running along. ( While I find different opinions and "hands on" of others to be interesting, some of it seems to be based on half truths, hearsay, or somthing that has been said before... and just passed on without any 1st hand at all. ( All AK's are inaccurate, all AR's are unreliable, and all chicom M14 rifles have " soft" parts that are not close to org. specs...to name a few examples) The posts usually end right there. No explanations as to an actual diognosis as to why a specific rifle was unreliable other than the words "jammed alot". Inaccurate rifles that " cant seem to hit the side of a barn whilst standing in it" are not followed up by additional info such as specific loads used, shooting positions ( prone,kneeling,or use of a bench to take as much "shooter error" out of the equation as possible...etc...), and other varibles such as the abilitiy of the person shooting it, weather conditions at the time of the test...etc....
Example: All them former SF snipers out there. :rolleyes: C'mon now. Ease up a little with the egos please;) I have respect for anyone who has served this country in military service, and I personally do not feel the need to.....exagerate. Just a "simple grunt" talkin here folks.:)

With that being said........ I currently own a WASR-10/63 (1963), sporting a Tapco side folder stock. I've only had it for a few days, and total rd count is a a whopping 140rds ( most of which was fired by my wife)...... and only thru the one specific magazine that sold with the rifle.....for the most part (Paid $275 bucks for it)
The both of us were able to hit a few milk jugs out to 100yds with this specific rifle from the prone/sitting position using Brown Bear FMJ, but a "true/formal" test of this specific rifle's potential has yet to be undertaken...so to speak. I feel that 140rds total aint near enough to give it the green light as a defensive rifle to stake anyone's life on, even though them 140rds went off as should with 0 mag/gun/ammo related issues. (Others milage may vary in this dept. but this one is still in the " better than nothing" train of thought for us at least.)
I picked it up mainly because the wife just plain liked the feel/balance of the rifle, and the price was negotiated to her/my satisfaction. The intent is for the wife to have a low cost, lightweight, compact, semiautomatic rifle that fires low cost, easy to find ammuntion using a detatchable magazine of 20rd capacity or more. Last but not least....if said rifle doeas not make the grade, it should be able to be sold/traded off at what was paid for it initially, or more, to include mags,ammo, etc.... This should make for an ideal truck/quad/horseback rifle for her once it is "proven" itself. ( She has her Rockola M1 Carbine in this role as of now, but the WASR should fill this role a tad bit better based on our requirements....once it is proven to be reliable.) Ths also left the current, higher $$ AK rifles like the Saiga.... off the list as I have not found any as of yet that meet the "low cost" requirement......YET;) It should not be a problem to sell/trade it off later, if the wife has a change of heart, either.

Which leads to a question regarding the "thinner" reciever as compared to the "thicker" Chicom models that I'm familar with. I your opinion (WASR users in paticular), does this amount to any issues to be concerned about in the long run?



11B
 
#20 ·
Which leads to a question regarding the "thinner" reciever as compared to the "thicker" Chicom models that I'm familar with. I your opinion (WASR users in paticular), does this amount to any issues to be concerned about in the long run?
People equate the thicker, 1.5/1.6mm receivers with being better than the 1mm receivers. There is no evidence to back this claim up either. The thicker receivers were used on the RPK squad mg's and were designed to be put up to more abuse than the standard AK receiver. That said I don't think anyone is going to be putting their AK through an 800 round/minute torture test to find out if a thinner receiver would fail under the same conditions. Doesn't matter because it won't happen ;)
 
#9 ·
Of course, the AK series was built under a regime with a different tactical doctrine founded upon the Soviet experiences in the Second World War with sub-machine guns. The AK isn't a sub-gun, but it was meant to be used on full-auto a lot more than the AR series was. AR's were meant to be used on full auto only during "final protective fire."

Critics of the AK would do better to criticize old Soviet tactical doctrine. The AK series does what it was designed to do. People sometimes believe that the concept of the assault rifle or the concept of the GPMG or the concept of the Squad Automatic Weapon or sniper rifle is the same in all countries. That is a mistaken view. These doctrines change a lot. The current US Army adoption of the designated marksman concept, for example, is very similar to the Soviet/Russian practice of issuing a Dragunov to one man per squad. Judging a Dragunov as an American sniper rifle makes the Dragunov look pretty awful, but as a designated marksman's rifle its a much better tool.

In short, weapons can only normally be judged within the context of the tactical use for which they are employed.
 
#10 ·
Im a small arms instructor for the AF, hit my 18 year next month!

We are biased. At least my guys are.

While we shoot/instruct primarly only US small arms, the few experiances I/we have had with an AK arent that impressive.

experiance #1 buddy and fellow instructors MAK 90, at 100m you couldnt reliably keep the grouping inside a pie plate. Might have been the ammo--dunno. At 300m, we were lucky to hit a green E target with his precious MAK 90. While my STg 58 and M1A had beautiful groups. Infact the M80 ball I was shooting that day, my FAL was killing my M1A:eek: But the AK isnt one of these sexy rifles.

experaince # 2, AK-47 at Camp Guernsey Wy. Groupings were about the same as the experiance #1, and jammed constantly. Could have been a tired AK, with crud mags and a blown out barrel from to much auto fire, dunno. Wasnt impressed.

exp # 3, One of my instructors bought some 7.62 AK "new in box"...Shot meh at 25-100m, groups were a tad larger than what an M4 has. 5 of my instructors tried it out, results were all bout the same.

We are talking standard issue weapons, not some pimped out 1.5 or 2 moa AK with a match barrel, 11 degree target crown and hand loaded cartridges...right? I have NEVER shot one of these high dollor AK's with "good" ammo. I believe in you when you say its capable of 1 or 2 moa.

Instructors like me always compair accuracy of the AK when its brought up in class, and we naturally compair it to the M16 series. Yes we do say its inaccurate...Sorry, folks like me are probably to blame, going back years and years from when I first started instructing, and years and years before that. There are obvious reasons why we down play our enemies equipment. Why we have from day one said and must continue to say we absolutly have the best and most accurate rifle, the better: rifle, equipment, sidearms, MG's, rockets, bombs, aircraft, etc. Lots of smart guys and gals on these boards, Im sure you understand. Guys like me are to blame!

If you were to stack a normal issue AK with its normal issue ammo vrs a norm M16 series with is issue M855 or M193 even...Which is more accurate? Im pretty sure...No, Im positive it will be our sweet 16! If you get crazy and throw Mk262 in the mix in an M16A3/A4, it completly blows the furniture off the AK's. But we arent talking about the 16! And we still arent compairing...Im sorry, its imbedded deep in me:( You see!

But like I said, I only have 3 experiances with an AK type.

So the end result, when one of our shooters asks or proclaim the AK as this that or the other, becasue they watched that eposode on the history channel...We will give the the benifit of the doubt, for everything EXCEPT accuracy.

The best I can say, from my experiance across the board as with most service rifles, its accurate enough to do the job its entended for.

The AK is a mean looking rifle though...And scares the crap out of folks.
 
#81 ·
The best I can say, from my experiance across the board as with most service rifles, its accurate enough to do the job its entended for.

The AK is a mean looking rifle though...And scares the crap out of folks.
As I said earlier...

Also to whom it may concern, I never proclaimed to be a SF sniper (SF CATM, as in SECURITY FORCES Combat Arms Training and Maintenance--YES)...Or simply Combat Arms now since the great SP, LE, CATM merger mistake back in 97:p FYI, to all you SF cops out there, I still heart you all, and I'll get off your badge now.

If you have some questions on my present/ past duties and accomplishment, please feel free to send me a private message...18 years as a CATM troop...Seriously, shooting is like breathing. Actually breathing takes more effort, since Im getting old.
 
#11 ·
Ya but we're dealing with American made AK47 clones and not real AK47s. American made receivers are about 1.2ml vs export AK47 stamped receivers (like Norinco/polytec) that are 1.5ml think. These thinker receivers don't flex as much as original stamped receivers. The same thing with milled AK47 receivers. Thicker stamped and milled receivers helps a lot in terms of accuracy.

Then another thing we have to contend with here in the States is quality. Anyone who has dealt with American clone AK47s knows that a good rifle is the result of a quality built receiver and properly assembled rifle. So not all clones are equal either.

And the effective range of the 7.62X39 is 400m while the .223/5.56 is around 600m.

Just an FYI: I own 3 different AK47s one milled while the others are stamped and 3 AR15s chambered in .223/5.56. I shoot both and love them equally.
 
#13 ·
And I concur with you, if it goes bang I love it. Shoot straight bud!

So in my 3 tryouts, it could have been a combo of, make, reciever type and ammo, wear an tear=not so impressive experiance? I'd buy that for a dollar! Maybe i'll put my next tax return towards a quality AK and a normal AK and compair...It's only money.

New hobby, attempt to put the AK myth to rest!
 
#12 ·
AKs have a max effective range of an M16A2 for a point target of 550m and area or 800m? M4s have max effective of 500m point and 600m area...Ak's are equal to that even?

I thought at best AK's had a max effective of less than that of an M16/M16A1, 468m.

Crazy the stuff they tell us and we pick up:p Damn those AF/Army FM's from the 1960/70's!

PS, I've been drinking, so Im a tad ornrey...And spell check is now off.

P.S P.S. I forgot to attatch a quote from the origional poster regarding ranges...Sorry not directed at above.
 
#19 ·
First off, I'll state that I owned a pre'ban AK variant (Maadi, Egyptian) from the late 80s through about 2002 when I finally traded it for an AR-15. I had a ton of fun playing with that thing, there is no doubt about that.

Now to my problem with AKs as your primary weapon in a SHTF scenarion... THEY ARE CONSIDERED BAD GUY GUNS... That sounds dumb I know, but its true and people don't always think right in a disaster (obviously)... Bubba sees bad guys on TV with them, sees videos of bad guys using them to kill Americans in Iraq. Doesn't seem to me such a smart idea to run around with one after a disaster, at least in "these here parts" of ******* Missouri ...

Guess what, you drive a Panzer tank around during WWII and Americans are gonna shoot at you, drive a Sherman and not so much so. Is it such a stretch to see that carrying a commie/terrorist gun might net you some trouble you could easily avoid by changing to a "good guy" weapon?

Everyone can disagree with me all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that ******** here DO NOT LIKE PEOPLE WITH AKs...
 
#21 ·
As far as the effective range issue, I am basing that off of the ability of the AK to actually take down what it is hitting. Quite a few South American nations have forgone the 5.56 M16 for a 7.62x39 AK for its ability to shoot through foliage and to be able to reach out and touch and take down a helicopter flying over the jungle, an AR won't touch the helicopter.

Plus, past 300m with a 5.56, that little light bullet is affected greatly by wind which make its stated effective ranges only relevant in a vacuum...

As has been the case with reports coming out of Afghanistan the AK with its supposed lesser range is showing a greater stand-off distance than soldiers equipped with 5.56 rifles... Imagine that, not everything you have read/been told is true.
(see the thread about the UK getting a new rifle)

So as I said, the AK has a greater effective range.
 
#24 ·
ak are ok with me, but i dont think you can qualify at the ranges with an AK at the 500 ,or 600, or whatever, meters we qualify at with the M16.

its good for what it was designed for, and i give it credit for that.


but dont make it something its not. you can put some sort of scope on a M16/AR15 and basically use it as a sniper (im citing the video of the guy knocking down a 4X5 plate at 860 yards with a DMPS AR15 that was posted yesterday. ), you cant do that with an AK.

once again, it beats the M16 in some categories, and the M16 beats teh AK in some categories.

each has a niche.
 
#28 ·
300m qualifications, the AK is more than capable at those ranges. Marines qual out to 500 on a target bigger than a man so, take from that what you will. There are some videos of some pretty long range shooting from a 7.62x39. There is no reason why you couldn't hit a reasonable target with an rifle. I have only been able to hit a man-size target out to 600m so far with my AK so I can't speak for 860. When I visit my friend at some point this year I am taking all my rifles and will be shooting out to 1km, and will try to hit with all of them ;)

AR's are not a sniper rifle and never will be. LEO may adapt them for the role but LEO's also engage at very short ranges. As I said in a previous post the AR is not suited for long range shooting due to the weight of the bullet and how much it is affected by the elements. Sure you can hit your target on a perfect day, with a crosswind, have fun...
 
#25 ·
Speaking of Soviet military doctrine, I once read that they had the attitude that "Quantity has a Quality of it's Own", and the AK-47 certainly seems to fit that mode of thinking.

As for the accuracy, while I've never personally fired the AK, it doesn't sound any worse than the Mini-14 I once had, and i don't see that being criticized as much as the AK, or being compared to the AR platform.
 
#29 ·
It has been my finding that,generally,a milled AK will produce better accuracy than stamped models. The typical 1 mm receiver like in the Romys will actually flex and torque on firing. Given a choice,I choose milled first,with heavier stamped units,like the Yugo,coming in second.Not sure about the American=crap receiver thing.Maybe ORF or home-rolled is,but I would put anything NDS makes as good or better than anything produced by the eastern europeans, or the Chinese. I've heard the inaccuracy thing attributed supposedly to the shorter sight radius,yet put an ak sights along side an M4,and you'll find they aren't very different in terms of sight length.
 
#34 ·
That test is the biggest bunch of crap I have ever seen assembled on a television. I will say that this test was rigged and not accurate...

Thank you for illustrating though that people make their minds up over a BS test put on by the Discovery Channel and not by actual experience.

Do me a favor and YouTube, Saiga 200m 7.62, and you will come across a range video I taped of shooting 4" targets with a standard 16" AK using standard 123 gr. Russian ammo...
 
#31 ·
A rifle is not as good as it's ammo. I store inexpensive 7.62x39 ammuniton. However, I keep premium ammunition around. I have done very basic ballistic test of my own. Mostly pepentration with water jugs. Premium ammo does better and groups maybe 30-50% better too.

the biggest dowsndie to an AK is it's iron sights. I put aftermarket thinner posts on my SKS's. I have never seen a flat tip AK front post, they always a bit lopsided. tech sights has the thin front posts. Also, peep sights beat regular iron sights any day. I put peep sights on most of my SKS's. Each time I did, the groups were noticeably tighter. Tech sights make peep sight conversion kits for the AK-47.

Most folks compare a retired military rifle that was reassembled with novice hands to a brand new rifle. I have seen several shot out AR-15. One was just old and beat from 20 years of shooting. The other had the same century WASR-10 treatment. It was a used vietnam USGI parts assebmled in aftermarket reciever. The paper looked like a mess with .22 cal holes.

We need someone with both AR-15 and AK models to do a paper target comparison. I only got SKS's, but can post some pics up. Would be better to get an AK-47 paper group posted. 100 and 200 yards.
 
#32 ·
For myself I will take the ak7.62x39 for the environment I will be in .The 308 is my choice for anti personnel anti vehicle(specialty work) and the 5.45 for lrp or bug out(more ammo able to be carried).The ar is a excellent range rifle but if the real deal is at hand a quality built ak is my choice.Ever go camping for extended periods or work outdoors in a trade every day.The neat light weight stuff works but dies quickly .The beefier caveman stuff seems to last forever.Imagine living in the woods in the mud on the run from the hordes or in primitive conditions that will inevitably come to even the best planned retreat(18th century)The ak will out last the ar of this I am sure.The ak is accurate enough and will do what it is designed to do save your life under trying and stressful situations long after the lasers and reflex sights are dead and the ar is only serviceable as a club.The ak is caveman simple and it is cave man simple that works best in the real world .

PS The NDS receiver is the only quality made domestic receiver available so if your receiver is domestic and not NDS good luck.The forien made jobd (Russian ,Chinese,Bulgarian,Hungarian and Yugoslavian are all just fine the Romanian stuff that is milled out is trash)IMO
 
#39 ·
check out any ballistics calculator
the one on Remington.com has the 7.62x39 over 100 inches low at 500 yards...
the .223 is only 45 inches low at that range..
OHH and they are carrying about the same energy at that range too

not even a contest in my eyes. i know i am not gonna change your mind. but don't say they are just as good.
lets see.. cheap gun. cheap ammo. does not equal quality choice.

I find it funny that the guys who say you have to have 'voodoo', 'Mollee',and 'Alice' gear or you will die, would tell you to buy cheap ammo and weapons..

cheap ammo is great for shooting but if the Armageddon happens you are going to need to put rounds on target.
If you want a home defense weapon yeah maybe.. no aiming just spray and pray.. i could see that. but when you see the bad guy skulking around in the distance and you want to take them out... AK is not a good choice.

I do alot of hunting and have yet to come across someone who has an AK.. but i have seen many people who have AR's .. WEIRD...

If they shot as good , were cheaper and had cheap plentiful ammo you would think the hunting world would be saturated with them.. but it isn't. In fact i have never came across a hunter who was using the 7.62x39 in a hunting rifle because of its superior ballistics or great long range performance..

If AK fans would just be honest and say the reason they have it is just to lay alot of lead out there in hopes to keep the bad guys thinking that there may be an easier target, then fine.. not gonna argue with that.. that is the advantage. you can get lots of ammo relatively cheap, and have alot of mags on hand also for cheap.
but do not try to say it is just as accurate as a M16 its not even close.

An AK is a good shelter in place gun.. where you just have to lay don't fire.. but if i was gonna bug out i would not want it.

plus you would look like a bad guy and someone might see you lurking around just trying to get to safety, but they see the AK and think you are a bad guy,, might even shoot first and ask questions later.. I know that if you were to come walking up to my place and you had one in your hand, even though i know that my survivalist friends have some, i would be a little weary about your intentions. Even though you think it is a myth.. most people think AK=bad guy..
 
#41 ·
i dont own an AK-47 or AR-15

If AK fans would just be honest and say the reason they have it is just to lay alot of lead out there in hopes to keep the bad guys thinking that there may be an easier target, then fine.. not gonna argue with that.. that is the advantage. you can get lots of ammo relatively cheap, and have alot of mags on hand also for cheap.
but do not try to say it is just as accurate as a M16 its not even close.

An AK is a good shelter in place gun.. where you just have to lay don't fire.. but if i was gonna bug out i would not want it.

plus you would look like a bad guy and someone might see you lurking around just trying to get to safety, but they see the AK and think you are a bad guy,, might even shoot first and ask questions later.. I know that if you were to come walking up to my place and you had one in your hand, even though i know that my survivalist friends have some, i would be a little weary about your intentions. Even though you think it is a myth.. most people think AK=bad guy..
this post is so full of crap it is hard to understand the ignorance,kalashnikovs have deservedly earned a heavy reputation for reliability and exceptable combat accuracy under every circumstance known to man,only an idiot would dispute this...
americans prize reliabilty so the kalashnikov is often the choice over the AR-15 for those who want bread and butter performance at a good price.......

secondly and this is important,the UNITED STATES is fast becoming the kalashnikov CAPITOL of the world so watch your ass with stupid comments about AK= badguy....as i recall the DC SNIPER used an AR-15....point being:firearms are as good or as bad as the guy useing it no more no less and your comment was brady-style-anti-gun-jim zumbo nonsense.........
 
#66 ·
The AK has just been on those rifles I always wanted every since I was a kid. It's great gun to burn ammo and simple to operate. But around 3-4 years ago I really got to thinking about the whole SHTF idea. I figured the AK47 was the best rifle for the job for a number of reason but up until that point I had never touched an AR. I figured if the SHTF I needed to know both weapon systems since for what ever reason I could end up with an AR15.

So I ran out and bought one for the interest in science. Well as you know things really did in fact hit the fan for a lot of people across the country in terms of the economy. This really got me thinking hard about all type of outcomes from nuclear attacks to invasions etc. It was then that I realized that although the AK47 is nothing short of a tool or piece for my personal collection, it was still viewed as the all time favorite bad guy weapon. Anyhow, if and when the S't really does hit the fan in a manor that requires using deadly force, I'll be packing an AR15 in hopes that I want be accidentally shot by friendlys.
 
#44 · (Edited)
What about all the other issues like ease of service and spare parts?
I don't know about AK's but, an AR is pretty easy to rebuild. After you've seen one, you've seen em all.
I have an identical pair of AR15's and a complete set of spare parts including the BCG.
There is also the versatility of the AR. Optics, night vision, rails, bipods, grips, lights, lasers, right hand & left hand lowers,
precision barrels, & all kinds of special ammo choices. HP, AP, FMJ, Soft point, Ballistic, Match, Frangible, 55gr, 68gr, 75gr, 77gr, etc.
Swap the upper and you've got 6.8 SPC.
Accesories like the M203, if your military. 40mm will definitely out perform 7.62x39
The AR platform is a weapon system not just a rifle like an AK.
Also, isn't it already established that post SHTF, you also should have a .308 MBR in addition to your AR15 for barrier penetration
and long range sniping?
 
#47 ·
no doubt the AR is a weapon system while the AK is a barebones workhorse,personaly i have never liked the .223 for defence, i have had the opertunity over the years to play with m-16's and they just never inspired confedence in me,by contrast the AK seemend to hit harder at close ranges and run like the dickens even when over heated while the boys with the m-16's were always worried about overheating their rifles,but, if i was handed ether one i would use it.....

my real prefrance is a battle rifle cartrige,
i shoot 54r,have for years but this year i am upgradeing to a diffrent semi-auto system useing the .308 win..........
 
#45 ·
Accesories like the M203, if your military. 40mm will definitely out perform 7.62x39
============================================================================================
There are a "few holes" in your theory.

1: I'm in the military, but I (or anyone else for that matter), are not allowed to take our work home with us...so to speak.

2: I have seen 40mm grenade launchers mounted on AK's before (among other military rifles), so both systems can have one.

3. 40mm HEDP takes about 35meters to arm itself after being launched, which is a very very good thing. ;)

4. It was not designed to outperform any paticular rifle cartridge. More along the lines of giving certain rifleman designated in a rifle squad the capability of limited indirect/antiarmor fires. The classic example of proper use of an M203 is to use it to cover "dead space" within the rifle squad's defensive sector. Also can be employed thru a window or similar opening during urban operations...as just another example.

On a side note.... It would be one hell of a way to paint a wooden fence florecent orange using a training round:)........JK ( The orange goo is more of a "flour type substance", and gets all of your uniform,boots, and battle rattle...if you are part of the range detail.

PS.... I hope that this thread does not evolve into an AK vs AR thread. This doesnt seem to be the point of this thread to me at least.
Note: I have just recently started snoopin around on the net for spare parts regarding the wife's WASR10/63. They are out there, and very cheap...compared to M14 spare parts especially.
Note: Someone earlier posted that he knew a few soldiers downrange that would have preferred an M14 Tanker to the M16/M4, or the AK.
I am of the same frame of mind, after being downrange on more than one occasion myself.


11B
 
#46 ·
Accesories like the M203, if your military. 40mm will definitely out perform 7.62x39
============================================================================================
There are a "few holes" in your theory.

1: I'm in the military, but I (or anyone else for that matter), are not allowed to take our work home with us...so to speak.

2: I have seen 40mm grenade launchers mounted on AK's before (among other military rifles), so both systems can have one.

3. 40mm HEDP takes about 35meters to arm itself after being launched, which is a very very good thing. ;)

4. It was not designed to outperform any paticular rifle cartridge. More along the lines of giving certain rifleman designated in a rifle squad the capability of limited indirect/antiarmor fires. The classic example of proper use of an M203 is to use it to cover "dead space" within the rifle squad's defensive sector. Also can be employed thru a window or similar opening during urban operations...as just another example.

On a side note.... It would be one hell of a way to paint a wooden fence florecent orange using a training round:)........JK ( The orange goo is more of a "flour type substance", and gets all of your uniform,boots, and battle rattle...if you are part of the range detail.

PS.... I hope that this thread does not evolve into an AK vs AR thread. This doesnt seem to be the point of this thread to me at least.

11B
I've never been in the service but, I was imagining some haji getting hit with one of those. Guess they're not used like that.
Anyway, If I'm not mistaken the M203 can be quickly attached to any M4/M16 where as on an AK you need a coat hanger or something to adapt it. :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top