Not sure if we were even going to have a new post for this here December 11, but I do happen to have a trick up my sleeve that absolutely guarantees it.
Here is a good comparison of the AK-47 and M16:
This comes under the category of “keeps on ticking”:
Military Channel a couple years back did it’s top ten list of combat rifles, and I’ll just let you guess which came out on top. “It will be around long after all of us have dissolved into dust”:
And remember: In Russia, president assassinates you.
Russia's Izmash plant where Saiga Ak-47s are produced
Tags: ak
As an old Marine, I still prefer the M16. Unlike the AK47, a good machine gun, the M16 hits what you are aiming to hit. The AK47 does not. What is the point of stopping power if you do not hit what you are aiming at?
Generally I agree with your premise save for the fact I believe the AK does tend to hit what it is aiming at.
Other than that, we are on the same page.
In the second youtube article, the Picatinny folks gave a demonstration of the two rifles firing at a target at 200 yds. The AK only hit once out of 5 shots fired, and it hit the edge of the target. The M16 was in the center of the target 3 out of 5 shots. The 2 outliers where both closer to the bullseye than the closest AK47 round fired. That is damning for a rifle.
How do you measure the effectiveness of a design ? If it is in results, the nod goes to the M1 Garand which liberated Europe. If popularity, the AK.
Depends a lot on the AK being tested and ammo being used. The bulgarians and yogos have heavier receivers and barrels – significantly heavier – so the whole notion of the flexing barrel will be different. Between a romanian and russian there is a world of difference.
Sounds like we need a trip to the range to answer this once and for all.
“The bulgarians and yogos have heavier receivers and barrels – significantly heavier”
The dream of every infantryman, a significantly heavier rifle…
Pondering this further, a heavier forged or milled receiver erodes the AK’s biggest advantage – cost.
I’d point out that the M-16 in the video appears to be the M16A1; the M16A2 has a heavier barrel, improved sight, and fires the NATO standard 5.56 round, makes it a more accurate rifle, (the A1 is rated at a max eff. range of 460m, the A2 550m.) I’d expect even better results than the video with the A2/M885. Of course, there are other variants of the AK, like the AKM out there so …
Watching the slow-mo of the AK firing, it’s easy to see where both it’s reliability and inaccuracy comes from – the bolt carrier looks extremely loose as it moves.
I think the point was pretty well-made; the AK is more of a sub-machine gun, the M16 more of a rifle. At 300+ yards, the M16 wins. In the brush, the 7.62 round wins.
Lesee…From the makers of the Lada…or the AR15…lemme think.
BM,
OK. I’ll bite, what are you trying to say?
What kind of gun did the guy in Woodbridge use who tried to kill his math teacher? I mean, it jammed!
He should have consulted Joe before the assault.
A rifle.
I lub me some AR15. Sorry, Joe…but I don’t like Russian stamped metal toys.
Monk, fair enough. I’d be interested in a field test, though.
Lovisa, do you know a damned thing about anything? Just wondering.
It was a Marlin 30-06. I believe that Marlin only makes those in bolt-action. Most likely, the jam was operator-error. Since it was a new rifle, he did not have experience with it.
Ajajajajaj!
Joe’s early morning temper is showing again.
A stupid question requires a stupid answer:
Yes, I do know a “damned thing” about childbirth. Does that qualify as “anything”?
No, I didn’t think so.
Hope you get to sleep in this morning so you won’t choke on your breakfast crumpets. Otherwise, have a nice weekend!
Joe eats crumpets for breakfast? Who knew?
I suspect that jam was likely caused by a failure to thoroughly clean the new rifle.
Joe — a perfect reason for another feild test!
Lovisa….why would you interject yourself into a topic on which you know zip?
I don’t see Joe prowling any childbirth forums to jump into their discussions with useless pearls.
Because Joe asked whether I know a damned thing about anything, that’s why, Monk.
And you gladly responded with the one thing you may have a grasp of? And don’t see how utterly humorous that was?
Monk
ROFLMAO – Why aren’t you?
Utterly, utterly – love that word.
Lovisa fires off a BB gun. Joe returns fire with a 9mm. The Monk unlimbers his AR-15. Lovisa responds with a .22 Winchester. Monk looks around to find his bazooka. Lovisa levels the twin barrels of a .40 AA gun. Joe hunts through the back shed for his bazooka. Lovisa goes down to the National Guard Armory for a .50 cal. Monk starts filling up the fuel cans for his tank. Lovisa calls SAC to check on the availability of any spare ICBM’s. “The Guns of December” Merry Christmas everybody…and Peace on Earth.
Wolverine
YOU TAKE THE CAKE! LOVE YOU TO PIECES!
I’m off across the Pacific for Christmas.
All my guns properly packed and wrapped; ammo in my carry-on. Be prepared!
Dan, I think you realize the cost is WAY lower than a comparable AR even for a very serious AK. Check classicarms.us just about any time and you will see. That is part of the appeal.
Lovisa, have a great trip, if there are any earthquakes get yourself off the beach.
Joe, yes, it is indisputable the AK is less expensive than an AR.
If you had to go into battle, mixed terrain, which would you choose, an AR or AK ?
That’s an awful big if, but probably the AK. For anything over 100 yards there had better be some sharpshooters on my side because as you know I’m a pretty lousy shot.
[...] is in reply to the thoughtful comments I read on Joe’s post regarding the AK, which became a discussion regarding the relative merits of the two types, AR v. AK. The general [...]