The AK-47 vs the AR-15

[Lemanrussland]

You can have failures by using bad magazines (usually shitty knock off ones without a proper machined steel top) or bad ammunition (primer failures and such). The action itself is extremely reliable, though.

...are you saying magazine failures with military-issued AK magazines were something of a concern?

My SGL 21-94 has used everything from brand-new Izhmash-made five-round magazines to "found in a ditch with a corpse or two" magazines retrieved from Serbian battlefields. Of all of my magazines, I have never had a single malfunction except for one magazine that does not properly feed... because its sides are crushed to where the follower won't move beyond a certain point. So long as it's made in an actual military plant (read: not America), it will work, and it will work well. I have East German, Polish, Albanian, Chinese, Yugoslavian, Bosnian, Romanian, and Hungarian magazines. All made in different machine shops, all equally 100% reliable. As for bad ammunition? That's an easy fix: cycle the bolt, clear the dud, insert live cartridge, fire.

I'm talking about after-market magazines. You also have to watch out for AK magazines with plastic locking lugs, they can have issues from taking falls (especially if you fall onto the magazine while hitting the dirt) or rapid insertion of ammunition. The real all-metal or metal lined ones are usually fine.

Also, a failure to fire is still a failure to fire, even if it's not necessarily the gun's fault. You must consider all parts of your firearm set up, including the ammunition.

[Spreewerke]

...are you saying magazine failures with military-issued AK magazines were something of a concern?

My SGL 21-94 has used everything from brand-new Izhmash-made five-round magazines to "found in a ditch with a corpse or two" magazines retrieved from Serbian battlefields. Of all of my magazines, I have never had a single malfunction except for one magazine that does not properly feed... because its sides are crushed to where the follower won't move beyond a certain point. So long as it's made in an actual military plant (read: not America), it will work, and it will work well. I have East German, Polish, Albanian, Chinese, Yugoslavian, Bosnian, Romanian, and Hungarian magazines. All made in different machine shops, all equally 100% reliable. As for bad ammunition? That's an easy fix: cycle the bolt, clear the dud, insert live cartridge, fire.

I'm talking about after-market magazines. You also have to watch out for AK magazines with plastic locking lugs, they can have issues from taking falls (especially if you fall onto the magazine while hitting the dirt) or rapid insertion of ammunition. The real all-metal or metal lined ones are usually fine.

Also, a failure to fire is still a failure to fire, even if it's not necessarily the gun's fault. You must consider all parts of your firearm set up, including the ammunition.

Okay, so just don't buy shit magazines? Last summer I bought seven in-the-grease Albanian flatbacks for $10.00 a pop., and four Serbs for $12.50/per just after Connecticut. Since I wish for my rifle to work, I don't get shit magazines. Likewise, I don't get shit ammo: I will never purchase TulAmmo, and instead use only Wolf poly-coated 123gr. FMJ or, more preferably, Golden Tiger 124gr. BTFMJ which is Russian mil-spec ammunition.

Of the thousands of rounds I've put down-range with AKs, I have had exactly two failure-to-fires.

[Puzikas]

...are you saying magazine failures with military-issued AK magazines were something of a concern?

My SGL 21-94 has used everything from brand-new Izhmash-made five-round magazines to "found in a ditch with a corpse or two" magazines retrieved from Serbian battlefields. Of all of my magazines, I have never had a single malfunction except for one magazine that does not properly feed... because its sides are crushed to where the follower won't move beyond a certain point. So long as it's made in an actual military plant (read: not America), it will work, and it will work well. I have East German, Polish, Albanian, Chinese, Yugoslavian, Bosnian, Romanian, and Hungarian magazines. All made in different machine shops, all equally 100% reliable. As for bad ammunition? That's an easy fix: cycle the bolt, clear the dud, insert live cartridge, fire.

I'm talking about after-market magazines. You also have to watch out for AK magazines with plastic locking lugs, they can have issues from taking falls (especially if you fall onto the magazine while hitting the dirt) or rapid insertion of ammunition. The real all-metal or metal lined ones are usually fine.

Also, a failure to fire is still a failure to fire, even if it's not necessarily the gun's fault. You must consider all parts of your firearm set up, including the ammunition.

Clearing an AK of a fail to fire and clearing an AR of a fail to fire are two totally different ball games.

Also, from a strictly standard-issue standpoint, an AK magazine is going to be much more reliable than a USGI magazine from an AR-15, and similarly a Magpul PMAG magazine for an AR.

[Lemanrussland]

I'm talking about after-market magazines. You also have to watch out for AK magazines with plastic locking lugs, they can have issues from taking falls (especially if you fall onto the magazine while hitting the dirt) or rapid insertion of ammunition. The real all-metal or metal lined ones are usually fine.

Also, a failure to fire is still a failure to fire, even if it's not necessarily the gun's fault. You must consider all parts of your firearm set up, including the ammunition.

Okay, so just don't buy shit magazines? Last summer I bought seven in-the-grease Albanian flatbacks for $10.00 a pop., and four Serbs for $12.50/per just after Connecticut. Since I wish for my rifle to work, I don't get shit magazines. Likewise, I don't get shit ammo: I will never purchase TulAmmo, and instead use only Wolf poly-coated 123gr. FMJ or, more preferably, Golden Tiger 124gr. BTFMJ which is Russian mil-spec ammunition.

Of the thousands of rounds I've put down-range with AKs, I have had exactly two failure-to-fires.

Keep in mind, I'm not claiming the AK is unreliable, but simply pointing out problem areas which should be minded. You buy shit, you usually get shit, even with an AK.

Magazines are a potential problem area for ARs too, even the military issue ones. If you keep lube on the bolt carrier and use good magazines (I've had good luck with PMAGs), ARs can take a lot of abuse too (video: http://youtu.be/dHwoZ6SS_pY)

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I just noticed an ad for a new .30 carbine load from Hornady in my American Rifleman magazine, and got to wondering if anyone makes an AR in that calibre. If not, I am sure I could get one custom built.

Thanks for that. I just spent the last hour and a half looking at various cartridges on wiki, seeing what might fit in an AR15 magwell.

BTW, did you know there was a 7.62x45mm cartridge? The same diameter as the 7.62x39mm Warsaw Pact round, with the same length as the 5.56x45mm NATO round. It was for the Chech vz52, but it was dropped for compatibility with Warsaw Pact standards. With slightly higher energy and ballistics than the 7.62x39mm M43 round, it ALMOST sounds like something I could get into, except for the fact that the brass is next to impossible to find (it pretty much has to be formed from other brass), and I'd have to figure out a barrel and magazines for it.

Ballistically, it doesn't seem to offer much worthwhile over the 7.62x39
However, 7.62 Czech is the parent case for 7x46mm UIAC which is billed as being an amazing general-purpose/all-purpose cartridge to replace 5.56 and 7.62 again.

Ar-15, I take accuracy over less maintenance of the AK-47.

The AR-15 is definitely more accurate than the AK pattern rifles (due to a variety of factors, like lack of a large gas piston, different cartridge (this is the big one, the AK-74 with it's light, high velocity cartridge is actually comparable to the AR-15) arguably better sights etc.), but it should be kept in mind that both of the rifles fire intermediate cartridges which are effective out to 300-500 meters, the AR-15 does not have a massive advantage over AK pattern rifles in that sense.

I prefer the AR-15 as well (mostly for the better ergonomics and better sights, I like mine for target shooting), but would you still prefer the AR-15 if spare parts, lubricant, and cleaning supplies were less available or not available at all? In those circumstances, I would definitely pick up an AK.

Civilian grade RPK and AK-based rifles can get 1 MOA out of the box.
I'd call that accurate.

[Lemanrussland]

Civilian grade RPK and AK-based rifles can get 1 MOA out of the box.
I'd call that accurate.

Of course, but that's single shot target shooting. When you fire with bursts of automatic fire, it has issues (one being due to the larger cartridge, the other main one being due to the very beefy gas piston/bolt carrier which rocks back and forth through it's operating cycle, which throws around the rifle a bit and causes some flexing (video: http://youtu.be/xeeeFxA_9nA)).

The newer AKs have definitely made improvements, however, with the lighter 5.45×39mm cartridge, large muzzle brake/compensator, and the recoil balancing mechanism found on the AK-107 and AEK-971 which helps reduce the problems created by the gas piston.

Edit: I would definitely agree that the AK has combat accuracy though, that is to say it's suitable for most combat situations, where the enemy is within 300 meters.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

You see, how much the gun moves about under recoil is not a function of "accuracy".
That's "staying on target", something the M16 happens to do very well.

But of course, most people trained on the AK were trained not to fire in fully automatic for most situations.

[Lemanrussland]

You see, how much the gun moves about under recoil is not a function of "accuracy".
That's "staying on target", something the M16 happens to do very well.

But of course, most people trained on the AK were trained not to fire in fully automatic for most situations.

I was using the term "accuracy" in a somewhat colloquial way.

The technical term you are looking for is precision (getting tight groups, hitting the same spot all the time). Accuracy is just a measure of how closely you hit your target.



Both are important when shooting, of course.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

You see, how much the gun moves about under recoil is not a function of "accuracy".
That's "staying on target", something the M16 happens to do very well.

But of course, most people trained on the AK were trained not to fire in fully automatic for most situations.

I was using the term "accuracy" in a somewhat colloquial way.

The technical term you are looking for is precision (getting tight groups, hitting the same spot all the time).



Both are important when shooting, of course.

Not really.
Precision would only be a quality you could assess under single fire.

Again, "precision" under automatic fire is just how easily the weapon stays on target. You can improve this by adding a bipod, so it's hardly an inherent quality of the precision. Precision is lost to automatic fire.

[Lemanrussland]

I was using the term "accuracy" in a somewhat colloquial way.

The technical term you are looking for is precision (getting tight groups, hitting the same spot all the time).

(Image)

Both are important when shooting, of course.

Not really.
Precision would only be a quality you could assess under single fire.

Again, "precision" under automatic fire is just how easily the weapon stays on target. You can improve this by adding a bipod, so it's hardly an inherent quality of the precision. Precision is lost to automatic fire.

I believe that's the correct terminology, from a technical perspective, regardless if you're firing single shots on a range or firing bursts at an enemy soldier.

Anyway, of course the bipod helps. That's basically what the Soviets did for the RPK, added a bipod and strengthened/lengthened the barrel (there are also other changes, like using thicker metal stamping for the receiver and strengthening the contact point between the barrel and receiver). The M27 IAR is also similar, which is basically an AR with a heavier barrel, bipod, and short stroke gas piston system to reduce fouling/heat on the bolt carrier group. For a squad automatic weapon, those changes are definitely necessary.

I always thought one of the main benefits of the assault rifle, as a concept, was to allow the individual soldier to hit targets out to 300 meters like a rifle, which was typical of infantry engagements in WWII, but also to employ automatic fire closer in like a sub-machinegun. It would seem like controllability on automatic or burst fire would be an important consideration when evaluating an assault rifle.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

It is controllable.

The dispersion at twenty metres is obviously significantly less than at three hundred.

[Lemanrussland]

It is controllable.

The dispersion at twenty metres is obviously significantly less than at three hundred.

How about at 100?

If the AK didn't have issues with controllability while employing automatic fire, why has the Russian military and Izhmash spent so much time trying to fix it?

[Greed and Death]

Ar-15, I take accuracy over less maintenance of the AK-47.

The AR-15 is definitely more accurate than the AK pattern rifles (due to a variety of factors, like lack of a large gas piston, different cartridge (this is the big one, the AK-74 with it's light, high velocity cartridge is actually comparable to the AR-15) arguably better sights etc.), but it should be kept in mind that both of the rifles fire intermediate cartridges which are effective out to 300-500 meters, the AR-15 does not have a massive advantage over AK pattern rifles in that sense.

I prefer the AR-15 as well (mostly for the better ergonomics and better sights, I like mine for target shooting), but would you still prefer the AR-15 if spare parts, lubricant, and cleaning supplies were less available or not available at all? In those circumstances, I would definitely pick up an AK.

If I were a 3rd world revolutionary or a gun hipster I would prefer the Ak-47. but I am not so AR-15.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

What is remotely hipsterish about the AK?
It's possibly the most prolific rifle in existence.

It is controllable.

The dispersion at twenty metres is obviously significantly less than at three hundred.

How about at 100?

If the AK didn't have issues with controllability while employing automatic fire, why has the Russian military and Izhmash spent so much time trying to fix it?

You say fix, I say improve.

The AK-107/AEK-971 would only roughly double the number of rounds on target in a burst at combat ranges (I believe it was cited as improving it from 2-3 rounds to 6-7 rounds).

[Kouralia]

If the AK didn't have issues with controllability while employing automatic fire, why has the Russian military and Izhmash spent so much time trying to fix it?

Tbf, afaik it shouldn't be on automatic. If you need rapid fire at 100m, use semi alongside the rest of your squad and the MGs on automatic. That's how the British Army does it, I think.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

If the AK didn't have issues with controllability while employing automatic fire, why has the Russian military and Izhmash spent so much time trying to fix it?

Tbf, afaik it shouldn't be on automatic. If you need rapid fire at 100m, use semi alongside the rest of your squad and the MGs on automatic. That's how the British Army does it, I think.

That's how all armies do it.

[Kouralia]

Tbf, afaik it shouldn't be on automatic. If you need rapid fire at 100m, use semi alongside the rest of your squad and the MGs on automatic. That's how the British Army does it, I think.

That's how all armies do it.

#MeanwhileInMurikaa

[New Maldorainia]

In regard to the M-16 the military uses, being able to use 3 round burst above single shot semi auto, and below full auto is great.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

In regard to the M-16 the military uses, being able to use 3 round burst above single shot semi auto, and below full auto is great.

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

[Republic of South Carolina]

In regard to the M-16 the military uses, being able to use 3 round burst above single shot semi auto, and below full auto is great.

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

Using Burst or Automatic is extremely rare with a M16 series/M4 series. Semi-automatic is now the preferred method of response. 45-60 rounds a minute in sustained semi-automatic fire is more than enough to suppress and still accurate enough to hit what you are aiming at with decent accuracy. The exception with the Burst is the M16A3. Which, has been converted back to Full-automatic with M16A1 lowers for use by the US Navy(SEAL Teams, CB Elements, Security elements).

[CTALNH]

In regard to the M-16 the military uses, being able to use 3 round burst above single shot semi auto, and below full auto is great.

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

And that is why trained personnel know that firing a AKM in full auto is a great choice if you want to shoot birds.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

And that is why trained personnel know that firing a AKM in full auto is a great choice if you want to shoot birds.

However, the Russian Naval Infantry were trained to do exactly as I described - leave the rifle in fully automatic, and use the trigger finger as a burst selector.

[Insane Kidney Mentality]

In regard to the M-16 the military uses, being able to use 3 round burst above single shot semi auto, and below full auto is great.

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

I believe there was some military study done a few decades back regarding that four successive rounds in automatic was the most effective compromise between accuracy and surpression, and then I believe that it was lowered to a three round burst because it divided into the thirty-round magazine so nicely to stop the complusive OCD of military ordinance.

... or... something like that.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

I never understood three round burst myself. I've always seen it as a way to stop conscripts from blatting away a full magazine in fully automatic.

Your finger should be your burst selector. If you're not disciplined enough to do that, leave it in semi-automatic.

I believe there was some military study done a few decades back regarding that four successive rounds in automatic was the most effective compromise between accuracy and surpression, and then I believe that it was lowered to a three round burst because it divided into the thirty-round magazine so nicely to stop the complusive OCD of military ordinance.

... or... something like that.

SALVO deduced that a four-round burst of any cartridge, irrespective of calibre, produced more casualties behind cover than fully-automatic fire of a battle rifle cartridge.
I have no idea how this supposedly works.

It's what led to interest in duplex rounds, because two shots would send four rounds downrange.

[Moriala]

There is no plain AK-47.
There's-
-The AK47 Type I http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSAg_wd9pJ63R8tNPtEQsXeyz-9mHTybogvV-6jQqZq1Ha4yWwTZg (Applies to the Ak-47 types 1-3.
-The AK47 Type II
-The AK47 Type III (Most familiar?)
-The AKM (Least familiar?)http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/AKM-JH01.jpg
-The AK74 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/AK-74_NTW_12_92.jpg
-The AKS74-U http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/assault/as03/aks74u.jpg
-The AK74M http://gunpedia.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/AK74.jpg
-The AK-105 http://www.enemyforces.net/firearms/ak105_3.jpg
-The AK-107 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/saiga_mk_107-660x216.jpg
-The AK-9 http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4149/4998354292_d7fb7cfa52_z.jpg
-The AK-12 (Modern AKM) http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTSZxM11J9-IPUppNUM6Q40Cov2Z1d41O7mE-G71LhwcCw7NyEv
Then, the ones that are close-
-The AN-94 http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/assault/as08/an94-1.jpg
-The AEK-971 http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5EM5pPDW2a2RQzstIri04oLHws0ejrpz1ZsCWuSzWY7diLZWZuA
-The AB-5.45 http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091104131161/guns/images/f/f9/Ab762.jpg
-The AS-VAL http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/assault/as10/as_val1.jpg