The AK-47 vs the AR-15

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

Where did you say this was again?

i didnt

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Where did you say this was again?

i didnt

I'm just curious as to what situation led to an AK crumbling in your hands, discarding it and drawing a combat knife and an IMI Desert Eagle handgun.

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

i didnt

I'm just curious as to what situation led to an AK crumbling in your hands, discarding it and drawing a combat knife and an IMI Desert Eagle handgun.

it wasnt an ak it was an zid 1 i was saying the ak is better than the zid 1

[San-Silvacian]

Anyone ever try the AKS-74U?

are you talking about the cqc variant of the ak?

It isn't a CQC variant.

The AKS-74U was developed for use by special operations and to replace the SKS when issued to rear-guard forces and SMGs used by tankers.

The AKS-74U is being replaced by the AK-105 in a number of roles, however its going to be around for a long time.

Personally I <3 the Indian AKS-74Us converted into AKMSUs.

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

ok how about this name what weapons youd favor primary secondary and melee total 3

[San-Silvacian]

ok how about this name what weapons youd favor primary secondary and melee total 3

AK-74M

Fuck the secondary I'll carry an additional two magazines worth of 5.45 ammunition

Bayonet/utility knife

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

ok how about this name what weapons youd favor primary secondary and melee total 3

AK-74M

Fuck the secondary I'll carry an additional two magazines worth of 5.45 ammunition

Bayonet/utility knife

you can have extra ammo and a secondary

[Kouralia]

How? DOes he magically use an anti-grav holster?

EDIT: I'd use the L85A2, with (If I had to choose a secondary) a Sig P226/P228. If I didn't have to chose the secondary then some more blammo. And then the standard British Army bayonet.

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

How? DOes he magically use an anti-grav holster?

if thats what he want then sure why not

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

if you can id like you to post pictures of your load-outs because not everyone may know what your talking about

[Kouralia]

if you can id like you to post pictures of your load-outs because not everyone may know what your talking about

That's not what this thread is about.

[Inquilabstan]

Personally I <3 the Indian AKS-74Us converted into AKMSUs.

I wasn't aware of this. Could you elaborate. I only know of some guys in the Rashtrya Rifles in Kashmir with captured examples. Never heard of full on conversion, though it would make sense as most Indian units with Ak type weapons used 7.62.

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

if you can id like you to post pictures of your load-outs because not everyone may know what your talking about

That's not what this thread is about.

its about guns aint it and which ones your favorite i just asked if i could get a better description of them and pictures help

[SaintB]

Good God, will someone please make a useful thread?

You have your task.

[Blakullar]

Both are essentially killing machines. I don't see how one could be better than the other.

Some killing machines do a better job at killing than others.

[The united empires of zxarrkoenia]

Good God, will someone please make a useful thread?

You have your task.

i just brought up another subject does that work?

[West Pacific]

Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, isn't it? A semi-automatic civilian firearm with 5.56mm bullet vs. an automatic military firearm with a 7.62mm round. The Ak-47 was designed for use as a "spray and pray" weapon by peasants and conscripts. The M-16 is designed for a rifleman and professional soldier. Lots of subtle clues about their different roles, but if one considers the times in which they were designed and political climates, you can easily see that the AK-47 is the people's weapon, while the AR-15/M-16 family are designed for professionals. The fire selector switch is a great example. On the AK-47 the options were safe, semi-automatic, and automatic, on the M-16, the options are safe, semi, and auto/burst, thus the first primary firing mode on the AK-47 is full auto and the primary for the M-16 is single shot. For me it comes down to accuracy. The AK-47 sacrificed accuracy for durability and reliability, when I fire my weapon, I want to know exactly where the bullet is going, not the general direction.

[CTALNH]

Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, isn't it? A semi-automatic civilian firearm with 5.56mm bullet vs. an automatic military firearm with a 7.62mm round. The Ak-47 was designed for use as a "spray and pray" weapon by peasants and conscripts. The M-16 is designed for a rifleman and professional soldier. Lots of subtle clues about their different roles, but if one considers the times in which they were designed and political climates, you can easily see that the AK-47 is the people's weapon, while the AR-15/M-16 family are designed for professionals. The fire selector switch is a great example. On the AK-47 the options were safe, semi-automatic, and automatic, on the M-16, the options are safe, semi, and auto/burst, thus the first primary firing mode on the AK-47 is full auto and the primary for the M-16 is single shot. For me it comes down to accuracy. The AK-47 sacrificed accuracy for durability and reliability, when I fire my weapon, I want to know exactly where the bullet is going, not the general direction.

Go get a sniper rifle then.

[Immoren]

Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, isn't it? A semi-automatic civilian firearm with 5.56mm bullet vs. an automatic military firearm with a 7.62mm round. The Ak-47 was designed for use as a "spray and pray" weapon by peasants and conscripts. The M-16 is designed for a rifleman and professional soldier.
Lots of subtle clues about their different roles, but if one considers the times in which they were designed and political climates, you can easily see that the AK-47 is the people's weapon, while the AR-15/M-16 family are designed for professionals.

USA still had conscription when (X)M16 was introduced.

The fire selector switch is a great example. On the AK-47 the options were safe, semi-automatic, and automatic, on the M-16, the options are safe, semi, and auto/burst, thus the first primary firing mode on the AK-47 is full auto and the primary for the M-16 is single shot.

No. Primary fire for AK is also semiauto. AKs setting just makes accidental use of automatic less likely

For me it comes down to accuracy. The AK-47 sacrificed accuracy for durability and reliability, when I fire my weapon, I want to know exactly where the bullet is going, not the general direction.

Precision doesn't win firefights, firepower does.

[West Pacific]

Kind of an apples to oranges comparison, isn't it? A semi-automatic civilian firearm with 5.56mm bullet vs. an automatic military firearm with a 7.62mm round. The Ak-47 was designed for use as a "spray and pray" weapon by peasants and conscripts. The M-16 is designed for a rifleman and professional soldier. Lots of subtle clues about their different roles, but if one considers the times in which they were designed and political climates, you can easily see that the AK-47 is the people's weapon, while the AR-15/M-16 family are designed for professionals. The fire selector switch is a great example. On the AK-47 the options were safe, semi-automatic, and automatic, on the M-16, the options are safe, semi, and auto/burst, thus the first primary firing mode on the AK-47 is full auto and the primary for the M-16 is single shot. For me it comes down to accuracy. The AK-47 sacrificed accuracy for durability and reliability, when I fire my weapon, I want to know exactly where the bullet is going, not the general direction.

Go get a sniper rifle then.

I believe there is a happy medium between a sniper rifle and a weapon that can't hit a 40,000 pound truck from a distance of 300m. I don't need to be able to hit a man sized target at a distance of 1km because I can't see that target with the naked eye, but I can make out the silhouette of a shooter firing over a berm/wall at 450m and I like having a weapon that can reach that far accurately.

[Immoren]

Go get a sniper rifle then.

I believe there is a happy medium between a sniper rifle and a weapon that can't hit a 40,000 pound truck from a distance of 300m. I don't need to be able to hit a man sized target at a distance of 1km because I can't see that target with the naked eye, but I can make out the silhouette of a shooter firing over a berm/wall at 450m and I like having a weapon that can reach that far accurately.

You can hit man sized target with AK at 200-300m which is enough accuracy for its job.

[West Pacific]

For me it comes down to accuracy. The AK-47 sacrificed accuracy for durability and reliability, when I fire my weapon, I want to know exactly where the bullet is going, not the general direction.

Precision doesn't win firefights, firepower does.

See above post. Whomever was shooting at us couldn't hit a downed truck from ~300m with their weapons, but we had confirmed hits on two of the four guys and all were firing from behind cover. A bigger bullet isn't better if the weapon system firing it can't put the bullet on its intended target.

[Kouralia]

Precision doesn't win firefights, firepower does.

See above post. Whomever was shooting at us couldn't hit a downed truck from ~300m with their weapons, but we had confirmed hits on two of the four guys and all were firing from behind cover. A bigger bullet isn't better if the weapon system firing it can't put the bullet on its intended target.

Are you sure that was because the rifle in a well maintained condition couldn't make that shot? Not that it was a crappily maintained one fired by an untrained loon?

[West Pacific]

I believe there is a happy medium between a sniper rifle and a weapon that can't hit a 40,000 pound truck from a distance of 300m. I don't need to be able to hit a man sized target at a distance of 1km because I can't see that target with the naked eye, but I can make out the silhouette of a shooter firing over a berm/wall at 450m and I like having a weapon that can reach that far accurately.

You can hit man sized target with AK at 200-300m which is enough accuracy for its job.

And an M-16 can reach out to hit a man sized target at 500m due to the flatter trajectory of the 5.56mm round and has less recoil, so who has the advantage? The Taliban like to post videos on the SAF ambushes on NATO forces, but how often do you seem them hit their targets?

[West Pacific]

See above post. Whomever was shooting at us couldn't hit a downed truck from ~300m with their weapons, but we had confirmed hits on two of the four guys and all were firing from behind cover. A bigger bullet isn't better if the weapon system firing it can't put the bullet on its intended target.

Are you sure that was because the rifle in a well maintained condition couldn't make that shot? Not that it was a crappily maintained one fired by an untrained loon?

Since that's the intended customer of the AK-47, I believe it is a safe assumption that the shooter did not have as much training nor were they qualified sharp shooter. I'm not primarily a trigger puller though, so it's not like we're comparing a Navy SEAL with Billy Bob who received his first .22 when he was three years old.