Yesterday's Weapons Forums

_________________
Live free or die hard

lol, well there's a can of worms. IMHO the AK has the power and reliability, whereas the AR has the accuracy. I've read on a few boards of people who had AKs built for them that they were more accurate then something off the shelf. I gave up and just bought both.

This is an argument that can go on forever. The AR was built more like a rifle than a machine gun, and the AK was built more like a machine gun than a rifle. The AK goes boom with every trigger pull, the AR needs more TLC, the AK has a bigger bullet, larger cartridge. I haven't heard too much about the AK-74s though.

Just my 0.02

_________________
Hunde, wallt ihr ewig leben?

Political Correctness is intellectual fascism
NRA life member
583rd ORD Co/59 ORD BDE
Handorf FRG 1988-1990

That's hard to say, as you'll get good arguments for both from both sides of the fence. It really comes down to personal preference, so the only way you can really know the answer is to get one of each (of course)

If you want a summary,
AR's are (should be) drop dead accurate, ergonomic, about as modular as you can get with spare parts abound. The down side is that it's more expensive (generally) than an AK. You also need to keep it well maintained as the direct gas inpingement is a dirty system, and the action doesn't react well to the introduction of foreign matter. It's pretty safe to say that you can only fire 'X' amount of rounds through an AR type system, and you'll HAVE to stop and clean it due to carbon buildup. 'X' will vary per user and conditions I'm sure.

AK's, well... they're a bit cruder in the ergonomics dept compared to an AR, and somewhat less modular. Looser tolerances help make it more reliable, but accuracy suffers for it. 7.62x39 AK's are probably the least accurate of all the cals they come in, but they weren't built to be target rifles and you should still be able to peg a baseball at 100 yards. Get one in 5.56x45 or 5.45x39 and your accuracy will increase. Get one with a milled receiver or a heavy duty trunnion/sheet metal combo (like the Yugoslavian or Vepr) and it should increase as well. The greatest asset of the AK system over the AR system is reliability. An AK can take a lot of misuse and lack of maintenance and remain reliable in just about all conditions. Probably why it's so popular among 3rd world peasants and conscripts. I believe I heard it said somewhere by someone that 'If I was going to be stranded on an alien planet and I could only choose one weapon, that weapon would be an AK'.

It really comes down to east vs west mentality. The AR is a marksmans weapon. The AK is more of a tool of practicality. They're both cool though. AK vs AR has blossomed into many a long winded debate. What do you want to do with it exactly, is the more important question.

_________________
Live free or die hard

_________________
Mark

Resident of the Northern Republic of Free California

"People should not be afraid of their Government, the Government should be afraid of the people." - V

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" - Ben Franklin

Don't forget AK's come in all shapes and sizes. .308, 7.62x54r, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 5.56x45, 8mm mauser... stamped receiver regular trunnion, stamped receiver bulged rpk trunnion, milled receiver.. not to mention long barrels, short barrels, light barrels, heavy barrels, medium barrels, chromed bore vs vanadium... side folders, underfolders and you name it. One countries AK is not like the next countries AK, you can't really make blanket statements about an AK's accuracy because they vary so much from caliber to country of origin. .308 and 54r AK's can perform as well as any rack grade M1A in the hands of a skilled shooter. They even make adjustable triggers for them now. I think your decision all depends on what you want to use this rifle for. Whatever you do, don't buy an AK and try to turn it into an AR... just buy the AR.

I might buy both and then trade for a M1A, that way I will have accuracy, power, and reliability all in one rifle.

_________________
Live free or die hard

And it will just be a matter of time before someone comes out with a piston driven upper for the AR-10. They have been around for ome time now for the 5.56 and manufacturers are becoming more numerous

_________________

It's 5 o'clock and it's watermelon time.....................
because you can't drink beer & load rockets - TXPete

Now that would be sweet.

AR15 just because.

_________________
M1 Garand,Swiss K31, Finn M39, M44 Mosin-Nagant, 91/30 Mosin-Nagant, Yugo M48 BO, Ishy 2A1, Long Branch No.4 Mk I*,
Yugo SKS 59/66, Styer M95

I'm not a hunter, I'm a population control specialist!

I know I'm bringing back a thread from the dead.. but the old 'AK's are inaccurate' adage always kind of bothered me. I finally got my 5.56 AK scoped and dialed in at the 100yd and have proved that there's at least one AK out there that's what I'd consider, accurate. Comparable to a mil-spec AR anyway. (ya that's right, I said it... )

Had the M95 out the other day, here's what I was getting @ 100 in 5 shot groups with a 9x cheapo simmons scope.



I had been using Wolf 62gr fmj... couldn't get a group out of that stuff to save my soul, the targets looked like a shotgun pattern. It's a 1-7 twist barrel chambered for 5.56, so I thought it would be able to deal with the heavier bullets. But, as it turns out.. it likes the lighter 50gr in .223. (??) eh, why ask why so long as it works.

There's a certain 'expendability' built into the Kalashnikov genre. They are made to loose specs so they will fire while dirty... made to fire best from the 'assault' position... designed to be easily made with less than perfect machinery... Rather a 'monkey model.. anybody can shoot one - anybody ( almost) can make one.

So you can blaze away while assaulting across open fields. Fall down in dust or mud? No problemo! Forward, comrades!!! And forward go all the comrades.... except those killed by return fire. But there is strength in numbers! Unless the opposition has indirect fire capability...

The Kalashnnikov design pre-supposes casualties and is a weapon that can be picked up by survivors from the battlefield and used with nothing more than a fresh magazine...

Accuracy meant little to Mikey Kalashnikov - volume of fire meant everything. Mobile volume! As in ever try to fire an AK prone? Prone at an uphill target??? VERY hard to do. Not so with the 20 round magazine of the AR... or BAR.

In Viet Nam, I NEVER saw an RPK magazine that was not extremely beat up.

The AR is capable of carefully picking off approaching AK carriers.

I say the choice depends on one's mindset: overwhelming assault or deliberate, accurate return fire. All the overwhelming attackers will most likely not be killed... that all will not live is a given.

The deliberate fire folks stand a much better chance of surviving a large-scale assault, especially if they have a little indirect fire help like artillery... maybe a little napalm judiciously applied...

I'll go with the AR crowd... I will still own an AK clone of some sort just because I can, but when serious trouble starts, I will reach for my AR.

And! How well has anyone here done with their AK when firing National Match from prone??? SW

_________________
Slava Ukraini!!

A friend has built up several versions of the FN FAL and from firing those I'd have to say it out classes both the AR and AK designs.

His rifles were built up using the most refined components and one of them is a very lightweight version with folding stoc, some sort of paratrooper version. It was as handy as either the M4 or the AKs I've fired and with much more horsepower and accuracy as far as group size goes gives up little to the AR, plus the heavier bullet is far less effected by wind drift, so in the long run it has more usable accuracy potential.

The AR is probably much easier to control in full auto, but I'm not likely to need or desire that feature. Ability to penetrate any commonly available cover with a high level of retained lethality is more important in my book.

Well, regardless of it's intended deployment and disposability... I was just trying to point out that at least one AK has proven capable of meeting the average AR's accuracy potential.. loose tolerances or not. So far as lying prone, they make 7.62, 5.45 and 5.56 mags in 5, 10, 20 and 30 (and probably more than that). I used a 10 round steel mag at the bench. So far as winning an HP match, don't know. I couldn't win an HP match with my AR, so I don't expect to with the AK... but I do know that the AK will do it's part so long as I do mine as evidenced from my range trip. Aside from preferring peep sights to open sights, I don't see any advantage an AR would have on my M95 (jmo). But to each his own, cheers!

FAL's are also a favorite but for different reasons. I like how clean the system is. I've only shot the .308 versions.. but I think DSA makes them in several other flatter shooting calibers. I'd like to take one of those out for a spin.

ive decided on the FN FAL





ive got the ARs and SKS [these are immpressive] , ive tried the AK[im not impressed ] , ive come to believe this and the M14 make the most sence

FAL is a good choice...

So waddya go with EnfieldNut?

_________________


██ █ ████ everything ███ █████ is █████ ████ ████ fine ████ ███ █ ██████ love. █████ ███████ ███ your █████ ████ government.

_________________

It's 5 o'clock and it's watermelon time.....................
because you can't drink beer & load rockets - TXPete