Ak-47 vs. M-16

i like the silencer on the p90 variant on the first pic i posted,,,very nice!!

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by Kozzy
The M16A2 would be better compared to the AK-101, 103, or 107. The A2 is definitly superior to the 47, it's much more accurate and will not jam if you clean it.

um u do realise we said that about the SA-80 and what happens ? it jams in sand even when u clean it
we spent 2 million on r+d trying to sort it and what do we improve? nothin!

Yes, and the SA80 isn't the m16. The M16 will not jam if you clean it.

First off.. you weapons experts... The Bugarian ak's available from arsenal inc are very, very, accurate and sweet shooting. Also there are vepr's that are sweet. To compare these to polytech or what-have-you is nonsense. Now.... Ar15's (the original name for the gun invented by Eugene Stoner et al..) are available from multiple sources too. I will name my faves if I may, #1 BUSHMASTER #2 COLT in that order. DSA offers ar's and I'm sure they are top shelf but can;t say I've used them. The biggest thing concerning Ar's today is what you feed them and what you wash them in. Use a high quality ammo -PMC--FEDERAL--OLIN--OR ANY NATO HEADSTAMP OF RECENT MANF DATE...--- LUBE??? OH!!! WEAPONS LUBE RIGHT..CHECK OUT MILITECH 1 (APPLY AS DIRECTED!!) it doesn't attract crud like what we've been using for years. But , reduced to a choice of one rifle???? M-1A/M-14 !!! But to close,--- the bulgarian AK's bring the accuracy gap closer--way closer. And, the cleaner weapons lubes (yeah probably more than one acceptable one BUT, militech 1 is top) bring the dependability factor closer. also , use the german manf' magazines if you can find them and it's legal , they are the absolute shizznit. Heavier by a few ounces each but,, how heavy are you in a bag? The HK weapons that may be adopted to some extent or totally are in fact the absolute stuff....Either M-4 uppers or the M-8, new caliber convertible of course..

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by bign]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by bign]

Everyone knows the P-900 is a modified P-90...but these modifications are significant and subtle alike...and these modification, except for the plain fact that both carry a large amount of round make the P-900 a completely different animal

my uncle used to smear a compound of some sort of the ejector slide of his M-16 during vietnam...i cant remember what it was...i think he said it was lithium but we all know that wouldn't make any sense. man i hope that wasn't the reason he got shrapnel in the back...lol

Originally posted by Russian
AK-47 vs M-16
which one is the better assault rifle



M16/AR15
The US switched to 223 caliber rifles during the Vietnam war; the M16 and civilian variants of it are the closest thing there is to a real assault rifle which is also a believable rifle and can hit things at significant distances. In particular, in a gunfight at 500 yards between a guy with an M16 and a guy with an Ak47, the guy with the AK would most often be SOL.

The first M16s had all kinds of problems, most of which have been resolved. The remaining problems mainly amount to jamming due to dust or sand during long periods in the field. Since civilians almost never spend weeks in the field, a civilian owner will almost never see one of those problems. The M16 is different from other military rifles in the following respects:

The 223 ammunition it uses. The rifle has enough power to kill humans or deer if not bears and cape buffalo, is accurate out to several hundred yards and, with heavy (75 - 95 grain) bullets and quick-twist barrels, can shoot to 800 - 1000 yards. It is accurate and allows rapid, well-aimed fire.
The M16 does not use a piston; gas blows back through a very small tube straight onto the bolt carrier. This eliminates the movement of the piston inside the rifle increases accuracy.
The bolt locks into the barrel rather than the receiver, simplifying several kinds of things, not the least of which is cleaning.
The lower receiver with the serial number totally detaches from the upper receiver and barrel, meaning that somebody who owns one lower piece of an M16 can buy several differrent upper ends, cheaply and with no further legal requirements.
The barrel-upper receiver connection does not involve high torque as with some other military rifles. This makes M16s basically easy to work on.
An AR15's can cost anywhere from $450-$1250 with an average service grade rifle being around $575 dollars. 30rnd magazines run from $7 to $30 dollars with an average price of $12. Ammunition is $190-$300 for 1000 rounds. So a standard rifle kit with 4 magazines ( not including the one in the rifle ) and a case of ammunition can run you $668-$1670 with an average price of $823.
"the M16 is by far the more superior weapon. It's lighter, more accurate, more versatile, and with proper maintenance it is very reliable. Indeed, it might be less sand proof then the Galil/AK47 series. However, all you need is to clean it once a day and it will work properly. Since modern armies clean their smallarms on a daily even during combat deployment this is a non-issue.

In fact, most of the myth regarding the M16 unreliability date back to the Vietnam War when the M16 was first issued. The 5.56 ammunition given then to the troops used a low quality sticky powder that caused massive buildup of dirt in the M16 mechanism and eventually to jamming problems. When the ammunition was changed, the misfire problems disappeared as well."

M-16 Pros & Cons

Pros


It's lighter,
More accurate,
More versatile,
Allow numerous modifications to be made such as mounting various uppers

Cons

The 5.56 ammunition
Reliable with proper maintenance



AK-47 and Variants
The basic Kalashnikov rifle, the AK47 and variants, is the other common true assault rifle. It uses a minimalistic 30 caliber cartridge (7.62x39) and is meant to be easy to manufacture and maintain. Actually hitting anything with one much past 100 yards is problematical.

The Vepr is Michael Kalashnikov's ultimate civilian firearm. Made with Steyr tools, it amounts to a medium-heavy, chrome-lined and hammer forged barrel mated to a RPK (squad light machinegun) receiver which, while stamped, is the strongest stamped receiver ever made. The Vepr comes in 223, 7.62x39 (AK caliber), and 308, is stone totally reliable under almost any imaginable circumstances, and is accurate enough to produce inch or inch and a half groups at 100 yards.

"All Russian and Eastern Block semiauto military rifles work pretty much the same way and are similar in their mechanisms, with just a few exceptions. The most basic criteria for an AK if I had to have one for some reason would be that it cost no more than $250, tops. The idea of paying $500 for a Bulgarian AK with a forged receiver makes no sense to me at all. One other thing which makes no sense to me at all is wanting to own the very bottom end of all Russian rifles, i.e. the SKS. The SKS was made to be so simple to manufacture that anybody with a lathe could make one, and that's about all there is to recommend it. "

AK-47 Pros & Cons

Pros

The AK-47 is a very effective weapon with great power
It has a very high rate of fire
Comes at a very reasonable price.
Light
Select-fire
Simple to operate, clean, and repair
Reliable
Look at the AK series. An AK is about $249 wholesale and retails for about $325. 30 round 7.62x39mm magazines can be had from $4.99 to $15.99. 1000 rounds of 7.62x39mm ammunition runs about $99. So an AK rifle kit can be as inexpensive as $370. As you can see for the price of a low priced AR15 or FN-FAL you could buy almost 2 full AK rifle kits.

Cons

Very loud noise
Is heavy,
Not accurate
You can't place any optics on it without special adapters
Many people also don't like the AK safety mechanism

OUTSTANDING !!!!!!!
I have actually fired both my opinion is that they are BOTH outsanding firearms. Kalashnikov must be the russian word for either robust or reliable . The one I fire did not stop with a handful of sand in it! I however would not trust it at over 150m to hit a target smaller than chest sized. The muzzle flash is like the 4th of friggin July and the metal stampings RATTLE when on the march limiting its special ops role. The M16 will kill a man at 500m with IRON SIGHTS, and head shots at 300m are possible (with no wind) the weapon can be finicky and the bayonet lug is a joke because I'm sure in brawl the weapon would disintigrate. The parts are cast or machined and makes no noise until fired and unlike the AK can be fired from the prone position with a 30rd mag.

ill take the m-16 becasue the bullet bounces around in the body and is hella accurate. although you can pour sand down the barrle of an AK and itll still work

Originally posted by Hard Red
Here it is in a nutshell...we're gonna go down the line on why the AK-47 is better...
1) It's 7.62 baby...a good quarter inch larger overall than the nato restricted 5.56 round the M-16 is chambered for. That equals greater stopping power.
2) Most would say that once an AK is dismantled, it's hard to reassemble, to this I say take a shower 'till the ignorance washes off...ANY WEAPON CAN BE DISASSEMBLED AND REASSEMBLED...the difficulty level is always different but that's neither here nor there...when the weapon needs disassembly, it needs disassembly...period.
3) Reliability- During Vietnam, U.S. soldiers frequently washed, pipe cleaned and maintained the feed and slides and covered the barrels in sack cloth to prevent it from jamming or stove-piping...which the M-16 did often. AK-47 Jams were practically non-existent, except in the most extreme cases of lack of maintenance.
4) The AK's gas operated blowback made quick rechambering of the next round seamless. (The new 74 builds even further on that concept)
5) The M-16 had only slightly better aim...various improvement's to the original AK's design have seen the AK be equipped with superb suppression, lengthened barrels, modular bays for housing various goodies and, above all, the improved blowback system, which in my opinion never needed to be improved. Theres even a tactical buttstock I just learned about the has a very effective dull matt finish and excellent design for usability!

In closing, the AR/M variants of the original Stoner design, although greatly imporved do not offer the superior stopping power, gas operated seamless chambering and ease of use the AK offers...not to mention if you're going to bring the disassembly argument to light, how well construscted must the AR/M Stoner M-16 variants be to even worry about the disassembly aspect? Although disassembly of any weapon is always necessary, cleaning and maintenance aren't at the forground of the AK's reliability issue list as it is with the AR/M variants.

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

The 7.62 round fired by the ak is 7.62 short. The 5.56 is a superior cartridge. While the 7.62X39 M43 projectile offers roughly 30% more muzzle energy than the 5.56, the low ballistic coefficient of the M43 bullet means it hemorrhages velocity very quickly. At ranges past 300 yards, the 5.56 will retain more energy, shoot flatter and is less affected by wind drift than the Russian round.

The 5.56 is also superior in other ways. For one, the M43 projectile is not particularly lethal. On the other hand, Russians tried more than once to get the 5.56 banned because of the horrific wounds it can inflict. The 5.56 SS109 when fired from a 1-7 twist barrel can penetrate a USGI steel helmet at ranges beyond 1300 meters. The M43 might, on a good day, do the same at 400 meters. Not to mention I heard quite a few level II vests in the Gulf stop AK bullets at ranges of less than 200 yards.

Originally posted by D

Originally posted by Kano
All you guys and your boring old weapons..



www.greendevils.pl...

Gotta love the AUG. Accurate, reliable and made even better by the Australian Army. I've always like the European rifles better, Steyr, H&K G36. BUt between the AK and M16 I'd go with th AK. Sounds more reliable.

it's nearly impossible to reload with any speed from the prone position..a poor battle weapon really only good for security uses.

The 5.45 so called 'fireball' round fired by the AK74 also tumbles, inflicting horrific wounds. The US round didn't get banned because they claimed it was not specifically designed to tumble and do all the nasty damage, tht was just a side effect of the design.
The fireball round has its centre of gravity deliberately off centre so the bullet tumbles when inside the body, shredding as much tissue as possible. This is why (according to janes small arms 19995) it was banned.

NOT ALL AK'S ARE CREATED EQUAL!!! AS, NOT ALL AR'S EITHER!! YOU CAN GET SOME REAL LOW END VERSIONS OF BOTH IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHATS WHAT. I WILL CONCEDE TO RUSSIAN AND APOLLYION AK'S ARE ROCK SOLID RELIABLE THOUGH. WASH'M WITH WHATEVER AND OIL'M WITH PENNZOIL AND SHE'LL RUN, THIS HOWEVER IS DUE TO LOOSER TOLERANCES IN THE DESIGN AND IN TURN YOU CAN'T GROUP AS TIGHT BUT... THEN WE GET INTO AVERAGE DISTANCE OF CONTACT ISSUES DON'T WE??IT TRUTHFULLY COMES DOWN TO ..AT 400M YOUR EVEN.. BUT, AT 600M OR GREATER YOUR DEAD IF YOU'RE BEING ENGAGED BY A M16-A4- THE WEST COAST RIFLE----OORAH!!!!!!! BE A GOOD OPERATOR AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT YOUR WEAPON GOING BANG WHEN YOU NEED IT TO.... BUT---ANYWAY---I LOVE MY ARSENAL AK AND, I LOVE MY BUSHMASTER CARBINE, I'LL TRY TO TAKE'M BOTH !!!! IN SUPPORT OF THE M-1A OF COURSE (1000M THREAT DAY IN DAY OUT) BY THE WAY, YOU GUYS ARE OK, IF YOUR EVER IN PHOENIX MAKE SURE TO GO BY "BEN AVERY SHOOTING FACILITY" OK? THER ARE MANY JUST LIKE US. RESPONSIBLE GUNOWNERS

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by bign]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by bign]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by bign]

AK owns all,,,,,nuff said

In reply to what Appolyon said, the 7.62 short round doesnt make any difference...the kinetic energy in the ballistic is the same and even a sniper can go 600 yards with it, granted that accounting for windage would come into play a little more, yada yada...5.56 is effective up close, in folded down buttstock type of applications...beacause its kinetic energy tends to go downward past a couple hundred yards...the 7.62 remains true for 600 at least, long or short variant, it doesn't matter...5.56 only works with close combat applications with few sniping roles and it is with that regard that the versatility of the 7.62 is always going to be the superior round

so poo poo on you appolyon, lol im just joking...and hey remember that the AK-103 fires the L variant 7.62 also, barrel change necessary, i'm not sure...but no one changes their barrel in the heat of barrel, so as Joey Tribiani from Freinds would say..."It's a MOO point...likes a cows opinion...it's MOO."
Yes, I know it's moot...but howzabout a little levity friends

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]

I never found the M-16 to be only a close-in weapon, I had no difficulty at 600 yards. Again, though, the marksman makes the difference. Also, the weapon was always good to me, but I was always good to it, as well as the rest of my gear.
The AK is not an innacurate weapon, either. I read several posts here in this thread where people said that. Again, I did not find that to be true. I did like the simplicity of it and the low-tech manufacture. If a spring broke in the field, the soldier could improvise, not so with the M-16.
As far as the round, I'll stand behind a 1/4 inch of steel and allow you to fire the 7.62x39 at me. I wouldn't think of it if you were using the M-16. I hate bleeding out of stupidity!

Now keep in mind that I never said that the 5.56 doesn't have it's uses...but me being a sniper liking chap that I am, I am naturally predisposed to rounds such as the X54 7.62 or the 8.6 70mm Lapua...I shot a 5.56 and I shot a X54 7.62 and I almost got a chance to squeeze a few 8.6 rounds, lol...I'll tell you that the 7.62 is a joy to fire because it has a tendecny to stay true for longer distances...that will always stray my opinion every time. I like 5.56 for close quarters...heck some sniper rifles even fire them nicely...namely most HK rifles, mine favorite being the SLR9...but in the end it comes down to comfort...and if you ever stood behind a quarter steel plate with the X54 7.62 AK103 aimed at you, i'd cry for you and the appendage I just put a hole through. No disrespect intended...by the way, the X39 just never did it for me though i will say that its energy reduces quicker over distance...in close quarters it just doesnt matter

[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Hard Red]