What In The World Most Deadly And Efficient Assault Rifle

reply to post by ssgtpetersen


What servers on Call of Duty 4 do you play on?

I'd love to join you in there!

I tend to play on maps where it's Spetsnaz and SAS cause I like to feel as if I'm a spec ops operative as well.

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by pinpoint sniper(1)


it is the inivisible shooter rifle for rival not seeing the shooter.

I think the new magpul masada looks pretty impressive. With bushmaster taking over production its shaping up pretty good. Its actually called Bushmaster ACR now I believe.

some time late last year i came across a thread here on ATS topic about the accuracy of the M16 and the Ak-47, i cant seem to locate this thread
because it seems every second thread is "M16 this"or "Ak47 that" too many to search through, anyway someone posted a video that shows the barrel flex on the ak47.

Now I've been shooting guns now for about 32 years and as far as i know barrel flex doesn't make for good accuracy don't you think?

www.youtube.com...

I call BS on that video, every AK i've seen can hit silhouette target at 200m, i can hit that with a revolver. Guys weren't even aiming, or they are crappy shots. Even worn out Norincos can hit better than that.

Or they intentionally selected an AK that had very worn out barrel (or even twisted one).

Ps. The M16 "group" was horrible too. It should do much better, i've seen original 60's weapons grouping around 1,3MOA...

I would say hands down the M-16.
It is the most efficient because of the accuracy shot after shot even while rapid firing. Another aspect to think about is how much ammo an average soldier carries. Thats 210 rounds for the m-16 and only 120 for the AK I believe. so even if you like the AK reliability, your enemy will enjoy the inaccuracy. Also. carrying a heavy rifle is a pain that wears down a shooter faster- increasing his heart and breathing rate- throwing off his shooting, God knows how hard it is to shoot with your head pounding from a high heart rate.

I think some thing else needs to be said, on a thread like this telling stories about "a friend's experience" or something you read/saw/heard doesn't cut it when you have real shooters that have used these rifles personally to kill.

In the end the real answer is a S.A.W. anyways.

We carried 180-210 rounds in 7.62x39 and our infantry boys usually carried a mag or so more than we did. So the amount of ammunition is not really a defining issue between AK and M16, but i think both are obsolete in their original form.

The Magpull Masada/Bushmaster ACR seems to be a really promising rifle. I heard (i know it's second hand information, but the gun is next to impossible to obtain) from a guy, who desings supressors and was given access to the masada for testing, that masada is the most ergonomical rifle he has tested. And within caliber performance, it's the best AR he has used. (this is purely based on a single day at range)

Allright guys...the M16 and AK are old old news.

The new era of assault rifles started mid 90s when the Pentagon put out requests for new designs to replace the M16.

Its now super composite modular and multi calibre capable that will soon handle caseless ammo with far more efficient, reliable and capable operating systems.

We are far far past Stoner and Kalishnikov. What makes it so much better now is that the manufacturing process to make such advances rifles has finally advanced to where costs dropped enough that equipping an army with them is as much if not lower than the cost of cranking out the nearly 50 yo Stoner rifles.

The Magpul Masada being the first breakthrough that combines the best of everything with lower cost manufacture. Now that Bushmaster has bought the manufacturing rights the costs will drop even lower.

If any of you havnt heard about the Masada yet look it up especially on AR 15.com.

Still needs to be war proven but you can count on it backing up the hype.
Ive been hanging on every shred of the Pentagons new rifle program since it
began.

The Masada IS the best assault rifle ever made. There is NO excuse for the Pentagon not to make it the new M-8(thats the designation for the next US main battle rifle). The changeover to caseless ammo will be flawless with this
system.

After the Masada? You can forget laser rifles. Start thinking rail-guns. Eventually developed into practicle and fieldable main battle rifles. No gunpowder and no recoil whatsoever throwing tungsten rounds at thousands of miles per hour with laser flat ballistics for miles.

But for now the Masada is the worlds deadliest assault rifle dominating all categories perfecting the modular gas operated system and able to change calibres in under a minute for whatever size round the operator thinks will be most effective for a given situation makes its lethality unbeatable.

The Massada/Bushmaster is a great 5.56 or the HK G36k. There is still allot to be said for the M4/AR15 rifles, still limited by the .22 cal projectile, but they will do the job, the 20 inch bbl is better then the shorter 16'.

As for an all around assault rifle, the AK 47 is the top dog. I too have seen the 200 yard test, and I would bet the AK was not sighted in, any rifle should be sighted in for any kind of meaningful comparison. Another thing is the AK or any rifle can be in accurate with crappy ammo, the 7.62x39 has some really poor ammo out there.

There is no BEST rifle out there, a calm, well trained shoother with an SKS is more dangerous then a poor rifleman with a $3000.00 tricked out Wilson super gun.

Edit to add, there may be better rifles in the works for the future, but the AK/AR is going to be around for a long, long time, as is the ammo. Having the newest/latest/greatest is not what counts when the bullets are flying, not even close.

[edit on 25-5-2008 by freecell]

I'm with Northwolf on this one. The Rk 95 is a very good rifle. It has all the advantages of teh AK but with most of its problems fixed. The sights are as good as any M16 or M4 and the ergonomics is great as well. My only problem with it was that it was a bit front-heavy which took some getting used to.

The folding stock is also worth it's weight in gold (even though I missed the fact that you could put your entire cleaning kit in the butt on the Rk 62 and not just the cleaning rod). A folding stock is much more convient (since it makes the weapon shorter) than just an adjustable one.

Some people have a problem with the fact that the safety ctach goes from Safe to Full auto to Single shot. I don't. In any situation where you have to keep the weapon on the safe (peace-keeping missions for example) it's actually an advantage. The reflex is to just slam the safety in the bottom. If you do that with M16-style safety catches (the Swedish versions of the G3 or FN FNC for example) you risk putting it on full auto and you might end up firing ten shots instead of the intended three.

The fact that you NEVER get jams is also a huge plus in my book. I'm not saying that M16 jam all the time, it's just that the Rk NEVER jams. I had a 40 year old Rk62 for six months (before I got the 95) and it jammed on one occassion and that was because the clip was full of sand.

All this being said, I'm not saying that the Rk is the best weapon but if I could choose one weapon to bring with me in any given situation teh Rk 95 would be my only choice.

Thanks for letting me say my bit.

Let me add my two cents worth here. My favorite and I have fired many. Is the FN/Fal .308 with the 20 round clip. Has the stopping power to drop 'em at 500 yards and great at 50 yards. The only problem is the .308 round is getting harder and harder to find. Luckily I have put away enough to ensure I can pretty much take any type weapon I need at a later date if it becomes necessary.

"Gentleman........prepare to defend yourselves." Top Sargent, "We Were Soldiers"

Originally posted by Vasa Croe
I am kinda partial to this one

Ah a real man

Originally posted by irongunner

I think some thing else needs to be said, on a thread like this telling stories about "a friend's experience" or something you read/saw/heard doesn't cut it when you have real shooters that have used these rifles personally to kill.

This is very true i agree with that fine statement.

as far as assult rifles go, i favor the HK 91. its a 762x51 that can hit a target at over 500 meters easily. i have owned my hk for about six years or so and have never had any problems with it.

I'll admit that I skipped over more than half the posts before replying. Sorry if this has already been said. Gun owners will NEVER agree on something like this. It's like 1911 vs. Glock, .40 vs. .45, etc. There is no perfect gun or cartridge for every situation. A gun is never deadly, it's the guy behind the gun.

reply to post by pinpoint sniper(1)


From what I have seen and experienced in the military, the 7.62x39 AK-47 is the most used and thus, most deadly.

the M4 is a good gun the bullet is designed to spin round and shatter in side the target but sometime the bullet spins round in flight and hits the target but does less damage. But if you are looking for accuracy then the SA80 is the best gun as it has been voted the most accurate AS rifle or the LSW which is an LMG version on the SA80

[edit on 18-2-2010 by 1992 SWFC]

I vote for

-Bushmaster ACR (formerly Magpul Masada)

Enhanced/hybrid version of the M16 and AK47...cant beat that, and its got a nice pricetag.



definitely pickin one of those bad boys up.


I also vote for:

-CornerShot

OK so maybe its not a rifle per say, but being able to switch between a handgun, a grenade launcher, or the new 5.56 mini assault rifle attachment is awesome, and being able to shoot from around corners is just a downright nasty advantage.

'Sorry if my first post makes me seem like an asshole, but a lot of people seem to be basing their judgments off of videogames, conjecture, or bad history/discovery channel specials.' True. To fully understand this subject, many hours of study are needed. Skimming through a couple of articles and playing call of duty doesn't qaulify.

'The most deadly/efficient rifle in the world today is indisputably the M16A2-A4 series and its cousin, the M4. It's ergonomic, very accurate, light, accepts a wide range of optics and other "tacticool" gear.' This I must disagree with. The AKM assault rifle (which has been unchanged since 1959) is no heavier than the M-16, and it is actually shorter in length. It is fairly accurate too, if the weapon is kept in optimal condition, and the shooter has experience with it. True, it is not as accurate as the M-16, because the barrel is shorter, as is the sight radius. Also, the bullets are larger (more drag, and more recoil), and the long stroke gas system has a stronger recoil impulse than a direct impingement system. But it is not nearly as innacurate as some people think. Modern versions accept the same optics and mods that the 16 does, with the additional advantages of being much cheaper, simpler, more reliable, and more durable. It is produced in far higher numbers than the 16. The 7.62x39mm bullet has more momentum than the 5.56x45mm (meaning it has more stoping power), and higher inertia (it is less easily deflected, giving it a superior hard barrier penetration ability). Although I do concede that the M-16 has superior ergenomics, is more controllable on fully automatic, and is always wielded by superior soldiers and marksmen.