The AR vs. AK Debate May Soon Come To A Close: The Faxon Firearms ARAK

reply to post by netwarrior


That will have to wait. Im going to bed right now. Nearly midnight here and I have to fly NVGs tomorrow evening. Luckily for me the Army lets me use some good ones for free.

Suffice to say you're not missing much. Less accuracy and more expensive than just sticking to the 7.62x39.

There are already piston driven ARs on the market. I don't see anything to make this particular model stand out. The only difference looks to be that Faxon will be using a long stroke piston instead of a short stroke piston.

reply to post by allenidaho


That's not the only thing they've changed. The FAL adjustable gas regulator, the entire bolt assembly, the quick barrel change, adjustable ambidextrous non-reciprocating charging handle. They've gone a lot further than simply building a piston AR upper.

reply to post by allenidaho


i am with ya. The gas piston does have some advantages over direct gas, however, all the stories you hear about burying an Ak 47, burning, submerging them in mud etc are just that, stories. The reason they are so popular is because they are so cheap and easy to manufacture, hell the receiver is stamped sheet metal.

The Russians replaced the AKM, (a refined Ak-47) in the 1970's with the AK-74, which also changed rounds, they use the 5.45x39 . The chambering was changed for a couple of reasons, one being the smaller ammo is lighter, so they can carry more (same reason the 5.56 NATO came about) secondly, the 7.62x39 round is not truly as stable ballistically speaking as commonly believed, especially from the AK platform.

So, if the AK-47, a weapon designed in the 1944 and in service in 1946 was so awesome, why was it replaced with the AKM, (ak type 4) in 1959 then the AK 74 in the late 70's and the beloved 7.62x39 round replaced in the 70's as well because of poor performance?

Looks a lot like the Adcor Bear.

Originally posted by SM2
reply to post by allenidaho

 

i am with ya. The gas piston does have some advantages over direct gas, however, all the stories you hear about burying an Ak 47, burning, submerging them in mud etc are just that, stories. The reason they are so popular is because they are so cheap and easy to manufacture, hell the receiver is stamped sheet metal.

Horse apples. I've done it. Well, maybe not burning but all the rest of it, yes. And *some* receivers are stamped sheet metal. They do have milled ones as well. I'm not a fan as it adds excess weight to an already heavy rifle.

reply to post by projectvxn


Nice Weapon.

The upper will retail for $999 with a 5.56mm barrel, $1099 with a .300 BLK barrel and $1299 for both 5.56mm and .300 BLK barrels.

Faxon Firearms ARAK Upper Receiver

Price is good too.

reply to post by netwarrior


Well, as the saying goes......Screen shot or it didnt happen. The Ak rifles will not fire reliably once submerged fully in mud. Yes, they are resistant to dust and sand and water, but so is my AR. Yes you can get away without maintaining an AK well, but seriously, if you depend on that rifle to protect you and your family, why would you not maintain it carefully?

I really believe that the whole AR vs AK debate is based on personal preference mostly due to the style, myths and urban legends (about both rifles) and very little actual difference in function and reliability. If someone just plain likes an ak or ar better, then fine, just say so, no need to try and justify it, but to say that the ar is unreliable is just plain hogwash. That whole reputation came out of vietnam when Uncle Sam decided he would try to save money on ammo and used ball powder instead of stick powder which caused fouling, which lead to the forward assist and chrome bores being used on the M-16 a1. It was the ammo not the rifle, had they used the ammo specified by the manufacturer it would have been much better.

The AK vs AR argument has been beaten to death all over the internet since the beginning, but for some reason I still enjoy reading what people have to say about the platforms and the differences between them.

Here is a thread on NES you guys might enjoy. One of the members makes an AK out of a $2 shovel. Yes, a shovel. Surprisingly enough, it is quite accurate!

Shovel into AK

Originally posted by SM2
reply to post by netwarrior

 

Well, as the saying goes......Screen shot or it didnt happen. Ok but i'm taking off my Eotech. It's a pain to get dried mud out of the crevices between the buttons. Might be a week or two til i get back out to the range. And The Ak rifles will not fire reliably once submerged fully in mud. Yes, they are resistant to dust and sand and water, but so is my AR. Yes you can get away without maintaining an AK well, but seriously, if you depend on that rifle to protect you and your family, why would you not maintain it carefully? Because I live in a swamp. It happens.

I really believe that the whole AR vs AK debate is based on personal preference mostly due to the style, myths and urban legends (about both rifles) and very little actual difference in function and reliability. If someone just plain likes an ak or ar better, then fine, just say so, no need to try and justify it, but to say that the ar is unreliable is just plain hogwash. That whole reputation came out of vietnam when Uncle Sam decided he would try to save money on ammo and used ball powder instead of stick powder which caused fouling, which lead to the forward assist and chrome bores being used on the M-16 a1. It was the ammo not the rifle, had they used the ammo specified by the manufacturer it would have been much better. Agreement. Lowest bidder gets soldiers killed and it sucks.

The AR is unreliable as to MY standards, meaning if I fall into a damn gator hole I don't want to have to field strip my weapon. I want my weapons to fire no matter what quality of ammo it gets fed because someday you may not be able to pick and choose your ammo. I don't have to worry with an AK. An AR...well, lets just say I'm going to wonder if it's going to work or not. Don't take my word for it, go register for the Warrior Talk forums or spend some time on the Tactical Response forums and talk to people that shoot more in 1 year than I have shot in the past 5. Ask the guys at Red Jacket what's underneath their beds. They trust the AK and the Glock. Why? Because it works and it works every time.

reply to post by anton74


This has actually been done since the late 80s. Its just been used by the South Koreans. We would never adopt a rifle with anything that has to do with AK technology. Anyway, the assault rifle is the Daewoo K2. I have been saying this might be one of the best rifles out there. Happy to see the concept coming up in the states

www.militaryfactory.com...

reply to post by Kodred95


That looks almost exactly like the StG 44 Sturmgewehr, but with a rail. I understand that almost all modern assault rifles hold a lineage from the StG, but the daewoo looks like a carbon copy!

There is a Red Jacket joke in here somewhere. ;-)

Apparently some of the AK users haven't seen the future weapons segment on the HK 416 lol ...

the reality is especially with a short stroke gas piston and a reputable and quality built AR you can put them through a large amount of punishment and have them continue to fire...

Also the bouncing off the windshield myth in regards to AR bullets is just that a myth... I've tested my AR on several windshields at varying degrees of obliquity and never had it fail to penetrate yet at the same time I tend to double tap just to be safe lol.

I've owned quite a number of both AR's and AK's as well as Fal's and etc and at the end of the day what works best for me is the AR platform. But at the same time I hold nothing but respect for the AK platform which has it's uses but I'll take my 500 meter reach out and touch you reliably option. As well as my ability to take very quick follow up shots.

This new upper does look to be a major quantum leap .... I am wondering how compatible it would be with 7.62x39, 5.45, 6.5 grendel, or other chamberings and or the MGI military modular lower.

Oh and this is not the first company to use a long stroke gas piston in an AR variant there are one or even two companies already producing them.

For me, not that I own one yet, there is only one gun to lust after.

PTR 91F

All of the benefits, none of the faults of the AR/AK.

If you don't know what it is, look it up, then buy one.

reply to post by projectvxn



the difference in recoil is due to the internal ballistics of moving a
5.56 mm (.222) round down the barrel as opposed to moving a
7.62 mm (.308) round down the barrel.
The 5.56 mm round is in the neighborhood of 50-65 grains and the
7.62 round is roughly 150-180 grains.

Study the laws of physics before you comment on internal ballistics, external ballistics and terminal ballistics. PLEASE!

That's a great looking rifle! It will be exciting to see how it performs.

reply to post by slugger9787


So you're telling me that the way a rifle is design and how its components operate have nothing to do with the way it performs?

Perhaps study weapons design before commenting on how it handles recoil forces.

Although this isn't the first hybrid manufactured, it is still awesome that people realize the advantages of gas piston.