PDA

View Full Version : AR vs AK: Let's talk about accuracy


MilitaryArms
12-04-2011, 8:26 PM
n98LszJAlTE

orangeusa
12-04-2011, 8:36 PM
Glock vs. world

.45 cal vs. 9mm

arghghgh.

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 8:39 PM
Everything that man said I agree with 100%!!!! AK74 is the beast for me!!!!

xSARSx
12-04-2011, 8:54 PM
dont even start with this... its been talked over and over buried then dugged back up and talked it over again before. have you tried using the search buttong yet? there are lots of thread like that already and can be found all over youtube.

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 9:02 PM
Actually most stuff has to do with the ak47 n ar15, not the ak74

Mamluke
12-04-2011, 9:15 PM
Good video....

The AR 15 round has a better chance of keeping as straight of a line firing thru light obstacles, such as brush, wooden sticks, foliage etc... than that nasty 5.45 round.
Its because of the ballistic design of the round, and no fault of the AK itself!
The air pocket/cavity inside the nose of the round pushes the heavier/denser rear forward upon hitting brush & the round yaws & over steers, changing direction.
This design causes horrific wounds when impacting living tissues BTW! So IMO, the 5.45 needs a clear line of sight to target!

Furthermore, the light weight of this round gives it a flat trajectory, arguably flatter than the M4. The air pocket contribute to this as the round begins to sail/lift nearing 2/3 of its terminal velocity, with the air slightly lifting the lighter nose up as the round pushes forward. Targets hit at these further stages experienced a slashing wound like this: ( / )

I'd be curious to have the OP put these things to fire thru sick brushes or foliage, I bet the M4 will be more accurate!

So, depending on which environment in SHTF situation, If I had to choose between the two, I'd pick me up an M4/AR15 rifle over the AK74. Just because of this nasty round it uses!

My two cents .... :D

m03
12-04-2011, 9:25 PM
That's a decent video on the subject. Yay.

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 9:31 PM
Ak74= reliabilty+wound damage+3moa
AR15=wound damage+2moa
I'll still take the ak74!

zfields
12-04-2011, 9:33 PM
I cant see worth a damn past 200 yards, Ill stick with 762x39 softpoints.

Mamluke
12-04-2011, 9:36 PM
I cant see worth a damn past 200 yards, Ill stick with 762x39 softpoints.

Prolific! I'm in the same boat, I think I'm gonna stick to my 7.62 AK!

.............. :oji:

zfields
12-04-2011, 9:41 PM
For what its worth, my next AK will be a 545, possibly SBR'd for 3 gun, just for fun : )

cheap ammo + more trigger time > the joy of my stockpile of 762x39

tuna quesadilla
12-04-2011, 9:42 PM
Ak74= reliabilty+wound damage+3moa
AR15=reliability+wound damage+ergonomics+2moa
I'll still take the ak74!

Fixed it for you. :)

zfields
12-04-2011, 9:45 PM
Fixed it for you. :)

Meh, I find ARs to be a PITA.


But im dumb. I like simple.

Code7inOaktown
12-04-2011, 9:47 PM
It's a pretty decent video as AK accuracy is really not that bad. And AR reliability isn't really that bad either.

but I think there is disagreement as to the effectiveness of the 5.45mm. Respected ballistics expert Dr. Gary K. Roberts: "While I can't vouch for the accuracy, according to some SF colleagues who took time to investigate this bit of trivia during their recent Afghan sojourn, "poison", in this context of "poison bullet", refers to the small amount of poison from a bee/wasp or other insect sting. In other words, the Muj were saying the 5.45x39 mm hit like an insect bite, not the hammer of Thor...

http://www.m4carbine.net/showpost.php?p=598102&postcount=101

I also disagree on the point of a support mechanism. With the immense popularity of the AR-15 platform in the US, parts, ammunition and, well, just everything easily outnumbers AK-74 parts and ammo by a pretty significant factor. That makes it easy to get the equipment and ammo before whatever fantasy SHTF situation as well as after that fantasy SHTF situation.

And just exactly would you need for that "theoretical" SHTF anyway? Do you really think you're going to be in your anti-zombie bunker cranking off 10,000 rounds of ammo with one rifle? Or is more likely that you'll expend 100 to 150 rounds before the fantasy SHTF is declared over?

Finally, I'd also argue that it's really about a good rifle example, vs. a bad rifle example. It really should be about having a good rifle period that you can rely on. That is, a good AR-15 that you can count on is of far more value than a bad AK-74 that is unreliable. Likewise, a good AK-74 is worth a lot more than a bad AR-15 that has issues.

vikingm03
12-04-2011, 9:48 PM
Here's another vote for the ar-15. Accuracy is everything.

tuna quesadilla
12-04-2011, 9:48 PM
Meh, I find ARs to be a PITA.


But im dumb. I like simple.

Frankly I think people should use whatever they're comfortable with, be it an AR, an AK, an FAL, etc... The only requirement being that whatever they choose is from a reputable manufacturer and free of gimmicks. ;)

RRichie09
12-04-2011, 9:54 PM
This is not directed at the OP. Just wanted to say that, but I don't understand the motivation for those that feel the need to talk sh*t about the products in direct competition with what they own. Like the Ford vs. Chevy. Does it really make you feel better about your product if you talk sh*t about the other product? Does it make your product better? You got it cause you liked it and it fit your criteria. The other person bought the other product cause they liked it and it fit their criteria. Are you really that insecure?

jeep7081
12-04-2011, 9:55 PM
deleted

tuna quesadilla
12-04-2011, 9:56 PM
This is not directed at the OP. Just wanted to say that, but I don't understand the motivation for those that feel the need to talk sh*t about the products in direct competition with what they own. Like the Ford vs. Chevy. Does it really make you feel better about your product if you talk sh*t about the other product? Does it make your product better? You got it cause you liked it and it fit your criteria. The other person bought the other product cause they liked it and it fit their criteria. Are you really that insecure?

Come talk to me when you're ready to sell that CBR and get a real bike, squid.



















:sweatdrop:

FourLoko
12-04-2011, 10:01 PM
I learned that you shot faster with the AK than the AR.

Good effort though.

SKSer45
12-04-2011, 10:03 PM
yeah saw this video early and commented on it :) Like i Said AR is a great range toy/competition rifle, AK-47 is a battle hardened and combat tested. AK-47 FTW!

jeep7081
12-04-2011, 10:07 PM
I learned that you shot faster with the AK than the AR.

Good effort though.

I noticed that too. He shoot the AK faster than the AR. :cool:

dieselpower
12-04-2011, 10:07 PM
all he proved was he can shoot an AR off a rest better than he can shoot an AK off a rest.

17+1
12-04-2011, 10:08 PM
Within 30 seconds: "Which one is the best combat rifle?"

I shut if off.

Who cares? I use my A2 for target shooting. In the very unlikely event that I did use it for self defense, I doubt I'd be firing enough rounds to realize the superior AK reliability. The chances I will use it in actual combat are even lower.

Furthermore, a lot of us AR shooters don't shoot military ammo and can milk sub-MOA accuracy out of tuned handloads, even with a chrome lined barrel.

;)

zfields
12-04-2011, 10:08 PM
I noticed that too. He shoot the AK faster than the AR. :cool:

Proof that AKs are just more fun to shoot fast.

tuna quesadilla
12-04-2011, 10:15 PM
yeah saw this video early and commented on it :) Like i Said AR is a great range toy/competition rifle, AK-47 is a battle hardened and combat tested. AK-47 FTW!

Pure ignorance.

Please explain to me why the AR-15 is neither "battle-hardened" nor "combat-tested." :)

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 10:18 PM
This is not directed at the OP. Just wanted to say that, but I don't understand the motivation for those that feel the need to talk sh*t about the products in direct competition with what they own. Like the Ford vs. Chevy. Does it really make you feel better about your product if you talk sh*t about the other product? Does it make your product better? You got it cause you liked it and it fit your criteria. The other person bought the other product cause they liked it and it fit their criteria. Are you really that insecure?

This is not always true... I own 2 chevy trucks but i'm a Ford guy theres nothing like a f250
Chevy sux harry b@11z but I own 2 rite now and not a single ford truck "she crashed it 11 months ago"
I use to own AR's and loved em but then I shot and ak and wanted one. Now all 9 AR's are gone and 13 soon to be 14 ak's adorn my house.

RRichie09
12-04-2011, 10:43 PM
Come talk to me when you're ready to sell that CBR and get a real bike, squid.




:sweatdrop:

Please tell me you're not talking about a Harley... :p


This is not always true... I own 2 chevy trucks but i'm a Ford guy theres nothing like a f250
Chevy sux harry b@11z but I own 2 rite now and not a single ford truck "she crashed it 11 months ago"
I use to own AR's and loved em but then I shot and ak and wanted one. Now all 9 AR's are gone and 13 soon to be 14 ak's adorn my house.

I was ranting about the people who this applies too. I don't have any problems if you only have an AR and would only get an AR... or if you have both... or anything else. I just have problems with people who always talk down about the AK because they have an AR or vice versa. The thinking behind it just blows my mind haha


all he proved was he can shoot an AR off a rest better than he can shoot an AK off a rest.

Or that the ammo for the AR was better suited for it. haha.

bighead
12-04-2011, 10:57 PM
I can only imagine how many people that own $2500 AR's cringe when they watch this video LOL.

bighead
12-04-2011, 11:02 PM
And to the OP, thanks for taking the time to make the video and post it.I enjoy watching your videos.Try to understand speaking or showing video against the AR platform will start a pursefight every time.

tuna quesadilla
12-04-2011, 11:04 PM
Please tell me you're not talking about a Harley... :p




No no. I said REAL (http://www.ducati.com/) motorcycle.

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 11:10 PM
And to the OP, thanks for taking the time to make the video and post it.I enjoy watching your videos.Try to understand speaking or showing video against the AR platform will start a pursefight every time.

Wait so the op is the video guy? You ro,k op lol

elSquid
12-04-2011, 11:18 PM
I can only imagine how many people that own $2500 AR's cringe when they watch this video LOL.

Nah, those guys cringe when they see the "Filthy 14"...

http://www.slip2000.com/art-swat2.html

-- Michael

MrPlink
12-04-2011, 11:28 PM
Sturm is no rookie to this game, and Im sure he is fully aware of the fires this will start, but Im guessing he made it as a general comparison for those who are not as illuminated as we forum commandos

NorCalK9.com
12-04-2011, 11:28 PM
I can only imagine how many people that own $2500 AR's cringe when they watch this video LOL.

Or when theyre getting pelted by hundreds of shell casings by the 350 dollar rusty ak on their left lol. Jk I actually like AR's I just dont want to own one

Maddog5150
12-05-2011, 3:16 AM
:yawn: booooooring. what makes this video different from the rantings of someone on a web forum? neat graphics and a video :rolleyes:

I laugh when I hear about reliability of a "SHTF" situation that people fantasize about so much. We have badasses in the military like seals, SF, Rangers, Recon that go through hell with thier rifles and dont *****. Guys who come out of salt water, live in mud for weeks at a time and yeah, they may have a malfunction or two but still get the job done.
Maybe in the online gun communities fantasies they may be doing that stuff but in reality, in "SHTF", people arent going to be emerging from a swamp or salt water where the difference in reliability between an AR or AK will matter

tuna quesadilla
12-05-2011, 3:17 AM
:yawn: booooooring. what makes this video different from the rantings of someone on a web forum? neat graphics and a video :rolleyes:

But... but... he proved that he could hit a target out to 300 yards by shooting five shots at 100 yards! :jump:

Standard
12-05-2011, 5:57 AM
Everything that man said I agree with 100%!!!! AK74 is the beast for me!!!!

Same here. I've owned both AKs and ARs, and like he said, the AR was more accurate on paper, but once I stood up and started shooting steel at 200 yards, practical accuracy was the same. I hit the target with the same frequency with both weapons.
I love both weapons, but the AK is not as inaccurate as most people think, especially the 74.

Standard
12-05-2011, 6:00 AM
BTW, thanks for the test OP, I always enjoy your videos.

Kinsel83
12-05-2011, 6:10 AM
Both will do their job. I will stick with the AK system. I don't mind shooting 223/556 out of my Saiga!

AlexDD
12-05-2011, 6:34 AM
If you look closely in the video, the author is using Mojo peep sights.

Not to stir a debate, but these can be highly inaccurate since the eye is too far from the aperture. He did damn well for using them.

I would like to see the channel test with notch sights that came with the AK platform if you want a tue comparison from a purist viewpoint on each weapon based upon one person shooting ability on stock platforms.

Want to make it even, put a Texas dog leg rail with peep sights on the AK then test

Or alternatively put a T1 on both then test.

The current test to me seems flawed even for a one person test.

Ps test a 5.56 AK with the above recommendations to the M4 to take out the variability of ammo using the same type of ammo.

Yes I know the 556 AKs aren't as reliable from what I have heard but you control variable of ammo and single out the mechanics of the platform.

Opposite use a SW 5.45 upper for the 5 shot group against the AK74.

I would also suggest 10 shot groups fwiw.

Keep the videos coming.

MilitaryArms
12-05-2011, 6:57 AM
It's a pretty decent video as AK accuracy is really not that bad. And AR reliability isn't really that bad either.

While I agree for the most part, there are those that have had very different experiences.

http://www.hotsr.com/news/WireHeadlines/2009/10/12/us-weapons-failure-in-2008-firefight-rai-33.php

I know from first hand experience that the M16 requires regular maintenance in less than ideal environments. I learned to live with it.

As a side note, here are the results of the US Army's sand tests from 2006. They didn't include an AK, but my gut tells me it would have done much better than the M4, perhaps as well as the XM8.

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m167/tharmsen/dust_test_graph.jpg

but I think there is disagreement as to the effectiveness of the 5.45mm. Respected ballistics expert Dr. Gary K. Roberts: "While I can't vouch for the accuracy, according to some SF colleagues who took time to investigate this bit of trivia during their recent Afghan sojourn, "poison", in this context of "poison bullet", refers to the small amount of poison from a bee/wasp or other insect sting. In other words, the Muj were saying the 5.45x39 mm hit like an insect bite, not the hammer of Thor...

http://www.m4carbine.net/showpost.php?p=598102&postcount=101
It's at least as effective as the 5.56 round regardless of the "poison bullet" mythology. What can be said is that the 7N6 round is designed to be unstable once it hits something. Does that make it more lethal than 5.56? That's open for debate, it's not something I touched upon in the video.

I also disagree on the point of a support mechanism. With the immense popularity of the AR-15 platform in the US, parts, ammunition and, well, just everything easily outnumbers AK-74 parts and ammo by a pretty significant factor. That makes it easy to get the equipment and ammo before whatever fantasy SHTF situation as well as after that fantasy SHTF situation.
By fantasy, you mean like Katrina? I would imagine there are quite a few people wishing it were a fantasy.

If your survival plans call for picking up ammo off the street or finding AR15/M16's laying in the streets for spare parts, I would say your plans aren't the best laid.

During Katrina, how many cases of 5.56 do you think the locals found floating down the street? How many AR15/M16's do you think they found lying on the ground?

If you buy a rifle for self defense, you better buy the ammo to go with it. Spare parts? Buy a rifle that's likely not to need them, or if you feel like your gas rings on your AR's bolt will fail you when you least expect it or that you might lose your firing pin retaining pin, buy extras and pack them in your bag.

And just exactly would you need for that "theoretical" SHTF anyway? Do you really think you're going to be in your anti-zombie bunker cranking off 10,000 rounds of ammo with one rifle? Or is more likely that you'll expend 100 to 150 rounds before the fantasy SHTF is declared over?
No, I don't. What makes you think that I would?

In a scenario like Katrina there's a very high probability your weapon will be exposed to debris and rather hostile conditions. Do you want to worry about the state of your rifle or would you rather focus on other issues and worry less about the condition of the rifle? That's what it boils down to.

Finally, I'd also argue that it's really about a good rifle example, vs. a bad rifle example. It really should be about having a good rifle period that you can rely on. That is, a good AR-15 that you can count on is of far more value than a bad AK-74 that is unreliable. Likewise, a good AK-74 is worth a lot more than a bad AR-15 that has issues.
You write that script and I'll put it to video. :)

SKSer45
12-05-2011, 7:43 AM
Pure ignorance.

Please explain to me why the AR-15 is neither "battle-hardened" nor "combat-tested." :)

ok easy. When I was in Iraq around Fallujah those little things called Sand Storms Happened quite often and would block out the sun. Even with a barrel cover and socks they gave us for our rifle would still jam. Sure you can clean it but for what? CLP made it worse some times and it would be like a soup in the chamber.

At the range on qual days in a controlled environment it would jam at least every other firing line. So what I could shoot the nuts off a nat at 500 yards? Happened alot during Rapid Fire Session even then, still kept jamming on slow fire.

There is a reason why the teach you tap, rack bang... Maybe because they know its going to happen.

Hows that for ignorance and combat tested?

wash
12-05-2011, 8:03 AM
I wish the unreliable AR myth would just die.

If you said that an AR would have 900 stoppages in 60,000 rounds of sand testing, that works out to 15 per 1,000 rounds. Not a big deal if you clean your gun on occasion and avoid sand.

The only stoppages I've had were directly related to a lack of lube. Solving that is as simple as getting in the habit of keeping your AR wet with lube.

In sand, use your dust cover and make sure you don't let your magazines fill up with sand.

I would treat any rifle that way, AR or AK and I wouldn't expect an AK to cycle if the magazines were full of sand.

An AK may be more tolerant of some sand in the receiver but that's about it.

An AR does have some wear areas like gas rings and bolts but a simple ~5,000 round replacement cycle or carrying a spare takes care of that.

When it comes to accuracy, how exactly do you buy an accurate AK?

It seems to me you put your money down and take your chances.

To buy an accurate AR, you buy an upper or barrel, put the rest together with just about anything you want and bam, you've got an AR that will shoot 1 MOA if the trigger doesn't mess up the shooter that much.

Just Saturday I spoke to a friend and he was telling me "this Arsenal AK100 clone is just as accurate as an M4" but what he didn't mention was that he probably could have bought an M4 clone cheaper.

I like both ARs and AKs but it isn't even like a Ford vs. Chevy debate, it's like a Jeep Rubicon vs. a Subaru WRX STI. The STI is more refined, it will go almost anywhere and it costs a little more. The Rubicon will go some places that the STI can't. Usually it's pretty easy to drive around the places where the STI can't go.

zfields
12-05-2011, 8:05 AM
I wish the unreliable AR myth would just die.

If you said that an AR would have 900 stoppages in 60,000 rounds of sand testing, that works out to 15 per 1,000 rounds. Not a big deal if you clean your gun on occasion and avoid sand.

Just Saturday I spoke to a friend and he was telling me "this Arsenal AK100 clone is just as accurate as an M4" but what he didn't mention was that he probably could have bought an M4 clone cheaper.

.


15 /1000 is not something I would consider reliable. Thats just me personally, so take it for what it is.

And that AK100 clone would be as accurate as a saiga out of the box, so how much he spent on it doesnt really make a difference.

FiveSeven
12-05-2011, 8:36 AM
If you look closely in the video, the author is using Mojo peep sights.

Not to stir a debate, but these can be highly inaccurate since the eye is too far from the aperture. He did damn well for using them.



True, at least in my experience as well. I shot much better groups with stock blade sights on my M48 Mauser than with Mojo sight that made groups open up quite a bit.
Good video nonetheless. Much better then others out there.

wash
12-05-2011, 8:41 AM
Sand testing...

Eliminate the sand and the stoppage rate almost goes to zero if you maintain it a little.

Once again, sand testing will cause problems for anything and that includes AKs.

sonnyt650
12-05-2011, 8:47 AM
When I read about jammed M4s in Iraq or Afghanistan I always wonder whether there were instances where the extra accuracy of the AR saved the day. It seems that in life and death people always focus on the negatives so that the small victories are forgotten by the wayside. And yeah let's give them piston kits already jeez.

tuna quesadilla
12-05-2011, 8:50 AM
ok easy. When I was in Iraq around Fallujah those little things called Sand Storms Happened quite often and would block out the sun. Even with a barrel cover and socks they gave us for our rifle would still jam. Sure you can clean it but for what? CLP made it worse some times and it would be like a soup in the chamber.

At the range on qual days in a controlled environment it would jam at least every other firing line. So what I could shoot the nuts off a nat at 500 yards? Happened alot during Rapid Fire Session even then, still kept jamming on slow fire.

There is a reason why the teach you tap, rack bang... Maybe because they know its going to happen.

Hows that for ignorance and combat tested?

I would urge you to speak with a Mr. Merriam and a Mr. Webster about the meaning of the word tested. After doing such, please reconsider your position about the post you quoted. :)

jeep7081
12-05-2011, 8:54 AM
15 /1000 is not something I would consider reliable. Thats just me personally, so take it for what it is.

And that AK100 clone would be as accurate as a saiga out of the box, so how much he spent on it doesnt really make a difference.

I have shot AR's with FTF after 40rds! The AR's were brand new.

So, I would have to agree with you.

Saiga $299, average AR to build $700. Like I have have always said, Saiga is #1, the struggle for 2nd place continues...

tuna quesadilla
12-05-2011, 9:00 AM
While I agree for the most part, there are those that have had very different experiences.

http://www.hotsr.com/news/WireHeadlines/2009/10/12/us-weapons-failure-in-2008-firefight-rai-33.php


The article you linked is very vague. It seems to reference the battle at Wanat.

If memory serves, the soldier's M4 had failed in part because he was doing non-stop mag dumps through it as if it were a squad automatic weapon. Am I correct or am I recalling a different firefight?

tuna quesadilla
12-05-2011, 9:02 AM
I have shot AR's with FTF after 40rds! The AR's were brand new.

So, I would have to agree with you.

Saiga $299, average AR to build $700. Like I have have always said, Saiga is #1, the struggle for 2nd place continues...

And I've shot AKs that didn't run worth a damn. Your sample size of two is statistically inconsequential. The truth is that all modern firearm platforms are plenty reliable when built correctly by a reputable manufacturer.

I can't help but wonder about people who would rather argue minute differences in equipment than discuss training and tactics. :)

jeep7081
12-05-2011, 9:10 AM
And I've shot AKs that didn't run worth a damn. Your sample size of two is statistically inconsequential. The truth is that all modern firearm platforms are plenty reliable when built correctly by a reputable manufacturer.

I can't help but wonder about people who would rather argue minute differences in equipment than discuss training and tactics. :)

Your big words, and your small stab at my comment makes no difference. Botton line that was my personal experience.

Personally, if you like your AR, go at it. I think it's great, the people who are loading up with AR's for the SHTF. I'll factor in the amount of people with AR's who have a cleaning kit in their BOB, just makes my job easier. ;)

Lone_Gunman
12-05-2011, 9:15 AM
If I could get a good reliable M4 for $499 and surplus 5.56 for $130 per thousand I might go with the M4, but I can't.

Saiga in 5.45 --------$299
Dealer fee+DROS -----$50
Bullet Guide-----------$25
Conversion kit -------$125
====================
$499


Show me the M4 that I can get for $499 and the $130 per thousand mil-surp 5.56...

jeep7081
12-05-2011, 9:18 AM
If I could get a good reliable M4 for $499 and surplus 5.56 for $130 per thousand I might go with the M4, but I can't.

Saiga in 5.45 --------$299
Dealer fee+DROS ----$50
Bullet Guide----------$25
Conversion kit -------$125
Reliable--------------$ priceless
====================
$499


Show me the M4 that I can get for $499 and the $130 per thousand mil-surp 5.56...

Fixed it for ya ;)

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 9:18 AM
You know, you AR guys make me lmfao! The op truly didnt say nothing bad about the AR, he just said he'd rather have an ak74 in a crisis. His test blatantly showed the AR more accurate of an inch to the ak74, I personally can pull chest sized shots at 300 yards standing with iron sights with an ak74, and thats more than enough accurate for me.

Lone_Gunman
12-05-2011, 9:19 AM
Fixed it for ya ;)

Word!

ZombieTactics
12-05-2011, 9:35 AM
Perspective and context are important, and often lost. The result is a failure to make apples-vs-apples comparisons. The OP's video and subsequent posts make perfect sense within their ostensible contexts, and given the limitations of his test methodology. He described what he was using, and how he used it, and what results he got ... can't get much more direct and honest than that. Most of the criticisms offered are possible only because he provided a complete set of information, rather than any attempt at obfuscation on his part.

That being said, context often gets lost when applying such information in a general sense. A lot of actual, serious testing has been done of the AR/M4 platform in very (more or less) public ways. This gives us useful data points for the specific models tested under the specific use-cases tested. If you intend to use the specific models tested in those kinds of uses cases ... bingo, you have your data!

What this means in a general AR-vs-AK comparison is quite a bit less certain. "AR" can mean a lot of different things, and "AK" can certainly mean a few as well. There are $600 AR rifles out there and $1700 AK rifles. There are $300 Saigas and $2300 LWRCs. Are we talking WASR vs. Adcor BEAR or M&P15 Sport vs. a Fullerized SGL-31? The details matter, IMHO.

Adding difficultly to the mix is that the AK reputation for reliability is based almost entirely upon anecdotal reports. If someone's AR dies on them, and they do a battlefield pickup of an AK which then save their lives ... hmm, that's a powerful emotional story but hardly equates to useful data. Lots of broken AKs are found next to dead guys too, but we don't tend to worry about when the other guy has an issue as much. There are no generally available verified reports of tests performed on the AK platform by independent labs. We have the very public comblock propaganda, but hopefully we have the sense to see that as no more reliable than some AR manufacturers ad slick in a magazine. I am told that information from the Kremlin Papers indicated that the Soviets (very quietly) admitted to each other that the AK was - technically - a "piece of crap" compared to the AR platform, but that it was an excellent design given their own unique economic, industrial and political constraints. If you can build 2-3 "pretty good" rifles for less than the comparable price of 1 "really good" rifle ... whose to say that's a bad decision for outfitting a large military?

I don't have good reason to believe that "an AK" is generally more/less accurate/reliable than "an AR" unless I know which particular AR and AK are being discussed. I tend to think of both as "pretty damned good thanks ... I want a couple more, lol". My preference is for the AK manual-of-arms, but conversely I prefer the modularity of the AR ... if only one rifle had it all, sigh.

wash
12-05-2011, 9:53 AM
A bottle of Breakfree CLP, a bore snake and a rag/piece of a shirt/napkin will solve just about any sand related stoppage on an AR (sand in the gas tube being the exception but you shouldn't get that).

So lube, a bore snake and maybe a spare bolt is all you need to stay in the fight unless you have a non-sand related malfunction.

If you really wanted to be ready for everything, carry an extra hammer spring, trigger spring, hammer, trigger, disconnector, disconector spring and a trigger pin.

That should cover everything and with the lube it's maybe 6oz of repair kit.

The AK does have the advantage that if you break a hammer pin, you can replace it with a stick.

Richard Erichsen
12-05-2011, 9:54 AM
n98LszJAlTE

As though this topic hasn't been done to death already. Fortunately he was far more pragmatic in appraising the results than many other reviews tend to be.

As mentioned in the video, if you actually have to use a rifle to protect your life from a similarly armed foe, making debilitating hits doesn't demand pinpoint accuracy. Sacrificing a little accuracy for some increase in reliability without adding substantially to the maintenance required is an important consideration.

However, none of this really seems to matter.

The SHTF type scenarios are very few and far between, most rifles of this type are used for target shooting and occasional hunting (where the caliber is permitted for the game being hunted) and people like what they like and dismiss any alternative that goes outside their familiarity, comfort zone or personal experiences.

There is no "best" there is only the appropriate tool for the task at hand. Both rifles in the review have compromises, some matter in one set of conditions and don't in others. Based on the typical uses being confined to the rifle range (and probably nowhere else) accuracy is what tends to matter and get nods of approval when you keep your groups tight. It's just not that impressive in the rifle range context to declare you managed a 3.5" group at 100 meters, but you haven't cleaned your rifle in the last 10 years/4500 rounds!

I'd still rather have a shotgun for shorter range personal protection than anything else. For more distant ranges, hunkered down with good visibility beyond 300 meters, why wouldn't I prefer a scoped rifle in .308/7.62x51 mm if I don't even have to carry it very far? In most parts of the world, a 10-11 lb. rifle is still fairly commonplace (particularly where the FAL and G3 tend to be fielded). If you aren't engaged in close quarters, house to house fighting, the short barreled light caliber carbine probably isn't the ideal implement.

It can be easy to forget given the changes in military doctrine over the decades that the whole reason for going from full power battle rifles to these small caliber intermediate arms was not for use primarily in semiautomatic modes of fire. Downscaling larger .30 caliber rifle rounds was meant to increase rate of fire and to provide more ammunition to a soldiers load for a given mass. Short bursts of fire at closer ranges were intended to increase hit probability and complex formula were presented to determine the optimal number of rounds per burst (which is where that latched 3 round burst mode that replaced full auto in weapons like the M16A2 came from).

If either of these rifles were intended primarily for carefully aimed semi-automatic fire, a larger and more powerful cartridge could have been used. The Russians and Eastern European nations were quite capable of producing accurate arms if the requirements demanded it, that was not what the AK was intended for and it's tolerances reflect a design favoring full automatic bursts rather than carefully aimed single fire.

Few armies still train soldiers to fire from the hip or chest level on the move (the original method of volley fire the "assault rifle" was intended for), the design of the section/squad has changed and higher value is placed on marksmanship than on hit probability through dispersion. The intermediate cartridge rifles are fun to shoot, but if semiautomatic is the only supported mode of fire, ranges exceed 400 meters and you might like to put meat on the table with the same rifle, you might be better served with a rifle more closely matching the "battle rifle" (or just a fairly ordinary semi-automatic hunting rifle) profile than either the AK or AR in their more typical intermediate caliber chamberings.

R

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 10:30 AM
Well lets agree to the fact that if s really did htf most of us would be on the same side so AR guys can take care of the 3000yard eyeball shots and us ak guys can hold the fort when the frogs are spraying sand everywhere!

Maddog5150
12-05-2011, 10:56 AM
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/10/18/26c93864-8396-43df-abc2-8a793c640a56.jpg

Richard Erichsen
12-05-2011, 11:05 AM
Well lets agree to the fact that if s really did htf most of us would be on the same side so AR guys can take care of the 3000yard eyeball shots and us ak guys can hold the fort when the frogs are spraying sand everywhere!

Don't count on it. Would you really trust an armed stranger walking in your general direction if the "S" really had hit the proverbial fan?

R

SKSer45
12-05-2011, 11:39 AM
I would urge you to speak with a Mr. Merriam and a Mr. Webster about the meaning of the word tested. After doing such, please reconsider your position about the post you quoted. :)

sure after a few beers I would love too. Now don't get me wrong I knew a bunch of service men that lived and breathed their M-16's A2/A4s and it did save their life. They swore and hey why not? Made in the USA, One shot one kill, etc... but nothing in the world is more scary when an AK-47 is pointed in your direction and you hear that distinctive sound. I mean just the psychological effect on that weapon gives the AK an edge.

Whats worse is even if you have body armor on you, you know that 7.62X39 is going to knock you on your *** and break some bones. That's just fact with that weapon.

Now don't get me wrong being a former Marine and having 20 rounds of 5.56 in your m-16 at your finger tips is damn good feeling but there was always that fact...not if my rifle jams but when?

Mamluke
12-05-2011, 11:40 AM
No no. I said REAL (http://www.ducati.com/) motorcycle.

Naaa.... bro, I think you mean this one ... :D

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y212/LavaBull/23057195-M.jpg


.... :P

rojocorsa
12-05-2011, 12:19 PM
Can't we all get along?

https://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.ak-47.us/Pic/AR-15/AR15vsAK47-002.jpg&sa=X&ei=WzXdTuLsG6iOiAKH7JG2Cg&ved=0CAsQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNHqLpctUY_Gfxk76wJA5Us9jU2ozg

jvpark
12-05-2011, 12:26 PM
Guys. We live in Americia. Buy them both.

ZX-10R
12-05-2011, 2:42 PM
AK accuracy is so underrated and very understated. I have both and will go AK overall but AR for accuracy.

SuperSet
12-05-2011, 3:44 PM
The article you linked is very vague. It seems to reference the battle at Wanat.

If memory serves, the soldier's M4 had failed in part because he was doing non-stop mag dumps through it as if it were a squad automatic weapon. Am I correct or am I recalling a different firefight?

Yes, that's my understanding as well. Proceedings magazine did a very good piece encapsulating different studies about the battle and the accompanying equipment problems encountered. Give a read when you get a chance:

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2010-07/what-really-happened-wanat

There's a little blurb that talks about RPM:

According to U.S. Special Operations Command's SOPMOD (special operations peculiar modification) program office, "The current sustained rate of fire for the M4A1 Carbine is 15 rounds per minute and a maximum rate of 90 [rounds] per minute for short periods in an emergency."18 Firing the M4 carbine at cyclic rates of fire of 90 to 150 rounds per minute, "which is the rate of suppressive fire associated with machine guns" for prolonged periods leads to rapid heating of the barrel and possible failure.19

Tests conducted by both the Army and by Colt indicate that "exceeding the sustained rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute will result in the weapon 'cooking off' rounds after approximately 170 rounds have been fired." If the maximum rate of fire of 90 rounds per minute "is maintained for about 540 rounds, the barrel softens and gas starts to blow by the bullet, changing the sound and size of the muzzle blast." If the operator continues to fire the weapon, the barrel will begin to droop, and finally, at about 596 rounds, the barrel will burst.

chicoredneck
12-05-2011, 3:48 PM
Have you actually ever shot living flesh with the 5.45? I have. It does not leave nasty wounds. Quite to the contrary a 22lr Hp causes more damage than the 5.45, because it just punches nice neat holes without expanding or breaking up. It does have a habit of changing direction of travel and does yaw some, but causes little damage, especially compared to the 5.56. It is a sleek bullet with a decent bc, but it is not flatter shooting than standard 5.55.

Good video....

The AR 15 round has a better chance of keeping as straight of a line firing thru light obstacles, such as brush, wooden sticks, foliage etc... than that nasty 5.45 round.
Its because of the ballistic design of the round, and no fault of the AK itself!
The air pocket/cavity inside the nose of the round pushes the heavier/denser rear forward upon hitting brush & the round yaws & over steers, changing direction.
This design causes horrific wounds when impacting living tissues BTW! So IMO, the 5.45 needs a clear line of sight to target!

Furthermore, the light weight of this round gives it a flat trajectory, arguably flatter than the M4. The air pocket contribute to this as the round begins to sail/lift nearing 2/3 of its terminal velocity, with the air slightly lifting the lighter nose up as the round pushes forward. Targets hit at these further stages experienced a slashing wound like this: ( / )

I'd be curious to have the OP put these things to fire thru sick brushes or foliage, I bet the M4 will be more accurate!

So, depending on which environment in SHTF situation, If I had to choose between the two, I'd pick me up an M4/AR15 rifle over the AK74. Just because of this nasty round it uses!

My two cents .... :D

alfred1222
12-05-2011, 3:55 PM
:popcorn:

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 4:12 PM
Have you actually ever shot living flesh with the 5.45? I have. It does not leave nasty wounds. Quite to the contrary a 22lr Hp causes more damage than the 5.45, because it just punches nice neat holes without expanding or breaking up. It does have a habit of changing direction of travel and does yaw some, but causes little damage, especially compared to the 5.56. It is a sleek bullet with a decent bc, but it is not flatter shooting than standard 5.55.



As a matter of fact I have...
Ive hit coyote thru ribcage and the opposite side was ripped from top to bottom, ive shot squirrels with 545 cuts in half, ive shot pumpking nasty exit hole, ive never shot a human with 545 though and I dont particularly want to.

MrPlink
12-05-2011, 4:18 PM
Guys. We live in Americia. Buy them both.

Consumerism trumps all!

The best way to settle the debate is to not make it a debate at all and buy both!
(Im guilty of this)

SKSer45
12-05-2011, 4:22 PM
As a matter of fact I have...
Ive hit coyote thru ribcage and the opposite side was ripped from top to bottom, ive shot squirrels with 545 cuts in half, ive shot pumpking nasty exit hole, ive never shot a human with 545 though and I dont particularly want to.

Hmmm never shot a rifle with a 5.45 but a 5.56 I have. Is there a real difference in recoil and muzzle velocity in those rounds?

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 4:30 PM
Recoil a little less in ak74 due to good muzzle brake.
556 fragments at times depending on velocity n barrel size
Both velocity is almost equal 556 is a little faster I believe

Cuerno_de_Chivo
12-05-2011, 4:31 PM
AR IMO is not more accurate, its just more precise. AKs can easily pull kill shots at large ranges, idk about you guys but that's pretty accurate to me. Yea you wont put a nice hole next to the other nice hole like an AR, but do you really HAVE to put another nice hole next to the other nice hole in order to take out a target? Don't think so.

Chatterbox
12-05-2011, 4:59 PM
After reading 5.56 (M193) and 5.45 (7N1) reports in gel, I've came to the following conclusion:
At point blank range, the M193 will create a larger cavity, up to twice as large as 7N6.
At ranges around 100+ yards, both rounds will create roughly the same sized cavity.
7N6 actually doesn't hit it's stride until around 100 yards - it's cavity at point blank range is smaller at 10 yards then 100. Does it make it bad? No, the cavity is still 3 times that of a .45 round. I doubt that most people would scoff at the stopping power of 3 .45 rounds, if placed to the torso.

Mamluke
12-05-2011, 5:12 PM
Have you actually ever shot living flesh with the 5.45? I have. It does not leave nasty wounds. Quite to the contrary a 22lr Hp causes more damage than the 5.45, because it just punches nice neat holes without expanding or breaking up.

Dude, from which AIRSOFT AK74 rifle did you get your data?!!
What you stated negates even the US army Ballistic tests, and the Soviets own ballistic tests. I've seen first hand what this round can do recently to anti regime protesters in Syria, the wounds are freaking horrific....

And just to drag your sorry ignorant a#$@$ in the mud a tad bit (cause I'm being kind)...here's a freaking EXPERT video for you...

http://youtu.be/2S1y7Bz3IuY?t=33m40s

Had enough ..... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/chairshot.gif ..... cause I'm itching for more ... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/crazy%20cabasa.gif

............ :D

p2rider426
12-05-2011, 5:21 PM
No no. I said REAL (http://www.ducati.com/) motorcycle.

Psh, Italian bikes...

I'd rather by a lightly used R1 or Gixxer 1000 on Craigslist, dump like 2k into it to make it a bad *** track bike and STILL be half the price of that Ducati.

I'm just glad you weren't talking about harleys though... don't even get me started on them.

SKSer45
12-05-2011, 5:23 PM
Dude, from which AIRSOFT AK74 rifle did you get your data?!!
What you stated negates even the US army Ballistic tests, and the Soviets own ballistic tests. I've seen first hand what this round can do recently to anti regime protesters in Syria, the wounds are freaking horrific....

And just to drag your sorry ignorant a#$@$ in the mud a tad bit (cause I'm being kind)...here's a freaking EXPERT video for you...

http://youtu.be/2S1y7Bz3IuY?t=33m40s

Had enough ..... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/chairshot.gif ..... cause I'm itching for more ... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/crazy%20cabasa.gif

............ :D

sweet! lol I remember watching that episode :) Ahhh that was when the history channel was good! Nice find bro

stix213
12-05-2011, 5:31 PM
Now that AR vs AK is settled, can we decide Aimpoint vs Eotech real quick?


:beatdeadhorse5:

wash
12-05-2011, 5:50 PM
For more anecdotal evidence, I took my Sabre Defense 16" chrome lined barrel Spikes upper to the 1,000 yard range at Coalinga and at the 600 yard line, using a low power variable scope at 4.5x it was a little less accurate than a Romanian Cugir PSL (with a PSO-something scope).

That shouldn't be any more accurate than any other normal AR barrel, on par with a BCM, Colt or FN barrel, very comparable to an issue M4 with just a ~1.5" longer barrel.

I was getting a group about 18" across (in some pretty good wind) which to me means I would hit a man sized target at that range at least 50% of the time.

That's pretty good but it's nothing special as ARs go, a Noveske or other premium barreled upper would do better than my AR and that PSL.

I didn't try an AK74 but I doubt it would do as well.

If you want something really accurate, none of your choices are AK pattern.

In the AR platform, accurate and reliable are not mutually exclusive, a really accurate AR is not necessarily unreliable and if fed decent ammo they can be just as reliable as any other AR so you can tilt the accuracy vs. reliability balance even more toward the AR if you spend spend some money to make it more accurate.

If you don't want to spend money on accuracy, you don't want to spend money on decent ammo and you want to neglect your gun, an AK will handle that better.

It all depends where you want to be on that spectrum of reliability, accuracy and cost.

I've never thought AR reliability was a problem for me so I've always gone with how much I want to spend on AR accuracy.

I'm starting to build AKs from kits but mostly for cool factor, not any reliability or accuracy reason.

Mojaveman
12-05-2011, 6:03 PM
Had an AK and an AR. They both have their advantages and disadvantages.

Mamluke
12-05-2011, 6:50 PM
Another interesting video, Black water guy dumping dirt into an AK74 receiver...

1QbZWg4lRkg

Can't do that with an AR ...

:49:

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 6:58 PM
Dude, from which AIRSOFT AK74 rifle did you get your data?!!
What you stated negates even the US army Ballistic tests, and the Soviets own ballistic tests. I've seen first hand what this round can do recently to anti regime protesters in Syria, the wounds are freaking horrific....

And just to drag your sorry ignorant a#$@$ in the mud a tad bit (cause I'm being kind)...here's a freaking EXPERT video for you...

http://youtu.be/2S1y7Bz3IuY?t=33m40s

Had enough ..... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/chairshot.gif ..... cause I'm itching for more ... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/crazy%20cabasa.gif

............ :D

:King::party:

chicoredneck
12-05-2011, 7:32 PM
Well, I have shot and seen shot several hundred rabbits with a 5.45 as well as several coyotes and a few other critters. My experience has been that the surplus Russian 5.45 ammo on the market does not leave very impressive wounds. Perhaps your experience has been different. How many living things have you shot with a 5.45x39? Care to share some of your personal field experience? I can say that a hit to a large bone will cause a good sized wound, which is what I suspect happened in norcalk9 scenario, but this would happen with most any center fire caliber. Overall, my field experience with the caliber has been right in line with what ballistics experts say the round does. I have proven to myself at least that Dr. Flacker's work is pretty accurate.

I like the caliber. It achieves close to the same trajectory as a 55gr 5.56 with less powder and recoil, shoots higher bc bullets, and the surplus ammo is pretty accurate.

Dude, from which AIRSOFT AK74 rifle did you get your data?!!
What you stated negates even the US army Ballistic tests, and the Soviets own ballistic tests. I've seen first hand what this round can do recently to anti regime protesters in Syria, the wounds are freaking horrific....

And just to drag your sorry ignorant a#$@$ in the mud a tad bit (cause I'm being kind)...here's a freaking EXPERT video for you...

http://youtu.be/2S1y7Bz3IuY?t=33m40s

Had enough ..... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/chairshot.gif ..... cause I'm itching for more ... http://ktmtalk.com/html/emoticons/crazy%20cabasa.gif

............ :D

coltn46920
12-05-2011, 7:41 PM
I love my ar's and ak's:D

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 8:55 PM
Well, I have shot and seen shot several hundred rabbits with a 5.45 as well as several coyotes and a few other critters. My experience has been that the surplus Russian 5.45 ammo on the market does not leave very impressive wounds. Perhaps your experience has been different. How many living things have you shot with a 5.45x39? Care to share some of your personal field experience? I can say that a hit to a large bone will cause a good sized wound, which is what I suspect happened in norcalk9 scenario, but this would happen with most any center fire caliber. Overall, my field experience with the caliber has been right in line with what ballistics experts say the round does. I have proven to myself at least that Dr. Flacker's work is pretty accurate.

I like the caliber. It achieves close to the same trajectory as a 55gr 5.56 with less powder and recoil, shoots higher bc bullets, and the surplus ammo is pretty accurate.

Yes I suspect the same hit bone on coyote but what about the squirrels? At about 50 yards it rips them in half. And the pumpkin is softer than human tissue and blew the baxk oyt of it nicely....

1911ZENSHOOTER
12-05-2011, 9:03 PM
I'll take a Daewoo with extra kimchi. http://img.tapatalk.com/4cab4d8f-b010-6f3d.jpg

NorCalK9.com
12-05-2011, 9:12 PM
I'll take a Daewoo with extra kimchi. http://img.tapatalk.com/4cab4d8f-b010-6f3d.jpg

That sure is purty.

elSquid
12-05-2011, 9:55 PM
And just to drag your sorry ignorant a#$@$ in the mud a tad bit (cause I'm being kind)...here's a freaking EXPERT video for you...

http://youtu.be/2S1y7Bz3IuY?t=33m40s



The report generated by the folks who did the initial evaluation at the Army's wound ballistics lab...

http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Fackler_Articles/ak74_wounding_potential.pdf

-- Michael

Exdc
12-05-2011, 10:15 PM
I learned that you shot faster with the AK than the AR.

Good effort though.

It's funny, I noticed the exact same thing. I believe he waited 2-4 times longer between shots while shooting the M4.

By the way, is it possible to order an upgraded barrel for an AK to make it shoot more accurately? I understand that AR parts are much more readily available in the US; I also realize it may be considered "unnecessary" (especially in a fantastical SHTF situation) but if it could make it shoot more accurately, would that not make it an all around better rifle, if only in theory?

TwoAsoapbox
12-05-2011, 10:19 PM
I didnt see much 5.45x39 or even 7.62x39 last time I was in Walmart. However I did find .223/5.56 in five different varieties. This is America, go with an American gun/caliber.

Javi
12-05-2011, 10:36 PM
This is America, go with an American gun/caliber.

This is also America, the free. Let's be free to choose either or better yet, both!

Cali-Shooter
12-05-2011, 10:51 PM
I have both, AR for accuracy with more maintenance demand, AK for less accuracy, but "enough" for most shooting distances, with much less maintenance demanded.

You choose the best tool for the job from the toolbox.

RRichie09
12-05-2011, 10:53 PM
When I read about jammed M4s in Iraq or Afghanistan I always wonder whether there were instances where the extra accuracy of the AR saved the day. It seems that in life and death people always focus on the negatives so that the small victories are forgotten by the wayside. And yeah let's give them piston kits already jeez.

I read somewhere that after they issued ACOGs an investigation was done to make sure the soliders weren't executing the enemy because of the rise in number of head shots.

Which is another point... why test accuracy with iron sights? If you really wanted to know how accurate the rifles were you shouldn't thrown some scopes on them. Seems to me the sights were the weak link, not the rifles... so you really tested nothing.

1911ZENSHOOTER
12-05-2011, 10:55 PM
That sure is purty.
Thanks
Excellent trigger, goes bang every time and nearly impossible to find OEM parts. I'm happy.

TwoAsoapbox
12-06-2011, 12:00 AM
Choose what you like. Im gonna go with my AR that weighs just over 7 lbs fully loaded with an Eotech on top. Also Im gonna go with my AR because .223 is some of the most common ammo around and also gun parts are very easy to come by.

Maintenance for my AR consists of a rag, a bore snake, a tooth brush and some lube.
For anyone who questions the dependability of the AR just look up "Filthy 14." Its a BCM gun that has over 40k rounds through it with very little maintenance and almost all the original parts. Also, I believe its failed less times than you can count on one hand.

chicoredneck
12-06-2011, 4:22 AM
Yes I suspect the same hit bone on coyote but what about the squirrels? At about 50 yards it rips them in half. And the pumpkin is softer than human tissue and blew the baxk oyt of it nicely....

In the squirrel the temporary stretch cavity is large enough in comparison to the size of the animal that it caused it to explode, at least thats what I suspect. In the case of the pumpkin, two things may have been at work 1) the pumpkins flesh is not elastic like animal muscle so the pressure wave caused by the round was permanent rather than temporary and 2) there may have been enough pressure forced into the hollow cavity of the pumpkin to make it pop.

sonnyt650
12-06-2011, 6:07 AM
Seems to me the sights were the weak link, not the rifles... so you really tested nothing.

I think that's why he took longer with the AR shots: it is expected to have more capability that way and he'd look foolish if he had no difference in accuracy. It doesn't impact my impression of his skills in any way where I can't do that with irons no matter how long I took between shots whether an AR not.

Actually I kind of thought that the 5.45x39 would shoot almost as well as the .223 and that the poor shooting of the AK was mostly related to the 7.62x39 bullet. It makes me wonder how poorly the older cartridge shot to entice the richer com-block countries to switch over.

zfields
12-06-2011, 6:33 AM
Well, I have shot and seen shot several hundred rabbits with a 5.45 as well as several coyotes and a few other critters. My experience has been that the surplus Russian 5.45 ammo on the market does not leave very impressive wounds. Perhaps your experience has been different. How many living things have you shot with a 5.45x39? Care to share some of your personal field experience? I can say that a hit to a large bone will cause a good sized wound, which is what I suspect happened in norcalk9 scenario, but this would happen with most any center fire caliber. Overall, my field experience with the caliber has been right in line with what ballistics experts say the round does. I have proven to myself at least that Dr. Flacker's work is pretty accurate.

I like the caliber. It achieves close to the same trajectory as a 55gr 5.56 with less powder and recoil, shoots higher bc bullets, and the surplus ammo is pretty accurate.

Rabbits.....

the 5.45x39 doesnt begin to yaw untill approx 3" into a target....thats already (or almost) exited something the size of a rabbit.


Do you know specifically which loading of surplus ammo. Some have the older bullet which dont yaw as quickly.


And I'm sorry, but I'm 100% sure the russians tested it quite a bit before they put it into general use. No offence to your rabbit testing.

SuperSet
12-06-2011, 6:37 AM
Those are some valid observations about setting a control on an accuracy test. If you put the same red dot on both rifles, you'll have a 'truer' test. Interesting how this discussion veered off from his original intent.

wash
12-06-2011, 7:24 AM
It's funny, I noticed the exact same thing. I believe he waited 2-4 times longer between shots while shooting the M4.

By the way, is it possible to order an upgraded barrel for an AK to make it shoot more accurately? I understand that AR parts are much more readily available in the US; I also realize it may be considered "unnecessary" (especially in a fantastical SHTF situation) but if it could make it shoot more accurately, would that not make it an all around better rifle, if only in theory?
The problem with AKs and accuracy is probably four things:

1. Since the barrel uses pressed on parts, there is no way to change the (fairly skinny) barrel profile.

2. For reliability, AKs are kind of overgassed by design and the gas piston rattling around in the gas tube doesn't help either.

3. An AK barrel is pressed and pinned in the front trunnion, the rear sight block, gas block and front sight are pressed and pinned on the barrel, swaps are not easy so people just buy another AK.

4. The AK trigger isn't the greatest and even a trigger like a Red Star isn't as good as many of the AR drop in triggers.

Put it all together and you see why people usually do not try to improve AK accuracy.

On an AR it's as easy as buying an upper with a nice free floated barrel and a drop in trigger kit, then you have a gun more accurate than most shooters.

If you think accuracy is a problem, you can't really throw money at it on an AK but an AR you can do that and see real results.

If you can't shoot for ****, either one will work fine and you'll never see a difference.

chicoredneck
12-06-2011, 8:36 AM
Rabbits.....

the 5.45x39 doesnt begin to yaw untill approx 3" into a target....thats already (or almost) exited something the size of a rabbit.


Do you know specifically which loading of surplus ammo. Some have the older bullet which dont yaw as quickly.


And I'm sorry, but I'm 100% sure the russians tested it quite a bit before they put it into general use. No offence to your rabbit testing.

The largest animal I have shot with the 5.45 has been coyotes, both length wise and broad side. The round does tumble, but it does not beak up or fragment. In a rabbit, the caliber does have enopuigh time to tumble, especially if shot at a hard quartering angle. The ammo I use mostly is 70's production russian surplus 7n6. I have also shot about 1000 rounds of 70gr wolf that seems to have similar terminal effects on target. And of course the russians tested the round. Do some google searching my firend. Those in the know are saying exactly what I have whitnessed is the norm.

The russians wanted a round that would increase hit probability, which was their primary concern. There is no clear answer as to weather the round was designed to yaw heavily or if the construction of the bullet was simply a combination of cost cutting and aerodynamics.

I have posted this picture on here quite a few times now, but this badger is interesting because: 1) I actually took a picture of it because it was the first badger I have ever shot, and 2) it was shot with both a 5.56 and 5.45. This is a picture of the 5.45 exit wound in the tanned hide. You can clearly see that the bullet was tumbling.

I have a picture of the just killed badger and it's exit wounds that I can try and dig up and post later.

http://i1099.photobucket.com/albums/g389/chicoredneck/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_9517.jpg

zfields
12-06-2011, 9:26 AM
The largest animal I have shot with the 5.45 has been coyotes, both length wise and broad side. The round does tumble, but it does not beak up or fragment. In a rabbit, the caliber does have enopuigh time to tumble, especially if shot at a hard quartering angle. The ammo I use mostly is 70's production russian surplus 7n6. I have also shot about 1000 rounds of 70gr wolf that seems to have similar terminal effects on target. And of course the russians tested the round. Do some google searching my firend. Those in the know are saying exactly what I have whitnessed is the norm.

The russians wanted a round that would increase hit probability, which was their primary concern. There is no clear answer as to weather the round was designed to yaw heavily or if the construction of the bullet was simply a combination of cost cutting and aerodynamics.

I have posted this picture on here quite a few times now, but this badger is interesting because: 1) I actually took a picture of it because it was the first badger I have ever shot, and 2) it was shot with both a 5.56 and 5.45. This is a picture of the 5.45 exit wound in the tanned hide. You can clearly see that the bullet was tumbling.

I have a picture of the just killed badger and it's exit wounds that I can try and dig up and post later.



Ive read up quite a bit on the 545 and the later 762x39 rounds ( based off the yugo m67 design with hollow cavity ). It sure seems like they were going for a tumbling round opposed to a fragmenting, considering the copper washed steel jacket with a relatively thick wall before the hollow cavity.

Im not saying the 545 is as effective as the 556 as far as overall wounds, but using a round that is pretty well known for fragmenting, to a round that's more known for tumbling is a bad comparison in small animals.

BTW I read your hunting thread a while back, very interesting and informative.

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 9:34 AM
Accuracy? 3 in @ a 100yards is not bad! 6in@200 yards is not bad! 9in @ 300 yards isnt bad! And 12in @ 400 yards aint bad! Its not a tac.driver but its still a killing machine and I wouldnt want a heavier barrel on any of my ak's, I wouldnt want to change anything in the operating design of the ak! You AR guys act like 3+_ moa is horrific but in all honesty it'll hit you out to 400+ yards. If you want something to go further well I wouldnt be picking up a 556 or 545, 308 great! 762x54 great, 30-06 good, 7mag great, 416 awesome, 338 lapua awesome,
I believe out of all the accuracy tests ive seen on youtube this is the fairest! Wuit whining the AR is a tad bit more accurate but that is all.
The problem with AKs and accuracy is probably four things:

1. Since the barrel uses pressed on parts, there is no way to change the (fairly skinny) barrel profile.

2. For reliability, AKs are kind of overgassed by design and the gas piston rattling around in the gas tube doesn't help either.

3. An AK barrel is pressed and pinned in the front trunnion, the rear sight block, gas block and front sight are pressed and pinned on the barrel, swaps are not easy so people just buy another AK.

4. The AK trigger isn't the greatest and even a trigger like a Red Star isn't as good as many of the AR drop in triggers.

Put it all together and you see why people usually do not try to improve AK accuracy.

On an AR it's as easy as buying an upper with a nice free floated barrel and a drop in trigger kit, then you have a gun more accurate than most shooters.

If you think accuracy is a problem, you can't really throw money at it on an AK but an AR you can do that and see real results.

If you can't shoot for ****, either one will work fine and you'll never see a difference.

ZombieTactics
12-06-2011, 9:34 AM
I am of the opinion that 5.56, 5.45 and 7.62 rounds will all ruin someone's day rather decisively. This "Captain Obvious" moment is brought to you courtesy of extreme boredom, and not much else.,

chicoredneck
12-06-2011, 9:38 AM
The really odd thing that I notice with the 5.45 is that sometimes the bullet seems to change direction dramatically once it hits it's target. Even in jack rabbits shot broadside the bullet has a chance to change its direction of travel nearly 90* sometimes. I have yet to recover a bullet, but I think that when this happens the bullet is bending, but not breaking. It is really weird to shoot an animal through their shoulder and have the bullet exit staight down through the brisket.

stormy_clothing
12-06-2011, 9:38 AM
I didnt see much 5.45x39 or even 7.62x39 last time I was in Walmart. However I did find .223/5.56 in five different varieties. This is America, go with an American gun/caliber.

There are two failings in your statement - A - only weenies depend on walmart for ammo. If it's there great but it's not a gun store or even a ammo specialist. And why would they have assault rifle ammo that's twice as powerful it's a place for smiles and sheep.

B: This is America and we like bang for the buck and big - 7.62x39 is both cheaper and twice as powerful can't get munch more American in a choice than that.

But if you really want to compare a caliber for hunting small creatures to one that can hunt large ones because the government tells you it's better, have fun.

ns3v3n
12-06-2011, 9:39 AM
Thanks for posting the vids! I LOVE my ak LOL.

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 9:40 AM
The really odd thing that I notice with the 5.45 is that sometimes the bullet seems to change direction dramatically once it hits it's target. Even in jack rabbits shot broadside the bullet has a chance to change its direction of travel nearly 90* sometimes. I have yet to recover a bullet, but I think that when this happens the bullet is bending, but not breaking. It is really weird to shoot an animal through their shoulder and have the bullet exit staight down through the brisket.

Dang id hate to have one hit me in the ribs and come out my nads lol that just wrong! Lmao

zfields
12-06-2011, 9:43 AM
The really odd thing that I notice with the 5.45 is that sometimes the bullet seems to change direction dramatically once it hits it's target. Even in jack rabbits shot broadside the bullet has a chance to change its direction of travel nearly 90* sometimes. I have yet to recover a bullet, but I think that when this happens the bullet is bending, but not breaking. It is really weird to shoot an animal through their shoulder and have the bullet exit staight down through the brisket.

That would ruin my meal.


* continues to eat some leftovers from Blacks BBQ *

chicoredneck
12-06-2011, 9:48 AM
In all honesty, with iron sights I can't tell the difference in accuracy between my 16" chrome lined AR and my 5.45 AK. With a holo sight or a scope I can, but there really is not any amount of warrantable difference between the two to discard one or the other for shooting under 300 yards if accuracy is your only consideration and your shooting irons.

Accuracy? 3 in @ a 100yards is not bad! 6in@200 yards is not bad! 9in @ 300 yards isnt bad! And 12in @ 400 yards aint bad! Its not a tac.driver but its still a killing machine and I wouldnt want a heavier barrel on any of my ak's, I wouldnt want to change anything in the operating design of the ak! You AR guys act like 3+_ moa is horrific but in all honesty it'll hit you out to 400+ yards. If you want something to go further well I wouldnt be picking up a 556 or 545, 308 great! 762x54 great, 30-06 good, 7mag great, 416 awesome, 338 lapua awesome,
I believe out of all the accuracy tests ive seen on youtube this is the fairest! Wuit whining the AR is a tad bit more accurate but that is all.

chicoredneck
12-06-2011, 9:51 AM
Dang id hate to have one hit me in the ribs and come out my nads lol that just wrong! Lmao

Maybe that was russians secret to increased lethality. Chest shot = castration! :o
Or their top secret plan to steralize the west!:TFH:

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 10:13 AM
Maybe that was russians secret to increased lethality. Chest shot = castration! :o
Or their top secret plan to steralize the west!:TFH:

And if you live no more breeding....

ns3v3n
12-06-2011, 11:39 AM
We'll just have to wait for the scoped version of the test :).

Standard
12-06-2011, 12:04 PM
Just for fun, here is a pic of two of the steel cores of 5.45 rounds after hitting a steel target at 100 yards.
The big one was a slug.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c318/ZUMin3K/2011-11-25154040.jpg

wash
12-06-2011, 2:00 PM
Wuit whining the AR is a tad bit more accurate but that is all.

I'm not whining, I'm just saying if you want a more accurate AK, there isn't much you can do.

It's not practical to change the barrel profile, they are overgassed in general (which is good for reliability but not so much for accuracy) and the trigger isn't very good.

If you want something you can bury in mud, wait a year, dig it up and go shooting, AK will do as well as anything.

If you store your guns in a safe (without filling it with mud), ARs will give you good service too and if you want to spend the money they can be quite a bit more accurate too.

4thSBCT
12-06-2011, 2:16 PM
Ill take a vanilla 47 all day long. I want a rifle that works for me, not me working for the rifle.

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 2:23 PM
I'm not whining, I'm just saying if you want a more accurate AK, there isn't much you can do.

It's not practical to change the barrel profile, they are overgassed in general (which is good for reliability but not so much for accuracy) and the trigger isn't very good.

If you want something you can bury in mud, wait a year, dig it up and go shooting, AK will do as well as anything.

If you store your guns in a safe (without filling it with mud), ARs will give you good service too and if you want to spend the money they can be quite a bit more accurate too.

What more do you need than 3moa? You guys really make me lmao. You shooting flies?
You have a misconception on accuracy, you think that is something doesnt shoot moa its not accurate? Your AR would die if I owned it! And thats why all 9 of mine are gone..
Now heres where 1moa comes in handy, shooting squirrels and I have a .22 for that!

Richard Erichsen
12-06-2011, 4:29 PM
What more do you need than 3moa? You guys really make me lmao. You shooting flies?
You have a misconception on accuracy, you think that is something doesnt shoot moa its not accurate? Your AR would die if I owned it! And thats why all 9 of mine are gone..
Now heres where 1moa comes in handy, shooting squirrels and I have a .22 for that!

I think folks are forgetting human error and exhaustion level into the calculation for what is 'good' vs. 'poor.' Just because your rifle is capable of sub MOA (from a mechanical rest) doesn't mean YOU are that accurate. The rifle is the tool of the rifleman, its the "organic" portion of the weapon system that is doing the bulk of the work and introducing most of the error, not the rifle.

What the rifle can do with the individual removed as much as possible from the equation and what a rifleman can be expected to do under realworld conditions are very different sets of capabilities. Even firing from the comfort of a shaded stall at your favorite range with cold Big Gulp, well rested in broad daylight vs. what your accuracy looks like when the sun goes down are often two very different things. I've tried working out at the gym for a couple hours, ran a few miles and THEN went to the range. Very different accuracy. Drink a few beers and then try staying on target - same idea. Check your accuracy against your baseline for "best" and you might find what constituted a "good day" at the range and what resulted in a fairly poor day at the range was what your physical condition and level of stress were at the time. Combat (as my veteran friends and relatives tell me) is high stress, exhausting and doesn't correspond to conditions favoring pinpoint accuracy. Throw in some rain, a mouthfull of dirt, a backache and some minor injuries, take away the shade and the rifle rest and shoot at small, moving targets from a standing, kneeling, seated or prone position. The point is you have to be a VERY good shot under physically demanding circumstances before even a half-decent rifle (which the typical AK most certainly is) is not mechanically accurate enough to keep up with you.

The effects of adrenaline, fatigue and foes not doing you the courtesy of presenting themselves as neat full frontal/upright high-contrast silhouettes and trying very hard not getting shot while shooting back, a rifleman equipped with a rifle that is four to five times more accurate than he is under those conditions isn't going to be any great advantage practically speaking. If you fire at what is as close to "center mass" as a partially hidden target behind concealment is going to present and manage to hit an arm or leg and take the enemy out of the fight, a hit is a hit.

A sub-MOA rifle wouldn't likely change the outcome when the organic part of the weapon system might well be an exhausted, adrenaline drained fighter with few targets of opportunity fleeting from cover to cover at the outer edge of the effective range of the rifle. 5MOA accuracy at 400yards might have been possible with a relaxed, well rested rifleman on a standard, fixed target (5MOA at that range would put you in the upper percentile among rifleman for accuracy), but that kind of accuracy just isn't easy to maintain in a real life or death situation. 5MOA is damn good accuracy, particularly from iron sights at that range, and a rifle capable of better accuracy really isn't going to eliminate the detrimental effects of human error.

R

ZX-10R
12-06-2011, 6:16 PM
9/10 X mark at 100yrds this weekend with my Daniel Defense...My AK had a group of 8 less than 2.5 at the same distance. Guess which I am taking if I can only have one? My AK...Guess which I would take if I could have two guns...BOTH.

I honestly shot more AR this weekend and found that love again...Man I was unstoppable...That was 49 out of a possible 50pts we were playing on that group. As someone said, I stepped it up. Then I did my AK group and that was impressive as well...Really who cares what you wield...I could care less what each of you shoot. I do care that what I shoot is reliable. There were two AR failures at the range that day and one was my buddies AR...Guess which didn't fail?

GOTCHA.

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 7:15 PM
And zx is back.....
Its real funny how many AR offers im getting for my saiga308 I say no but ask why they want an ak hmmmm I heard their more reliable.

Code7inOaktown
12-06-2011, 8:15 PM
While I agree for the most part, there are those that have had very different experiences.

http://www.hotsr.com/news/WireHeadlines/2009/10/12/us-weapons-failure-in-2008-firefight-rai-33.php

I know from first hand experience that the M16 requires regular maintenance in less than ideal environments. I learned to live with it.

There is no argument that the AK system in general is a legendarily reliable system and isn't as inaccurate as people make it out to be. It's more the user than the weapon that has given it the image of being unreliable. Think of sub-Saharan child soldier firing full auto without the use of those things we call "sights." And again, the AR is not as unreliable as it is made to be as well with proper maintenance. And, I might point out, there are also incidents and individuals who feel it has performed fine and is a superior weapon system to the AK platform due to its modularity and accuracy. Wanat was not exactly a normal circumstance. Dumping magazines at the cyclic rate of the weapon in a very short amount of time that the weapon is not designed for is not a good measure of a weapon system. How many full auto mag dumps can you do with an AK74 before it catches on fire as well? Since we're both using the statistical accurate model of one incident I found a couple for us:


911 for the M4A1

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/m4-and-m4a1-guns/

Gomer here actually fires 300 rounds from a burning AK. How many it took to catch on fire I don't know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNAohtjG14c


Of course, let us blame any failures at Wanat on the M4 and not on how it could have happened in the first place. It's sort of like how the problem with the FBI Miami Shootout was not the tactics or training of the FBI agents it was a single silvertip 9mm round that was to blame.




As a side note, here are the results of the US Army's sand tests from 2006. They didn't include an AK, but my gut tells me it would have done much better than the M4, perhaps as well as the XM8.

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m167/tharmsen/dust_test_graph.jpg

It's at least as effective as the 5.56 round regardless of the "poison bullet" mythology. What can be said is that the 7N6 round is designed to be unstable once it hits something. Does that make it more lethal than 5.56? That's open for debate, it's not something I touched upon in the video.


I would not disagree that sandy environments isn't the AR's strong point. Nor is it the FN-FAL's nor M249 nor numerous other weapon systems. But that doesn't stop the Israeli Defense Force from issuing (ostensibly free/low cost) M4/M16's over their own homegrown Galil's or AK's even. And for what it is worth, Colt said the raw test data was leaked to make the M4 look worse than it is and paid an independent company to run the same test from the Extreme Dust III test with 10 M4's. In that test, Colt reported that the M4 experienced 111 stoppages. See http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2010-07/what-really-happened-wanat

My "gut" is that 7N6 is about as poor a man stopper as M855. But what exactly do you base your statement that it is "at least as effective as 5.56?" Both Dr. Roberts and Dr. Fackler have said 5.45 doesn't reliably fragment and thus isn't as effective as fragmenting 5.56mm. And this is from Roberts who has pushed for a switch away from 5.56mm because of its ineffectiveness as say, 6.8 SPC. Again, I'm saying noted experts in ballistics say 5.45mm isn't the round people people think it is. You are correct. You did not address the lethality of the round used in a SHTF rifle in your video -- some would say that would be a very important point to consider in any SHTF weapon. See: http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Fackler_Articles/ak74_wounding_potential.pdf



By fantasy, you mean like Katrina? I would imagine there are quite a few people wishing it were a fantasy.

If your survival plans call for picking up ammo off the street or finding AR15/M16's laying in the streets for spare parts, I would say your plans aren't the best laid.

During Katrina, how many cases of 5.56 do you think the locals found floating down the street? How many AR15/M16's do you think they found lying on the ground?

If you buy a rifle for self defense, you better buy the ammo to go with it. Spare parts? Buy a rifle that's likely not to need them, or if you feel like your gas rings on your AR's bolt will fail you when you least expect it or that you might lose your firing pin retaining pin, buy extras and pack them in your bag.


I know, I read about those firefights during Katrina where residents were doing mag dumps and burning through barrels because they were expending so much ammo during Katrina right? Again, my statement regarding the AR/M4 platform is that it is a far more common so you can get support, parts, ammo, advice, etc. far easier than you can with an AK74 now before the fantasy SHTF. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America with millions sold. Logistics leading up to the fantasy SHTF event should also be considered I believe. If we lived in say Poland or Ukraine, I would argue for the AK system based on this point.


No, I don't. What makes you think that I would?

In a scenario like Katrina there's a very high probability your weapon will be exposed to debris and rather hostile conditions. Do you want to worry about the state of your rifle or would you rather focus on other issues and worry less about the condition of the rifle? That's what it boils down to.

True. That's because I read about so many incidents of people's AR's jamming during Katrina. It happened during all of those firefights where people were crawling through the mud and muck and engaged in running street battles with street criminals right? It was on the news when people were doing human sacrifices in at the Super Dome right?

It's interesting because I thought the video was pretty fair (despite it being pointed out that it really doesn't prove anything except how well you can shoot either weapon) but I do suspect that you do have a vested interest in one system over the other now.

(;

You write that script and I'll put it to video. :)

ZombieTactics
12-06-2011, 8:57 PM
Oh the joys of trading snarky bons mots over equipment preferences.

NorCalK9.com
12-06-2011, 9:08 PM
Code7inoaktown AK74 is far superior to the AR. You can make fun of people with your running gun battles in the streets comments, but pure simple fact is this you can bring any of your AR's out here to my property and we can do ANY test you want and I bet your ar has way more stoppages, and remember this AK parts dont wear out like ar parts do.ive been trying to wear out my vottom of the barrel wasr for a year now and cant get it to mess up.

Code7inOaktown
12-06-2011, 9:52 PM
Code7inoaktown AK74 is far superior to the AR. You can make fun of people with your running gun battles in the streets comments, but pure simple fact is this you can bring any of your AR's out here to my property and we can do ANY test you want and I bet your ar has way more stoppages, and remember this AK parts dont wear out like ar parts do.ive been trying to wear out my vottom of the barrel wasr for a year now and cant get it to mess up.

You're right. I did that forget that argument. It is far superior. You're right. I fold.

Now, the AK47 is far superior to the AK74...

Code7inOaktown
12-06-2011, 10:13 PM
Here is a video that I believe is bit more impartial on this subject.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QABoEzyBm9w&feature=related

bighead
12-06-2011, 10:45 PM
MAC's test wasn't impartial, he merely bench tested 2 guns, posted the results and gave an opinion.For the life of me I can't understand why people get soo butt-hurt over a video that dosent align with their fantasy doctrine.

Code7inOaktown
12-06-2011, 10:51 PM
MAC's test wasn't impartial, he merely bench tested 2 guns, posted the results and gave an opinion.For the life of me I can't understand why people get soo butt-hurt over a video that dosent align with their fantasy doctrine.

It's pretty predictable actually:

10 Video or comment or opinion is posted.

20 Initial comments are positive and say it's pretty fair. Small debate on points left out of the video some thing should be made (it's call "discussion.")

30 Fans of System A come in to now proclaim it's the bestest over System B and that System B suxors because System A is better.

40 Fans of System B then come in and return fire that System A suxors and System B is the bestest.

50 General ramp up of back and forth until new thread is created saying System C is better than System A.

60 Go back to line 10.

bighead
12-06-2011, 10:53 PM
FOr myself, within my scope of reference, NONE of my AK's has ever jammed.Spam can after Spam can with zero malfunctions.My best friend has a Bulgarian SLR that he hasn't cleaned in over a decade and it's never failed in front of me.(maybe it jams and he dosent tell anyone)The only AR out of my 3 that hasn't jammed is my SIG 516.I still love my AR's and my AK the same.Their just rifles.

Cali-Shooter
12-07-2011, 12:08 AM
There should be a sister thread posted in this sub-forum called:

"AK vs. AR: Let's talk about reliability." :43:

Sent from Black Mesa Research Facility, Area 8 Topside Dormitories.

Code7inOaktown
12-07-2011, 12:16 AM
FOr myself, within my scope of reference, NONE of my AK's has ever jammed.Spam can after Spam can with zero malfunctions.My best friend has a Bulgarian SLR that he hasn't cleaned in over a decade and it's never failed in front of me.(maybe it jams and he dosent tell anyone)The only AR out of my 3 that hasn't jammed is my SIG 516.I still love my AR's and my AK the same.Their just rifles.

That's great. I have a friend who bought a Lancaster AK that has jammed from the get go. He can't get through a magazine with it and it still doesn't work right to this day. There are also plenty of forum posts of poorly built AKs that don't work right either on this forum. There's also plenty of forum posts of AR's that don't work right either and there are examples of AR's that have fired upwards of 35,000 rounds without ever being cleaned too and people who run their AR's through carbine classes where they will fire 3,000 rounds in a weekend without issues and many members here who simply don't clean their ARs with no problems.

What does this tell me: It's not about X being better than Y. It's about this particular example being good.

Can't we all just agree that the AK is more accurate than people give it, and the AR more reliable than people will give it an leave it at that?

zfields
12-07-2011, 12:19 AM
Code7...this is the interwebz.

If we all agreed on something, what fun would it be?

MilitaryArms
12-07-2011, 6:56 AM
Oh the joys of trading snarky bons mots over equipment preferences.
I know, right?

I'm not going to respond. When the other guy starts putting words in your mouth and twisting previous comments with outlandish examples it reaches the point where it's become a religious argument which quickly degrades into a flame war.

For the children, I remove myself from the discussion! :D

So, how about those Bears?

MilitaryArms
12-07-2011, 6:58 AM
That's great. I have a friend who bought a Lancaster AK that has jammed from the get go. He can't get through a magazine with it and it still doesn't work right to this day.

Lancaster... your buddy might as well have bought a Hesse. :D

You're right, there are very poorly built AK's just as there are poorly built AR's. That's why a Colt 6920 and a Russian made SGL31 were chosen for the video.

Javi
12-07-2011, 9:42 AM
Lancaster... your buddy might as well have bought a Hesse. :D

You're right, there are very poorly built AK's just as there are poorly built AR's. That's why a Colt 6920 and a Russian made SGL31 were chosen for the video.

I was hoping you were going to bring out the Interarms IAC :)

NorCalK9.com
12-07-2011, 10:03 AM
Code7...this is the interwebz.

If we all agreed on something, what fun would it be?

Debating is what makes this forum fun! If it wasnt for that we'd all buy the same stuff and all have the same problems!
Heck if my grandfathers who both fought in ww2 but on different sides could debate and still be friends we can too!
and in all honesty I like ALL guns from muskets to AR's, to cannons to AK's! I just prefer the ak for myself!

captbilly
12-07-2011, 1:22 PM
If we are talking about the inherent accuracy of the design then the answer is simple, the AR platform is very nearly the most accurate auto loader in the world. I built an inexpensive AR ($800) that will shoot 0.5 moa 10 shot groups with factory ammo (HSM $14 a box), something that is pretty much impossible with an AK. In a combat situation there are very very few people who could shoot sub moa even if the fifle could do it, but that does not mean that anything better than moa is irrelevant. One could argue that in a close in fight that anything better than a degree (60moa) is meaningless, and when shooting full auto I doubt that many people could even shoot within a degree, but that doesn't change the relative accuracy of the AR vs AK.

I took my brother to the range some time ago and he was very proud that he was able to keep most of the shots on the paper target (about 10 moa) so for him the relative accuracy of an AR vs AK is completely meaningless. But for a sniper or target shooter 0.5 moa is too much.

tacticalcity
12-07-2011, 1:28 PM
It's kind of a wierd question. When you look at the AK it's closest comparison in the AR world (not historically but mechanically) is the 16" carbine. Neither is a precision rifle. Neither is designed to be an "accurate" gun. They are designed to be fast and portable. Yes a basic 16 carbine can be very accurate for what it is, but it's not the rifle of choice for accuracy hounds and bench resters.

So the question it self is like asking which truck is faster on the race track, an F150 or the Chevy equivilent. It ignores the more obvious question...what the heck are they doing on the race track in the first place?

That said, the AR can be a very accurate platform for a semi-auto (nothing as good as bolt action but impressive none the less). But by the time you get it configured to be as good as it can accuracy wise, it no longer has anything remotely incommon with the AK and is an absurd comparison.

Between the two, the AR is much more accurate. But that is all relative, just like comparing which work truck is fastest. Neither one of them is as fast as that Italian Sports Car on the race track.

TwoAsoapbox
12-08-2011, 1:28 AM
There are two failings in your statement - A - only weenies depend on walmart for ammo. If it's there great but it's not a gun store or even a ammo specialist. And why would they have assault rifle ammo that's twice as powerful it's a place for smiles and sheep.

B: This is America and we like bang for the buck and big - 7.62x39 is both cheaper and twice as powerful can't get munch more American in a choice than that.

But if you really want to compare a caliber for hunting small creatures to one that can hunt large ones because the government tells you it's better, have fun.


No, a great deal of people depend on Walmart, Big 5 etc. for their ammo. I dont know about you but I go where I can find what I need for a cheap price, and based on my research, Walmart has some of the cheapest prices around (excluding crap surplus and/or bulk ammo). The point of my comment is that maybe some day you wont be able to find AK ammo or get it delivered to your door. I dont like depending on a Communist country to supply me with ammo to make my rifle work. Also, we're not talking about shooting Wildebeest here, we're talking about shooting thin skinned, two legged critters which is what the 5.56 was originally designed for, and if the shooter does their job it is incredibly effective for that purpose. However, I just shoot targets and coyotes with mine, and it works great! I prefer Remington, Federal, Winchester and Hornady over Wolf, Brown Bear and TulAmmo any day. You can shoot your crappy Russian made steel cased fmj ammo and I'll be shooting my American made high quality brass cased V-max if the SHTF.

zfields
12-08-2011, 4:27 AM
No, a great deal of people depend on Walmart, Big 5 etc. for their ammo. I dont know about you but I go where I can find what I need for a cheap price, and based on my research, Walmart has some of the cheapest prices around (excluding crap surplus and/or bulk ammo). The point of my comment is that maybe some day you wont be able to find AK ammo or get it delivered to your door. I dont like depending on a Communist country to supply me with ammo to make my rifle work. Also, we're not talking about shooting Wildebeest here, we're talking about shooting thin skinned, two legged critters which is what the 5.56 was originally designed for, and if the shooter does their job it is incredibly effective for that purpose. However, I just shoot targets and coyotes with mine, and it works great! I prefer Remington, Federal, Winchester and Hornady over Wolf, Brown Bear and TulAmmo any day. You can shoot your crappy Russian made steel cased fmj ammo and I'll be shooting my American made high quality brass cased V-max if the SHTF.

That "crap surplus" has been used in anger more then any other round out there.

Ill pass on the V-max, give me TAP or gold dots in 556, or a good soft point in 762x39.

CK_32
12-08-2011, 8:49 AM
This is not directed at the OP. Just wanted to say that, but I don't understand the motivation for those that feel the need to talk sh*t about the products in direct competition with what they own. Like the Ford vs. Chevy. Does it really make you feel better about your product if you talk sh*t about the other product? Does it make your product better? You got it cause you liked it and it fit your criteria. The other person bought the other product cause they liked it and it fit their criteria. Are you really that insecure?

:patriot:

Come talk to me when you're ready to sell that CBR and get a real bike, squid.




:sweatdrop:


Hey my gf likes Vespas too! They do get some wicked gas mileage ;)




:smilielol5: