AR or AK?

[Richard Fitzwell]

The classic debate.

Im suprised it hasnt been discussed yet!(if it has i appoligize)

Which gun do you feel is superior?

I will chime in later.

[Hugh]

Assuming manufactured to equal quality, not so much superior, as having different purposes and being designed for different operating conditions.

The bullet is what matters, what it may need to penetrate and how it reacts, and what you want it to do when it hits the target.

The AR is designed to wound, so as to slow the opponent down as they have to carry casualties, use up their medical supplies, demoralise them etc.
It's a good weapon for government forces, with time to train, plenty of spares, workshops etc, and lots of time. Ideal for conventional struggle, clear field of fire, and long range.

The AK is designed to finish the argument, for ambush, regime change and ideal for small guerilla bands, use in rough terrain over short range - usually 50 to 100 metres.

Single shot accuracy is not essential for most troops in the field, cost of manufacture, durability, reliability, cleanability, availability of parts and ammo, whether troops can repair weapons themselves in the field, time required to train, how easy to use a bayonet with, these are what matter.

People with AKs get taken seriously, and the psychological impact on an opponent should not be underestimated.

If in doubt, go for the AK.

Quite a nice series here, but one needs to ask which weapon is the weapon of choice for people, as opposed to governments.

YouTube- TOP 10:Combat Rifles - AK 47 (NO.1)

YouTube- AK 47 vs M16

[TwistedCross]

Hugh is correct.

The AK is the superior firearm in most cases, provided you dont have a cheap chinese one.

The advantage of the AR in the US is the round it uses is everywhere. You cant scavenge AK rounds off dead loyalists so you will be limited to what you can carry.

You can always use the AK until you run short of ammo then take a loyalists rifle and ammo.

If you are talking about run for the hills survival I suggest a .22lr. Quiet, big enough for small game to feed your small party and you can carry a thousand rounds without thinking twice.

Thats not to say your party should be without protective arms.

[Peter Hecht]

Personally I think AR's look nicer, feel nicer, are more accurate yet do less damage, however, compared to an AK they are nothing. You can fire an AK underwater, covered in oil, covered in sand, doesn't jam, etc. A good reliable firearm, not as accurate as an AR, but does more damage.

Too bad that every motherfucker in a 3rd world country has one - thanks America.

[Thomas de Aynesworth]

Even Norinco AKs are decent quality nowadays.

[10Bears]

It's been discussed before but that's alright.
AR's for accuracy, ergonomics and VERSATILITY. AK's for rugged reliability.
Frankly, the AR-platform chambered in .308 is looking more and more interesting to me.

Does anyone have that ever-changing AR-graphic that was posted during the last discussion of this topic? It was fascinating.

[Thomas Roisto]

AR

I have yet to see a good reason to get the ok over it

[Hugh]

Not really a debate.

Those who used the AR were defeated by those who used the AK.

[OTPTT]

Arizona looks far better politically than does Arkansas. I've never been to Arkansas though and have only passed through Arizona.

[OTPTT]

Arizona looks far better politically than does Arkansas. I've never been to Arkansas though and have only passed through Arizona.

[Leonard Rouse]

Definately AK. Have you seen that Sarah Palin chick? She's hot!

[chopper stopper]

well boys this my first post my name Col pale horse and I was trained by a Aussy. Going into battle you carry around twice issue 320 rounds 223 the ar is a good rifle if kept clean and very good if use in semi one shot one kill. the Ak is on the other hand a very robust rifle I have a russ smerch vest and it holds 12 30 shot mags binos & a small ruck with 3 days of rats. Both guns where made for very diff battle roles the ak will run where the ar will not and parts supply roles are 2 parts ar to 1 part or nerver to the ak it will take so much abuse I have both 9 ar & 22 ak,s and then some heavy com bloc stuff so there you go. I hope this help I feel the same as you guys do about being white and its half the white you have to watch out for too I hate all equal and trush no one and nothing of what I even see my job is to keep a Alaskan A team alive in times of need we deploy ar rifles as it what nato has for parts. But I have many ak,s to run op,s with as they will run so much better and longer ammo is not as good but if you match reload for the ak in brass is a tack driver in the right mans hands. I know and I hope you dont think Im bullshiting you all if and we you really have to fight you will find out what works and what will not pure and simple good luck if the shit hits the fan as I plan to put a hurting on all bad folk in my AO .WE also deploy a 50 bmg sniper rifle for hard targets and such and demo would have to be made at home or taken in a fight this is really how it will pan out in small groups of fighters Pale horse out

[Simo Häyhä]

Neither.

Just get a DSA FAL. A battle rifle that is as reliable as the AK, albeit, unfortunately, not as cheap (WASR-10's sell for less than 500 bucks and are of actually decent quality).

[Thomas de Aynesworth]

There are AKs chambered in .223 NATO, if you want the quality and reliability of the rugged AK and those tiny little rounds made in the USA.

[Simo Häyhä]

Originally Posted by Thomas de Aynesworth

There are AKs chambered in .223 NATO, if you want the quality and reliability of the rugged AK and those tiny little rounds made in the USA.

I believe you're referring to the AK-74/AKS-74/AK-74SU, but you're mistaken regarding the caliber. They're actually chambered in 5.45 instead of 5.56. Understandable mistake, though, they're quite similar.

PS: I know 5.56 and 223. aren't exactly the same, but the difference is barely worth mentioning.

[Thomas de Aynesworth]

I am not mistaken, I was referring to the Saiga sporterized AKs in the United States, and the newer AK-102 chambered for .223 and 5.56x45 NATO. I am quite familiar with the family of assault rifles. Sorry for the confusion Simo.

[ray bateson]

Originally Posted by Thomas de Aynesworth

I am not mistaken, I was referring to the Saiga sporterized AKs in the United States, and the newer AK-102 chambered for .223 and 5.56x45 NATO. I am quite familiar with the family of assault rifles. Sorry for the confusion Simo.

You aren't thinking of the sporters. You mean this.



(four year old picture)

[Simo Häyhä]

I totally forgot about the AK-100 family. I thought we were discussing AK-47's. And yeah, I looked into it and indeed you're right, Saiga now has AK's chambered in 223; and in 30-06 (kinda useless if you ask me)...and in 308...

I never heard of them up until now that you mentioned it, though.

Oh well, as long as it's not a Krinkov, any AK will do its job, I guess.

[OTPTT]

AR10 (.308 Winchester)
AR15 (.223)

You'll want firearms that shoot NATO cartridges. Do I need to tell you why?

[Thomas de Aynesworth]

Originally Posted by ray bateson

You aren't thinking of the sporters. You mean this.



(four year old picture)

I loves me some orange Bakelite.