your right i like bushmaster for one reason they are made in my home state and i like suporting it colt is a fine weapon along with the others that produce ARs

Apples and oranges - depends on the mission.  Which is better to drive, a sports car or SUV?  There is no better, it all depends on where and how you need to drive.

I have AR and AK and have not had a problem with anyone of the many of each.  If i had to deal with Zombies it would be the AR and if the AR was not handy or available I wouldnt have a problem with the AK.  Now if we are talking Hi-Point then its time to convert to zombie.

First, let me say I have owned several ARs over the years and currently own an M-4gery which I built myself from parts to celebrate 9/13/04, along with a Brit. AR-180 (irrelevant AR, I know).  I have only had a few malfunctions out of my AR-15 types, once due to a bad magazine and again once due to over-oiling the bolt head/extractor, resulting in failures to eject.  I also own several AKs of various types, and have had occasional failure to eject malfunctions, but only when using commercial Wolf laquered ammo.  The laquer is like a glue, liquifying under the heat of firing and sticking the case to the chamber walls.  Other than that, no AK malfunctions over many thousands of rounds.  In essence, AKs and ARs both work well in a civilian, shooting range type of environment.  

The most important facet of a combat rifle is that it fires when the trigger is pulled, every time, until the ammo runs out.  Military testing and actual combat have shown that in general, AKs seem to do this more consistently than ARs (okay, M-16s technically) when the operating conditions are harsh.  War zones can be pretty nasty for people and equipment alike.  Sand and mud do not coexist well with the AR's tight operating tolerances.  Sometimes that nasty stuff gets into the rifle's action, and it is often at a time when cleaning is not possible!  All other design factors, while important or desirable, fall into line behind reliability.  This trait is the AKs crowning glory.

To be certain, the typical AR is more ergonomic, has better sights, has less recoil/climb, and is "more accurate", than the typical AK.  The 5.56mm round is likely more lethal on soft targets than the 7.62x39.  The AK is more resistant to harsh combat conditions, is not as maintenance-intensive, is "accurate enough" for most combat targets and distances, and is more compact (AKM to M-16, or AKMS to M-4).  The 7.62x39 is a better round for punching through light cover and remaining lethal than the 5.56mm.  One thing which enables the incredible reliability of the AK is its magazine; these are far sturdier than the AR types, although at a significant weight penalty.

Unfortunately there still is no "perfect" combat rifle embodying the best traits of all the good ones currently in circulation.  They all have their warts to be sure, and to say that one is "better" without qualifying what characteristic one is referring to is simply ignorant.

Quoted: I think they are just mad cause they can't afford an AR...I had to take out a second mortgage for mine  seriously though, I have a Romanian SAR-1 (AK) and an AR varient, love em both along with my SKS, Mosin Nagant, Ruger P89, etc..........The point is ALL firearms are great! Those who hate any are just 's Now I'm in the mood for work. Off to the airport!

Yup, If it goes "Bang" and you can point it at something, you just HAVE to play with it. Get your mind out of the gutter! I was talking about Guns.

I would have to agree with most of what was posted above. I'm sure the cost of the weapons has a lot to do with it. You can spend thousands on an AR with hundreds of options. Whereas the AK doesn't have that many. I guess it all depends in what you value in a firearm. I value accuricy, dependibility, reliability, cost, function, maintainance, Etc... They all play a roll in the like/dislike of AR's. Personally I love my AR. I also love my AK (Romainian WASR-10). I damn sure wouldn't take my AK deer hunting though. It doesn't have the accuricy or velocity of my AR's which may be critical for those long range shots. My AR-15 or AR-10 (.308) would work and I would take them in a New York Minute. In fact I'm going to the first week of November. I know they say you can fill an AK with Mud, Muddy Water, Sand, Etc... and it will still function. I'm sure the AR will do the same to a degree but how often are you out drudging through the mud? And why would you want to? I have a fit if I get sand or dust in my weapon and have even stopped shooting because of it. Yes the weapon can handle it but I don't want excess ware because of sand in the moving parts. I think to have such a "hate" says a lot about the person. I dunno... it's sad. It's almost as bad as "Colt Haters". So Angery. *shrug*

I have shot both the AR and AK. I own both the AR and AK. Both are fine weapons and both have their strong points and weak points.

In a SHTF situation, I will grab an AK hands down. They ARE more reliable, they will work where the AR will jam and ammo would probably easy to find. I have never had an AK jam on me and I have shot 1000s of rounds through them. Can't say the same for the ARs. For accuracy. I will taek an AR any day of the week! 6 inchs at 100 yards with an AK is great!

Quoted: I browse various forums, like this one, gunsnet, highroad etc... I was over at gunsnet's AK forum, and I read through about 2 long threads that were pure AR bashing. I know it is an ongoing thing, like 9mm vs 45, Chevy vs Ford, Coke vs Pepsi...BUT, I just don't understand the pure hate people have for the AR. Unlike all other preferences, usually people say so and so sucks or I prefer A over B. When it comes to the AR, there are long, over-exaggerated hate testimonies that just go on and on. Over here on AR15.com, sure there might be a little bashing of the AK, usually about the pros/cons, but a lot of people here own AK's and love them for what they are. AK people tend to just be vicious against the AR and fanatical about the AK. Less appreciation for both, lots of criticism for one and not the other. All I hear is tons of unsubstantiated claims, bandwagoning, appeals to authority (famous military testimonies), Myths and other nonsense. Aside from features, use, pros/cons -- why does the AR catch more hate than any other weapon? Is there something about it that marks it as the weapon of choice to criticize or attack?

Think about how I feel.  I own AR and Glocks

The original question was "why the hate?"  Long before I actually owned and shot guns, I disliked ARs/M16s because of:

- Reputation for "jams" in Vietnam, resulting in needless US casualties
- The 5.56 round
- The now-roundly-debunked myth that "Mattell" had made them out of "plastic"

I own an AK (a good one, too) but this past weekend I picked up my first AR.  I neither love nor hate either system (I'm more of a FAL/HK91/M1A type of guy), but I can tell you that if I had to choose between the AK and the AR, I'd choose the AR hands down.  The AR is more accurate in my experience, and as far as I have researched, neither's cartridge trumps the other.  AR is also far more ergonomic (the AK safety/select SUCKS, IMNSHO) and the AK remains closed on an empty mag -- arggh!
 
ARs certainly have their faults, but I find it hilarious that anyone would stack an AK against an AR.  Yeah, you can fire an AK 800,000 times without cleaning it, but I would not trust an AK past 100 yards if my life depended on it -- clean OR dirty.   ARs can easily and accurately go to 300 and still have sufficient stopping power.

Out of curiosity, I wonder how many of these AK lovers who praise the "jam free" AK design also own 1911s?  I deeply respect the 1911 (esp. the triggers) but they tend to have more malfunctions than Glocks, in my experience.  I have lost count as to how many times I've seen 1911 owners have malf's -- even on brand new Wilson Combats.   I AM NOT BASHING 1911s, just pointing out a possible discrepancy.

Dang for a newbie I've spoke too much already. [/soapbox]

Ok, I'll be the first to stick his neck out here . . . I like Pepsi better than Coke.  

I also like Jeeps (I currently own three Cherokees).

Does this mean that everyone should drink Pepsi and drive Jeeps?  I hope not.

Getting back on topic, I agree with the others who have stated that the AR, Glock, 9mm, (or whatever) bashers, bash out of an immature need to feel good about themselves and their choices.

I have shot AKs but I own an AR.  I did not like the sights on the AK, and it just didn't fit me very well.  That said, I intend to own one someday, just for fun.  I think that there is probably some truth to the notion that there is an economic/sour grapes/resentment in the Nietzcheian sense element to many of the AR bashers.  ARs are more expensive than AKs and it is somewhat natural to denigrate a rifle that you can't afford to feel better about the one that you can.  I think there is probably some merit to the notion that AKs are more reliable than ARs, especially in the sense that the AK is less maintenance intensive.   It has also been my experience, however, that my AR is as reliable as I have ever needed it to be.  In fact, I have never had a failure of any kind with my AR (not that I have subjected it to any kind of "abuse" beyond going in excess of 1000 rounds without cleaning it).  

As far as the Glock vs. 1911 issue, I have shot Glocks, but own and carry 1911s.  Again, the 1911s are more maintenance intensive, but they just feel right to me.  I have problems with the Glock's trigger, which I could probably overcome if I spent some time with one.  But the 1911 works for me, its what I know, and I have the liberty to choose to carry whatever I want.  If I was required to carry a Glock, I'm sure I could learn to love it also.  

On the .45 vs. 9mm, again I own pistols in both calibers.  I carry a .45, but I would not feel unsafe with a 9mm.  The 9mm definitely has its place.  A 9mm can be made more concealable or with a larger magazine capacity than a .45, and it is definitely a better choice for the recoil sensitive.

Anyway, I have now added my essentially useless opinions to the basically useless AR vs. AK/1911 vs. Glock/.45 vs. 9mm debates.  Use what works best for you, and never close yourself off to the possibility that there may be something out there that might work better for you.  Also, never assume that because something works better for you something else might not work just as well for someone else.  As others have stated: If it goes Bang, it can't be Bad.  Anyway, I have now wasted enough of everyone's time, including my own.  Carry on.

i like the AK because of its reputation, but its a commie gun. i would deffitanlly take an AR tho over an AK, the AR is americas rifle.

bbr

Quoted: they bash the AR cause they know, vut wont admit, its better than the AK but i like both; i just like the AR a lot better by the way: .45acp, chevy, coke are the best

No words truer.

I dont like AKs tho, i got nothing against em, just dont like em. I havnt seen any for sale on my street corner since the AWB Sunset tho, wonder whats up.

"I just said that I didn't like handguns, didn't say I couldn't use them."  

They probably heard from their best friend’s, mother’s stepfather that he had a buddy who had a feller working on his pickup truck who knew this guy who bought a monkey from a feller who had heard that they had some problems with the Mattel rifle back during the war in Korea.

By the way…

45ACP without a question

DODGE

And Pepsi (I like the cherry flavor)  

Quoted: "I just said that I didn't like handguns, didn't say I couldn't use them."

Matthew Quigley

You're all wrong, it's .40 s&w, Toyota Tundra, and soda is bad for you so I don't drink it. hadI loved my AK, but then again I loved the Ford Maverick I had in high school. But if I drove it today I bet I'd think "This thing SUCKS!"

-J

Quoted: they bash the AR cause they know, vut wont admit, its better than the AK but i like both; i just like the AR a lot better

you mean

by the way: .45acp, chevy, PEPSI
are the best

Quoted: I think it follows that anything that achieves that kind of popularity becomes a target of ridicule by those who don't like to be on the bandwagon.  Kinda like Mac guys hammering the windows OS.

A bit off topic perhaps, but hold on there... Mac guys hammering on Windows? From my perspective it's been much the other way around.

Like the AK and the AR, both will accomplish the same thing, one just lets you do it with style.

:)

crimeny!


BUY BOTH!!


sorry, 3 pages.  had to be said.



my ak is the best $300 rifle i've ever shot.  would have no issues going into battle with it.

SHTF?  ar15.  why?  cuz if i really need it [sam elliot]there'll be plenty of mags lying on the ground for it[/sam elliot]

Here is A Ar15 Hate Link I found Probly A dupe
Why I hate the M-16/AR-15 Rifle and variants.

Quoted: They probably heard from their best friend’s, mother’s stepfather that he had a buddy who had a feller working on his pickup truck who knew this guy who bought a monkey from a feller who had heard that they had some problems with the Mattel rifle back during the war in Korea.

Best reason yet... ++++++++1

Quoted: Here is A Ar15 Hate Link I found Probly A dupe Why I hate the M-16/AR-15 Rifle and variants.

That guy makes a couple of real good points, and I tend to agree with him to some degree about the unsuitability of the AR as a front-line groundpounders weapon. It does seem to do better in the hands of a more skilled operator. Maybe we could give M4's to Rangers and SF, and Mini-14's to everyone else? hinking.gif

-J

Quoted: Quoted: Here is A Ar15 Hate Link I found Probly A dupe Why I hate the M-16/AR-15 Rifle and variants. That guy makes a couple of real good points, and I tend to agree with him to some degree about the unsuitability of the AR as a front-line groundpounders weapon. It does seem to do better in the hands of a more skilled operator. Maybe we could give M4's to Rangers and SF, and Mini-14's to everyone else? -J

Mini 14????  Crappy rifle that's much less accurate and less reliable than an AR?   Actually the M4 should be the operators weapon, with appropriate ammunition of course.  The average soldier should be carrying an M16A2 20" with M193 ammo.  The M855 apparently wont fragment far enough out.   I'd also like to see a decent optic as standard issue.  The carry handle should be retained as a failsafe BUIS you cannot lose.    I'd also like to see a handgun used as standard issue to any soldier that desires to carry one.    

My AK (sar1) has crappy ergos and although combat accurate is a distant distant second choice to ANY of my ARs.

Quoted: Quoted: Here is A Ar15 Hate Link I found Probly A dupe Why I hate the M-16/AR-15 Rifle and variants. That guy makes a couple of real good points, and I tend to agree with him to some degree about the unsuitability of the AR as a front-line groundpounders weapon. It does seem to do better in the hands of a more skilled operator. Maybe we could give M4's to Rangers and SF, and Mini-14's to everyone else? -J

You have to be joking right? Mini-14 is the biggest piece of shit yu could get. The M16 is just fine for front line ground pounders (I am one of them)

I have both, and like both.

when all is said and done, AR > AK

Quoted: Quoted: I  liked the AK-47 alot,but a semi  auto AK-47 is about useless  as tits on a bore hog. I  use the think  the AK-47  was a great MBR, itleast untill I'd purchased a M4  clone. TG That is interesting. I never really thought about it in that way. I never fired a full auto AK. I have fired a few semi-auto AK's before. Is it full-auto that really makes the AK stand out? Is that what makes it useful? I find that shooting semi-auto single shots, aimed...is just a greater joy with an AR. Easier. The AR is used in its military role as a 3-round burst, the AK as a full auto. Since I am discussing civilian weapons that are limited to semi-auto only, which weapon loses more of its "edge" when it is relegated to a semi-auto form?

AK's lose more of their "edge" in semi auto.


AK's are primarily for full auto fire., which is why the selector on a real AK goes safe-full-semi

M16's, M4's etc are primarily for semi auto, which is why the selector goes safe-semi-full (or burst).  
From what I understand, most of the training in the military is for aimed semi auto fire.

the sights on an AR' and especially using a red dot sight lend itself better to quick and accurate semi-auto shots.

AK sights are pretty crude.

You have to be joking right? Mini-14 is the biggest piece of shit yu could get. The M16 is just fine for front line ground pounders (I am one of them)

Yeah I'm joking, cause we all know that the US military still places a great deal of emphasis on accurate aimed fire, not sustained firescreens. If the Mini-14 is so unsuited for tactical use, why does a military/LEO full auto version even exist?

-J

Quoted: You have to be joking right? Mini-14 is the biggest piece of shit yu could get. The M16 is just fine for front line ground pounders (I am one of them) Yeah I'm joking, cause we all know that the US military still places a great deal of emphasis on accurate aimed fire, not sustained firescreens. If the Mini-14 is so unsuited for tactical use, why does a military/LEO full auto version even exist? -J

Show me where the US military uses a Mini 14.

Quoted: why does a military/LEO full auto version even exist? -J

There are militayr/LEO versions of neirly every gun on the market, that doesn't mean they are all worth a shit.

Let me preface this post by saying I don't know shit.

That being said, what's the most prominent weapon used by the most powerful military in the world?

When you see hordes of towelheads in the streets of bagdhad waving guns around in the air, what kind of guns are they?  They are the cheapest, most mass produced guns they can get their hands on, and that's why they use them.

It's kind of like comparing Harleys to Hondas.  The Honda people will tell you that Harleys are overpriced and overrated.  The Harley people don't care because they know they have the best, and wouldn't mind having a cheap, mass produced honda as a backup bike.  We all know which is really the best.

I may be entirely wrong about this post, but it's just my observation and opinion.  I'd love to get an AK one day soon, just to have one.  Not because I think it's better.  Although, from what I've read and heard, I think I'd really like a Galil SA 5.56, but that's just me.  I like to go with the best of whatever I'm looking for.

Like I said earlier, I don't know shit.

Quoted: Interesting, but most of the AR bashers don't give a damn about modding or accessories. It seems to be A] caliber sucks B] Gas system is terrible C] too tight aka can't take a handful of sand in it. Those are the major gripes, but aside from those comments, the general hate for it is almost unmatched. Those that hate glocks don't compare to those that hate AR's.

Exactly: Innacurate, unfounded gripes based on 3rd-hand 'urban legend' class information...

Im gonna throw in my .2 as well.

I also saw that history channel episode where they said that most countries who field AK's cant afford AR's.  I agree with this for the most part but I think it transcends to people as well.  Pros and Cons of the weapon aside I think that aside from penny pinching builds your average AR is WAY more expensive than an AK clone.  I think most people are trying to justify cheaping out and make themselves feel smarter by getting the cheaper but "better" rifle.  I owned an AK before any AR's because at the time I couldn't afford an AR.  But when I stepped up to flavor and got one I freakin love it and would never look back.  My AK is only used now for cheap plinking and I think that many AK owners would feel the same way when given an AR.      

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Here is A Ar15 Hate Link I found Probly A dupe Why I hate the M-16/AR-15 Rifle and variants. That guy makes a couple of real good points, and I tend to agree with him to some degree about the unsuitability of the AR as a front-line groundpounders weapon. It does seem to do better in the hands of a more skilled operator. Maybe we could give M4's to Rangers and SF, and Mini-14's to everyone else? -J Mini 14????  Crappy rifle that's much less accurate and less reliable than an AR?   Actually the M4 should be the operators weapon, with appropriate ammunition of course.  The average soldier should be carrying an M16A2 20" with M193 ammo.  The M855 apparently wont fragment far enough out.   I'd also like to see a decent optic as standard issue.  The carry handle should be retained as a failsafe BUIS you cannot lose.    I'd also like to see a handgun used as standard issue to any soldier that desires to carry one.     My AK (sar1) has crappy ergos and although combat accurate is a distant distant second choice to ANY of my ARs.

1) I agree, Minis suck... That article is more of the ignorant that I was talkinga bout earlier... Another M14's-rule-so-Ruger's-look-a-like-is-great type...

2) What is this love of the too-light-for-practicality M193 round? Because you all can get it cheaper? Seriously, if we're going to chance from M855, it should be to a 77gr SMK based round, NOT to the old fashioned 55gr... it's allmost as bad as the folks who think 5.56 'tumbles', or that we should have some noxiously slow twist because it makes the round 'more lethal'....

3) As ffor the other one,  the RIGHT answer is:

9mm, PONTIAC, and Coca Cola

(No, Pontiac does not make trucks. But I do not own a farm, or run a contracting business. I have *NO* use for a truck/SUV)...

Quoted: First, let me say I have owned several ARs over the years and currently own an M-4gery which I built myself from parts to celebrate 9/13/04, along with a Brit. AR-180 (irrelevant AR, I know).  I have only had a few malfunctions out of my AR-15 types, once due to a bad magazine and again once due to over-oiling the bolt head/extractor, resulting in failures to eject.  I also own several AKs of various types, and have had occasional failure to eject malfunctions, but only when using commercial Wolf laquered ammo.  The laquer is like a glue, liquifying under the heat of firing and sticking the case to the chamber walls.  Other than that, no AK malfunctions over many thousands of rounds.  In essence, AKs and ARs both work well in a civilian, shooting range type of environment.   The most important facet of a combat rifle is that it fires when the trigger is pulled, every time, until the ammo runs out.  Military testing and actual combat have shown that in general, AKs seem to do this more consistently than ARs (okay, M-16s technically) when the operating conditions are harsh.  War zones can be pretty nasty for people and equipment alike.  Sand and mud do not coexist well with the AR's tight operating tolerances.  Sometimes that nasty stuff gets into the rifle's action, and it is often at a time when cleaning is not possible!  All other design factors, while important or desirable, fall into line behind reliability.  This trait is the AKs crowning glory.OIF has shown this to be a good amount of  myth... To be certain, the typical AR is more ergonomic, has better sights, has less recoil/climb, and is "more accurate", than the typical AK.  The 5.56mm round is likely more lethal on soft targets than the 7.62x39.  The AK is more resistant to harsh combat conditions, is not as maintenance-intensive, is "accurate enough" for most combat targets and distances, and is more compact (AKM to M-16, or AKMS to M-4).  The 7.62x39 is a better round for punching through light cover and remaining lethal than the 5.56mm.  One thing which enables the incredible reliability of the AK is its magazine; these are far sturdier than the AR types, although at a significant weight penalty.Basically, the AK is perfect for poorly trained 3rd-world armies... A designation that covers most AK deploying countries... Unfortunately there still is no "perfect" combat rifle embodying the best traits of all the good ones currently in circulation.  They all have their warts to be sure, and to say that one is "better" without qualifying what characteristic one is referring to is simply ignorant.

Quoted: 3) As ffor the other one,  the RIGHT answer is: 9mm, PONTIAC, and Coca Cola (No, Pontiac does not make trucks. But I do not own a farm, or run a contracting business. I have *NO* use for a truck/SUV)...

I would say for me it would be:

9mm, Harley Davidson, and Dr. Pepper

(I don't own a truck either)

The AR15 is a great gun, if you know how to clean it, it will do its part. That said, I'd rather take an ak into combat, not for reliability, its just Im afraid of banging my ar around, hitting it, dropping it. Dragging my prescious through mud+gravel? But an ak cost alot less $$$ so I could bang it up without cringing (at least not as much with my ar)

Quoted: The AR15 is a great gun, if you know how to clean it, it will do its part. That said, I'd rather take an ak into combat, not for reliability, its just Im afraid of banging my ar around, hitting it, dropping it. Dragging my prescious through mud+gravel? But an ak cost alot less $$$ so I could bang it up without cringing (at least not as much with my ar)

Ahh, but the M4s & M16s that go to combat are *free* (at least as far as the guys who take them to war are concerned... As taxpayers we all pay for them, but it's a worthwile investment, don't ya think?)....

Ok, I have 4 ARs and 1 Sar.  The Sar is ok and functions without a hitch. It has fair accuracy. The AR functions reliablyand is very accurate as well as easily modified. I'd go with the AR. If I need a bigger hammer then I'll use my M1A.