Narrator on history channel just said that Stoner once told Kalashnikov that K's weapon was the "more reliable of the two"
Guess that ends the controversy.
BP

Bah... I'll keep my AR and just clean it once a year.

So, which round would you rather get hit by [rolleyes].......BWAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAA

Didn't the show say that Kalashnikov's pention is only $50 a month ?

Also didn't the show say that Stoner could afford a personal plane and Kalashnikov could only afford a plane ticket. ?

Hell, which round has a better chance of actually hitting it's target?[shock]

Possibly very true, however, those who are smart buy both[:)]

Sgtar15

I'm not sure I understand how much you get paid has to do with how well your weapon design works.
BP

Got'em !

Let me add: I only reported what the narrator said. I dont even know if its true.
I agree with SGTAR and I own both weapons. If the SHTF I will grab my AK first.
Several thousand rounds NO malfunctions.
My AR on the other hand has had the occasional problem. Had to replace Ex. spring after couple thousand rounds. It was a little finicky at first.
When I go to the range, I bring my AR. Its more accurate and far more sexy. Tha AK(5.45) is close to the AR's accuracy. Could it kill at 100 yards as easily? You bet.
I like my AR more than my AK by a wide margin. But I dont use it as tool, more as a toy. As a tool, I would prefer an AK.JMHO
BP

Very true. Kalashnikov is *still* a hard-line Communist after all these years, even though he's totally poor because of it. Had he patented the AK-47 in America he would be a billionaire. Insanity to the extreme.


Indeed. Some people forget that the AK-47 was designed as a rifle of war whereas the AR-15 was a new design live-fire tested by our South Vietnamese allies.

If you can swing it, use an AR-15 in your left hand and an AK-47 in your right! [:D]

And if you had a choice between a Ford Escort station wagon and a new Cobra Mustang, and the sales guy said the Escort was more reliable......Which one would you get?

Neither

Most people that can afford their own plane should be thrown from it. Just my thoughts on the filthy rich and my assessment of their character.

That's a pretty broad brush you paint with.  Maybe you should put a little more thought into your words.

Ya know, one of them who is a die hard Colt fan, (2 Colt 1911's, 1 Colt AR15 (yes marked AR15) and 1 Sporter) shocked me when he said if TSHTF he was going to grab his SLR95!

Correction...Those who are smart [b]add[/b] those two to their FAL variant!!!!

Just so you know where I'm coming from on this, I have 3 AR's and 1 AK.

I watched the same show and it seemed pretty much everybody said the AK was more reliable.

Okay, you can set the oven to MilkMan now.

SHTF and I can only grab one rifle? I'm  grabbing the scoped M1A. Hell, I ain't no hero! I'll take the bad guys out from a distance and run (if I can).

The best part of that whole meeting between the two was Stoner stating "Everyone was happy with their 20rd (M16) magazines, until they saw that the AK had a 30rd magazine. Now all they wanted was 30rd magazines"

Funny because all I want is 30rd magazines too.



JerrY

The VW. Why do you ask?

If the bad guys are far enough away that you need the scoped rifle to hit them, they are far enough away that they probably cannot see you.  So, do you really need to start shooting at them and drawing their attention?  What happens when they start shooting back and maneuvering their superior numbers around to flank your position? Unless you have a spare quad of guys around to back you up, you are in some serious trouble now.  Whereas, if you had let them go along their way (presuming they are not moving directly toward your home already) you might continue to live on in stealth, un-noticed by the bad guys and with a much higher chance of surviving the day.

YMMV of course.  I live in the northeast where any range long enough to require a scope to hit the target usually has ample opportunities for cover and concealment (lots of trees, bushes, hills and other visual obstructions to make it real difficult to pick someone out over say 300 yards. Conditions will vary dramatically in other parts of the country with much more open ground.

My SHTF scenarios also do not include trying to make it on my own out in the wilderness. They revolve around forting up with as many other survivors in the local area as possible and trying to re-establish order, not playing the lone wolf out in the woods.

Based on my fixed base scenarios, I will have an AR for patrolling and close in defense, a scoped M1A for long range defense and some large game hunting, an M1 Garand for long range or hard target defense.  Then for small game hunting, I'll use a .22 LR with a low powered scope.  A handgun for walking around twon/village/fort and last ditch back up, and shotgun for other close in work.

When you operate out of a fixed base you can afford to have your cake and eat it too.

You guys are comparing blue berries to black berries when you could be talking about apples and oranges:  M1 Garand and FN FAL.  Both are extremely reliable and both shoot a cartridge that will do real damage.

On the other hand, I do love my ARs [;)]

Yeah, the M16 has a bad rap when it was "newer"... seems that the quality & reliability are pretty darn good to me now though.

Good one, that should be the answer whenever the AR-vs-AK, 5.56-vs-7.62 etc. etc. arguments come up!

Hey, like I always say, just because YOU don't know how to make a lot of money, shouldn't stop others from doing it.  

I prefer the 20s. I like to get in a nice low prone, and I really don't expect to use full auto for suppressive fire, so the extra ammo in a 30 is sorta moot . . .

If they can't see him, how are they going to figure out where to place their fire & where to flank? It is very difficult to figure out where one rifle shot came from, and it is also fairly difficult to figure out where several rifle shots came from. This is specially true if some shots hit home, and the pucker factor is real high. Historically, snipers tend to be hard to locate and kill, even when they are engaging in behined the lines ops (for example, the Russian snipers who operated behind German lines during WW2 were very hard to catch, the Germans tended to take it out on the nearest village--and the German soldiers were first rate).

And, of course, the sniper does not neccessarly need to stay put. Given the right terrain, shoot n scoot becomes a very viable tactic.

Frankly, about the only viable way to engage superior forces is from a distance, using sniping tactics.

Ahh, envy. The root cause of socialism and fascism the world over.

Just because the History Channel said Stoner made such a statement doesn't make it true.  Did Stoner say this to the History Channel people before he died?  Is this comment recorded on video or audio tape?

Was this comment made by Kalashnikov?  Can he be trusted?

If Stoner did make this comment, was he being nice?  I myself have made flattering comments to ALL SORTS of people that were not even remotely true.  Comments to employers, women, relatives, etc.  

Perhaps he felt sorry for the wretchedly poor bastard, Kalshnikov.  Maybe he was just trying to make him feel better and lessen his misery.

"Kalashnikov is *still* a hard-line Communist after all these years, even though he's totally poor because of it."

huh? the man owns stock in several american firms. pretty "capitalistic" of him, i would say.

Are you talking about the same person we are, that is Mikhail Kalashnikov, former tank mechanic injured during WW2 who designed the original AK-47? He's broke! Can't invest in American firms with nyet rubles.

Remember: communism = all profit to the state. He gets a small pension from the state and that's it.