AK Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - AK v AR (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 10/29/2006 4:15:33 AM EDT
| A lot of the problems that gave the AR such a bad rap as being a "jamomatic" have fixed for years. I still don't think it's as reliable as an AK though. But more accurate. 7.62X39 ammo will not dry up, but it's not cheap anymore either. For casual plinking I like shooting my AK better. I can't say why but the AK just has more "fun to shoot" built into it for me. I like and own both and wouldn't steer you away from either. |
Maybe, maybe not.
Why Panther? What's wrong with Colt or Bushmaster or.... You get the point I hope.
Old news, the price and availability of 7.62/5.45x39 is fine now. AKs can be had in .223 too.
He must not sell many ARs and a shit load of AKs 
The mark of a true SALESMAN (hint, salesman are in it to make money first, customer second) Newer AKs with western ammo are pretty accurate, newer ARs are a more reliable.
Try both before commiting your hard earned dollars. Go to a few more gun shops and see how the story changes. Being new, it would be best to find someone to go shooting with, alot of good folks in the GA Home Town Forum here. I'd strongly suggest you post down there and see who's near by. |
No experience with either!|
i have shot bothand now am building an ak so i will own both. the AK is more reliable (yugo), and the AR is less so. the AR is more accurate, the AK is less so. personally if its a home defense type weapon, i'd think of this angle: You shot an armed (somehow the media will forget this part) intruder with a communist, ganng-banger style cheapo assault rifle = The AK You shot an armed intruder with an m16 assault rifle just like cops use. thats the difference for me in my home defense planning. |
|
I have both a couple times over. I carry an M4 for my duty weapon. I carry an AK in my truck.Knock down of a 7.62 far outshines a .223. Accuracy is better with an AR. At 100 yards an AK is more than sufficient for combat. 7.62 is heavier to carry. My AR is reliable as long as I keep it clean and lubed. Try shooting an AR dry. Try shooting an AK dry. As far as ammunition, it's going up accross the board. We had low prices on 7.62 x 39 for years until the flood of AK's into the states. Supply and demand. Everyone including me wants to hoard ammo, and the price goes up. |
|
Anyone who tells you that one gun is openly better is selling something. Simple as that. Both guns have their strong points and both guns are worthwhile. I would be very leary of him saying he makes the same amount of money and then pushing a specific brand AR for you. The AR requires more maintaince than the AK. thats a simple statement of truth. I highly doubt he's seen the same number of busted AKs as busted ARs. The AR is more susceptible to damage with its constant need for oil. The AK isn't. Its a great selling point for an AK, but part of the reason for this is tied to the workings of the guns. The AR is designed to be a more accurate gun and the AK is designed with a lot of wiggle room. The AK was designed as a combat rifle in response to the short range military tactics of world war 2. It was designed as a 300 yard battle rifle that was supposed to be able to take the beatings of a dumb conscript army. The AR was not designed around those concepts. I think blanketly comparing them is pretty pointless, they are designed with different needs in focus and those differing priorities were implemented very differently. They're both impressive and worthwhile guns and while people may have a preference for one or the other of them. Just keep in mind that instead of most people aspousing the high points of both it comes down to some stupid "AK vs AR" debate. There is no debate. In short, Get both. They're great guns. They both have a purpose. just my .02 |
You will find zealots on both sides of this argument. I own both and enjoy both. I shoot the AK's more often because the ammo is still somewhat cheaper and all of my shooting is at 200 yards or less. Shoot both if you can, then buy the one that YOU enjoy the most. Like many of us, you may end up owning both 
|
|
Also remember this. The AR is not nearly as unreliable as some AK folks think it is. No, it won't take the dirt or abuse the AK will, but if you take reasonably good care if it, it won't let you down. The AK isn't nearly as inaccurate or primitive as some AR people make it out to be. If you can't hit a man's chest at 300 yards with an AK, it's probably you. Some can do much better than that. With practice, AK mag changes can be done it about the same time as an AR. |
|
I own a couple ARs and am thinking about an SLR-106 (5.56x45), but I won't buy until I see some range reports, preferably with photos of targets. My ARs have been 100% reliable with all the ammo I've tried (XM193, Q3131 and Q3131A, Guatemalan Surplus, Wolf, Silver Bear, Black Hills) since break-in, except when I tried fancy Chrome-Silicon "extra power" action springs, which wouldn't work with Russian ammo. My two A1-style rifles consistently do better than THIS with iron sights and the carbine does about as well (my eyesight gives me trouble with the closer front sight post). Not bad for pencil barrels. The link is to one of the more accurate AKs (Robinson Arms Vepr) with a 20" barrel and a 3.5x21 scope. I'm not posting this to brag about my ARs or bash AKs. I'm just saying my ARs are more than reliable enough for my purposes, and I find more accurate guns more interesting. If I see some convincing evidence the SLR-106 is a consistent 2 MOA rifle, then I'll buy one. |
| I have both. Why do posters say that one (the AR) requires more mantinance than the other (the AK)? Both seem about equal to me to maintain (clean-up) after a shoot with them. About the same number of parts and the same amount of time. Actually, I find that breaking down the AR, including the bolt to be a lot easier than the AK, including the bolt. I use mainly Wolf in the AK though I do have some Federals, I use WWB mainly in the AR and the white box stuff is a lot easier to get off. Do you mean to say that you can let it get really crummy in between cleanings? For what? Why would I want to purposely let my stuff go to crap? Maybe it's me but again, they both seem about the same to me by way of mantinance. |
|
Thanks to B Bait for the reply. Range mooch locally to learn (like gee with common grade ammo the AR and 5.56 AK both get 2" groups). Or just get both, because that and taking off and nuking form orbit is the only way to be sure. And find another gun shop with less rectal cranial impaction. |
Hey! Let's not bash Barbra! If half the folks could shoot as well as she sings... there'd be more blood on the ground... and blood makes the grass grow real green. hunt4info, Get both. I started with an SKS, moved up to an AK, and then went wild with AR's. I'm building a Romy Ak now(as well as a number of AR's). I like the 7.62x39 cartridge. It's a 30-30 in new clothes. The AR is a more versitile platform, in that you have so many calibers and options (don't I know that!). The AK is the Volkswagon of weapons, built for the masses. In the DIY arena, building is more the forte of the AK... You get to build and AK; an AR is more like "assembling". Back on the trail... read this and other forums, as well as gun magazines to get the true nature of each weapon. If personal defense is your reason for purchase, determine if it's home defense or other. A shotgun is the best choice for the home (IMHO) and not as "evil" as either the AK or AR. Fot the SHTF scenarios, either the AK or AR cannot be surpassed. AR's are lighter, even laden down with tacti-cool gadgets. AK's are cheaper. Choose your weapon, buy lots of ammo, and practice... practice... practice. There is no better weapon than a trained shooter. I read once that the study of martial arts was summed up by years of preparation for the few seconds of possible use; Practice so the body can react instinctively. (Yes, kung-foo master). Heck, this is sounding more and more like a Sunday sermon. ... back to listening to barbra singing broadway! buckmeister |
|
I had both: an LMT M4gery with some refined additions and an AKS 74 built by MCA (Duke Nukem), a really great build... Loved them both. Each shot about 2 MOA. BUT I HAD TO MAKE A CHOICE. I have had a lot of surgery in the last two years and a lot of medical bills. I could not afford to keep both. I sold both the LMT M2 and the AKS 74 along with all the mags and accesories and bought an SLR 106F. The 106 has a Steyr technology hammer forged chromed lined barrel. As I understand, factory AR barrels are not hammer forged. At any rate, I took the 106 to an indoor range a produced a 1 inch 5 shot group at 50 meters. The range has very poor lighting and I was using open sights and the grouping wasn't bad. The trigger on mine really sucked so I had to work pretty hard to get that kind of accuracy. All of my groups were not that good. Now I have done a trigger job and will test the improved trigger today. Tomorrow I am installing a side mount plate and maybe by next week, I will have some optics on it and I will let you know how that goes. I miss the AR some, but I am very satisfied with the SLR 106. I especially like the fact that it has a 1 in 7 twist that enables me to shoot 55 gr to 77 gr loads. BTW, your dealer sounds pretty lame. |
|
Since this will be the first buy for each of the two, I would go for the AR. NOT a panther. Get a bushy or Colt. The AR plateform has 1000 more items that you can buy and modify the weapon in any way you want. Its more virsitle...you can buy 1 lower, and then with a few part swaps go from a 16" carbine close range weapon to a 24" long range nail driver. You cant do that with a AK. |
Lets see, the AK is not versatile.  
|
|
The AK is far superior to the AR in ALL respects except for accuracy at distance. it was designed by M. Kalashnikov as such for mid-range 30-130~ yards typical battlefield conditions. If the sheyat hits the fan and your slogging thru the woods etc etc for extended periods without cleaning for extended periods, the AR15 is not what you want. I love ARs, built more than 30 of them, entirely both upper and lower, but its a high power .22 thats accurate. Learn what the LAPD learned from the BANK OF AMERICA shootout.....2 thugs with Underfolder AKs and Chinese drum mags held off 300+ police with 9mm,.....and swat showed up with HK MP5's....also pathetically mere 9mm guns. Rememer many dumb idiots in Mideast and africa who carry them around in the sand and mud and never if very rarely clean them. you cant do that with an AR15. the .223 is inferrior to the AK, sorry.....the AR15 is more accurate, and also more reliable than it used to be however also Bushmaster just came out with the NEW GAS SYSTEM which is basically a copy of the AK which uses a Piston system instead of a gas tube....you guys seen it yet?? It was designed to superceed the unreliable and inferior aspect of the M16/AR15, being its narrow jamOmatic gas tube. You say the M16 doesnt jam, but your not a soldier in IRAQ with blowing sand clogging up your gas tube. several soldiers back from tours in Afghan, and Iraq have mentioned same to me, .  Unless your prey/defensive target is far off, theres no reason to have the AR15, none. Do you REALLY think you need an ACOG or EOTECH over Iron sights between 30-130 yards?? You CANNOT logically argue that position. period. And i know someone is poised to say "well you cant mount superior optics on an AK like you can an AR15". At 100 Yards, your Eotech (which i love) or ACOG or otherwise has no advantage over IRON SIGHTS. if you had to carry your AR15 for weeks out in the open, how long do yuo think your battery powered optics and narrow gas tube will hold up? |
AK is a wonderful system but if you can acknowledge that the M16 (the second most mass produced weapon in the history of the world) is an above average weapon in it's own right.... well that's just dumb. Part of why AKs are so wide spread is not only their reliability but their cost of production (which in many times was free). If Belgium would have given out millions of FALs or Germany millions of G3, that would have taken the place of AK among any tribesman or third world militia that need a weapon. AK is a great weapon, I have/had one in at least every caliber but the AR is no slouch or second place weapon in my book. |
1. the claim that the 5.56 M16 round is = to the 7.62 is absurd by any logic or reasoning. Absolute horseplop. the 7.62 has proven itself over and over in penetration and lethality over that of the 5.56, youve no postion to make such an absurd claim. 2. the AR is more accurate, nothing more, its also more modular, which is irrelavent of its reliability and lethality in Shock trauma. |
|
Some of the newer AKs in .223 are approaching the accuracy consistencies of ARs. This recent build is heavy barrel, 5.56, 18", 1/7 twist, chrome lined and on my first outing I was able to put together 2" groups at 75 yards with Wolf and irons. That will improve the more I shoot and with better ammo. The single most significant reason why it would be a tough decision on a SHTF is that AKs are predominantely heavier than ARs. I have a 11.5" barrel Bushmaster with CAR stock and it weighs 7.2 lbs with a full 30 round light aluminum mag. This build is nearly 12lbs with full heavy steal mag. Pack 8 or more hours carrying the AK as apposed to the AR 15, and its easier to keep a gun clean. 
|
|
Quoted: Speaking of which the Saudis use/issue the M16, as well as other africans quote] One M16 to 1000 AKs in africa is no comparison. The Israelis have bitched AT LENGTH about the poor reliability of their M16s in "Sand-Land" Mideast. the M16 is being phased out as quick as possible by the Israelis due to its lack of rough and tumble reliability and penetration/power/lethality |
Do tell? What is replacing the M16? Got any pictures of Isrealis carrying this new gun? edit-nevermind I read your other posts about clogging gastubes and how eotechs are useless at 30-130 yards, you must work in a gunstore  If I didn't know gunkid was in jail, right now.... |
What???? I NEVER said "eotechs are useless at 30-130 yards.....i said no such thing!!!  I saw the NEW gun the Israelis are spitting out by the 1000s on Hunter Ellis' show on HIST. Channel I cant remember the name of the gun to save my life...He took it to the range, and visited the factory where chicks are building them at breakneck speed. the gun has built in holographic sight. The designer said it was build around the common Israeli combat close quarters they encounter, so its very short overall, but still has longrange accuracy. sorry i cant remember name of the gun, .......
|
|
He makes more off selling the Panther arms I'd guess. Panther is also known as DPMS which I've heard been called Don't Purchase My Shit. I wouldn't buy a DPMS. |
|
Thanks a lot...this has been really helpful! I appreciate all of the very good information here. Great discussion. Hmm. After this maybe I'll go over to a U.S. politics discussion board and ask "which is better, Democrat or Republican?" hat |
Or Doesn't Pass Military Specs. hunt4info Your dealer is either: a) an idiot and doesn't know what he is talking about or b) pushing you Panther because he needs to get rid of them Both have advantages and disadvantages, but either will suit you for defense purposes with the correct ammo and lots of training. Make sure to try both out and then promptly start saving for whichever one you didn't get. |
+1. Also, DPMS rifles are swinging from just about the lowest rung on the AR quality ladder. They are the WASRs of the AR world. Stag, RRA, Bushie, Armalite, Colt, LMT, CMMG-all make better products. Go shoot an AR, then shoot an AK. Go from there about which you want to buy And if you buy an AR, don't buy DPMS. Just my $.02....... |
I assume you mean HOME defense, right? If so, then I would buy NEITHER, sorry. Unless of course you already own a good handgun, and plenty of ammo. Neither AK's nor AR's were designed for home defense, by any stretch of the imagination. As far as the AK/AR argument goes ... I look at it like this: If I'm in control of my situation, making all the rules ... I'll take an AR. I'll keep it spotless, I'll feed it match grade ammo, and I'll keep the enemy 300 yards away. But if this situation disintegrates, and I find myself running for my life through the swamps (or some zombie-infested, alien planet) ... I'll take an AK. I own both. But my #1, go-to, home defense weapon is a 4" .357. There, I said it. |
2 different weapons, designed for 2 different purposes... The AK is an evolution of German WWII armor tactics... It's designed to fill the role that the Germans placed the MP-40 SMG in (infantry support of armor) with a more powerful round... Essentially, it's a SMG firing rifle-caliber ammo... Hence 'Auto' is the first position below 'safe' - the weapon is designed for full auto supressive fire (to be fired from APCs, used to keep enemy troops off of friendly armor, or to keep the enemy's head down untill someone can blow 'em up)... The AR is a light infantryman's rifle, designed for US infantry doctrine which focuses on precision accuracy and at-range engagements, not close-range supression thru full auto fire... This was further reinforced when the A2 came out, and auto-fire was removed... Each is good for what it is... It's not a 'vs' argument: if you have a SMG mission, the AK will do better than a 'true' pistol caliber SMG... If you have a 'rifle' mission, the AR will beat pretty much anything out there, as evidenced by an AR-action (SR-25 in 7.62x51) replacing the Remmington 700 as the Army's next sniper rifle... |
|
Definitely try both. You will probably end up buying both eventually. I will say this: It is much, much more difficult to build an AK at home than an AR. If I was going to buy something at a gunshop (and I don't anymore), it would be an AK. The AR is a simple matter of a $95 receiver and the rest of the parts off of the internet. As for the reliability differences, there are plenty of f$&!ed up Romanian and parts kit guns floating around. Yes, a properly built AK is extremely rugged and reliable. A poorly assembled gun with a bad receiver will be a nightmare given the riveted assembly. To me, the sights are the biggest practical difference. AK sights are antiquated and just plain suck. A 20" AR has an outstanding sight picture, which gives it much more PRACTICAL accuracy. |
| They're both fine weapons. Get the one you're most comfortable with. If you don't like to clean guns get an ak. If don't mind to clean every once in awhile get an ar. I prefer my AR slightly more than my ak's. Ak's are fun to shoot though. I really like shooting my Mak90 with K-var plum stock the best of the ak's. Folders are cool but not as comfortable to shoot. I like the collapsible stock on the AR too. Not quite as compact as an Underfolder but I like it better. |
| Personally, I like the open sights of the AK. The older I get, the worse my eyes get, and I find it more difficult to utilize peep sights and ghost ring sights. The less the sight picture obscures the target (for me), the better. Hence, my preference for the AK sights. I might get a rear sight that's been opened up a bit. Gabe Suarez sells them over at Warrior talk. |
+1... Why can't you just agree to disagree? You have your opinions but unless you have experince with both and have used both in combat why should we assume what you say is 100% correct? Some of what you say is true but you also spread misinformation. Back to the original poster. If you do decide AR get one with a better reputation than DPMS. For some reason they sit on the shelf in gun shops alot longer than Colts, Armalites, Bushmasters, and even some of the newer manufacturers like Stag. Less headaches in the long run. If you decide to get an AK good for you too. If you're looking for my opinion get a AK in .223. I just bought a SLR-106 and it has been 100% reliable for the 700rnds I have through it and I'm as accurate with it as I am with my Colt LE6920. I get around 2.5 MOA with both. The AR is definitely capable of better accuracy but who cares about the weapon peak performance if you're not capable of that same accuracy (as in my case). It will only shoot as good as you do. If you want to put it on a benchrest and shoot itty bitty groups buy a boltgun...  CMS |
|
As many people have previously said, plan on getting both. All things considered, they are both the two greatest assault rifles of all time (IMHO). The AR is noticably more accurate and a fairly reliable weapon if properly maintained. However, the AK is king of reliability with low maintanance requirements. The AK is surprisingly accurate out to typical combat ranges though, at least compared to what most non-AK owners (that I've met) assumed. The AK ammo is also slightly cheaper for me. I have been able to get it for $0.15 consitently ever since I bought the AK a few months ago. The AK round does more damage than the 5.56 AR round. AK's are cheaper to purchase. You can get one of the best AK's for the price of a mediocre AR ($800). A good AK only costs around $500. A cheap one will go for around $300. Felt recoil is less on an AR than AK. From my experiences, if I was going into combat with support, ie military, I would take a 16" AR. If a SHTF/EOTWAWKI event happened, I would take an AK. A lot of people have told me that the AR is a much better weapon because the U.S. military (read best military in the world) uses it. They have said, "look at the kill ratio of US soldiers with M-16's compared to enemy soldiers with the AK." I think it has more to do with training that the weapon. If you gave every terrorist/enemy soldier an M-16 and equipped the US with the AK-47 (and trained them as well as they have been trained on the M-16), then the kill ratios would be almost the exact same. It is the man far more than the gun... Again, get both. If money is a significant concern, go for an AK now. Get the AR later. |
Regarding using 5.56 mm for home defense, your statement is ill informed. Visit the Ammo Oracle for enlightenment. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - AK v AR (Page 1 of 3)
AK Sponsor