Ak-47?
- Thread starter A Man Apart
- Start date
- Location
- Ontario, Kanada
GunBoy said:
and the ability to lay down huge volumes of fire
- Location
- Ontario, Kanada
TDC said:
Well it depends, many ARs are neutered and only have semi and 3 shot burst, whereas AKs are full auto, thus the AK can lay down a heavier volume of fire.
3 round burst is a joke. Maybe if the Americans (back in the day) taught there troops how to shoot and control their muzzle rise on FA they would of not have to put in 3 round burst to help them hit their targets. You can lay down a pretty steady stream of fire with 3 round burst.
I play a combat ninja on TV.
I play a combat ninja on TV.
gunplumberr
Regular
AK's are cool
muh-muh-muh-mauser said:
a valid point. Then again there are plenty of Ak's that are semi only. Comparing both systems in their original format/design(that is both capable of full auto) my statement still stands. Who can tell the difference between 700 and 800 ronds per minute when on the receiving end?? I'd say no one, and more importantly no one cares at that point.
TDC
- Location
- Calgary, AB
What's a better handgun caliber, 45 or 9mm? Which one has more stopping power? 
- Location
- land of f-cktards
...you dit shisturber
depends who is using them
Last edited:
Since we are comparing AKs and ARs, I've got a question.
In terms of maintenance schedule, how do these two rifles compare? I'm not asking about normal useage, and it would be easier answered by KevinB or Reaper. When you are using these two rifles in Mid-East, meaning desert environment, I'm sure you have precise maintenance regime prescribed for M4. But how does that maintenance schedule compare to what you'd need to do to keep an AK going? Is there huge discrepancy between them?
In terms of maintenance schedule, how do these two rifles compare? I'm not asking about normal useage, and it would be easier answered by KevinB or Reaper. When you are using these two rifles in Mid-East, meaning desert environment, I'm sure you have precise maintenance regime prescribed for M4. But how does that maintenance schedule compare to what you'd need to do to keep an AK going? Is there huge discrepancy between them?
The maint schedule for the M4 is not as precise as most ould lead you to think. In the desert you keep the bolt well lubricated and the rest of the weapon dry. We had no issues with the 40 or so C7A2,C8HBARs and C8 rifles iand carbines in my platoon during our tour in A'stan,not a single one jammed or malfunctioned in any firefight we were involved in. I cannot say the same for the C9 LMG but that is another deal altogether.
The AKs used by our allies over there suffered many more stoppages and FTF than our weapons due to lack of maint, poor condition,and poor ammo, the Vz58s worked quite well but again suffered from a lack of maint.
No rifle will work without maint. of some type that is a well known fact. The AK series simply does not live up to it's hype.
The AKs used by our allies over there suffered many more stoppages and FTF than our weapons due to lack of maint, poor condition,and poor ammo, the Vz58s worked quite well but again suffered from a lack of maint.
No rifle will work without maint. of some type that is a well known fact. The AK series simply does not live up to it's hype.
How would brand new Minimi perform, I wonder. You think it might still have problem? How would you think KAC LMG would do? Or Ultimax 100 for that matter?
I read about how people are saying M4s are terrible in desert environment, but there aren't any objective reviews on how and where these problems occured. Mostly conjectures on part of people who are promoting other platforms, which sound quite ignorant to even to people like me who has no combat experience. Could be that some force within american military is trying to promote other platform, possibly for economic gain? I don't know. All I know is, that there aren't many complaints registered by the real operators, who are actually out there fighting the war in the front line, against M4s, if at all.
I read about how people are saying M4s are terrible in desert environment, but there aren't any objective reviews on how and where these problems occured. Mostly conjectures on part of people who are promoting other platforms, which sound quite ignorant to even to people like me who has no combat experience. Could be that some force within american military is trying to promote other platform, possibly for economic gain? I don't know. All I know is, that there aren't many complaints registered by the real operators, who are actually out there fighting the war in the front line, against M4s, if at all.
Political... You cannot use the gun of your foe... All the BS about bad accuracy is all based on the fact they use good quality AR vs. crappy AK (usually made in china) which was obsolete in USSR never mind Russia. Don't forget that Russians sold their surplus all around the world the same way US sold their old M14 and Garands all around the world too. If you really want to compare M16 to AK, you should compare it to AK-74 not to some archaic AK-47. AK-47 is so old that it's not even easy to find a DEVAT in exUSSR. The oldest DEVAT or surplus AK converted for civilians you will find is AKM. AK-74 is not the latest rifle anymore too, AN-94 is replacing AK-74 since 1994.
It's very easy to read AK: AK-47 went to army in 1947, AKM went to army and replaced AK-47 in 1959, AK-74 (totally different ammo 5.45x39) replaced AKM in 1974 and finally AN-94 replacing AK-74 since 1994.
AN-94 is not really AK, but totally new gun. The next step for AK is AK-107, but way different from AK-47. For example AK-107 has 2 opposite moving gas pistons instead of one and accuracy is superb.
AN-94 (Looks weird in my opinion, especially muzzle brake):
AK-108:
PS. AN-94 can easily put 2 bullets in one hole (the main idea in the system to overpower personal armor). Each movement of the bolt shoots 2 rounds in the row... e.g. you shoot 2 rounds minimum in semi-auto (but only one light recoil movement), or just go full-auto...
Last edited:
