AK is easier to clean,handle and more reliable.Would you trust a gun made by a guy with the last name Stoner? LOL!!! really,I don't like the set up of an AR and would rather have a good AK any day.Why on god's green earth would you put the charging handle for a right handed gun on the left side??? leave the .223 for gophers and coyote-get a real gun if you gotta' put your own ass on the line___________
Private security in Iraq - choice of weapon AK47?
- Thread starter wherermykeys
- Start date
Now another FWIW, they could have been VZ58s...I know I should be able to tell the difference...I just assumed they were AKs...
I definitely didn't see any vz58s in the documentary, which i happen to be watching now. weird.
Simple answer is that if you work for a low end company you get low end weapons. The better companies have a logistics system to get you modern American or European weapons. The low end companies do not and you'll likely end up with a locally purchased AK or VZ. There are some small companies with good gigs, but you still have to accept that they don't have the logistical capability of the larger firms and thus supply locally procured equipment.
While generally I prefere the AK frame I must add that the cocking handle on the AR/C7 is on the left side so that your primary hand can stay on the pistol grip while clearing a stoppage. also the C7A2's have an adaptor so left handed people can have the same advantage.
To be honest - AR is more of an 'offence' rifle while AK is more of a 'defence' one.
Range, accuracy, weight/size, reliability, cost, how much damage a round/bullet can make - it's all relative.
AK is way better suited for partol/defense troops or city based troops as their shooting distance is usually in or way below 100m range. 7.62mm bullet will do way more damage than 5.56/5.45; unless it's a bullet that hits a living being and is one that can change its [movement] direction towards more dense tissue (bones, muscle and so on).
It's not much fun when a bullet hits you in chest/abdomen and ... exits about either arm pit or left knee or so...
It will cause some damage along its path.
Range, accuracy, weight/size, reliability, cost, how much damage a round/bullet can make - it's all relative.
AK is way better suited for partol/defense troops or city based troops as their shooting distance is usually in or way below 100m range. 7.62mm bullet will do way more damage than 5.56/5.45; unless it's a bullet that hits a living being and is one that can change its [movement] direction towards more dense tissue (bones, muscle and so on).
It's not much fun when a bullet hits you in chest/abdomen and ... exits about either arm pit or left knee or so...
It will cause some damage along its path.
Last edited:
hmm, all very valid points...and the million dollar question...what would you guys use?
Wud take the Ak-47 every time over the AR........................tried and proven in the sweat box of SEA.
Big JD-From the hills
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Saskatchewan.
well since the going rate is 100'000rds of 5.56 per 1 enemy kill..... why not the ak 47? if all your doing is lacing an area with suppressing fire. and its a fine close in machine gun too(quite accurate and controllable full auto)... unless your a child sized man. I had a low opinion of them until I rented a live one, they work as intended no bs.
Kayser Sose
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Van Isle
+1 good video
