Reader Poll
AR or AK? Discuss. My thoughts are forthcoming.
Update: Or other? Some folks like M1s, SKS, and Fals.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 26th, 2005 at 11:45 am
I own an AK, but i’ll vote for AR. Er, well, M4.
January 26th, 2005 at 11:47 am
Neither. Be a Man and get a Garand. When you’re shooting 30-06, you don’t NEED 30 rounds.
January 26th, 2005 at 11:50 am
AK.
Pros: supremely more reliable. _Far_ less expensive. Weighs less. In 7.62×39, fires a much more effective round. Bolt has a fixed handle. Gas system is the well-proven, and what we’re apparently finally going back to, long-stroke piston.
Cons: Ergonomics leave lots to be desired. Harder to put optics on. Mag changes require both hands, and take longer. Accuracy is usually not as good. Shorter barrel (than standard AR). Provided fixed sights are far substandard to ARs. Stock is usually too short for US male shooters (but just right for my 5’1 girlfriend, who loves shooting my AK).
Toss-ups: Both benefit greatly from add-ons.
Basically, the AK needs some tuning, not unlike the 1911. Mine has an ultimak gas tube, and a replacement adjustable trigger, (to get rid of the trigger slap, primarily.) So I’ve got less than $550 in my gun, which accounted for a small buck last year (prior even to the ultimak and the trigger).
We’ve got a guy who loved loved loved the AR, don’t dare say anything bad about it or the 5.56, and badmouthed the AK. Til he shot mine last time we went to the range. Cheap-ass BSA red dot, and he loved it. Not to mention, the AK went “bang” every single time, unlike his AR. My AK also weighted about 1/2 what his AR did – my gf was unable to handle his 20″ HBAR. Luckily, someone did have a carbine with collapsable stock, and collapsed it fit her.
If you can work sheet metal, you can fix a lot of the ergonomic issues. I don’t, so I’m going to get a replacement safety lever, with the extension so you can use the trigger finger to apply it (I’m wondering how hard it would be to remove my riveted on crappy side scope mount, and build one for the left side). Extended mag releases are also available, and would help.
That’s where the AR is superior, off the shelf the ergonomics are much better. Where I have trouble with the AR is the lousy round it’s chambered for, the direct gas impingment system, and the lack of a real bolt handle. That, and after I add all the geegaws onto my AK, I’m still $100-300 under the cost of a new AR. 🙂
January 26th, 2005 at 12:30 pm
I think the AK is a fine weapon. Must be, because it’s wielded by most of our enemies. No doubt that it’s a marvel of economical engineering. Couple it with cheap ammo, and it’s small wonder it’s ubiquitous.
I love my AR. It’s made in America.
After fixing an issue with my carrier key on my AR, it’s never failed me – not once. Guess it’s a lot like a 1911, too – take good care, it runs like a scalded ape. I like the range and accuracy of the AR.
January 26th, 2005 at 12:31 pm
I’d really like to try out the FN FNC, too.
January 26th, 2005 at 12:53 pm
It’s not legal to hunt deer with a .223 here (Michigan). A deer can run so far after a hit with that tiny bullet that you’ll never find your venison. The AK’s 7.62×39 round is practically identical in performance to the beloved old 30-30 round, so you know it will do the job at any reasonable range.
‘Nuff said – almost. If you don’t hit the deer in the right area, no round will do the job. Many AK’s weren’t exactly built with accuracy in mind, so leave room in your budget for some improvements in that department.
January 26th, 2005 at 2:45 pm
I’ve shot both, but not owned either. For me, this kind of gun is going to be a toy, a plinker, so cost is a big issue. I decided on a .30 Russian platform (AK or SKS) for pretty much that reason. And I’m leaning towards the cheaper SKS unless you take me shooting and the WASR wins me over. (Hint, hint.)
AK: cheap, reliable. Accuracy is so-so if that matters, and sights aren’t very good.
AR: accurate, lots of interchangeable accessories, easy to mount a scope on. Cartridge isn’t everything it could be. Like Addison, I don’t understand why the charging/forward assist system is so complicated, but it works.
I’ll probably wind up owning both at some point.
January 26th, 2005 at 2:58 pm
The WASR is en route. Got it for about the cost of prebie SKS :^)
January 26th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
Ah, well, if we get to talk about “others” as per the update….
I think if I had to pick one, and one alone, it would still be the AK. Especially if we’re talking about “as-issued”. The M14 (Springfield M1A) would come in a close second, but partially that’s due to some sentimental reasons.
The FN seems to be a better “battle” rifle than the M14. Sights and trigger suck in comparison, but the gas tube above the barrel, and the more direct-line recoil is easier to shoot. Plus, pistol-grip, “break open” cleaning, including the ability to look straight down the barrel and into the chamber (the Garand and M14 both suffer in that respect).
(I have no personal experience with the CETME/H&K G3).
Again, the FN wins against the M14/M1A on cost alone. $1100 or so will be needed to get into the M14, but a $400 and under FN isn’t hard to find.
So, depends on what your goal is, but if it was “you’ll find out later” and could be anything from CQB to long-range.. I’d still stick with the AK.
Having said that, I’m rather lucky in that I’ve got a Garand, M1A (soon to get a E2 stock, currently sporting a Leopold MK 4 3x9x40 Tactical), a FN (and another FN parts kit and Imbel receiver I ought to sell), and an AK.
I guess I need to get an AR one of these days. 🙂 I’m waiting for the 6.8 to get more into production, and to hear about it’s reliability. (I’ve heard not-good-things about 7.62×39 in AR conversions, mainly due to mag problems)
January 26th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
In order of preference:
Garand
M1A
FAL
AK
SKS
10/22
Slingshot w/ High Quality Rock
AR
But if it came down to it & I could only pick between the two, it’s be the AK over the AR. More reliable, better cartridge & no odd vibrations under your cheek reminiscent of a toy gun every time you pull the trigger.
Course I’d try my best to cheat & get a Garand. 🙂
January 26th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
This debate is always a hairball, a huge can of worms, a slippery slope, a… well, you know.
Get them both.
January 26th, 2005 at 6:01 pm
The Galil: The AK, perfected.
January 26th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Publicola:
Oh, yeah, I forgot the biggest problem with the AR – the Slinky sound!
*crack* *sprrrrooooooiiiinnnnnniinnnnng*
January 26th, 2005 at 6:18 pm
I like the slinky sound. It’s like the rattle of a 1911, it lets you know it’s working.
January 26th, 2005 at 8:50 pm
M1 carbine!
(Hey, it’s all I’ve got… for now…)
January 26th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
Now you see I thought you were trying to decide between Arizona and Arkansas for a vacation.
January 26th, 2005 at 11:51 pm
For the record, Robinson Arms has a new gun that supposedly has the reliability of the AK, and the ergonomics of the M4. It might be worth looking into.
http://www.robarm.com/xcrtm_modular_weapon_system.htm
January 27th, 2005 at 12:53 am
Gun Links #31
It’s been a busy week, so it’s going to be a short set of links this time around. Zendo Deb notes that the gun-free utopia of England has highest crime rate among top 20 nations. Smith & Wesson Forum thread on Oswald’s .38. As a JFK buff, I knew tha…
January 27th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I like the AR over the AK and M14 for one big reason…just slap the magazine into the well and it’s in. No angling the thing into a catch or anything. The cartridge some call “the poodle shooter” is good enough for me. It contributes to a base of fire that may not be intended to kill every time, but to suppress the enemy. I’m still in favor of designated marksmen carrying the M-14 to reach out and touch the enemy, but the AR is best suited for fire and maneuver warfare, IMHO.
January 27th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
I’d have to go with the AR, not because of any ballistic advantage, but because I can shoot the thing all day long.
January 27th, 2005 at 12:39 pm
CETME! Like getting an M1A for the price of an AK and some WECSOG work. I have a Century Arms model.
The pluses are: 7.62×51 (practically the same power as the Garand), cheap 20 round magazines, no gas cylinder to clean.
The drawbacks to mine have been: needed to be sent back to the factory because the parkerization was so thick it slowed the action; sight adjustment ran out of elevation (I epoxied a little horn to the front sight to fix it); mediocre trigger; and unreliable manual stripping of the first round from the magazine. Autoloading has been 100% reliable since I got it back from the factory.
January 27th, 2005 at 1:10 pm
OK, what I want is something with an AK’s inards with an AR ambi selector (aftermarket, I know), AR sights, and AR style mag catch/release.
And just to be a PITA, I want it in either 7.62×45 or 7x43mm.
January 27th, 2005 at 3:18 pm
Hey! I like my AR varmint rifles!
For serious work I like the HK91.
January 27th, 2005 at 10:26 pm
The HK91 is H&K’s version of the CETME. G3 is the German military designation for the HK91. JLD Enterprises makes a nice-looking HK91 clone, the PTR 91; I had a chance to look at one and it didn’t appear to have any of the problems that my CETME did. Lots more expensive than the CETME, but lots cheaper than an H&K.
That Robinson XCR Matt mentioned looks like it might be pretty cool in .308.
September 14th, 2005 at 9:14 pm
[…] Update: The original thread I brought this up on is here. […]
November 16th, 2005 at 5:37 pm
[…] Also, the original thread from a while back has excellent comments too. […]