Originally Posted by DeltaF
A guy shoots five rounds on you tube, misses 4 times and this means no one can hit anything with an AK-47 more than 1/5th of the time?! And all ARs are better? Based on 5 rounds and 1 video?!?!
First things first, when you are comparing the two guns, you have to realise that a .223 round is nothing more than a long .22 round with a lot of gunpowder behind it while an AK-47 round is .3mm BIGGER than a 308.
It takes less less money to make an accurate shooting .223. It's a smaller, lighter round, parts can be made cheaper and still function adequately. Parts that function well are cheaper too. A person can build a fairly accurate shooting AR for under $400.00 with very basic knowledge. There's a million and one places to buy the parts and a million and two guides to put them together.
An AK-47 takes more money. Parts are more expensive. Good parts are harder to buy. Cheaper parts are more prone to fail or have problems.
This means that it is much easier and cheaper to get your hands on an okay shooting AR-15 than it is to get your hands on an okay shooting AK-47.
IT DOESNT mean ARs are better than AKs.
IT DOESNT mean that it's impossible (or even terribly difficult) to find an AK that could do the job at that range.
Both an AR and an AK will shoot man sized targets out to 500 meters if they are well made, well maintained and well handled. They won't be spot on, but they will do the job if nothing else is available and enough rounds are fired. My friends who spent time in the dirt pit tell me the AK will do it better through concrete and brick.
But if we are speaking of junk we spent $400 on at the pawn shop, if you are shooting 200 yards and farther, you probably don't want to be shooting either. Any hunting rifle worth the powder it takes to shoot it will probably serve you better than a mass produced cheap junk AR or AK once you are outside of 150.
In fact your local law enforcement guys are already sending in the guy with the 308, 7mm mag or 300 mag at that range. And they have the money to buy whatever they want for engaging man sized targets. That video says literally NOTHING.
Sent from my iPhone using Firearms Talk
Why does it bother you that some random person with an AK didn't hit much at 200 yards with one? It could mean a lot of things.
Two guys who have shot rifles before tried to hit targets at 200 yards with carbines of the same era with the types of ammunition the carbines were designed to use.
What's the general case for the average AK user? Think they're going to hit a lot at 200 yards with a carbine that was built as cheaply as possible?
Sure, you can spend more money and buy a more accurate rifle/carbine. I think the M-14 and M-16 are proof of that. They are more inherently accurate than comparable eastern bloc weapons. The question is, how much more accurate and what does the accuracy buy you in a combat situation. Russian engineers would have made their weapons more accurate if they had wanted to.
The American military maintains this notion, mostly fictional where snipers aren't involved, that you're going to pick off the enemy with single, aimed shots. The Russians believed, having experienced the Wehrmacht in WWII, that massed fire (aimed, but not precisely aimed) and violence of action would overwhelm their enemies.
Most people I've seen have an easier time with the sighting mechanism on the M-16/M-4 than the sighting mechanism of the AK-47/AKM/AK-74. It doesn't mean the Kalashnikov pattern carbines are inherently inaccurate nor that a user with a M-16/M-4 will hit the target every time.
Most people I've seen who haven't picked up a rifle before have an easier time figuring out how the Kalashnikov carbines work whereas the Stoner pattern carbines are a little perplexing to them.
All that said, you'd think that it would be obvious that a militarized version of a civilian target rifle would be a little more accurate than a military assault weapon that was never designed to be used over 300 yards for which the designer intentionally loosened tolerances between components to enhance reliability, fully realizing that some inaccuracy would be introduced in so doing.
If you put an Aimpoint on both carbines, you'll see that there's little meaningful accuracy difference between the two weapons at that distance, but the AR is still a little more accurate.