Ak-47 or ar-15

Discussion in 'Survival & Sustenance Living Forum' started by archmicheal, Apr 6, 2012.

  1. archmicheal

    archmicheal New Member

    10
    0
    0
    I'm looking at buying a new rifle I'm trying to decide between an ak-47 or a AR-15. I want something that if something happens I can grab with my go bag and head out. What do you guys think between the two?
     
  2. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    Either are very good, but they both suck. The AR is better than the AK unless the AK is better than the AR. 7.62x39 is vastly superior to 5.56 unless it's the other way 'round. :D

    You will get endless argument and discussion on this subject. Bottom line is it doesn't really matter: they both work well and are effective in short/medium-range situations. Others will tell you there are better options out there.

    What's important to you? Start from there and that will guide you to the right rifle.
     

  3. nastyogre

    nastyogre New Member

    116
    0
    0
    Couldn't have said it better myself. Figure out what's important to you in a rifle and go from there. This has been hashed out so many times on so many forums it's not even funny. Use the search bar that's what it's there for. :)
     
  4. HockaLouis

    HockaLouis New Member

    3,617
    0
    0
    Rule #1 is Avoid The Fight!

    Get the AR-47. The AK-15 is accurate, inaccurate, reliable, unreliable, potent and impotent, plus, for the extra money you'll use better cartridges or have more ammo.
     
  5. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    12
    38
    i agree with bkt.

    i choose the ar15 however because of weight issues. can carry more ammo for the same weight. while there are ak varients that use a lighter 5.45 round they are corrosive and introduce cleaning issues like a 762x39 does as well. when your trying to survive your going to have more than enough to do without worrying about corrosive residue rusting your gun out.

    just my take on it.
     
  6. BenLuby

    BenLuby New Member

    2,178
    0
    0
    I thought the best one was the RK-62?
     
  7. Lessdragon

    Lessdragon New Member

    120
    0
    0
    neither

    Get a 12 gauge
     
  8. downsouth

    downsouth New Member

    5,007
    3
    0
    Part of your criteria is to grab and go. That would sway me to the ak. As far as cleaning issues, there is a rod under the barrel and a place for oil and patches in the butt stock. Ak is very low tech, no batteries for sights or flaslights. Grab and go ready! IMHO
     
  9. TLuker

    TLuker New Member

    3,937
    0
    0
    I know the question was about the AK and the AR but my personal choice for a grab and go gun is the mini14. I think it's a good compromise between the AR and AK. Not quite as reliable as an AK but more accurate. Not quite as accurate as an AR but more reliable.

    I think the .223 caliber is also a good compromise. It's not complete overkill on small game and can still take big game with good shot placement. The ammo is also reasonably light.

    Just my .02:)
     
  10. mcb

    mcb New Member

    534
    0
    0
    Bkt gave the best possible advice.

    The AK vs AR threads and the Glock vs 1911 threads usually turn into a fanboy pi$$ing contest.
     
  11. HockaLouis

    HockaLouis New Member

    3,617
    0
    0
    Down...;
    Sorry I don't follow your point and it's the first time I recall ever seeing this benefit attributed to an AK type. HOW/WHY is it grabbier-to-go than an AR (or Mini-14 for that matter)? I'm not sure the latter requires a battery or flashlight to operate or if I'd describe your opinion as humble...
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2012
  12. JTJ

    JTJ Well-Known Member Supporter

    9,539
    139
    63
    Wow. I did not know my AR was battery powered. There must be C cells in the buffer tube. Now I am going to have to get spare batteries. That means more weight to carry. Why didnt you AR experts tell me about this? Do AK's have a wind up key so they dont need batteries? :rolleyes:
    I am not in a bug out position so I dont have a weight issue to worry about. I have an AR and a Mini 30. No AK. To me a lot would depend on the number of people in the family. I would expect everyone capable of carrying something would. If there is a good sized dog involved, get a pack for it. For my wife and I it would probably be the AR and a 22lr if it were necessary or possible to bug out. The desert town we live in is pretty isolated. If I were in a wooded area, I would prefer the Mini 30 over the AR. Go with the conditions you face and what you are most comfortable with. In a home defense position, my wife would be able to handle the AR better than the Min 30 or an AK.
     
  13. TLuker

    TLuker New Member

    3,937
    0
    0
    I think downsouth was trying to make a very good point? The AR is obviously battle proven, but a lot of people love to add all sorts of gizmos to their AR's. There's nothing wrong with that and it's great that the AR is capable of adding so many different things to it. The problem is that a lot of those gizmos are not battle proven. Its ironic because a lot of people are going for the "tactical" look but the word "tactical" means of or on the battle front. A lot of the the things we have come to associate with "tactical" might be great in specific situations but probably aren't the best idea for a true battle front. Turning on a flashlight attached to your rifle on a battle front would likely get you killed really fast?

    If shtf simple is probably going to be better but that's just my opinion. A cleaning rod attached to your rifle is probably going to be much better than a holographic sight?

    The AR itself is still battle proven and none of that is meant to reflect poorly on the AR. It's not the rifles fault that so many people want to add cheap red dot sights with an attached holographic sight and a flashlight, and five other things. And of course not everyone does that, but a lot do and many of us have just come to associate all of that with the AR.

    I think this also illustrates two different mind sets, low tech and simple vs high tech and complex? The AR itself would be considered high tech and complex compared to most of the other popular rifles. The gizmos attached to the AR are an extension of that high tech mind set. There is nothing wrong with high tech and in the right situation technology can offer distinct advantages. Simplicity can also offer advantages in the right situations so neither is good or bad, it's just two different mind sets and both offer advantages and disadvantages.

    Just my .02:)
     
  14. downsouth

    downsouth New Member

    5,007
    3
    0
    Thank you tluker^^^^^. You expressed what I was trying to say.
     
  15. GLKmiester

    GLKmiester New Member

    64
    0
    0
    Get both, that's what I did.
     
  16. Mosin

    Mosin Well-Known Member

    7,369
    167
    63
    Don't~!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I bought two guns, and they weren't in the gun safe for like a week, and next thing I know, WHAM, now I have like 14 little guns, all huddled in there. I swear, those things breed like rabbits!
     
  17. BenLuby

    BenLuby New Member

    2,178
    0
    0
    You got something against rabbits?
     
  18. lbwar15

    lbwar15 New Member

    2,058
    0
    0
    What's wrong with that.
     
  19. archmicheal

    archmicheal New Member

    10
    0
    0
    Thank you downsouth you were one of the only ones that actually gave a actual answer. It did seem to turn in to a pi$$ing contest this is the first time iv used this forum. I was curious to see how people respond on here most were giving stupid answers just to answer. Thank you to a few of you for answering my question.