AK vs AR15

Discussion in 'AK & SKS Discussion' started by unclebear, Feb 24, 2012.

  1. unclebear

    unclebear New Member

    1,154
    0
    0
    not what you think me and some guys at work got into a discussion today that with how the market is now a days that the AK is really a poor mans AR.

    I like the AK I like how it feels like how it shoots, I don't need the fancy crap that goes along with the AR's. If I want a red dot or something along those lines they make new for arms that have the tac railing on them. I've taken coyote with an SKS just because where I hunt them it's as long range as some of the other places. I just don't need an AR I don't need to drop what almost a $1000+ to get one when an old russian/ chinese import does just fine.

    What do you all think?
     
  2. silverado113

    silverado113 New Member

    2,992
    0
    0
    I only dropped 700 on my AR but AK's are reliable rifles as long as you don't want to shoot that far.
     

  3. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    I like/own both but the AR is much more versatile and if you get a quality AR they are just as reliable. Plus they are much more accurate, faster, lighter, etc.
     
  4. okdonk

    okdonk New Member

    2,821
    0
    0
    To me AR has more abilities to be modified and modern looks. And more accessories available. It can be modified for close combat or sniping rifle. While AK has classier looks and durable. They both are good rifles. I have DD AR for my first rifle and now i'm waiting for Bushnell Trophy red dot and Magpul CTR stock which i ordered online to be put on my Arsenal Saiga AK.
    Will post both rifle pics when im done.
    If i have to choose between these 2 awesome rifles, i'd definitely choose the AR imo.
     
  5. littlejimmy

    littlejimmy New Member

    41
    0
    0
    My only hangup with ar's was the 5.56 round, so I got the best of both worlds. Built my ar in 7.62x39. Heavy round, cheap ammo, and still get the highly versatile ar platform.
     
  6. Georgiahunter

    Georgiahunter New Member

    506
    0
    0
    I wouldn't call an AK a poor mans AR, it's more like a poor countries budget rifle (or something like that). It can be beat to death and still fire, which is what is what it was intended to do. The AR is made for high performance and accuracy, which makes them popular with many people because let's face it, what civilian will willingly beat the crap out of any gun? If I were fighting in a resistance, I would pick up an AK over an AR, not because either gun is superior, but because the AK is better suited for the job. Both weapons are very good at what they do, and putting one above the other does not do the other one justice. That is why I don't really agree with the idea that an AK is a poor man's AR.
     
  7. PrimePorkchop

    PrimePorkchop New Member

    1,743
    0
    0
    this thread will end in blood shed....they always do =)

    I think both rifles are bad-ass. Its sort of like the cartoon 'spy vs spy'. Pick your poison and be happy.

    If you judge the two rifles based on capability, the AR15 has better accuracy and more versatility. The AK47 has more reliability and packs a bigger punch.

    As with anything in nature, you lose some and win some. Pick your rifle based on situation. Not public opinion.
     
  8. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    That's not entirely true. ARs have proven to be extremely reliable and with current bullet technology the 5.56 is more than capable. Picking the one you are more proficient with is probably good advise.
     
  9. Papa_Woody

    Papa_Woody New Member

    294
    0
    0
    The black rifle has come a long way as far as reliability and having trusted one with my life, it us my choice. I have about 700 bucks into my current clone and it's finished. Never had a hiccup in easily 1000 rounds.

    Light to carry, easy to modify parts are plentiful. ammo is light, I shoot mostly WPA and cheap Feds unless I am hunting and Sometimes even then, So my ammo cost is low.

    I love the AK. I think it is a fantastic firearm. It is battle proven no doubt. I feel an AR clone is more versatile. But it depends on what you are doing. I'd be more willing to beat on an old Russian AK than my black rifle.
     
  10. RufusTFirefly

    RufusTFirefly New Member

    127
    0
    0
    AK vs. AR? It's a pointless and moot comparison. think Apples vs. Oranges
     
  11. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    How so? .......
     
  12. Jstrong

    Jstrong New Member

    984
    0
    0
    Both weapons were designed by their creators with almost polar opposite philosophy of uses in mind,this shows when you compare the strenghts and weaknesses of both platforms. You can see that on most counts... where one rifle excels,the other is lacking,and vice versa.

    Like comparing a lowered,supped up Dodge srt-10 to a lifted 77 f100 custom on 35" mud crawlers. Just because they're both pickups doesn't mean they are made with the same purpose or method of use in mind.

    Apples and oranges indeed.
     
  13. PrimePorkchop

    PrimePorkchop New Member

    1,743
    0
    0
    Don't get me wrong - im siding with the AR15 platform 10 times out of 10. But I still recognize that the AK47 is a formidable foe and one that shouldn't be taken lightly :D

    Proficiency stems from desire. If you work at ______ longer, you become more proficient in it, so i think it's only fair to say that man A can be more proficient than man B with either rifle, depending on how much they use it.

    That's more my point - i just chimed in because these arguments typically end up in "AK47 (or AR15) sucks because I said so"

    Not that this was YOUR argument, just one i'm sure we've all seen several times =)
     
  14. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    Look at how they are used today. They are used in the same basic role (infantry weapon).

    What does the AK do well that the M16 family can't do as well or better? Not trying to bust your balls, just want to hear so I can possibly alter my opinion.

    True but you have to take in natural ability and the traits of both firearms. Some guys are going to be better than others no matter how much the other trains. There are natural limitations in the design of these weapon systems. That will have some say in the overall ability of man and machine.

    Not trying to argue but feel we should consider all avenues of this discussion.
     
  15. Jstrong

    Jstrong New Member

    984
    0
    0
    Your thinking is a little too shallow on this one bud. The AR is used by highly trained militarys in situations where they can capitalize on the AR's adaptability,speed and accuracy.

    The AK is primarily used by gorrila forces today,as it fits the bill quite nicely. The guerrilla forces have no training to take advantage of the AR so they opt for a rifle that has things they can capitalize on... the AK. The AK is a very simplistic rifle that affords to its ruggedness and reliability with little care. The people that use it don't have the resources to keep other rifles running so in the end they need a rifle that just plain works when others wont. The AK was made to shoot no further than the battlefield distances of its time and to be capable of hitting center mass of an enemy soldier and hit hard at those distances,to penetrate at close distances,and to keep working when the Russian soldiers it was designed for couldn't maintain their rifles in wartime conditions during cold Siberian winters.

    This translates to the gorrila fighter of today as they need simalar things from their rifle,to hit a person from a few hundred yards,to turn cover into concealment at across the road distances,and to work regardless of environmental and maintenance factors. The AR does not do some of these things as well as an AK.
     
  16. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    Your assumption of the enemy we face today is way off.

    I said "today" and you keep mentioning the past. Both weapons are used in the same capacity on todays battlefield.

    Have you heard of Ft. Drum, N.Y.? It gets very cold there well into the 30's and 40's below zero. The M4s work fine there. I think there is to much credit being given to the notion that the M16 family of today is fragile, not durable, and unreliable.

    Have you seen a combatant engage an enemy w/ an AK "from a few hundred yards?"

    An AR is much easier to work on as it requires no special tools like the AK. One example, an AK requires a press in order to change out parts. What tools does an AR require. People over exaggerate the maintenance that goes into An AR. It has been proven to run for 10K+ rounds w/ nothing more than reapplying lube.

    I think you're a good guy w/ good intentions. I just don't think you're delving deep enough into the topic.
     
  17. Capybara

    Capybara New Member

    136
    0
    0
    Sigh...

    Ford vs. Chevy
    Mac vs. PC
    Nikon vs. Canon

    I have never understood platform jingoism of any kind, seems weird to me. I have a Chevy 2500 HD Duramax but my neighbors Ford 250 PowerStroke up the street is a sweet ride. I have Macs and PCs, both are good, both are different. My two favorite cameras are my Nikon D300 and my Canon 5D MKII. This whole, "my platform is good and the other one sucks" thing is infantile.

    The Jihads never end. I agree, both were designed with different purposes in mind. Both are good, both are capable, I am happy with either for fun, plinking, self-defense. I live in SoCal though and the required non-magnetic 7.62 ammo is getting harder to find and more expensive so have been shooting the AR a lot more as I can buy PMC Bronze 55gr pretty cheap and it is new, factory fresh.
     
  18. Quentin

    Quentin New Member

    7,551
    1
    0
    Say again? A nebulous, biased question like yours is difficult to answer. Tighten it up if you really want answers. Or just read a thousand other AK vs. AR threads.
     
  19. Jstrong

    Jstrong New Member

    984
    0
    0
    Clearly you have experience with the AR type platform,im assuming some time served or currently serving in the military? If im correct,thanks for your service. I think our argument stems from the fact that both of us think the other is trying to undercut their defense of their chosen platform which i don't think is what either of us are intentionally trying to do. Im in no way trying to downplay the AR,its an awesome versatile system that fills many roles... the AR is in no way "finicky". Others with more experience with both systems than me have made the observation that "the AR will run dirty,and it will run dry,but it wont run dirty AND dry"...thats a lot more than people can say about other platforms im sure. But the AK runs indverse conditions,its proven. Its not magic,its because its caveman simple and idiot-proof. Its purpose built to fill one roll.

    You statement about a press needed to work on the AK is indeed true,to install a barrel on an AK you need a press. Outside of that you only need a punch,and the only moving parts once inside are just the FCG and the bolt/piston and bolt carrier/recoil spring and thats it.

    If my assumption of your training was correct then i will back off about how the enemy we face today uses the AK,as u have more experience than I do. But Its not hard to hit a silhouette target a 2-300 yards with the AK with a little practice,I assumed the enemy can as well If a 20 year old recreational shooter can. All I can do when it comes to that is take what I've heard from people who have been there and then apply my own logical thinking to create the best argument I can.
     
  20. mjkeat

    mjkeat New Member

    4,026
    0
    0
    Jstrong, thank you.

    I may have took the OPs question wrong. I was thinking more along the lines of which had the most potential. I feel if you took ten people and trained them equally on both systems the majority would be more proficient with the AR. In my eyes that makes it better. But don't for a second think I don't like me some AK :)