The AK-47 or the M16 ?

Site Issues 2005 Archive Room
#1

The AK-47 designed in 1947 by Mikhail Kalashnikov,
The AK-47 was not the first assault rifle but was preceded by earlier Italian, Russian, and German MP 44 assault rifle designs. Mikhail Kalashnikov furiously denies it is based on the German or Italian models. More then 100 million have been built It had many positive and negative feedback from experts that used it…such as the following:

Positives

* The AK-47 is a very effective weapon with great power
* It has a very high rate of fire
* comes at a very reasonable price.
* light
* select-fire
* simple to operate, clean, and repair
* reliable
* 600 round per minute.

Negative

* Very loud noise
* is heavy,
* not accurate
* any optics require special adapters
* Many people don't like the AK safety mechanism

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/AK_47

After the Soviets brought out this assault rifle, just two years after the War, the U.S.A began contruction of the M16 in 1957 which is the US Military designation for the Armalite AR-15, an assault rifle which fires NATO standard 5.56 mm ammunition (STANAG 4172). This has been the primary infantry rifle of the United States military since 1967.
This gun too has had positive and negative feedback from Assault Rifle Experts but more highly marked as a reliable positive Machine gun.
8 million of its kind has been produced , which is the most produced of its caliber.

Positives

* It's lighter,
* more accurate,
* more versatile,
* allow numerous modifications to be made
  such as mounting various uppers

negatives

* The 5.56 ammunition
* reliable with proper maintenance

](http://imageshack.us)[/img]

#2

](http://imageshack.us)[/img]
AK-47 Carbine
](http://imageshack.us)[/img]
AK-47 oringinal kalashnikov

](http://imageshack.us)[/img]
M16 soldier Iraq

#3

I would much rather have the M16 over the AK-47. I’ve fired both, and the M-16. The AK was semi-automatic, and the M16 was full automatic. I scored a better grouping with the M16. The M16 has less recoil, muzzleclimb, and is slightly quieter.

#4

I’ve fired both, and the simple answer is “depends”.

The M16 is a far better range gun - much more accurate to a much longer distance.

But, it does need regular cleaning, and it sh1ts where it eats.

The AK is a bit agricultural, and is actually pretty small, but will keep going and going and going. It is less accurate than the M16, but packs more of a punch.

It would depend on whether a) I was going to be in a cleanish or dirty environment, and b) whether I would be engaging at range or not.

So there you go - “depends”…

#5

Ypu perfer the M16, yeah i have to agree that there has been much more positive feedback from people that have used the M16 then the Ak-47

you ever fired a scoped M16 , they are quite innaccurate.

#6

They’re no more or less inherently accurate than an unscoped one!

#7

Why is the noise of the weapon feature in this debate?

Neither are particulary quite are they to be fair!!!

Anyway for what it’s worth I prefer the M-16 for accuracy, however if I was not a skilled shot and a trained professional soldier i would pick the AK-47. It just goes on and on, and is a very simple weapon.

With regards to the safety it has been comented on in that glorious read “Combat and Survival” that the arrangement says much for the ethos of the Russian army. In that the first setting after safe is fully auto, and then Semi.

I would like to say that I think this in inspired. Think of the young tomski, under fire for the first time. He slams the safety off in a panic, no doubt all the way to the bottom and lets rip. Instead of a burst of his entire mag, which could go everywhere he only fires one round.

Top marks as far as I’m concerned. Also the lever acts as a dust guard for the inards, you can’t not put it up unless you are off safe.

L85A2 kicks both asses tho i think.

#8

Off-topic:
Quoted:
L85A2 - an upgraded, but still troublesome weapon
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm

And a French will say that FAMAS G2 will rules…
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Edited: The same childish “Mine is bigger…” :lol: :lol:

#9

Agricultural is true. The AK-47 is designed in a way that most parts are manufacturable just using hand tools. IMO, the most difficult part to manufacture is the cam slot for the bolt inside the bolt carrier. I’ve got one (with a demill cut to make it legal) and I’m still trying to figure out how they set up the mill to cut it.

On the other hand I’m fascinated by low tech firearms, which, like the Sten gun, have been manufactured in garages and other unlikely places.

The M-16 requires much more heavy equipment, making the receiver without an industrial mill is impossible, and it contains many parts cast of aluminium.

Also home production of firearms made of welded steel stampings with complicated shapes is more or less impossible for home production, due to the size of the presses required.

Jan

#10

Off topic.

Although look at the simplicity of the UZI 9mm. Which is made, almost completely, out of stamped parts.

Walther if you want, I will try to find some pictures of the homemade weapons used over in NI by the terrorists there. Some are quite complex. And I am sure I have seen at least one knock off of the Sten.

Let us know if you want to have a mooch.

On topic.

Isn’t there a very accurate sniper rifle built on the AK-47 design? Druganov is it?

#11

Off topic It is Dragunov.

"Mine is bigger…: :smiley: "
The Romanian PSL is considered to be of higher quality to the other Dragunov range.

http://www.dragunov.net/romanian_psl.htm

#12

Well…there have been problems with the M16 ever since it was made, as man of Stoat said, it does get dirty rather easily and more vulnerable then the Kalashnikov.
Though New trustworthy models of the M16 has been brought out you could say the same about the Ak-74 8)

#13

I never knew that they made a AK-47 carbine though, it looks awesome !!!
If anyone can find some info on it thatll be great.

#14

Aah, you had to mention the L85A2.

Next time you have one, place it to your left shoulder (as you would have to do when firing around to the left of cover without exposing yourself), and squeeze one off. You’ll only do it once! Plus, the L85 is significantly heavier than either the M16 or AK, especially with the SUSAT.

The Dragunov’s not /that/ accurate when compared to “proper” sniper rifles - it’s used at platoon level to give the platoon a bit of accurate firepower to beyond AK range. Supposedly a good dragunov with good ammunition can manage 1MOA, but seeing as a proper, modern sniper rifle can halve (or even better) this, it’s not too impressive. Being semi-auto it also kicks a nice shiny cartridge in the air when fired, which is not what you want to happen if you’re wearing your ghillie suit & trying not to be found.

#15

SVD’s may be a bit inaccurate compared to other snipers, but it’s strengh is amazing, the speed, the impact of the bullet…yet alone the probable killing range was 3,800 m.

Man of Stoat check out this site : http://club.guns.ru/eng/dragunov.html

#16

3,800m is the extreme range of the bullet at which it is still lethal, not the accurate range of the wpn. This is also a similar extreme range for 7.62x51, .303mkVIII and other similar cartridges.

#17

Quoted from http://world.guns.ru/assault/as18-e.htm

M16 rifles are used by many foreign military groups, most notably the British SAS, who preferred the M16 over the infamous L85A1 rifle, and by many others.

How much reliable is this information?? :shock: :shock:

#18

It is well-known that “THEY” prefer M16 & derivatives to the L85A1.

The only time that “THEY” use the L85 is when they are posing as normal soldiers.

#19

Oh, and from the SVD data quoted, the accuracy potential at 600yds is 14.17". This is approx. 2.3 MOA. Which, in sniper-world is not terribly good - compare this to the Accuracy International L96 which is capable of sub-MOA (i.e. 6" at 600yds).

#20

No it’s a Romanian AIMS model, but it’s an interesting pic in that it has an AKSU type muzzle device for the very short bbl and the rearward swept foregrip,
(necessary for the older stock which folded under the wpn,) which makes reloading a right pain in the butt.
I’m interested in the device though, can anyone help ?

No, it’s a semi-auto airsoft copy.

Iraq ?

As you say the AK is not generally particularly accurate, a run of the mill one will give you three to four MOA.
But given the ranges they are presently being used at in the sandpit, how wide is your head ? :frowning:

Edited by mistake when trying to extract the first picture (I’m not a computer genius !)
Possibly edited a second time to put the original post back, although I don’t know if it is was actually posted ! (I said was no computer buff ! :lol: )