# Should i buy a AK47 or an AR15.



## AestheticPrep

Hey all, i'm here to ask a question that i can see is a age old debate question but i want to know what i should buy. I either want a AK47 or a AR15. I've heard everything from the AR is more accurate than the AK from 300+ yards but idk why and when i would ever be shooting that far anyway? I've also heard that the AR will jam on me if it is a little dirty or whatever but the AK47 will still perform well even if it is covered in shit. Also I've heard that the AK47 has better stopping power or whatever it is called than the AR as the AK47 has a bigger bullet. Can anyone clarify anything and help me to choose a weapon please? This is for home defense and also if SHTF and i need to bug out.


----------



## SDF880

I have both and either is just fine for social work! I like the idea of 7.62X39 for close up work and a shotgun to back that up and AR15 for
medium to longer range. I have never had a fail to feed, fail to fire, fail to eject out of either AK or AR, your mileage may vary!


----------



## Gunn

I prefer the AR, due to the versatility, like 5.56, 300 Blackout and 6.5 Grendel. Which I have all three in complete firearms. But All I really had to do was change out the uppers.


----------



## Prepared One

Both. Buy quality and learn your rifles.


----------



## Tennessee

It all depends on your budget. If you can afford a high quality AR or AK then it really doesn’t matter. Both should serve you well. But if your budget is tight then a good quality AK can be had for less money than most ARs. I would rather have a well built AK then a cheap AR any day.


----------



## Smitty901

AR 15 is far more flexible. AK47 is over hyped in many ways. Great short range tank. I have both but if I could only have one it would be an AR.


----------



## Prepared One

Smitty901 said:


> AR 15 is far more flexible. AK47 is over hyped in many ways. Great short range tank. I have both but if I could only have one it would be an AR.


Quite right Smitty! I started with AR's simply because of the flexibility and availability. Grid down, it will be easy to find rifles, parts, and 556 ammo. I have both but prefer a quality AR.


----------



## csi-tech

The age old question. If I had to buy one, it would be the AR-15 all day long. I own both because the AKM is just so much fun! I have an Npap but I think most people lean towards the Romanian WASR for inexpensive reliability in an AKM these days.


----------



## Chipper

If you can only have one might I suggest an AR-10 in 308 or a M1A. Then you will have a tool that will do everything and more then both of the other rifles.


----------



## dwight55

AestheticPrep said:


> ........ I either want a AK47 or a AR15. I've heard everything from the AR is more accurate than the AK from 300+ yards but idk why and when i would ever be shooting that far anyway?..........
> This is for home defense and also if SHTF and i need to bug out.


In today's firearm world, . . . ammo for either is fairly readily available, . . . but ammo for the AK is dependent upon mostly foreign sources, . . . 5.56 / .223 ammo is plentiful and quite available, and a lot of it is made in the USA............favoring the AR.

You say you don't know why or when you would shoot at someone 300+ yards away: someone is threatening and / or shooting at you and / or your loved ones from 300+ yards out, . . . and there is quite a number of them. Shoot first and ask questions later. Taking out an enemy combatant at a greater range is far preferable than allowing him / them to close upon you. That is a simple military rule / law that you never understood by not being in the active military............again, favor goes to the AR.

You make the statement that you intend to bug out: do you have a place to "bug" to??? Most individuals I speak to have this vague idea that they will bug out to less populated areas, . . . build a shelter, . . . live off the land, . . . and watch pretty rainbows in the sky.

If I see you, . . . traipsing around my property, . . . carrying THE FAVORED weapon of the people who would overthrow us, . . . I'm going to assume you are an enemy combatant. I will proceed upon that idea until I understand something differently, . . . in other words, . . . carrying a bad guy weapon might be dangerous to your health.

If you want a 30 cal weapon for home defense / SHTF / bugging out, . . . you would do better to get an M14 or clone, . . . which is a far superior weapon than either of these.

AND, . . . one clinching idea, . . . anyone seeing you afield will tend to take you as an American friendly, . . . as you are carrying a proper American weapon.

One thing a lot of people who have never been in the military completely miss in their thinking, . . . once the SHTF, . . . there are going to be a lot of people "defending what is theirs". Looking like or acting like a bad guy may become truly detrimental to one's health. That can include carrying a bad guy weapon. I can tell you for certain that ANYONE who would come near my AO carrying an an RPG, . . . he's going down the instant he is within my capable range. THAT is the second most favored weapon of the bad guys, . . . is devastating, . . . and I will not take a chance that he might be a friendly and picked up the weapon on the battlefield.

Look like a bad guy, . . . die like a bad guy.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Targetshooter

My vote will go to a AR or M1A in 5.56 or 308 . For long range I would go for a Night Train in 308 .


----------



## Oddcaliber

It's the old Ford,Chevy debate. I made my choice for the SKS years ago. It suits my needs and I'm going to get an AK someday. My friend has AR's and is quiet happy with his. Shoot both and then make a decision.


----------



## KUSA

Why settle for one rifle? Buy both and don't just get one of each.

With that said, I prefer the AR. I have them in 223 and 308.


----------



## MisterMills357

AestheticPrep said:


> Hey all, i'm here to ask a question that i can see is a age old debate question but i want to know what i should buy. I either want a AK47 or a AR15. I've heard everything from the AR is more accurate than the AK from 300+ yards but idk why and when i would ever be shooting that far anyway? I've also heard that the AR will jam on me if it is a little dirty or whatever but the AK47 will still perform well even if it is covered in shit. Also I've heard that the AK47 has better stopping power or whatever it is called than the AR as the AK47 has a bigger bullet. Can anyone clarify anything and help me to choose a weapon please? This is for home defense and also if SHTF and i need to bug out.


I was a proponent of the AK for a long time, until I fired the M4, and that was it, I was in love. It fired until the barrel smoked and never intimated that it was going to slow down. 
I had to make myself stop, it wasn't the gun that stopped, and I was putting it through full-auto Hell. I have never fired an AK, but I have heard nothing but good things about them, as a close in gun.
As a distance gun, I have heard bad things about them, they can be very inaccurate. But, like everything else, some are accurate and some aren't, if you get one, test it at scope distances.

My advice is ultimately, test your theory, and one is as good as the other for most things. Whatever you do, be ready to fight, and that will get you through.
PS: They use M4's, and the Big Bullet/Small Bullet, debate will wear you out if you let it. The M4 will knock the fight out of a man or dog, and that is what a good test is to me.


----------



## Denton

What is your experience with either rifle?


----------



## Medic33

it will really all come down to what you prefer -the only reason the AR is so popular I my opinion is for a couple reasons, a lot of people the first intro to fire arms is in the military and they use the M16/AR15 so they are familiar with the platform and how to run it blindfolded. another is because every were you look in film ect the AR is the glorified good guy weapon against the evil ak toting bad guy.
in my opinion the AK is way better -it is less complicated,everyone knows about it's reliability and will not argue it, it does fire a heavier .30 cal bullet instead of a high velocity .22 and they are more or can be more compact with the right stock such as an under folder(that a lot of people think is junk), I like the AK but you will have to make up your own mind after it is your money and ass on the line right.
as for looking like a bad guy during a SHTF well anyone roaming around with an evil rifle will be a bad guys right?
carrying an RPG? what are you thinking?
the 300 black out - let me clarify this round -it is to duplicate the ballistics of 7.62x39 for the soul reason because the AK round(7.62 x39) doesn't fit in an AR magazine and an AK mag doesn't fit in an AR that's about it and something to think about.


----------



## Smitty901

There are major differences in the 5.56 and 7.62X39. As for cost a good AK will run about the same as a good AR. A high end AK will run about the same as a high end AR.
Times have changed.


----------



## Camel923

I think both have merits. Having said that, I made a decision to streamline calibers 20 years ago. AK/SKS is what I chose. Both proven in abysmal combat conditions by the Red Army filled with illiterate peasants. Longer range m-1 garand, 03 Springfield, moisin Nagant or 1917 enfield. Under a hundred yards or more likely under 30 (statistically most encounters) placing your shots in a dime as opposed to a 50 cent piece is testosterone talking. The results of social cleansing are of equal out come. Just my reasoning. Lots of folks will tell you why I am wrong.


----------



## Medic33

nope camel I agree on the shot placement and what I have said many times sub moa or 4inch group at a 100 yards draw a 4 inch square on your forehead now think is it really going to matter if one is all you get?


----------



## SGT E

Camel923 said:


> I think both have merits. Having said that, I made a decision to streamline calibers 20 years ago. AK/SKS is what I chose. Both proven in abysmal combat conditions by the Red Army filled with illiterate peasants. Longer range m-1 garand, 03 Springfield, moisin Nagant or 1917 enfield. Under a hundred yards or more likely under 30 (statistically most encounters) placing your shots in a dime as opposed to a 50 cent piece is testosterone talking. The results of social cleansing are of equal out come. Just my reasoning. Lots of folks will tell you why I am wrong.

















I can get ten shots under a quarter....Cant find my best group? Its a .247.....


----------



## Seneca

You could split the difference or not
https://www.cmmginc.com/shop/rifle-mk47-akm2-7-62x39mm-sbn-mutant/


----------



## Kauboy

Different guns for different purposes.
What is your purpose?

If short range(0-100yds), either can suffice, with the AK having more stopping power simply due to bullet mass and penetration.
If medium to long range(101-600yds), the AR takes the win. The lighter round is far more accurate at longer distances.

I currently own only an AR. I chose it due to its ubiquitous nature. You can find one in every police department and military base in the country. As a prepper's weapon, you will never be without supply options. Replacement parts and ammunition will be easy to find. If we were in just about any other country, the same would be true for the AK. However, the U.S. uses NATO weapons, so I choose NATO weapons.

That said, I am no opposed to picking up an AK, if the price was right.
For a prepper weapon, the AR fits the niche.


----------



## Arklatex

I like both. The thing I really like about the ak is that I can get those big ass "spam cans" of ammo dirt cheap. Already sealed up for storage. If u was just starting out prepping I would go that route first and stack the ammo deep!


----------



## LunaticFringeInc

dwight55 said:


> In today's firearm world, . . . ammo for either is fairly readily available, . . . but ammo for the AK is dependent upon mostly foreign sources, . . . 5.56 / .223 ammo is plentiful and quite available, and a lot of it is made in the USA............favoring the AR.
> 
> You say you don't know why or when you would shoot at someone 300+ yards away: someone is threatening and / or shooting at you and / or your loved ones from 300+ yards out, . . . and there is quite a number of them. Shoot first and ask questions later. Taking out an enemy combatant at a greater range is far preferable than allowing him / them to close upon you. That is a simple military rule / law that you never understood by not being in the active military............again, favor goes to the AR.
> 
> You make the statement that you intend to bug out: do you have a place to "bug" to??? Most individuals I speak to have this vague idea that they will bug out to less populated areas, . . . build a shelter, . . . live off the land, . . . and watch pretty rainbows in the sky.
> 
> If I see you, . . . traipsing around my property, . . . carrying THE FAVORED weapon of the people who would overthrow us, . . . I'm going to assume you are an enemy combatant. I will proceed upon that idea until I understand something differently, . . . in other words, . . . carrying a bad guy weapon might be dangerous to your health.
> 
> If you want a 30 cal weapon for home defense / SHTF / bugging out, . . . you would do better to get an M14 or clone, . . . which is a far superior weapon than either of these.
> 
> AND, . . . one clinching idea, . . . anyone seeing you afield will tend to take you as an American friendly, . . . as you are carrying a proper American weapon.
> 
> One thing a lot of people who have never been in the military completely miss in their thinking, . . . once the SHTF, . . . there are going to be a lot of people "defending what is theirs". Looking like or acting like a bad guy may become truly detrimental to one's health. That can include carrying a bad guy weapon. I can tell you for certain that ANYONE who would come near my AO carrying an an RPG, . . . he's going down the instant he is within my capable range. THAT is the second most favored weapon of the bad guys, . . . is devastating, . . . and I will not take a chance that he might be a friendly and picked up the weapon on the battlefield.
> 
> Look like a bad guy, . . . die like a bad guy.
> 
> May God bless,
> Dwight


I own both and I have multiple combat tours where I wasnt in the rear with the gear. Now that, thats out of the way...

I like just about everything that was said in the above reply. Except....



> If you want a 30 cal weapon for home defense / SHTF / bugging out, . . . you would do better to get an M14 or clone, . . . which is a far superior weapon than either of these.


For Home Defense a 308 Battle Rifle would not be my choice any wheres near the top of my list. Its ridiculasly over powered, ridiculasly loud even with hearing protection and MAJOR hazard to any other good guys in the building due to gross over penetration of interior walls! If your gonna see engagements beyond 200 yards on a fairly regular basis then Im liking that 308 a lot more.

Back to the original post though...

I would choose the AR over the AK 8 days a week. The cost difference in the two aint all that much in what I am seeing in the gun stores these days. The AR is a far more flexible weapons system than the AK is. Need AK power and dont like the 5.56, there is the 300 Blackout which is hot on the heels of the AK ballistics wise. The 300 Black out is more design friendly to the AR platform than the AK round in the AR platform. While the AR aint nearly as rugged of a design I have not found any issues with the M4 from a operational stand point. Clean it occasionally and it will likely serve you like a Boss.


----------



## Camel923

SGT E said:


> View attachment 16100
> View attachment 16101
> 
> 
> I can get ten shots under a quarter....Cant find my best group? Its a .247.....


Impressive.


----------



## Quip

Quality AR with a 1:7 / 1:8 twist rate and a butt load of the 62gr green tips. Simple, plentiful and easy to maintain with minimal tools. Spare parts kits are ridiculously cheap.


----------



## mcangus

From a pure economic point, the AR. Because it is as cheap as it will ever get right now. The AK market has room to move down, not saying it will but it is possible. The AR market is at the bottom, it really can't go too much lower.

AR15, because it is the best value.


----------



## txmarine6531

Your typical AR-15 is good from 0-600 meters. Yes the max effective range is 800 meters but the energy of the round is so low, it won't be all that great, that's why I said 600. That's with a 20 inch barrel. It's accurate enough. The 7.62x39 round is effective out to 400, maybe a little further with high grade ammo. It's accurate enough within that distance as well, assuming you have decent quality ammo and rifle.

Reliability wise, the AR requires more maintenance, especially the lugs, that's why it had a forward assist. Seen lots of them have cycling issues when not cleaned and lubed enough. Only jam *I've* ever had out of that design was when I was firing on 3 round burst in the Marines. Semi, never had a problem. A military spec AK has much looser tolerances, that's why you can drag it through the mud and still be able to fire it, for the most part. The high end AKs like from Rifle Dynamics, have tighter tolerances, but are still stupid reliable.

Ammo availability for both are good, so is selection. AR is much more modular, which can be a downfall for your wallet. If I were to choose, I'd get the 5.56. Mainly for carrying capacity of ammo, smaller and lighter round means I can carry more. Also I'm more familiar and comfortable with that design as I've handled it more than I have an AK.


----------



## BulletClub

ar15 in a 223 will be more accurate then an ak. I am talking about loading up 20 or 30 rounds and shooting at a moving target at a decent pace. The ar15 in 223 has less recoil and I can hold it on the target much better. I just bought an ar10 in a 308, haven't shot it yet so can't compare that or even the 300 blackout, but for accuracy the 223, for stopping power the ak.


----------



## SOCOM42

I have plenty of both.

It is tough to choose, however, for up to 300 yds, an AK will do fine.

In close and dirty, it beats an AR for durability, reliability and knock down power,

if you fall on it you are less likely to bend or break the stock, which will deadline an AR.

There was a time, when the AK's and cases of ammo were dirt cheap, that is when I bought them and tons of ammo. 

I have M4's and other models, however, I prefer my 5.56 Galil's which are AK patterned an much more accurate.

Suck up and by both, if not able, get a good AR in 5.56.


----------



## mcangus

So what did the original poster decide on?

I still stand firm on AR15.


----------



## mooosie

First let me say I'm not rich by any means . What u have I have accumulated over time. I have a couple of AR's, a couple of AK's one is an under folder and a bushmaster Orc 308. My reason is ammo availability ! I want options if things get tough! Another little gun I picked up is a keltek PL 16 . It gas a single point sling and will hand under a knee length coat fully concealed . It has a light a laser and a double drum 100 round magazine! That is a lot is 223 hidden under your coat! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Operator6

AK 7.62x39 will have more penetration and require less maintenance. 

Spoken from experience......I own both.


----------



## M118LR

AestheticPrep said:


> Hey all, i'm here to ask a question that i can see is a age old debate question but i want to know what i should buy. I either want a AK47 or a AR15. I've heard everything from the AR is more accurate than the AK from 300+ yards but idk why and when i would ever be shooting that far anyway? I've also heard that the AR will jam on me if it is a little dirty or whatever but the AK47 will still perform well even if it is covered in shit. Also I've heard that the AK47 has better stopping power or whatever it is called than the AR as the AK47 has a bigger bullet. Can anyone clarify anything and help me to choose a weapon please? This is for home defense and also if SHTF and i need to bug out.


If you ever shoot a Military Course of Fire, (Militarily or NRA) the advantages of the AR over the AK shall become readily apparent. If you begin to shoot to the level of marksmanship required to qualify on the USMC Boot-camp known distance range, the AK's 500 yard nonperformance shall immediately explain why you should select an AR. Just my opinion. LOL.


----------



## Mad Trapper

M118LR said:


> If you ever shoot a Military Course of Fire, (Militarily or NRA) the advantages of the AR over the AK shall become readily apparent. If you begin to shoot to the level of marksmanship required to qualify on the USMC Boot-camp known distance range, the AK's 500 yard nonperformance shall immediately explain why you should select an AR. Just my opinion. LOL.


I'll take a M1A with a peep


----------



## M118LR

Mad Trapper said:


> I'll take a M1A with a peep


Don't recall that being either of the OP's operating systems Mad Trapper. The further you go from where you are at, the more expensive the delivery system you need to purchase to ensure the mail get's through. JMHO.


----------



## SOCOM42

In the form of self defense, what justification over three hundred yards?

Here if you are over 20 feet and shoot, self defense is questionable.

In WORL thing will be different, but you still need to justify at least to yourself shooting someone 700 yards away, plus not all are good enough for that..

It will all come down to perceivable threat, no less.

Where I live, 200 would be the max norm, yeah it could go longer if we did not have all the trees everywhere except in the centers of the big cities.

Right here on my property, if it happens, I will rely on 7.62 Nato Israeli AP and 30APM2 to punch through the trees,

and for pulling the chain (FPF) it will come to 8x57MM heavy ball mixed with AP.

I have plenty of AK's and AR's, can't beat the AK for close in, it was conceived for Rattenkrieg and there it excels.

If you want a short range real man stopper then get an AK.

Here, that is what the fighting will be like, quick, dirty and close with no quarter asked or given. 

I would love to have three to five hundred yards fields of fire, 

The M25's, M1D's and my Brookfield Precision Tool custom built bolt gun would rule, if I had the range.


----------



## M118LR

Haven't we had this conversation at 400 yards before SOCOM42?


----------



## bigwheel

From the pragmatism of an old Boy Scout. A smart person should use the serious money to buy a couple of 10 22s and a few pallets of ammo. Leave the army guns to GI Jane. If a muzzie cant be slain at a hundred yards with a .22 I will get Slippy to kiss your grits. lol.


----------



## dwight55

bigwheel said:


> From the pragmatism of an old Boy Scout. A smart person should use the serious money to buy a couple of 10 22s and a few pallets of ammo. Leave the army guns to GI Jane. If a muzzie cant be slain at a hundred yards with a .22 I will get Slippy to kiss your grits. lol.


You make a good argument bigwheel, . . . as you always do.

I prefer an AR or M1A as they will hurt more and bleed out faster, . . . plus I like the old adage of ".30 cal, . . . making concealment out of cover".

The .22LR won't do that. My .308 won't stop an MRAP coming down the driveway either, . . . but there are a bunch of other vehicles that may veer into the shooting lanes that will stop dead from .308 lead, . . . and a .22 won't even penetrate the bumper.

Just some thoughts.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## bigwheel

Good point. Did have the honor of shooting a junk car in the trunk with a .12 gauge slug one time. Yeppers it came out the front. Talking about a car stopper lol. Think it must have did a richochet over the motor..or hey maybe somebody had swiped the motor. I aint sure.


----------



## Cheesewiz

I like them both , so I have both platforms .Different tools for various jobs . I would not hesitate to grab either one in an emergency. What ever you have in your hand is better than nothing if that would happen. Shooting paper one thing, shooting a moving person is another story. Take the one two inch groups on paper and kiss those goodbye. Paper does not shoot back, no adrenaline dump and no Wizz, Zing or Crack over your head tango_face_smile:


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

No clue if this helps anybody but Iraqveteran8888 did burnout videos with both platforms on full auto.





 WASR-10 AK-47 265 rounds before failure





 VEPR Ak-47 895 rounds before failure. They made a simple fix using a tree limb as a hammer and put the gun back in service in the field





 DI AR-15 830 rounds before failure





 Piston Ar-15 833 rounds before failure

Note all these tests where conducted on full auto which you as a civilian probably don't have access too, if you do then I need to borrow a few bucks  . They where also just mag dump after mag dump that isn't going to happen. Just some information for your information.

Bonus Ultimate Glock Meltdown Video since these video's are awsome


----------



## M118LR

Bye any chance are any of these conclusive video's shot beyond the 300 meter range? Would you care to explain why I am not trembling at 400 yards with my antiquated M-14NM?


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

M118LR said:


> Bye any chance are any of these conclusive video's shot beyond the 300 meter range? Would you care to explain why I am not trembling at 400 yards with my antiquated M-14NM?


They weren't, the purpose of the videos if I'm not mistaken was to see how many rounds each rifle could fire in sustained automatic fire before a major stoppage/malfunction.


----------



## M118LR

I have no desire to die atop a warm pile of spent casings. I'd rather fire one shot, record one kill and come HOME to those folks that depended on me. JMHO.


----------



## csi-tech

I love his meltdown videos!


----------



## Medic33

no, you'll die on top of a unused rusty mk 2 navy knife or one unfired bb gun.


----------



## Smitty901

Full auto burn outs are just for show they prove little about the platforms over all. The current full auto offered by the people that invented the AR shoots many more round flawlessly. 
Huldra took one of their AR's and chambered it for the dirty 5.45 round with out adding any lube they fired it over 4800 rounds before it had a fail to fire. That was with NO cleaning. That is what I find impressive not shooting full auto for 800 rounds.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

Smitty901 said:


> Full auto burn outs are just for show they prove little about the platforms over all. The current full auto offered by the people that invented the AR shoots many more round flawlessly.
> Huldra took one of their AR's and chambered it for the dirty 5.45 round with out adding any lube they fired it over 4800 rounds before it had a fail to fire. That was with NO cleaning. That is what I find impressive not shooting full auto for 800 rounds.


but the burnout video's are so cool!


----------



## RedLion

I chose the AR platform for several reasons. Multicaliber, easy to build and modify, better performance than the Ak overall, it will function just fine in all environments with some time and care and ammo is and will be much more plentiful in the event of a SHTF situation. I have a vepr 12 shotgun and it is great, but I have no AK's, SKS or other commie guns. :tango_face_wink:
I have been tempted to buy an AK and/or SKS to have and shoot, but have not yet pulled the trigger, but will stay with the AR as the primary platform.


----------



## Smitty901

NotTooProudToHide said:


> but the burnout video's are so cool!


 Ok then how about the m60E4


----------



## M118LR

Medic33 said:


> no, you'll die on top of a unused rusty mk 2 navy knife or one unfired bb gun.


Okay Medic33, lets attempt this from a civilian outlook. The AK or AR you purchase from your local gun store is by no means the Issued piece of equipment that any soldier on either side of the "Battlefield" is carrying. All these torture tests on u tube are so inferior to what the real professionals assigned to proving grounds perform prior to Military acceptance of a small arm I don't have the time or space to debate. SOCOM42 (YUP I ride him) has been explaining how inferior Springfield's M1A is when compared to the actual issue M-14's that he built. We won't even get into the upgrades that SEI performed just to bring back the M-14. So if you have never used an actual issued AK or AR how much technical information is required to fill in the difference? An AK or an AR are just what they say they are, the fact that I paid 1/10 of the price that the issuing Military paid for thier weapon just means that I am a better shopper. Now let me make a U-tube video torture test and everyone will can understand.

Hope everyone can understand satire.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

M118LR said:


> Okay Medic33, lets attempt this from a civilian outlook. The AK or AR you purchase from your local gun store is by no means the Issued piece of equipment that any soldier on either side of the "Battlefield" is carrying. All these torture tests on u tube are so inferior to what the real professionals assigned to proving grounds perform prior to Military acceptance of a small arm I don't have the time or space to debate. SOCOM42 (YUP I ride him) has been explaining how inferior Springfield's M1A is when compared to the actual issue M-14's that he built. We won't even get into the upgrades that SEI performed just to bring back the M-14. So if you have never used an actual issued AK or AR how much technical information is required to fill in the difference? An AK or an AR are just what they say they are, the fact that I paid 1/10 of the price that the issuing Military paid for thier weapon just means that I am a better shopper. Now let me make a U-tube video torture test and everyone will can understand.
> 
> Hope everyone can understand satire.


The major differences is the military versions are select fire giving the option to switch from semi to 3 round burst or full auto and the military M4 has a 14.5 inch barrel and the fact that military rifles are made with uniformed components that make the rifle "Mil Spec." Select fire is out of the question for most people due to cost but you can take a rifle off the shelf and make it as close to mil spec as it can be without the select fire option. There are plenty of components and parts out there that are just as good if not better than what the military uses.

You are correct in that the budget or entry level rifles that people tend to but because their cheap are not close to military rifles in quality or performance. That being said, most civilians aren't going to Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, or anywhere other than the range or their back yards and even there they aren't going to be engaging multiple enemies in perilous life and death combat. Most people buy these rifles for sporting use or personal/home defense and for those purposes a rifle off the rack is just fine and will serve that purpose well.


----------



## M118LR

You have skipped allot of construction differences, but that can slide. If your not going to engage multiple assailants in perilous life or death combat why do you require a semiautomatic rifle? 

You had better become accustomed to rifles for sporting use as bolt actions without a detachable mag. Even then, nothing off the rack is constructed like an M2010, M24, or M40.


----------



## inceptor

M118LR said:


> You have skipped allot of construction differences, but that can slide. If your not going to engage multiple assailants in perilous life or death combat why do you require a semiautomatic rifle?
> 
> You had better become accustomed to rifles for sporting use as bolt actions without a detachable mag. Even then, nothing off the rack is constructed like an M2010, M24, or M40.


So for those without your level of expertise, semi-autos should be off limits. Add to that bolt action rifles with detachable magazines. (Maybe I should just call those clips since I have no formal training.)Then what about a pump shotgun? Would that be okay or should we just stick with the single shot?


----------



## inceptor

Oh, and you may want to add semi-auto pistols to that. A revolver is much less complicated.


----------



## M118LR

inceptor said:


> Oh, and you may want to add semi-auto pistols to that. A revolver is much less complicated.


Just be careful what you ask for at X-mas inceptor, Madam President just might grant your rant.


----------



## inceptor

M118LR said:


> Just be careful what you ask for at X-mas inceptor, Madam President just might grant your rant.


I wasn't quoting her.........


----------



## Medic33

do not forget ML our weapon was made by the *LOWEST* bidder.
you know some of us may know a thing or two abut what we are talking about, but then again we don't ride high horses.


----------



## Smitty901

Every m16 from A1 to A4 version and every M4 I was issued worked as it should for me. Any weapon that had issues was replaced and repaired. I do not know what Army some of you were in. But if we listed defects of any kind on the 2404, it was taken care of. It would take 2 years to cover all the BS about the deployment of the M16 in the first years and we would still never sort it all out. For years the M16 and M4 were Colt. Latter when US took over the rights others came in but they functioned as they should. When age and wear became an issue with the M60 we replaced them with the 240 because the m60 was being phased out.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

M118LR said:


> You have skipped allot of construction differences, but that can slide. If your not going to engage multiple assailants in perilous life or death combat why do you require a semiautomatic rifle?
> 
> You had better become accustomed to rifles for sporting use as bolt actions without a detachable mag. Even then, nothing off the rack is constructed like an M2010, M24, or M40.


Your situation may be different but for me a rifle such as a M2010, M24, or M40 would be a waste. Other than sporting purposes my guns where purchased with home/personal defense in mind a shot over 100 yards is awful hard to justify as personal defense. In fact I'd say most defense scenario's are going to happen within handgun range. Also our local range maxes at 300 yards and I don't have a private place to shoot. Right now my skill set also isn't good enough to justify spending the insane amount of money one of those would cost but I am eventually going to move into the world of long range bolt action. Right now a Remington 700, Mossberg Patriot, Savage Axis, or whatever Marlin's budget rifle in 30-06 is on the wishlist along with a .357 magnum, standard cap 9mm, and for fun a 1911 either colt or springfield. Now that I think about it I would like to have one of those new Springfield M1a's even if they aren't as good as the old M-14's. So many guns I want so little money I have


----------



## RedLion

Smitty901 said:


> Every m16 from A1 to A4 version and every M4 I was issued worked as it should for me. Any weapon that had issues was replaced and repaired. I do not know what Army some of you were in. But if we listed defects of any kind on the 2404, it was taken care of. It would take 2 years to cover all the BS about the deployment of the M16 in the first years and we would still never sort it all out. For years the M16 and M4 were Colt. Latter when US took over the rights others came in but they functioned as they should. When age and wear became an issue with the M60 we replaced them with the 240 because the m60 was being phased out.


I have to agree that in my service in the Army weapon issues were rare and taken care promptly when they arose. Only one that I can recall that was not, but that was on the main gun of my tank. bleeding bolt on top of the breach of the 120mm main gun was replaced by just any old bolt that fit when a mechadick lost the original in the sub-turret floor. Damn thing shot straight out and hit the turret ceiling on the first round down range during gunnery. Hydralic fluid every where. In my mouth and in my TC's eyes. Highly carcinegenic stuff. :sad2:
Unfortunately my protective mask when deployed to Iraq 2003-04 had 4 deficiencies and I rolled on missions without protective gloves, so stuff does go wrong.


----------



## Smitty901

I think every one should also own an SKS or AK 47 . main reason there is a lot of 7.62X39 ammo already here. May as well have a weapon that can fire it. Better to have one then running around looking for one someone does not need any more.
I just do not think it should be the first or only weapon.


----------



## Medic33

Red lion
your loader is down ,gas gas gas, enemy in your sector, scan your lane, sabo loaded, your lane is hot, send it. 
watch out for the deer out on 5 north.


----------



## M118LR

NotTooProudToHide said:


> Your situation may be different but for me a rifle such as a M2010, M24, or M40 would be a waste. Other than sporting purposes my guns where purchased with home/personal defense in mind a shot over 100 yards is awful hard to justify as personal defense. In fact I'd say most defense scenario's are going to happen within handgun range. Also our local range maxes at 300 yards and I don't have a private place to shoot. Right now my skill set also isn't good enough to justify spending the insane amount of money one of those would cost but I am eventually going to move into the world of long range bolt action. Right now a Remington 700, Mossberg Patriot, Savage Axis, or whatever Marlin's budget rifle in 30-06 is on the wishlist along with a .357 magnum, standard cap 9mm, and for fun a 1911 either colt or springfield. Now that I think about it I would like to have one of those new Springfield M1a's even if they aren't as good as the old M-14's. So many guns I want so little money I have


Hope you followed the reference to the (Thread:How far is to far?) and the concept of an America without any semiautomatic firearms.

At 300 yards your local range is long enough to effectively display the inherent accuracy/sight system advantages of the Armalite over the Kalashnikov. For sporting purposes the available chamber's/cartridges of the Armalite make it a more utilitarian selection. For sporting Matches/competitions low recoiling flatter trajectory offerings like .223/5.56 are excellent. While I would recommend the higher energy selections like .308 Win/ 7.62 NATO for hunting.

Home/Personal Defense: While a rifle/carbine is primarily used afield (Mil-Slang: Primary Weapon), in defensive situations at close quarters, a sidearm (Mil-Slang: Secondary Weapon) is far less cumbersome and much easier to wield within a confined space. If you select your primary weapon based on it's ability to perform the tasks assigned to a secondary sidearm you are limiting your operational/tactical abilities.

As the OP narrowed the selections to either Armalite or Kalahnikov, if I had to select one as my Primary Weapon it would have to be the Armalite. (To get the most utility afield it would be a .308 Win.) JMHO.


----------



## Smitty901

M118LR said:


> .
> . As the OP narrowed the selections to either Armalite or Kalahnikov, if I had to select one as my Primary Weapon it would have to be the Armalite. (To get the most utility afield it would be a .308 Win.) JMHO.


 We are in agreement for the most part. The 308 while superior to the 5.56 in many way the 5.56 does a better job for the day to day infantry. Down side to the 308 as in weight and size are not put a side by the longer range and ability to kill. Facts are facts we kill far more of them with 5.56 than they do with 7.62X39. not even a close race. We lose because of politics not fire power.


----------



## Medic33

the 5.56 is or was designed and selected because it wounds not kills(what? ya, I know silly isn't it) because it takes more out enemy out of the fight -now you have a wounded guy and another guy helping the wounded guy.
too bad we are one of the few that actually follow that we go nutz trying to get to and save the wounded guy.
the 7.62x39 was designed to kill germans or who ever the Russians were fighting and the 5.45x39(not 5.56) well just makes some really nasty wounds that usually kill the person in time.
the 308 well it does all the above.
I still prefer the 7.62x39.


----------



## M118LR

Smitty901 said:


> We are in agreement for the most part. The 308 while superior to the 5.56 in many way the 5.56 does a better job for the day to day infantry. Down side to the 308 as in weight and size are not put a side by the longer range and ability to kill. Facts are facts we kill far more of them with 5.56 than they do with 7.62X39. not even a close race. We lose because of politics not fire power.


Day to day infantry requires all the support mechanisms that "Big Green" can provide. None of which shall be available to those outside the "Big Green Machine" in times of need Smitty901. Thinking/sitting outside the full automatic kill box of either honest military assault carbine, the cyclic rate of a semiautomatic dictates a greater chance of survival when utilized at a longer distance. Neither the support network or the full automatic cyclic rate will be common place, so saddled with an inferior rate of fire the extra range (lethality) afforded by the .308 Win makes it my preference. The smaller the organization, the greater the need for utility in order to survive. JMHO.


----------



## shooter

I have put a fair number of rounds though both weapon platforms. I will say this if you buy a good AR it will shoot well if you buy a good AK it will shoot well. You can sometimes find "cheap" AK's around $400-$500 bucks, however they tend to have issues, while a S&W sport is $600-$700 and works great but tis missing some features. A good AK will run $700 or more. A good AR will round about $1000. Both can malfunction, it could be due to ammo, a bad mag, dirt or bad luck. I will say that most AR jams, can be fixed with a drop the mag, rack the cocking level slam the mag back in and you are ready to rock. However my experience with the AK is that if you get a jam you will be removing the top and kicking the bolt back, to get it firing again. Granted this is not 100% of the time but a large percentage of the time.

AR's make it easier to mount an optic, but you should know how to shoot with Iron sights. Both rounds will cause a world of hurt to anyone they hit. 5.56 is lighter so its easier to carry more ammo. AK mag tend to be cheaper.

The best advice I can give you is go to a gun shop handle both guns, see if there is a range where you can rent one of each and shoot them see which you like more. Pick one buy lots of ammo, and mags then practice, practice and practice some more, strip and rebuild the gun until you can do it while watching TV and not paying attention to the gun.

The true is if there is a true EOTWAWKI situation by day 5 there will be plenty of guns laying around corpses to pick up so you can switch platforms then. Its more important to pick one and train then to own multiple weapons at first.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

M118LR said:


> Hope you followed the reference to the (Thread:How far is to far?) and the concept of an America without any semiautomatic firearms.
> 
> At 300 yards your local range is long enough to effectively display the inherent accuracy/sight system advantages of the Armalite over the Kalashnikov. For sporting purposes the available chamber's/cartridges of the Armalite make it a more utilitarian selection. For sporting Matches/competitions low recoiling flatter trajectory offerings like .223/5.56 are excellent. While I would recommend the higher energy selections like .308 Win/ 7.62 NATO for hunting.
> 
> Home/Personal Defense: While a rifle/carbine is primarily used afield (Mil-Slang: Primary Weapon), in defensive situations at close quarters, a sidearm (Mil-Slang: Secondary Weapon) is far less cumbersome and much easier to wield within a confined space. If you select your primary weapon based on it's ability to perform the tasks assigned to a secondary sidearm you are limiting your operational/tactical abilities.
> 
> As the OP narrowed the selections to either Armalite or Kalahnikov, if I had to select one as my Primary Weapon it would have to be the Armalite. (To get the most utility afield it would be a .308 Win.) JMHO.


Excellent Post!

I do agree the Armalite is superior to the Kalashnikov especially when the Armalite is maintained. A basic cleaning kit should be included in all bugout bags and a complex one should be kept in your home. Gun maintenance components like oil, solvent, patches, rods, brushes, and spare parts should be in the conversation right along with ammo. You should also be familiar with field stripping your weapon at the minimum and I would recommend taking an armors course for more advanced maintenance if you have the resources to do so.

All that being said I also agree that if you have the resources you should have more than 1 gun available to you. A 5.56 carbine is best suited for 2 legged predators although you can technically hunt with it its far from the ideal hunting weapon. In fact its pretty limited to varmint level game to deer if you use the right cartridges. Versatility is an area where the 7.62x39 outshines the 5.56 because its similar to the 30-30 in performance. The .308/7.62x51 (or any other full sized center fire rifle cartridge) blows both away (pun intended) in the area of putting bacon on the table and quiet frankly knockdown power. In fact, honestly if you can take the weight of the rifle/ammunition, you can afford the increased cost of the rifle/ammunition and more recoil doesn't bother you then a full power cartridge like the 7.62x51 will probably serve you better overall. Just my 2cents


----------



## csi-tech

AK-47s are for people who do not know or understand firearms. They are designed for those who do not care or have no inclination to clean a rifle. They were made so that anyone could pick it up and go to war. The AR was designed for the American fighting man. The mistake we made was trying to relegate it to the same rudimentary level of the AK. We told soldiers it did not require cleaning and gave them rifles with non lined bores. Once they started cleaning them and shooting with chrome lined bores the advantages were clear.

I have never personally heard from soldiers who used the rifle in Afghanistan or Iraq. How did the M4 hold up in sand? How did they compare to the AK=47 used by insurgents. We fared quite well I think, but I wonder what improvements the average soldier would have made to the platform.


----------



## Operator6

csi-tech said:


> AK-47s are for people who do not know or understand firearms. They are designed for those who do not care or have no inclination to clean a rifle. They were made so that anyone could pick it up and go to war. The AR was designed for the American fighting man. The mistake we made was trying to relegate it to the same rudimentary level of the AK. We told soldiers it did not require cleaning and gave them rifles with non lined bores. Once they started cleaning them and shooting with chrome lined bores the advantages were clear.
> 
> I have never personally heard from soldiers who used the rifle in Afghanistan or Iraq. How did the M4 hold up in sand? How did they compare to the AK=47 used by insurgents. We fared quite well I think, but I wonder what improvements the average soldier would have made to the platform.


Some of our guys that had the choice, chose AK47s.


----------



## M118LR

Operator6 said:


> Some of our guys that had the choice, chose AK47s.


I forgot how extensive that small arms training was in the Salvation Army Operator6. During the beret conflict did they hold classes on the proper wear of a Sikh instead of a Turban? :lol:

Perhaps I confused you with New guy 101 Operator6. If I did I apologize, but the use of either actual Military Full Automatic Assault Rifle is of no conscience when being compared to a civilian semiautomatic. JMHO.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide

Another point I think worth mentioning is no matter what optics you mount on whichever platform you choose you need a good set of iron sights and you need to know how to use them.


----------



## Operator6

M118LR said:


> I forgot how extensive that small arms training was in the Salvation Army Operator6. During the beret conflict did they hold classes on the proper wear of a Sikh instead of a Turban? :lol:


If they didn't they should've.

Do you work in the thrift store or do you ring the bell outside the stores at Christmas ?

Doesn't matter, thank you for your service bro....


----------



## rice paddy daddy

This shtick is really getting old.
I think I'll wander on over to the K98k Forum, where actual rifle discussions take place.
Good night.


----------



## M118LR

Operator6 said:


> If they didn't they should've.
> 
> Do you work in the thrift store or do you ring the bell outside the stores at Christmas ?
> 
> Doesn't matter, thank you for your service bro....


They always assigned me far away from the thrift store, the places they sent me didn't become bad neighborhoods until I got there ringing my little bell. (forgive the Patti Labelle reference)

Your Welcome.

Hope I didn't stir up New guy 101 to much, :lol:


----------



## ND_ponyexpress_

I prefer AR.. use the 308 for the deer and the 223 for the coyotes.... and I am, one of the blessed with 800yd 360 field of fire at my AO...


----------



## Medic33

you know ML so far I haven't seen you give any good advice other than you prowess-so you talk or in this case type a good talk, I am sure that in an actual verbal conflict( or otherwise) face to face say up against, socom42, red lion, operator6, INPUT NAME ,or heaven forbid RPD you would do nothing but stair at your feet period.
so if you have such worldly knowledge why not share some actual life saving tips that you may have acquired? -why not? cause I think your a fat azz liar that's why! now shut up or put up.


----------



## csi-tech

ND_ponyexpress_ said:


> I prefer AR.. use the 308 for the deer and the 223 for the coyotes.... and I am, one of the blessed with 800yd 360 field of fire at my AO...


Bush hogging some senderos. Max will only be 4-500 yards methinks.


----------



## M118LR

Medic33 said:


> you know ML so far I haven't seen you give any good advice other than you prowess-so you talk or in this case type a good talk, I am sure that in an actual verbal conflict( or otherwise) face to face say up against, socom42, red lion, operator6, INPUT NAME ,or heaven forbid RPD you would do nothing but stair at your feet period.
> so if you have such worldly knowledge why not share some actual life saving tips that you may have acquired? -why not? cause I think your a fat azz liar that's why! now shut up or put up.


I sense allot of frustration Medic33. Perhaps some time face to face across a checkerboard at Ann O'Malley's would lighten your load? A lifesaving tip in a thread about selecting between an AR/AK? Perhaps I should just refer you to the thread "How far is to far" and give the lifesaving tip of remaining out of the AR/AK rifles range. You wouldn't believe how many lives could be saved by staying out of the range of rifles.


----------



## hag

M118LR said:


> I sense allot of frustration Medic33. Perhaps some time face to face across a checkerboard at Ann O'Malley's would lighten your load? A lifesaving tip in a thread about selecting between an AR/AK? Perhaps I should just refer you to the thread "How far is to far" and give the lifesaving tip of remaining out of the AR/AK rifles range. You wouldn't believe how many lives could be saved by staying out of the range of rifles.


Y'all should go to Ann omalleys on Sunday and have the beef weck and listen to a little Irish music and all will be fine. Don't worry it's well out of rifle range lol


----------

