https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn1 7MwQT8DI Where were you

>romanian parts kit AK versus brand new custom AR
>tested the AK firing multiple times, tested the AR once and said it was fine
I own neither rifle but this test was just poorly conceived

>>28473075
Sitting at home laughing at how pitiful they are. They make a skewed test and then imply its somehow valid in any manner.

>>28473075
i personally believe that where tha ak came from should have some sway in that decision but ian could have done more to test the ar

>>28473086
>tested the AR once and said it was fine
Did you even watch the video? He fired the AR 5 times after each test, not once. He even continued to fire the rest of the magazine without fail at the end of the video.

>romanian parts kit AK
A custom made AK
>versus
>brand new custom AR
A custom made AR

You take the parts, you put them together, you have a rifle.

The tests aren't scientific, but you are 98% an idiot.

>>28473098
Oops, I forgot to stumble into the AR general and add all the tripfags to my filter this time around.

>>28473075
>Modern rifle that is developed beats out cold war rust.

>>28473075
I really believe that the mud used to test the AR was plain mud - dirt+water, while the one used on the AK had a lot of sand and gravel. So far no weapon has worked through their wheelbarrow mud test out the three (?) they tested - Garand, RDB and AK.

>>28473075

> Warsaw rifle stock
> AR receiver
> Delta ring
> AK handguards, sights, and gas tube

This image perplexes me.

>>28473075
well shit.
Glad i went with team AR when got/built my first rifle.

>>28473075
I want to see AKOU47-74 test done to an AR before I accept it's as reliable as an AK.

>>28473192
>>28473203

Really? Is it that important to you? Do you ever plan on treating your own weapon that poorly?

It's the equivalent of seeing which circular saw can get smashed more with a hammer and still work. It's a cool video, but my follow up question is always, "Why would I ever do that? I just wanted to cut lumber/shoot bullets."

>>28473203
http://youtu.be/eQYV96hHoGU

>reliability and durability aren't important

>>28473252
Second part was meant for
>>28473229

That's such a bullshit statement it just about warrants a buttstroke to the face with a cast iron nugget.

>>28473229
Its just nice to know.
I seriously doubt that shtf or racewar/habbening will ever be a thing. but if imma go innawoods at least I know I can go innamud as well.

>>28473158
Go to the video, you can see grit on the stock of the AR in the first seconds of the video.

People keep bringing up the test about the video, the issue is, it's the same mud. If we assume they're not telling the truth, then great, we just don't listen to what they're saying. However, they know the truth, you're only validating their test if it wasn't carried out falsely.

What you should be pointing out is how they seemed to have their minds made up before the test was complete. Perhaps you should bring up that this is hardly a scientific test, there isn't a high enough sample size to account for all the variables. They definitely seemed biased, but their results back up their bias, as does your accusations.

>>28473229
How can you not understand? It's a reliability test. It's done beyond normal circumstances. No one intends to fuck up, but if someone does fuck up, will their gun/circular saw continue to work? (Dropping the saw might be a better test, that's at least realistic.)

>>28473252

Yes, anon. That's exactly what I meant. If my sidewinder cuts a single piece of lumber and then dies, I consider that an acceptable tool purchase.

If we're done being silly, both rifles are well within any reliability limits that most mere mortals will ever need. Pick whichever gun is more familiar, shoots the caliber you want, or has lots of replacement parts. (In the US, that generally means an AR.) But enough with the nonsensical abuse tests.

If you must have an abuse test, why not just put the rifle through 1000 rounds in a single day. That way if someone wants to take it on a carbine course, they'll know it will hold up without FTEs or FTFs.

>>28473075
Ok. This changes nothing at all. There are two videos on all youtube saying the AR is more reliable and there are five times more videos showing the AK being more reliable than the AR.

>>28473122
He fired multiple 5-round tests on the AK, he did at most 2 on the AR not counting the test with the dustcover closed.

The Romanian parts-kit AK is nowhere near the level of build quality his AR was, that's just silly to believe.

>>28473252
>@6:36
Is there any activity where a slav won't squat?

>>28473379
Nyet

>>28473348
He emptied the rest of the mag on the dust cover open test. Stay mad slavaboo

>>28473348
Give me a timestamp for when he fires only two rounds, please.

AR
Control: 0:45 - 5 rounds.
Dust Cover Closed: 1:45 - 5 rounds.
Dust Cover Open: 2:50 - 5 rounds "I'm gonna keep going." 5 more rounds.

You are just 100% wrong on this.
You could bring up the fact that he said that it functioned with no malfunctions. The bolt didn't lock back when he ran out of ammo, not a failure to fire, but still not intended.

>20 rounds no malfunctions literally submerged in mud.
You could bring up that it wasn't actually submerged, or that there were only 15 shots after mud was added. No, you have to just be a fucking idiot.


>The Romanian parts-kit AK is nowhere near the level of build quality his AR was, that's just silly to believe.
That's kind of the point.

>>28473229
>do you ever treat your rifle that poorly

You've never eaten shit on the range with your weapon? I have. And I fell into mud pretty similar to that mud.

So yeah. It feels good knowing I have a weapon that will tolerate falling into the mud once or twice without gumming up like an AK.

The value of the test is that a common American owned AR is better in terms of reliability than an American owned AK.

Slavaboos can claim "BUT A RUSKIE AK-74M THATS BEEN SITTING IN A SHED FOR 20 YEARS" is more reliable, but for AMERICAN hobby shooting use, the AR is more reliable in adverse conditions. Stay mad about it.

File: fe9fb458cad3d89c.jpg (48KB, 650x497px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 650x497px

Also, I'd like to point out that the test was conducted in a way that would prevent the AR from failing.

Firstly, Ian took a custom AR where just the BCM top cover and the Spike's bolt must cost more than the whole AK.

Secondly, the test itself was rigged in favor of the AR. Let me explain. AR's fail mud tests when they are thrown and submerged in the mud. What happens then, is that mud and gunk enter the trigger mechanism and fuck it up. In the test conducted by Ian, the mud was poured over the AR in such a way it wouldn't enter the trigger mechanism. Try the exact same test by holding the rifle with the trigger on top. The AR will fail 100% of the time.

File: draper kek.jpg (80KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 413x395px

>AKfags BTFO
>All this damage control

>>28473440
1:33
>I can see stuff going into the trigger control area.

>>28473445
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a9lZO74YCE

>>28473445
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7d_bsaPR_Q

>>28473440
Also, maybe you should ask him to do a test with a superior AK. He seems like a really nice guy. Maybe ask him to do a more in-depth test.

>>28473445
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7d_bsaPR_Q (starting from 44:00)

>>28473075

apology for poor english

i was sat home drinking brain fluid when fred ring

'ak is die'

'no'

and you????????

>>28473477
I'm pretty sure I had already seen a mud test done by Ian where the AR passed, while AK and M1A failed.

>>28473427

I've never wiped out into mud that thick, even hiking around creek beds. I usually only get up to knee deep or so. But in your case, mud tests appear to be an important selling point. Go hog wild.

The core of my argument is I would prefer to see endurance tests centered around round counts without malfunctions. And my hunch is nearly any modern service rifle will pass with flying colors.

File: 456768764.jpg (780KB, 2158x986px) Image search: [Google]

780KB, 2158x986px

>>28473445

>>28473440
>Carbine gas 16" BCM upper
>Probably $400

>Spikes BCG
>literally $100

Its a middle of the road AR.

Also; literally says "I can see shit going into the trigger group. They did the exact same fucking thing in the AK test. With the dust cover CLOSED.

Stay utterly fucking anally devastated slavaboos.

>>28473518
>AK Not on list
>Thinks it proves his point

>>28473252
At 1:50
>"it is durable , but do not over the rail with the car."
I fucking lost it.

>AK fags try to commit suicide
>AK jams

>>28473531
>AK Not on list

>We began by listing the basic requirements we felt necessary.
Look at number 5 and look at the date (AK chambered in .223/5.56 or .308 before or during 1986?). The AK wasn't on the list because it already didn't meet the requirements.

>>28473522
500 bucks just for an upper and a bolt. Add a lower, a barrel, a trigger and some furniture and you're pretty surely at twice the AK's price.

The question is why does the AK now magically jams, while the AR doesn't on a test the AK normally always passes while the AR always fails?

>>28473531
Features two AK clones (Valmet and Galil).

>>28473569
>AK fags performing mud test
>AK jams
>Grabs AR that didn't jam to commit suicide

>>28473578
>The question is why does the AK now magically jams, while the AR doesn't on a test the AK normally always passes while the AR always fails?
Because it didn't this time. Read the thread, I'm not going to post the same shit twice.

I've seen plenty of AK vids showing the opposite. Logic would dictate that what's unique here in this case in causing the failure isn't the weapon, but the test itself.

>>28473604
Actually, it's a myth. It's the people testing the AK that have constantly upheld it by sabotaging all good AR results and rigged tests.

>>28473578
500 bucks just for an upper and a bolt. Add a lower, a barrel, a trigger and some furniture and you're pretty surely at twice the AK's price.

Complete lower can be sub $200.

Upper was a complete upper so it had a barrel included.

>>28473252
>>28473252
>center of the body of the mass
I fuggen love russians speaking english

AK fans are worse than NFL fans desu. As soon as anyone hints at a shortcoming in your platform, you initially try to question their honesty, a ruse meant to cover your frantic search for any legitimate excuse that can prevent you from re-evaluating your opinions.
>th-the ak does b-better in dust
>y-you just used a shitty ak
>the a-ar is harder to c-clean
Disgusting.

Tempted to try this test with a 6920 and a sgl31.

>>28473685

Consumer tribalism is barbaric in any form anon. But don't judge them too harslhy.

Something will eventually come along to replace the AR, and I promise you the butt hurt will be defeaning.

>>28473418
Two 5-round tests, not two shots. As you said, 2:50 was the first 5 and 5 more soon after
He shot many more times on the AK

That doesn't even disprove the results of the test, which wasn't my point. It shows that they made no attempt to keep the AR running in adverse conditions.

The AK they managed to get firing manually working the bolt for several rounds even after putting MORE mud on it, the AR they got to shoot 10 rounds after one dunk and just said "yep it's fine!"

If you were actually in terrible terrain conditions your rifle would be exposed to a lot more than 1 trip through the mud and you'd need to fire it more than a handful of times, which this test did not account for.

Tl;Dr all they showed was:
- AK can work consistently, albeit hampered, after multiple trips into mud
- AR can shoot a handful of rounds after one trip, no idea how well it works in continued exposure

Also, the AR test didn't illustrate what happens when an AR IS gunked up and jammed, while the AK test did.

Damn it guys I don't want an AR
What should I get for my outdoors fuckery? I was going to get an SLR-104 but now I don't know. :c

>>28473518
Here's a fun fact I learned the other day, Apparently, those tests were rigged big time by the military because they did not want the M16 to look like a good rifle since most of the top brass hated it. When Eugene Stoner heard about how poorly his rifles were doing, he flew up to the testing grounds to inspect them. Upon arriving, he saw that all of the ARs had been fucked with (moving parts out of alignment, replacing the gas block with welding tube, etc.). Once Stoner unfucked the rifle, they performed flawlessly.

>>28473762

If only all trolling could be this caliber.

>>28473762
Im thinking about grabbing one as well even though I already have an sgl31. Kind of feeling buyers remorse after getting btfo by an AR.

>>28473518
>Testing of the AR-15 weapon system had met with contempt from the Ordnance Corps. In one test in the Arctic, weapons were malfunctioning at alarming rates. As soon as Gene Stoner heard, he was on the next plane to Fort Greeley, Alaska. He found parts misaligned, front sights removed (front sights held in with taper pins have no reason to ever be removed) and replaced with pieces of welding rod.

>With missing and damaged parts, there was no way the weapons would function properly and, with welding rod replacing the front sight, accuracy suffered. The arctic test was, in fact, rigged to make the AR-15 look inadequate. Gene Stoner repaired all the weapons; the test resumed and the weapons performed admirably

>http://www.gundigest.com/article/the-ar-16m16-the-rifle-that-was-never-supposed-to-be

There ya' go. Military politics at its finest. Eugene Stoner was based as fuck.

>>28473075
Sitting at my computer, contemplating whether it was more admirable to kill myself or shoot up my school.

What? I've already got a bowl cut, I kind of have to at this point.

>>28473786

That's twice I've heard this story. Do you happen to have the source? My google fu isn't showing shit, and I've heard many Finn-bros express love for long stroke rifles when their guns freeze up.

>>28473827
Yeah, I linked the story here: >>28473818

>>28473818
Nice job.

File: ак залипание гильзы.webm (2MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 640x360px

unjamming ak takes hitting buttstock at the ground

unjamming ar requires special rod and a workbench. guess how many of those would you find in verdun

>>28473759
Thank you for clarifying your bad wording. Thank you for pointing out something besides a rigged test.

However, they gave the AK a lot of chances. It completely failed on the first attempt. By your logic:
>If you were actually in terrible terrain conditions your rifle would be exposed to a lot more than 1 trip through the mud and you'd need to fire it more than a handful of times, which this test did not account for.
It failed by the criteria you just laid out. Also, they cleaned the AK and started over. Again, it only fired once. Yes, the eventually got it to work manually.

They probably could've ran that test until the AR failed, but the AK in comparison didn't come close.

As I stated previously though, their test was in no way scientifically accurate. I don't think it matches real world conditions, but do not try to refute that what happened in that video didn't happen. It does not represent every torture test and military trial ever.

>>28473252
http://youtu.be/eQYV96hHoGU

Watch their other tests, these are a lot better.

>>28473075
I was sitting on the turlet fapping while shitting my colon out.

>>28473327
Based Ian is the /k/ culture fuddlore god. Every other test is therefore invalidated.

File: Type-81rifle.jpg (41KB, 600x295px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x295px

>>28473075
>One test
>Confirmed

Ya no. Come back with multiple variable test using diffrent models. Then have the test run by several different non biased people. Then maybe I will consider it.

>>28476457
based ian

>>28473818
This is a separate incident. The one in >>28473518 is a test for the Alaska State Troopers; yours is military testing. The Alaska State Troopers test was very harsh - the rifles all passed the standard tests and it was only once they intentionally poured water into the action and let it solidify did some rifles malfunction.

>>28473857
Oh slavboos.

>>28473762
arsenals are the best aks, if you're not buying online make sure rivets,barrel are good, and no canted sights/gasblock

>>28473161
Apparently a blowback .22

>>28473075
Vietnam

File: thewayofthefuture.gif (1020KB, 500x240px) Image search: [Google]

1020KB, 500x240px

>>28473075
>all these retards still subscribe to fuddlore originating in Vietnam
>"durr plustik gun"
>it isn't common knowledge that even Russia is fielding AR platform weapons
>AR is the way of the future
>MFW

This video isn't the only tests that demonstrate these results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=synlZgnTnXg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSizVpfqFtw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlL-uRkJ0yA

>>28481240
Is that right?

Thanks for the info, anon. Ice will seriously fuck up a gun. It seems like guns with tighter tolerances would be fucked up more because the expanding ice wouldn't have a place to go.

>>28473348
But anon all aks are below build quality of any ar :/\)

>>28484736
I love how IV8888 received so many comments from butthurt AKfags about his WASR meltdown test that he had to go out and re-test on a VEPR that basically has a RPK-style receiver (that is to say thicker and higher quality than a normal aK) with a heavy as fuck match-grade barrel.

>>28484814
...wait WUT
That...happened?

File: спецназ-с-AR10.jpg (22KB, 415x240px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 415x240px

>>28484832
>>28484814
Oh man. Terrible.
This is like getting pissed that his AR meltdown didn't go long enough and retesting with an IAR.

>>28484888
Oops, need to change that filename.

>>28473075
Drunk-fucking my gf while fantasizing about AKs.

Ima get one anyway because it's two times cheaper and still does dakka.

So fuck you, amerykański.

>>28473098
Go figure the stupidest asshole on this website is a Muslim

>>28486233
>WASR is like $600
>basic AR-15 is $500
No, and ammo prices aren't much different either.

File: 1395008937700.jpg (116KB, 497x640px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 497x640px

>>28473130

>2015+?
>seeing >>28473098 this post by some random tripfag

>>28473671
He's polish, retard

>>28486330
Cheapo AK
CZ58 1500 PLN
AKM 2000 PLN

Fancy AK
Beryl in 5.56 about 3000 PLN

Knockoff AR
DPMS Oracle 3500 PLN

Real AR
CMMG mk4 T 5000 PLN

5.56 1.6 PLN/round
7.62x39 0.8 PLN/round

The price difference is tremendous. If AK breaks I can use my old shovel and some rocks to repair it. It goes boom and that is what matters, and is accurate enough to hit a man-sized target at 100m, which is probably the height of my abilities anyway, at least for now.

So yeah, maybe AR is fancy, but I'm a dirty slav and dirty slavs shoot AKs.

>>28473625
Ha! Such backpedaling and hypocrisy.