Why is the AK meme still alive? They are trash guns.

>>32661206

No intelligent person now denies that the AR is a better "closed system" than the AK and will survive extreme dirt/mud/sand better.

However, if you had to use a gun and never clean or apply lubrication to it, do you honestly think the AR would outlast the AK?

File: neverforget-18.gif (101KB, 492x492px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 492x492px

>>32661206
There's probably less than 5 people on /k/ that actually need to be concerned about how reliable their weapon is in the dirt. The rest of you are range queen civilians.

File: 1429294917993.gif (2MB, 390x285px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 390x285px

>>32661206
>YouTube August does rigged test.
ITS TRUE GUYS!
>Decades of combat experience/Multiple Military trials.
f...FUDDLORE!!!!!
kys.

>>32661274
>rigged test
AK fanbois in full damage control

>>32661318
Go back to /o/ with that shit

File: 1482281055438.png (980KB, 1752x1342px) Image search: [Google]

980KB, 1752x1342px

>>32661274
>Decades of combat experience/Multiple Military trials.
>STOP TELLING ME YET ANOTHER COUNTRY ADOPTED AN AR VARIANT REEEEEEEEE!!!!

>>32661233
Wow, thank God I live in the US, where there is a bottle of lubricant in every store, in every garage, in every dumpster, in every lawnmower, in every car, in every... Well I don't know how much more you need.

Also, you act as if it needs lubed every time it's used. It's not that picky.

>>32661206

>hurr AKs can't handle dirt

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

lol okay

>>32661466
>video specifically states the AK was cleaned and lubed

>>32661499
>expecting AKfags to be able to read

>>32661505
it was audio, but your statement still applies

>>32661499

Show me an AR that isn't just a pile of scrap metal after being buried for almost 2 decades.

>>32661505

>ARfags thinking reading has anything to do with watching a youtube video

File: 9123ae5b2ab08ca3d86d7bf1afb0dcea-056017000_1484027292-Untitled.jpg (30KB, 673x373px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 673x373px

>>32661206
> AK
> Trash

Enjoy you're little .22 daisy red ryder fag

>>32661528
Well, you did read the title before you watched the video...
Just saying.

>>32661206
>Meme
Stop.

>>32661562

That has nothing to do with the argument, nor the anon's rush to shitpost where he implied I couldn't read information that was relayed through audio.

>>32661459
Lubricant? You don't even need "lubricant". All you need is motor oil, hell even basic petroleum jelly would do.

File: 1447345424966.png (522KB, 619x801px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 619x801px

>not having both platforms because you're poor faggots living in your mother basement

I really hate you guys. I didn't buy an AK cause muh reliability. I bought an AK cause I have money and because I can.

It's a fucking classic. Whatevers better comes down to the actual gun you buy.

>>32661635
Noguns gotta have something to shitpost about, brainless fanboyism fits the bill beautifully.

File: 1465378170859.jpg (38KB, 604x516px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 604x516px

>>32661206
>Intentionally breaking a gun constitutes a test of combat operation
>puts a true Armalite production AR against a non-Russian made AK-47/AKM/AK-74/AK-104

I'll take that bait.

>>32661583
Which is why I ended with
>Just saying.
You aren't helping your point.

File: 2015-05-16 12.01.32.jpg (3MB, 4208x3120px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4208x3120px

>>32661635
I own both as well. It's just so much fun to drive this rediculus argument, as if we must chose which one to ban.

>>32661561

Enjoy hitting NOTHING while I perforate you beyond your effective range.

AK is shit for slavshits

>>32661626
But just needing it means it's weaktitty shit compared to the AK, which can run flawlessly dry and never touching any lubricant

>>32661396
From only countries that would never adopt anything that hasn't been at least tested by the Americans.

It is accepted because 5.56 is the NATO standard and is already in all stockpiles. Even then with the US running NATO nearly 99%, no NATO country would accept a design used by a country that NATO is opposed to.

>>32661702
5.45x39 does almost as well as 5.56x45 in terms of accuracy at range. Not as good, but close-ish.

>>32661233
Anderson rifles do't need lubrication, because of their RF85 treatment teknawlugy

>>32661526
If it's not in Russian then it's not a real test.

File: 4HgSpk3.jpg (230KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 598x792px

>>32662451
How is this even a thing, everytime this dead horse topic gets posted the slav defence force shows up with the same tired failed argument

If / when an AK fails you get the below statement for t.vatnik

>used a Wasr
>HUURR NOT REAL AK!! CENTURY MONKEE SHIT
>Uses a *insert com block county name here* kit gun
>HUUR NOT REAL AK BURGER CANT AK FAGGOT
>Uses a Arsenal
>HUUUR NOT REAL AK DO DAT SHIT WITH A MOTHER RUSSIA BUILD!!!
>Uses a Siaga
>HUUR NOT REAL AK TRY DAT WITH ANOTHER RUSSIAN
>uses VEPR
>HUUUR NOT REAL AK!!
>uses a Mak 90, or polytech
>HUUUR NOT REAL AK GIT THAT WATER DOWN CHINESE SHIT OUTTA HERE FAGGOT
>Uses Maadi
>HHHUURRR NOT REAL AK GET THAT PYRMID SHIT BACK TO SAND MONKEE BITCH!!

you guys are just in denial that the 50yr old AK invincible and AR is jam meme is dying out at an accelerated rate

>>32661233
in range tv proved the AR does far better in mud than the AK ever will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX73uXs3xGU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAneTFiz5WU

>>32661206
>AR-15
>stoppage after the second shot

Gee, nice bait OP

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

On a lighter note, the Steyr AUG works fine.

Then again it's made with kraut space magic, so what do you expect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1oEdmzE9g

Long term parts reliability and lack of need for lubrication are more important than pure mud resistance.

Doing dumb shit like submerging guns in quicksand is pointless because its never going to happen, no one is fighting in the somme right now. You can see dumb towel heads that have been using the same AK's for 40 years likely without ever taking the dust cover off because they are stupid to clean them, and they still work.

>>32661274
>Decades of combat experience/Multiple Military trials.
Are you really going to sit there and claim the M16 trials, adaption, and issue process were flawless and not messy as fuck on fuck ups that resulted in the gun shitting the bed?

If the M16 didn't encounter changed powder, actually rolled out with training and maintenance, and had cleaning tools on day 1, would it have been the cow we all think of today?

File: pleb.gif (415KB, 480x238px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 480x238px

>>32661273
This

>>32661206
ak family kicks the shit out of everything else in extreme cold

>>32661635
i bought aks when they were cheap then ars when they were.

>>32664031
>>32664297
In-range proved on video that an AK with sticky mud in its internals will fail while an AR with none in it functions. Whoopee doo.

>>32664960
More damage control I see.

>>32661233
The AK doesn't need lubricant or cleaning.

This is why the AK was not issued with a bottle specifically designed for holding lubricant, or a rod under the barrel and kit in the stock for cleaning.

>>32661466
Everything posted on the internet is true. It's totally believable that a fairly thin piece of steel would just have surface rust after nearly two decades of sitting in shitty storage conditions.

>>32661683
"True Armalite production."
Anon, I've got some bad news for you about the brand name Armalite...

For fuck's sake, I even like AKs, but you fags need to apply some critical thinking skills.

File: AKM 63 night vision.jpg (292KB, 800x947px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 800x947px

>>32661206
>oh look, its an other AR/AK fag trying to validate their expesnive rifle purchase by shitting on the next largest camp of competing rifle design.

Kill yourself
you shoot 200 rounds a month, and will never ever get into a situation where the mechanical reliability of your rifle will truly matter.

It is down to personal preference. Some guys like ARs, others like AKs.
Thats. Fucking. It.

>>32665263

>Anon, I've got some bad news for you about the brand name Armalite...

Was going to post a serious reply until I saw this.
You either are so retarded that you don't realize the brand name is still in use right now,
or you're a 2/10 troll.

File: gk.jpg (67KB, 420x700px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 420x700px

>>32662707
this

>>32661206
they are durable and come with cleaning kits.

perfect peasant rifles

>>32664297
Do you really think that people are so stupid thst they aren't capable of wiping down their guns? Or even taking apart very simple machinery? Sure they're not using snake oil lubes with heavenly miracle cloth from the newest jew on the block. But they definitely don't completely neglect their rifles. And it's not like they'll get a lot of fouling from all the rounds they shoot for training either.

If you didn't buy an AK back in 2007 or so when they were dirt cheap you are a cock loving patsy

>>32661635
When people can choose there will be always people who choose to get a cock up their ass so that they don't have to choose between two things.

>>32661206
The reliability of an AK is not about extensive sand or mud resistance. Its about the durability of the parts.
The BCG of an AR-15 need to replaced every 1000 rounds. While an AK lasts about 30'000 rounds.

>>32667194
I actually fully replace my BCG after each range trip just to be safe!

>>32661273
This

>thinking that inrangetv mud test is viable

File: 132678053812.gif (332KB, 518x350px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 518x350px

>HURR ITS NOT A RUSSIAN AK FAKE TEST FAKE TEST
Every thread

>>32667830
Ok would m16a1 made by afghani last as much as ak in video? Answer: no

File: 14656485143640.jpg (721KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1280x960px

slavshit is pure sex tho

>>32667908
Are you saying that an Eastern bloc production AK using the same tooling as Russian AKs is equivalent to an Afghani potmetal M16? Are you saying that Russian AKs are magically better because they are Russian? Get the fuck outta here.

File: 1478086568777.jpg (60KB, 761x563px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 761x563px

Idiot, weapons are not made for the sole purpose of sportive use in the US. Would you give kurds, novorossians, and every other paramilitary group M16s and AR variants?

>>32664960
>In-range proved on video that an AK cannot handle muddy environments while an AR can

>>32661206

See >>32667150

>>32668014
Russia actually did give Novorussia a bunch of AR's they captured in Georgia.

>>32668099
Still not enough to supply the whole army.

>>32665307
You have no reading comprehension nor can you understand the assertion being made.

>>32668122
And? Russia supplied Novorussia with what it had to give (including T-72B3 tanks and Buk missile launchers).

>>32661206
Since the two faggots Carl and Ian made a video where the AR outperforms the AK in term of reliability, the AR has become the more reliable rifle on /k/. Never mind the tests from Aregularguy, MAC, AKOU, and others where the AK was more reliable. They all don't count (same as MAC's VP9 test is the only valid one).

The AR isn't unreliable at all but it's less sturdy (aluminum vs. steel), requires more maintenance (a fuckton of parts vs. 6 moving parts + DI vs. piston), and once shit gets inside it takes much longer to put back into action (tight tolerances vs. large space, few moving parts and tapered bullets) than an AK. The AK might jam once crap goes inside, but it takes like seconds to put back into action whereas it takes minutes with the AR.

>>32668140
Still doesn't make sense calling the AK a meme just because it's not the best.

Or the T-72 is a meme? Should have supplied them with T-14s?

>>32661728
If that's the case, why doesn't everyone just adopt FNCs or Galils?

>>32661233
The AK isn't going to last long without lubrication, either. Both will do fine when dirty.

>>32668214
Who is calling the AK a meme? I thought people were saying AK reliability was a meme.

>>32667908
But pot-metal Khyber Pass AKs are notorious for blowing up and having all sorts of issues

>>32665307
He's saying the current Armalite is nothing but a name and has zero relation to the real Armalite that was part of Fairchild.

>>32664142

>Tfw he shot 3 groups of ten
>After each group of ten he'd apply more dirt
>Tfw the 3rd group actually had the stoppage

Are you dumb?

Steyr Aug, though. <3

>>32664142

Oh, also

>Tfw the Steyr Aug's trigger failed to reset
Bet you didn't watch all the way through, didja?

>>32661206
Then don't buy them, dumbass.

AR fanboys be like "AFTER 70 YEARS WE FINALLY MADE GUN AS RELIABLE AS 1940S AK"

>>32668383
The 60s AR-15 was as reliable, what are you talking about? The Colt 601 had all of the design elements that allow it to pass these dirt tests.

>>32661702
The AK round drops off past 300m. The AR round is ineffective past 300m. It shoots flat but won't even penetrate glass at that range, if it even makes it there on target because twigs and light wind can throw it off course.

With an AK you just adjust the sights, conveniently all standard sights are adjustable. With an AR you're cucked at that range, you aren't killing jack shit. That's why my arsenal consists of 7.62x39 guns for intermediate ranges and .308 for long range, there is no need to try and bridge the two with an ineffective caliber.

RANGE TOY.
A
N
G
E

T
O
Y
.

>>32668214
Your post is a non sequitur.

>>32668450
dunning kruger on full display

>>32661702

Fun fact, 5.45 actually has better energy retention at ranges past 300 or 400 yards compared to 5.56!

>>32668587
Do you even understand that theory? It doesn't apply to my claim.

The round was designed for suppressive fire, you're not a soldier and don't benefit from that at all. Deal with it.

>>32668450

>The 7.62 round leaves your wobbly slavshit rifle and sails wildly overhead your enemies, hitting millions of molecules of O2 instead. You adjust the sights but Russian steel isn't straight, because it's made by gay homosexual slavs who love too much drink. The next round actually tavels backwards and hits your own friend, piercing through his My Little Pony Patch he JUST bought. But he doesn't care because he is dead. You're terrified and hiding in cover because those AR rounds are right on you. You know their hitting power is reduced but you aren't brave enough to test that theory by letting one strike your eBay chest plate. Your habit of testing MREs instead of training for battle makes you bolt. You are routed and hunted down, gun taken from you, and you are shot by a .22lr in the head at 5 feet. The bullet bounces off but the blunt trama is enough to make you shit yourself in your digital rainbow BDUs. Your poo filled uniform is punishment enough. The AR master race heros walk off with your slavshit rifle. It will be melted down and turned into a proper gun.

File: image.png (210KB, 1334x750px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1334x750px

>>32661206
>AR- Cycled an entire magazine, Failed to Fire the next round in the second magazine. Can be fixed with recharging the handle for the next round
>ARX- Similar to AR, easily fixed with charging the handle for another round
>Ruger- Didn't go to Battery, simply has to lock for it to go to battery. 1 round fired.
>SCAR- Didn't go to battery, simply has to fix to go into battery. 12 rounds fired
>Arsenal- Didn't go to battery, simoly has to push in bolt for it to go into battery. 1 round fired
So... if these minor problems can be fixed by a simple push or recharging the charging handle, how does this exactly means it's unreliable if we haven't seen them repeatedly jam after it fsced a malfunction in this video?

>>32668704
Correction on the ARX, it had to lock back the charging handle and get the un fired round out of the chamber

>>32668620
doubling down is not the way to dispel the dunning kruger you have displayed

>>32668228

>The AK isn't going to last long without lubrication, either.

I have 5k+ rounds through my milled receiver Arsenal without lubrication and there is pretty minimal wear.

>>32668596
No, it doesn't.

>>32668733
>The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is.

It's not even an accepted theory in the psychology community, which is a joke in and of itself. This is a theory that only exists on the internet, much like Poe's "law."

Real or not, it doesn't even apply to what I stated, I can back that up with facts. Look at a velocity chart. A .22 cal does in fact lack penetrative ability at ranges that a .30 cal won't have similar issue with.

Why doesn't anyone try to submerge an AR and an AK, pull them up fast and see which one functions?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEteC_M1154

>wanting a rifle that can be stopped by a fucking bee

All memeing aside, the general trade-off is this:

1. AR is FAR better sealed against the outside environment, and thus superior in muddy conditions, but if carbon/fouling/dirt actually gets into the system in significant amounts, you need to really break it down and clean it thoroughly or risk severe, repeated malfunctions.

2. AK requires you to be much more careful when handling in really foul conditions, since mud/dirt/rocks making it into the action will stop it easily. However, clearing a malfunction when it happens is much easier, ranging from popping the dust cover and emptying it out, to running some water through it.

The moral of the story is: don't drop your gun in a muddy Typhus-infested WWI trench, you fucking conscript.

File: HK416-colt-explode.jpg (299KB, 999x768px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 999x768px

>>32668825

This is why.

There's a really good reason why the SEALs, a water-borne special operations group, use the HK416.

>>32668792
And you are still doing it.

>>32668825
>>32668851
You could have made a single post instead of responding to yourself with a falsehood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MA1IFKwdAQ

>>32668228
I shot my first AK 100℅ dry for about 800 rounds (I was new to guns and didn't know you had to lube them). You can't do the same thing with any AR, you have to lube them right out of the box or you'll have a single shot gun, maybe 2-3 before a failure. This is a known "issue." You HAVE to keep an AR lubed and clean to an extent, that extent depends on factors such as environment, type of ammo used, and the quality of the gun itself. The AK is not similar in that regard. You can use shit ammo in a shit environment and not have to clean or lube it, BUT if you drop it in clay/thick mud with the cover open you may have an issue that you otherwise wouldn't have with an AR. If gunk WERE to get into the AR action, you'd have a much worse situation however, because you can't simply throw the dust cover off and dump your water bottle or pee into the action to fix it. And the action of an AR WILL get gunked up, the shits-where-it-eats thing is not a meme. Every gun shits where it eats and gets gunked up from normal use, the AK handles that very well and can function while never being cleaned or lubed, the AR does not share that ability.

I consider the AK a better option for a warfighters gun. The AR is more of a law enforcement type gun, including the caliber quirks because you don't want excessive penetration in certain cases. In a war though, fuck that I want to shoot through enemy cover and not have to clean my gun every day, or every other day, because I may not get the chance to. Plus I live in a desert environment where lube gets evaporated quicker. If I lived in the cold where lube solidifies it the AR would also be an issue.

>>32661206
Can I get a link for a citation regarding your MS Paint picture, OP, or should I just take your word for it?

>>32668915
It's on the picture, bottom right corner.

File: 1426109060323.gif (144KB, 1072x268px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1072x268px

>>32668883
>the shits-where-it-eats thing is not a meme

It is a meme because what is being implied has no relation to how Stoner DI works.

>>32668883
>tfw a friend fell for the "truck gun" meme
>keeps an AR in his car in the 100° Arizona heat
>I ask him how often he checks up on it and lubes it
>never, the lube stays in there it's not like I'm shooting it

If the poor bastard ever has to use it he's going to grab a completely dry gun. I hope he's practiced his failure drills.
>he hasn't

>>32668934
What are you implying because I'm literally watching that gif of an action shitting where it eats.

The action around the feeding area, trigger components, and firing pin mechanism of my AR are significantly more dirty after a range trio than those same components on my AK. The AK keeps the soot in the gas piston tube. Even if the critical components were to get gunked up with soot they'll continue to function due to low tolerances/high clearances, hence reliability.

The same is not true apparently if tons of small pieces of silicate get in there, which I've noted. I use a pressurized hydration bladder so I can squirt into the action to clean it if I have to.

>>32668975
You are blind then because the gas going inside of the BCG and out the ejection port is not "where it eats".

>>32668879

Not shooting underwater retard, but submerging the gun and then lifting it out and shooting.

>>32668975
>a generic AR is more sealed than an AKM variant
>this means blowback is less able to escape in an AR

You would think someone who owns both an AR and an AK would understand how they work.

>>32668998
Shoot both guns, put the same number of rounds through, then clean them. You're going to find significantly more soot on the critical components of the AR, despite probably using cheaper, dirtier, steel ammo out of the AK.

This isn't anecdotal, it's observable. Is it an issue? If you're going to be shooting your gun for long periods of time without maintenance, like in an SHTF scenario. Are we going to face that? Probably not, so they doesn't matter if you get the best tool to survive it. Why even own a rifle at all?

>>32668883
>If I lived in the cold where lube solidifies it the AR would also be an issue.

In the cold, you're fucked with an AK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVe7d7xJdAo

>>32669013
Based on an HK marketing video where they let the piston AR drain before firing?

>>32669081
>>32669032
The reason your AR is dirtier after use is the same reason your AK will fail mud/dirt tests.

>>32661561
>Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: From grandma

>>32669096

No, I'd like to see an AK vs AR comparison but seems like youtubers are too much of pussies to do that.

>>32669145
You'll never get it because that's a retarded and dangerous practice. You ALWAYS drain the rifle before firing.

>>32669113
Because if the action gets fucked up your weapon is prone to failure. The AR fucks up its own action, it doesn't require an outside force to do it.

File: 1245687905_ak47-slow-motion.gif (1MB, 280x212px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 280x212px

>>32669081
You're actually a moron. Both guns are dirty. There's nothing you can do about blowback, except use a bolt action.

>>32669087
>an Amerishit (century arms at that) """AK""" with a plastic stock broke

No surprise.

>>32669238

see >>32662707 →

>>32669194
>The AR fucks up its own action

Thousands of rounds later.

>>32668697
ARfanbois are so insanely insecure, for fucks sake. Do you all have to seek validation? Do we HAVE to have these little confidence boosting threads all the time? "muh wifle isn't gay, it's not!" It's fucking pathetic, you may not see it, but the rest of us do. Buy what you like, and leave your drama on AR15.com faggots.

>>32669660
AKfanbois are so insanely insecure, for fucks sake. Do you all have to seek validation? Do we HAVE to have these little confidence boosting threads all the time? "muh wifle isn't gay, it's not!" It's fucking pathetic, you may not see it, but the rest of us do. Buy what you like, and leave your drama on AKforum.net faggots.

So much cancer in a single thread.

File: 1478124601606.jpg (50KB, 420x622px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 420x622px

>I'm such a broke faggot I can't own both and enjoy both.
>The thread.
>The movie.
>The game.
>The novel.
>The animated series.

>>32669869
I own both too but when SHTF happens I can only carry one gun. So we all need to decide, whats better in SHTF

File: 1474266010165.gif (428KB, 200x183px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 200x183px

>>32669916
Which of the two has been in apocalyptic scenarios since it's inception?

Oh, both?

Well gee, doesn't look like you could go wrong with either one, since they're both common as all fuck brother.

>>32667194
>The BCG of an AR-15 need to replaced every 1000 rounds.

what

Lubricated/cleaned, maybe. AR bcg is robust as fuck

File: 1453708432454.jpg (106KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 640x640px

Lets take a moment to understand that the AR is always going to be better at keeping particulate out initially.

But once it gets in, it will choke.

The AK is weak at keeping the particulate out, but it's also very good at getting it out of the way once the user shakes it free, or just sealing itself by just applying the safety.

Which matters more to you?

Personally, the AK is easy to just remove the dust cover and shake it out when it gets jammed up with debris.

The AR being a gun made with fine fitment is quite a bit more difficult to clear issues in when it's gummed up, given the spaces inside are small and narrow.

In my experience anyway.

>More resistant to initial failure, but fails easier upon infiltration.

>Less resistant to initial failure, but is less difficult to free the action in, and capable of collecting much more debris before failure.

What's your environment, and what will you be doing in it.

And why the fuck are you dropping your rifle in the dirt/mud, you stupid fucking nigger.

>>32661635
>>32661677
These two

>>32669990
>it's also very good at getting it out of the way once the user shakes it free
No
>just sealing itself by just applying the safety.
Haha, no.

The takeaway from these tests is to not bury your gun in sand or mud.

>>32670061
It's very obvious you've never cleared a jam caused by shit getting into your AK.

Also

>Why the fuck are you dropping your rifle in the dirt/mud you stupid fucking nigger.

Seems pretty clear to me.

But you'll argue about everything won't you.

>>32669916
>I can only carry one
>not dual wielding an AR and AK for SHTF

>>32670081
>It's very obvious you've never cleared a jam caused by shit getting into your AK.
Ok. Both are stopped dead when anything gets inside. You know why? Critical FCG engagement surfaces have close clearances on both rifles. There's nothing you can do about this unless you come up with a different way to design this stuff that doesn't rely on tightly fitting parts together.

>>32668975
>low tolerances/high clearances, hence reliability

You are fucking retarded

If your carrier is tilting and flopping around every time your gun cycles that shit is NOT going to be reliable. On the other hand if it's some fucking match-grade fit with 0.0001" tolerances that you won't even be able to assemble with the wrong viscosity of lube it's not going to be reliable either.

There's a balance to be found and the "hurr loose as a 50 year old whore = reliability" meme needs to fucking die

>>32670119
>Man, wiping this wide ass rail for the system with my finger is really hard.

>Oh shit my finger isn't long enough to clean my whole upper out, let alone access the intricate bolt lugs without my chamber brush.

Fuck what now?


That's the point I'm making.

AR's will go longer because they're sealed to the elements better, an AK will be shooting long before the AR will after an inevitable failure of both.

>>32670149
>an AK will be shooting long before the AR
No, it won't. They'll both require total disassembly.

>>32666045
I was 10 in 2007

>>32670178
No shit?

Have you actually ever taken both apart?

Which can you literally dip a whole fucking shop rag in and swizzle it around with your hand and have it be "clean enough"?

Further more where did I ever explicitly mention neither would need to be taken apart?

>>32670210
>Have you actually ever taken both apart?
Yes.
>Which can you literally dip a whole fucking shop rag in and swizzle it around with your hand and have it be "clean enough"?
Both? Neither? It depends on how dirty they are.
>Further more where did I ever explicitly mention neither would need to be taken apart?
You didn't, but they both would need to be in order to remove the grit of sand or mud from the fire control group. It takes a similar amount of time to do that with both guns.

File: 1482294594271.jpg (32KB, 448x635px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 448x635px

I can completely break down an AR BCG in 5 seconds flat (minus the ejector), why does everybody act like they're mystical mechanical wonders that require special tools to disassemble?

File: talks-trash-about-il3sxg.jpg (57KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x500px

>>32661206
OP in a nutshell

>>32670266
Because they don't know anything.

>>32661528
considering theres more aluminum parts in the AR it is very likely it would do just as well in these conditions. Additionally, the type of mud very much depends on the outcome of this test. If its the type that keeps out oxygen and prevents a large portion of rusting (which seems to be the case) then many if not all firearms would survive being sealed.

tl;dr
youre retarded

File: 1330310353833.jpg (42KB, 651x719px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 651x719px

>>32661699
>owns a .22
>calls it an AR

File: 1330848361051.jpg (72KB, 450x373px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 450x373px

>>32667194
>1000

>>32661626
But both of those things are lubricant

File: 1342499543205.jpg (2KB, 126x118px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 126x118px

>>32668883
Do I have to bring this test up every single fucking time? Or is it just because you're so fucking retarded to have never done your research and instead just spew fudd lore like its truth.

SR15 - 20,000+ rounds, not a single rifle related failure, many rounds shot suppressed (even more "shits where it eats"), and tested in adverser conditions.

Sit the fuck down and let the adults talk .

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

>>32670409
Would you honestly take your range toy over say an FNC?

You realize what makes the FNC better is that it's more AK-like right... Stop talking about the AR like it's the best intermediate gun. Compared to other things it fucking sucks at what it was designed to do. Compared to other things the AK excels at what it was designed to do.

>>32661459
B-but when da shit hits da fan there won't be no lubricant! And I'll be shooting hundreds of rounds everyday and I won't never have none time to clean muh rifle! So that's why muh AK is da best!!!!!

>>32670950
Keep memeing kiddo. You'll see what happens when you try to take your range toy to war if it ever comes down to it. You're not part of a military, there won't be a forward operating base to retreat back to to cry and clean your gun (and the shit out of your pants) after every 1-2 mag engagement.

>>32670927
You cant name shit it excels at. Every single iteration of the AK gets closer in design to the AR and nothing about the AR gets closer to the AK.

I own both.

My 7.62 x 39 vepr has not had any malfunctions yet. I have shot only cheap steel case through it.

My m&p sport has had a handful of stovepipes. I have only shot brass cased through it.

take that as you w

>>32670927
>Compared to other things it fucking sucks at what it was designed to do.
Ok, how?
>SR-15 a range toy
lol

>>32671170
>buying an M&P Sport
Haha. That's where you went wrong. At least your RPK is a nice gun.

>>32671132
HAHAHAHA ok what is the FNC, SCAR, ACR, MSBS, every piston AR ever, holy shit I could go on. Every last one is an attempt to make the AR platform more AK-like. I know of ZERO attempts to make the AK a direct impingement gun. You're thinking that because they put rails and thumb selectors on it they're making it more like the AR? HAHAHAHA that's called making it modular/modernized faggot. Rails don't make an AR and AR.

>>32671170
B-but it was only an m&p 15 and not a REAL colt or FN m4!!!!

>>32671132
>and nothing about the AR gets closer to the AK.

The biggest fad in AR's this past decade has been shoehorning pistons into them.

>>32671268
>FNC
Not an AR
>SCAR
Zero design elements from the AK and also not an AR.
>ACR
See above.
>MSBS
See above.
>every piston AR ever
Garbage that is an AR, but has no design elements from the AK.
>I know of ZERO attempts to make the AK a direct impingement gun.
That's unsurprising, the Ag/42 and Hakim weren't very successful. I disagree with the other poster's assertion that they're trying to take AR-15 design elements and incorporate them into the AK, though.


Does the rifle contain your whole identity or what makes you behave this way?

>>32671233
>Ok, how?

Take the few examples I just gave in>>32671268

Would you take an AR over an FNC, SCAR, ACR, or MSBS? If so, you're stupid, and those are just the examples that jump to the top of my head, there are plenty more.

At least pick the best example of a 5.56 shooter so we can argue which caliber is better. That's a better argument, we already know the AR is outdated shit. You can make the same argument about the AK but at least it does what it was designed to do better than a lot of its competition. It's only knocked off its throne by izhmash itself with new, modernized iterations of the same design.

>>32671317
>Would you take an AR over an FNC, SCAR, ACR, or MSBS?
Yes.
>If so, you're stupid
Haha, good argument. What a joke you are.

>>32671302
>Not an AR
Yeah they didn't want to build off of an already known shitty design. They're all attempts at making a new 5.56 NATO gun that doesn't suck.

>>32671302
> I disagree with the other poster's assertion that they're trying to take AR-15 design elements and incorporate them into the AK, though.

It's that modern AK's have moved away from the "loose tolerances make gun reliable!" myth.

>>32671250
I know rite. I should have spent $2000 on an ar so it can be as reliable as my $600 vepr.

>>32671341
>different companies try to make their own proprietary designs
>AR's still prove superior and dominate the market

neat

>>32671372
You could have built your own AR for $600 that would be better than your M&P or vepr.

>>32671410
I dare you to piece together an AR for $600 that isn't entirely composed of bargain bin PSA parts.

If you think that a $600 AR is going to be more reliable than a VEPR you are high on crack.

File: 1333758107013.jpg (66KB, 701x497px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 701x497px

>>32671268
You are actually fucking retarded. This is cute. Its like you dont know the difference between long stroke systems and short stroke systems. And maybe before you try to talk to the big boys you should do a little research

>>32671447
Just because you were lazy/didn't know better doesn't mean that your M&P is representative of cheap AR's.

>>32671504
Except that the M&P is literally the gold standard of budget AR's.

Oh wait, let me guess, all the glowing reviews are all paid shills right?

>>32671447
Well, the minimum price for a Vepr closer to $700, and thats for an unconverted sporting model. If you convert it, change, the furniture and mags, then it comes closer to $8-900 where there sits plennty of respectable AR's that can compete for quality.

>>32671590
You do realize that just a couple of years ago people were buying them for $450 right. No respectable AR was ever that cheap.

>>32671607
>a couple of years ago
I forget, is that today?

>>32671460
The AR sucks compared to a lot of semi-auto 5.56 shooters, the vast majority of them actually.

The AK is fine compared to a lot of semi-auto 7.62x39 shooters, there are few above it.

What's difficult for you to understand? My point being why are you trying to argue that the AR is better than the AK when the AR isn't even the best at what it attempts to do? It's an apples to oranges argument and not even a good one.

File: frog3.png (246KB, 550x535px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 550x535px

>>32667194
>replaced every 1000 rounds

I think you mean lubed, I hope

>>32671716
The AR is exceeded in quality by the FN SCAR and MAYBE the 416. Everything else there is mickey mouse bull shit. And the SCAR per unit is 4x the price. The SCAR is in no way approaching the AK in design and in fact is probably closer to the AR. 7.62x39 is an outdated caliber that is objectively inferior to most other calibers like 5.56, .308, ect.

>>32671716

AK is a piece of shit, it's not even a top-10 7.62 weapon. The ONLY thing the AK ever did right was flood markets. Stop shilling that shit gun.

>>32671546
>M&P is literally the gold standard of budget AR's.
>4140
>gold standard
lol

>>32671841
The 416 is a piece of shit because of the piston. Never mind the MRs which are complete garbage.

>>32665303

>this

>>32670409

They lubed the gun regularly. Yeah, 20k without cleaning is impressive and all, but do that without applying any lube to the gun first. Then run it against a dry AK and we'll see who jams up first. Fuckin kek.

Why are these threads always started by people who are too poor to own both inexpensive rifles?

>>32668310
May or may not skipped half way because I was posting while playing Rainbow Six Siege :P

>>32661206
In theory you could do away with the cover. Then again that'll expose parts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHlFfhrDn2c

>>32668176
This. Ak seizes, remove dust cover, stick fingers in, scrape out mud with glove. Resume firing. Put the dust cover on if you have time.

Ar jams, field strip, clean everything, clean everything, try not to lose your gas key, reassemble, pray.

>>32675278
Damn you are a clueless lil noguns.

Gotta be 18 to post here, nigga.