The great debate. http://www.strawpoll.me/12174872 Are you

>>32740927
apples and oranges
sage and saged

>ak's can witstand the elements
>decent range
>that 7.62 burn bitch


>dinky bitch gun
>muh accuracy
>breaks if one drop of water goes down the barrell

>>32740927
>AK-47
consider suicide dumb amerishart
there was only 1 rifle prototype named AK-46

I like the design of the m-16 more. the ak looks autistic. But I think the AK is more practical.

>>32740942
they have the same range.

>>32740972
>the ak looks autistic.
thats a little ridiculous, elaborate.

>>32741013
Are you sure? I'm talking the original AK and the original m16. Pretty sure the ak has less range and more recoil.

>>32740927
They are both fine

>>32741024
I don't know how to describe it I guess it just has this "chunky" and "archaic" look to it. It looks like a bunch of shit glued together.

The M16 on the other hand looks like some thought was put into the design and it's got a nice barrel to.

File: 1484262260714.jpg (143KB, 500x653px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 500x653px

>>32740927
>chose m16
>am terrorist

Ok lets settle it finally
AK74M3>AK74M=M16A4>AK74=M16A3>AKM>M16A2>M16A1

>>32741090
Where's the AK74U

>>32741107
In deep shit

>>32740927
slavs make the best weapons.

What if I'm just european?

They're both shit.

Tavor master race.

Goyim watch out.

File: tumblr_mzwpzbkr3m1qaq4vgo2_1280.jpg (450KB, 667x1000px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 667x1000px

>>32740941
I would like to share my opinion and thoughts.
>apples and oranges
not really.
They are very similar answers to the same question.
>intermediate caliber
>light weight
>medium length
They just have different ways of filling in the rest.
The AR has
>closed up protected action
>Direct gas impingement
While the AK has a
>open action
>Piston operated

This goes back to American vs Russian needs.
When the russians built theirs they wanted something that didnt need much maintenance or cleaning and could be easily disassembled in case something went wrong. They also wanted something that could easily be used by anyone so they made it simple. They did this because its was the late 40s and they had just come out of a very hard war were supply lines werent always clear and soldiers needed something that didnt need much training and would work even after being treated like shit. They were willing to sacrifice weight for reliability and simplicity.

While Eugene stoner was making a rifle for him and his wife to shoot. Something that was light weight. Well because eugene wasnt worried about the gun getting to dirty because he could clean when ever he wanted he went with DI which allowed the gun to be lighter and because he chamber it in .308 the action was violent enough to push through any built up carbon. The gun was rechambered for military interest. the Government liked the design it was lightweight and would be relatively reliable as long as it had proper maintenance. There would have never been any issues with the AR as long it had the right maitnence and the food. The US military had very little problem with supplies lines in the last two wars it had been in so they weren't worried.

notable info
>The US government didn't give it the right food and made a few other mistake along the way.


They arent apples to oranges they are more different types of nails, no matter what its a nail and you can knock it through just about anything.


but thats just my opinion.

>>32741026
im sure. Look that shit up friend.

>>32741400
I would also like to note that modern AK's are being fixed with polymer/tactical stocks. Making the lighter and giving them more applications.

>>32741400
and that in soviet doctrine the ak was meant to be an smg, the whole squad runs up blasts the target and hope they die.

>>32741409
ak effective range: 350m
m16 effective range: 550m
gib yer source
https://web.archive.org/web/20141006092719/http://www.izhmash.ru/eng/product/akm.shtml
http://www.peosoldier.army.mil/portfolio/#201

>>32741460
>ak effective range: 350m
>m16 effective range: 550m
how ever you should look up how far out they are used. Simple Infantry does not shoot people at 550m with their M16.

The most any soldier will realistically use his M16/AK is out to 350m. Also The AK has been shot way farther than 350m.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtlElIiZQp0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TsN7Jerx74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic-4iI-lswQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qiq3szgZgjI

Thought I would add my gay useless opinion. After working for a manufacturer my opinion changed on this debate.

Imo an akm is still more desirable to me in a shtf scenario where I know I might go a good while with no lube. Is it the overall best gun? No...

The methods of manufacturing an ak are old and proprietary. Though stoners design is also old, his design is simple enough that manufacturing isn't a burden. Tooling up to make an AR isn't that bad with how far CNC technology has come. Specs vs specs, building a good ak takes more specialized tooling. I'm not talking about going to akbuilder and buying surplus parts, and doing a home job. To do shit right and not take forever. Also it's just less machine time for an AR. More simple geometry. If hobby builders had to machine their own AK parts, like the helix in the carrier, they would be like ooohhh fuck, I gotta design my own fixtures and this is gonna be hard on my manual hobby mill.

>>32741785
effective range is the keyword here not maximum, they both are around the 3k meter mark for that. at ~500 for the 7.62 the round crosses through the transonic zone and starts going everywhere, while the 5.56 will still be supersonic.

>>32741900
well if we are going to bring up natural problem, tell me about 5.56 going through foliage.

Range doesnt matter and the AR has no real advantage in fact it has two distinct disadvantages.
>light bullet allows it to be pushed by the wind easier
>It deflects incredibly easily when used in the bush.

>>32741871
>The methods of manufacturing an ak are old and proprietary
Proprietary? Not really. It was designed for gun mass manufacturing techniques used in the 40s, where you'd have a setup of mills, each designed to make a single precision pass. After which you'd move the part over to the next mill. So the helix for example would be extremely easy to make, all you need is for the mill that cuts it to turn the carrier as the millhead moves laterally.
This of course requires custom built rigs for producing guns. While it makes perfect sense for the Glorious People's Tractor Factory which will make millions of them, US manufacturing in the 60s was no longer really based on that, but rather spread out and with less custom rigs. Which is what you see today, though with 5 axis CNC you can get pretty much exerything a old custom rig could do, with tighter tolerances (not clearances, people should learn the difference) and with greater flexibility.

>>32742046
m16 keeps cleaner though, being a lot more sealed than the ak. the only problem is when something does get in it takes more work to fix. and yeah, zipped up .22 sucks for bushes, thick walls and shit that's one of the reasons 7.62x51 is still around. we're specifically talking about range though, and in the open field of eastern yurop (where 5.56 and 7.62 we're supposed to fight) range is everything.

>>32742144
fuck you too muscle memory
*were

>>32742085
Correct. Shop time will be less with an ar regardless.

Lol I don't believe I have run into anyone who doesn't understand tolerance vs clearance. Definitions do a lot for words.

>>32742144
Well they dont fight in the some how more beguiling part of europe.

I dont care about how far you can piss i care about how far you actually piss. I couldnt care about the range, i dont buy guns for the range. I buy guns for specific uses and that means i take field data over range data any day of the week because field data actually has applicable information.

>>32740927
I think that the better comparison would be an M4 and an AK-74 since they're more comparable.

>>32740927

No "both"!?

What kind of pole-sucking fascist are you?

Speaking as an Australian, the only way I could get either is by building one myself.

Without a CNC mill, the AR rifle would be pretty bloody difficult, but you could make an AK pattern rifle with a little skill, trial and error, and manual machinery.

But I do lack the knowledge and skill to make a proper assessment, so maybe AR receivers are easier than I'm estimating. But they look pretty hard.

File: ARG SPERG SWITCH.jpg (637KB, 1055x831px) Image search: [Google]

637KB, 1055x831px

>he doesn't have both

how embarrassing

>>32740942
>drinking the koolaid this hard

File: 1405109167948.jpg (203KB, 494x817px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 494x817px

>>32744205
>owning slavshit

>>32741400
>wears gas mask
>no filter

File: chrome_2017-01-22_23-31-51.png (15KB, 996x273px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 996x273px

ayy lmao

>>32741400
>There would have never been any issues with the AR as long it had the right maitnence and the food.
canuck reservist here

i have literally never seen one range visit or parade with blanks where there wasnt a stoppage at some point

The AR is a piece shit unless drenched with lube, had to hose down BCG's to keep them working in muh stan, CLP is also trash.

>>32747092
then there is either a problem with food or maintenance or just shitty mags.

>>32747117
>CLP is also trash.
I hear that in the CF, people don't even use it in favor of graphite powder when they're actually deployed.

>>32747062

lol, the ride never ends.

File: 1484532531538m.jpg (42KB, 1024x640px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1024x640px

I'm more a fan of AKs, but I will aknowledge that the AR platform is better engineered.
ARs were built on a fundamentally better round. This is evidenced by the fact that the russian military had to upgrade their 7.62x39 to 5.45x39 in the AK-74, a round which continues to live on in the 100 series AKs. The 5.45 more closely approximates the 5.56x45, and this is because there is more advantage to a small round with a flat trajectory that you can carry more of. The adoption of the more 5.56-like round reflects this fact.
The AK also has a more open design, meaning that although it will last longer without routine maintenance, it is more likely to be filled with dirt and other ingress.
The AK has also got a much shorter sight radius, and un my own opinion from shooting both, the AR has got a superior aperture/peep sight.
The AR is also more ergonomic, especially with respect to the fire control group and mag release. As an added bonus, die to the United States' military doctrine brass(and not steel, like the AK) is most commonly used in casings, which is favorable from a civilian/reloader standpoint.
Anyone who argues against the AR for things like direct impingement or casing deflectors should not be taken seriously.
All in all, I think that the AK is a lot more fun to shoot, so given the fact that I as a civilian don't have to deal with combat, prefer the AK.

File: 1478810579873.jpg (362KB, 1018x674px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1018x674px

>>32747227
oh shit I forgot to award the AR bonus points for modularity and optics rails.
>pic related, the gun to settle all beefs

>>32740927
Apples and oranges

File: IMG_3789.jpg (315KB, 1024x635px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 1024x635px

>>32740927
>Not the Right Arm of the Free World
Pfft.

>>32740927
AKs are for 3rd world shit holes.
While the top nations in the world are all adopting AR variants.

>>32745312
Pride of Baghdad was a good comic

File: inline.png (144KB, 736x305px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 736x305px

>>32747227
your points are good but
The M16 is desigend to transmit the recoil directly and so producing less kickup because of its straight-line recoil design

File: IMG_4208.jpg (90KB, 800x550px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 800x550px

>>32747186
This is a lie. Good ol' Break CLP is perfectly fine.
>>32747316
This. Or the G3 family because
>Dat Roller Delayed Blowback
>7.62 Real Fuckin' NATO
>A S T H E T I C S

File: b1804cccb998f343b28bcc24b815c9b6.jpg (60KB, 800x542px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 800x542px

>>32740927
>I HAVE THE FIFTH FREEDOM.

>perfect 50/50 deadlock
Truly the argument that will never end.

>>32745445
#nofilter

>>32747186

Guys were either using that, or LSA oil, CLP evaporates within a day or two

>>32747350

Well break free hasn't been a supplier to the military for years now, and the current formula doesn't meet mil spec, CLP we got at my FOB was G96.

>>32747354
>a p90 with none of the things that make a p90 good or interesting
>shitty meme sling tightened around it and tons of useless accessories to boot

kill everyone

>>32747400

Or Royal CLP, we got that sometimes all CLP's sucked though.

>>32747400
I'm ex-Pats myself. Was just at the RHQ here on Friday to harass a pal, and they still got crates and crates of every size bottle of Break. Hm, but maybe they started issuing new stuff since I left? Never liked the smell of that crap.

>>32740927
I'm both I guess
both are great
AK not as accurate, I would take my AR for long shit
but if I keep the AK racked for HD because muh heavier round

>>32741400
>AK
>Light

Nigger please, easily more than a pound on ARs while performing the same task.

>>32747436

I was a 13B and our FOB's armorer was as autistic as I was when it came to gun stuff, Breakfree isn't even on the approved product list anymore and cant be ordered, it's been removed from the supply chain, If you ever got any it was old stock.


We used that shit by the gallon.

but the AK is my patriotic choice

>>32747483
so you cant read?

>>32747489
Oh, 'Meribro. I thought you were a Syrup like me. Nah, the CLP still flows up here, far as I can tell.

>>32747534
The AK is not more reliable than the AR.

It's dated, at it's inception it was top quality, but now it's simply not as good as more modern firearms such as the AR.

Aesthetics aside, the AK is worse in every possible category than an AR except for aesthetics but that's simply an opinion.

That being said, choosing an AK over an AR in this day and age with this current market for anything other than the aesthetic is a real mistake.

File: 1484973298358.gif (903KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 300x200px

Does /arg/ have to break out the mud test again?

Not only that but on the ak the piston sits right next to the barrel.

When in action its vibration imparts a huge wobble on the ak's bullet.

>>32740927
Considering the current market, ARs are so cheap it wouldnt make sense to get an AK unless one is just enamored with AKs.

File: 1479185476089.jpg (769KB, 776x1094px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 776x1094px

>>32747615
soon friend

File: Ak74MuzzBrake.jpg (67KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 900x600px

the AK platform is still rolling it's "tried and true" design and i'm fucking sick of it. every time they feel like it's not very accurate, they just make the muzzle break longer.

>>32747185
It's shitty mags, and receivers from the late 80's or early 90's that have seen tens of thousands of rounds. Combine that with our blanks being dirty as shit, and you tend to get stoppages from carbon build up very quick.

I never had a stoppage with live ammunition, only with blanks. As long as you keep it clean they work just fine.

t. Former Canuck reg force infantry

>>32740927

AR

>.223, which matches the external ballistics of the .308 ball
>accurate out to that range
>about as reliable

5.45mm makes the AK-74 more competitive, but the accuracy isn't as good.

>>32747241
I unironically want one of these.

File: 15541924_10154293339977901_2419057489697696547_n.jpg (20KB, 487x323px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 487x323px

>>32747571
nigga, can you read?

>The AK is not more reliable than the AR.
I never said that and more importantly what makes you think that?

Also it depends on what your thinking of? Is AR better in mud and dirt? YES. Which can be shot longer without maintenance? AK.

Also any gun will fail in mud given the opportunity the difference is the AK is easier to get back to running once it has stopped working.

>the AK is worse in every possible category than an AR except for aesthetics but that's simply an opinion.

I dont know where you get off saying that either, its purely subjective on your wants and needs. I think when it comes to a semiautomatic platform they a pretty much equals.

Now the AR has better options when it comes to attachments but you can do the same thing with an AK its just a little different.

>That being said, choosing an AK over an AR in this day and age with this current market for anything other than the aesthetic is a real mistake.

fucking what? What if i want a gun for hunting, SHTF, Homesteading, competition, living very far away from civilization, or life and liberty.

Choosing a gun just because it looks nice is incredibly stupid if you ever want to depend on it.

>>32747615
this>>32747628

>>32747642
ye

>>32740927
5.56= Better target shooting round.
7.62= Better hunting/ home defense round.
As a military's assault rifle round, the 7.62 wins. 5.56 is accurate and low recoiling, but after the 250m mark, (being generous) its stopping power halves. Seeing as average engagement range could be anywhere up to 300m, the 7.62 is worth the recoil, with an accurate range of 450m, (rather than an excessive 550) and stopping power is fine, for as far as my ballistic calculator can go.
AK47= Not user friendly. Excellent sights. Cheap and reliable. Note, some cheap slav Kalashnikovs are worse than mediocre ARs.
AR15= User friendly. I hate the sights. (unpopular opinion) Can be fairly reliable. Again, you get what you pay for, if you get some cheap model.
The Kalashnikov has the better performance/price ratio, but for just your average normie, the AR15 wins. If you have a big enough wallet, the gun will last just fine, and is quite modular, with so many more different caliber options.

>>32747508
This desu

>>32740927
I pick the ak 107. The best gun in the world

>>32747827
I prefer the RPK version of it.
5.45 Kalashnikovs are perfect.

>>32740927
The AR is objectively better in every single possible way.

That does not, however, make the AK a bad gun.

>ARs are just as reliable as AKs, unless you bury it for twenty years
>Lighter round, can carry more ammo
>Can shoot more often, with greater accuracy
>Volume of fire absolutely wins fights
>AR can punch out to 600m and be reliably lethal, 800m for less effective but still useful fire
>AK absolutely shits the bed after 350m
>AR is lighter, which matters a fuckton when you've got to carry it all day, fire a lot, then continue carrying it, and have to shoot again
>AR: MOA accurate
>AK: 4 MOA

>>32741013
You're retarded.

>>32742046
You don't understand how wind affects bullets. .223 is faster and smaller; wind affects it less.
Any bush that will deflect 223 will deflect 7.62x39.

>>32742144
>More work to fix
>Pushing a pin is hard guys

>>32743976
This tripnigger gets it.

>>32747117
>Has never shot an AR

>>32747316
4MOA factory

>>32747350
>Rollers need replacing every 1k rounds

>>32747354
>Wood screws

>>32747771
You're fucking retarded and don't know dick about either caliber. .223 yaws upon hitting soft things, 7.62x39 not only does not reliably do this, but it's heavier, has half the ballistics performance, and if you honestly prefer mid-blades over peep apertures you need an optometrist.

>>32747092
>>32747185

Without a bullet for the gas to pressurize behind, there isn't enough pressure to actuate the bolt. Hence "blank firing muzzle brakes" they have a smaller muzzle opening, causing the gas to pressurize sufficiently

>>32747869
5.56 yaws, but unreliably at range. 7.62 yaws better, with the exception of rubbish WW2 era rounds.
As I have explained, an assault rifle needs to be accurate to 300 metres, ar15's accurate to 550, ak47's accurate to 450. Its ballistics is not a problem.
I live in Australia. We don't have AKs and ARs. (But we have .223 and 7.62) Only people I've heard of who prefer apertures are Americans, who grew up with ARs. We Aussies don't have them, so we're used to notch sights.
Don't call people retarded.

>>32740927
>statistical probability the poll

>>32747899
ARs are accurate to just over 600 with M193.

AKs with Federal can't hit shit past 400, the fuck are you smoking?

Even then, the AK is approaching area-fire range. 400 really is the last leg of the round.

>I live in Australia

That explains why you don't know shit about guns.

>Don't call people retarded

There's a fucking easy way to avoid that.

>>32740927
I'm... Both? My VEPR is chambered in .308 because I wanted an actual battle rifle.

>>32747910
DURR, ar15 is liek sniper rifle, and can kill bears at 600m, and they last forever!

You sound like the biggest AR15 fanboy. It's one thing to think it's a good gun, it's another to think it can do everything a .308 can, with a quarter the recoil.

>>32747869
>>Can shoot more often
what?

>AK: 4 MOA
dude, learn to google shit.

>AR is lighter, which matters a fuckton
not really, the AK and the AR are in the same weight range. The original M16 was lighter but with all the attachments and changes its pretty much the same weight. But the M16 was not a "fuckton" lighter.

>Volume of fire absolutely wins fights
nope, dont know who told you that.
for one the AR and AK are pretty much equal when it comes to putting lead down range.
As for more bullets wins fights then please explain vietnam friend. Where we had 1000 rnds for every 1 VC killed.

>Any bush that will deflect 223 will deflect 7.62x39.
aon, stop lying to yourself.
also have you never heard of 5.45x39?

>.223 yaws upon hitting soft thing
with the right velocity.

you dont understand much about the world do you?

>>32741041
you must be a noguns holy shit

>>32748069
Volume of fire is a very significant factor in winning firefights. We've known this since at least WW2 for goodness sake.

At ranges where 5.56 loses lethality, 7.62 loses lethality AND starts to show how inaccurate a cartridge it is. 5.45 alleviates this issue somewhat, but the debate has always fundamentally been between the AKM and the AR15. The -74 is a different weapon.

>>32740927
G3

File: tmp_23797-IMG_20170111_005941_140-1019495864.jpg (3MB, 3842x2660px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3842x2660px

I don't know i don't remember

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

>>32748111
>Volume of fire is a very significant factor in winning firefights.
yes and no, bullets down range do win but the AR and AK for intensive purposes put down the same amount.

but the keyword was "absolutely" Which is not correct.

>>32740942
>muh reliability

ak 47 mud test
https://youtu.be/DX73uXs3xGU

m16 mud test
https://youtu.be/LyXndCxn9K4

how will ak shits ever recover

File: 1484120829667.jpg (215KB, 1500x1142px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1500x1142px

>>32748165

>>32740942
>Being this retarded
This is why people hate AK owners, because you represent the average fat idiot at the range with 3 different poorfag rifles.

>>32748165
By claiming the mud was biased.

>>32748182
>>32748165
they have both state often if they could only have one of the two they would choose the AK.

>>32740927
>AR vs AK debate
>2017
Reported for underage

>>32748259
Good for them. Neither of 'em have ever fired a shot in anger in their lives.

AR>AK>Nothing

>>32740927
As a Marine I'd probably choose the M4, no they do not have the same range and accuracy. They do not break easily however the aren't as resilient as AK's are

>>32742369
>tolerance vs clearance
Anyone who says "muh ak dirtproof because loose tolerances".

I haven't fired an AK but I have fired an AR. Does the AK spring upwards like in CS?

>>32748165
yeah well field observation for vietnam weapons states differently than this leading test conducted last year

>>32748380
they address these in the video with the military fucking with he design and making them fail.

>>32747869
>Any bush that will deflect 223 will deflect 7.62x39.

Not really. Based to actual observations made from several cases of targets partially placed behind bushes 7.62 x 39 made nice round holes in them, while .223 Rem/5.56 x 45 made a lot of holes shape of bullet side profile.

>>32748165
>Taking a test seriously in which Ian and Karl specifically said not to take seriously
>Jams and issues that can be cleared with a push or flicking of of debris
>implying every single battlefield is Verdun
>What is different mud consistencies for 500, Alex?
>inb4 slavaboo
I rather superior delayed blowback actions than gas system operations.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzlYUcfqG08

Now move over Rover, and let roller delayed take over.

File: Wood CETME L.jpg (118KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1024x768px

>>32748519
Forgot pic

>>32748519
man i never expected that shit. you'd think id fail with all the grunt complaints and spain replacing the L so quickly.

>>32748536
Alot of the CETME L's issue was quality control, specifically bad magazines and weak springs. The issue with Spanish STAGNAG magazines was that they had more thicker walls, causing feeding issues than a US STAGNAG magazine. The moment Spanish troops used US loaned mags, they had their feeding issue resolved. Springs can be easily replaced, or, you could put in a a cartridge to reinforce the spring so it can cycle reliably like Karl did with a Lebel cartridge.

>>32748519
So it just confirms closed system designs are better?

>>32748599
Pretty much.

I'm a right wing nationalist but I admit the AK is better.

AR is okay though, as long as it ain't the M16 (the stock is horrible and I hate aperture sight).

>>32747349
Yeah, but I never said anything about recoil. In my opinion, ARs need stocks like mg34s had.

>>32748353
74 spring less than m4/16 t b h

>>32740972
Newfag spotted

>>32748063
And this is why I call you retarded.

.308 is effective out to 1200 if you've got glass and a spotter, with much better ballistics and terminal ballistics than .223. .308 is an absolute dream of a GP cartridge.

.223 is just an absolute dream of an intermediate round, but 5.45 is even better.

7.62x39 is just kind shit unless your target is within 300m, then it's great.

>>32748069
>What?
.223 allows more shots on target, faster.

>google shit
Granted, it depends on the AK. Anything cheap, like DDI, Century, or god help us, IO, isn't going to do any better than 4MOA - however, that's still accurate enough to do their job.

>Same weight range
Are you forgetting ammo?

>Volume of fire doesn't win fights
It absolutely fucking wins fights. 1000rnds per VC killed proves that. If your enemy can't move, he can't fight very well, and certainly can't maneuver very well. The fight is now on your terms.

>Lying
It's true, though. Not as badly, sure, but .223 won't give two fucks about a leaf. If you're trying to shoot through trees, neither is really ideal.
>5.45
Is fucking amazing.

>Right velocity
Yeah, about 2,300fps, which M193 will have at 600m.

But yeah, no, 5.45 is fucking awesome.

>>32748131
>Put down the same amount
>Can't carry as much for the AK
>AK barrel gets hotter, faster
>AK has more recoil - Of course it's manageable, but you can still get four accurate shots with an AR to an AK's two

>>32748445
Welp, I might be wrong about that one.

>>32751450
>>Volume of fire doesn't win fights
>It absolutely fucking wins fights. 1000rnds per VC killed proves that. If your enemy can't move, he can't fight very well, and certainly can't maneuver very well. The fight is now on your terms.
u wot

>>32751535
You do know we never lost a battle in Vietnam, right?

And I'm almost certain it was a lot more than 1k rounds per dead VC.

Point remains; suppression is king in firefights.

>>32751550
>You do know we never lost a battle in Vietnam, right?
Topkek

How many here have combat experience with either weapon? I don't and therefore know I've no right to hold an opinion on something I haven't experienced directly.

There should be at least one soldier here among the cosplayers.

>>32751550
We do know you neglected your professional military education.

http://www.g2mil.com/lost_vietnam.htm

>>32740927
ak shits on garbo m16

>>32751604
>ak shits on garbo m16
What was your combat experience and with which weapon?

File: Screenshot_2017-01-23-12-34-05.png (73KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 720x1280px

Original M16? Or one of the later variants?
If the original, AK. If like, the A2? M16
Also, apparently this thread likes AKs

>>32751603
>Ap Bac
>3 Americans killed, 8 wounded
>South Vietnam fucks up, US wins the fight
Lolkay.
>Sinking a cargo ship is a lost battle
Alrighty
>Bien Hoa - Lost some aircraft from mortar fire, worst disaster there was from mishandling of ordnance
I'm noticing a trend.
>A small raid is a lost battle
Mhm.
>Three aircraft shot down during Rolling Thunder somehow constitutes a lost battle
I'm going to keep deconstructing this page item by item, because it's clear neither you nor this write knows what a battle is.
>Aircraft get shot down, objective is fulfilled
Still not a lost fight.
>VC overrun South Vietnam base
>US forces lose 20 guys
>US forces drive them out
Oh, I get it, you think a 'lost battle' or 'lost fight' means anything that resulted in a US casualty, or you're including South Vietnam fuckups.
>Destroying aircraft on ground and killing a sentry is a battle or fight
Nope!
>Aircraft being shot down, objective still completed
>A supply ship got lost and got sunk, this is a lost battle, obviously
>Losing more aircraft to SAMs somehow constitutes a lost battle
>An Ninh; 13 Americans dead, 34 wounded - 226 enemy dead, VC retreat in the morning
Wow, sure is a spicy loss.
>IA Drang, result is the US winning
>LZ Albany, part of IA Drang

Taking casualties and losing hardware isn't the same as losing a fight, you retarded mong.

>>32740927
>IO AK
Gonna have to go with the AR on this one

>>32751450
>>Can't carry as much for the AK
you do realize most soldiers carry 5-8 magazines with them no matter what side they are on right?

>AK barrel gets hotter, faster
what is burst fire

>It absolutely fucking wins fights. 1000rnds per VC killed proves that. If your enemy can't move, he can't fight very well, and certainly can't maneuver very well. The fight is now on your terms.
you are aware we lost that war right and they couldnt see there enemy half of the time. The reason it 1000rnds to 1 vietcong is being cause they were firing blind.

how about a motherfucking minigun

>>32751450
Comparing the worst makes of ak to thw best of ar? Maximus keksimus

>>32752893
>Most soldiers carry 5-8 mags regardless of the side they're on
Trump-style WRONG.
US infantry loadout is 10-12 mags. The amount of ammo opfor carries depends on equipment. Older chinese/Russian chest rigs hold about 6.

Still, you can carry 1.5 times the ammo in .223 than 7.62x39 for the same weight.

>Burst fire
Shit that we don't use.

>Lost the vietnam war
Are you high? We won. We dragged the NVA kicking and screaming to the table, they signed surrender and terms, we left.

Then the NVA decided to violate those terms and South Vietnam was too incompetent to stop them. We did our job and left.

And that still doesn't discount the fact that volume of fire was what won WWII and Korea, and one of the reasons Iraq was a lollercoaster. Suppression is god in a firefight.

>>32753285
>Comparing two platforms means I must be biased
7.62x39 is a fucking amazing round within 300m. After that it's shit. .223 is less amazing within 300m, but infinitely better beyond 300m.

I'd rather have 5.45 than either of those, desu.

File: 1475954571560.jpg (19KB, 501x485px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 501x485px

>>32753400
>US infantry loadout is 10-12 mags
im telling you the average i got when i started asking around 5-8 was average depending on the soldiers job. 10-12 were also a few answers but very few.

you keep saying it weights more but that doesnt stop a soldier from carrying the same amount.

>Shit that we don't use.
yes ever military does, its more effective to go full auto in short burst than to go straight full auto. Most soldiers use SemiAuto in the first place.

>one of the reasons Iraq was a lollercoaster.
dont forget shock and awe, we brought god down upon a bunch of sand people

im tired of argung with you, you will never understand because you refuse too.

Soldiers carry pretty much the same amount magazines no matter the army, 7.62x39/5.56/5.45 will kill regardless.

you are fucking special.

>>32747316
this nigga gets it

>>32747869
That's a lot of memes there, kiddo. Be careful

File: 12159836735.png (614KB, 671x683px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 671x683px

>>32740942
>>ak's can witstand the elements
LOL
O
L

As an individual with time behind both M16A4, M4, M27 IAR, and a few different personal bought rifles (5.45 Arsenal and a Colt LE6960) - This is my opinion on the subject:

It's a must to understand that both rifles have their perks and drawbacks. If you're willing to shit out the money for a quality rifle on either side of the spectrum, both can be just as reliable.

My very first AK was an Arsenal SLR-104FR with Zenit handgaurds and top cover, DDI Fighter-24 break, AR Stock Adapter, Magpul Pistol Grip, and an Aimpoint Comp M8.

My only complaint with the AK is that when you decide to make it "tacitcal" (modern) - You're only adding weight to it. Other than that, I could touch a target at 300m with 2 inch groups no issue - it's a matter of taking the fundamentals of marksmanship seriously.

My LE6960 is lightweight and ready to accept a variety of accessories from the factory. The mid-length gas system is fantastic and I have yet to have a single malfunction after maybe 1000 rounds or so. Time will tell if this changes, but for now - It's my go to rifle. DI rifles aren't as bad as the internet would make you believe. - I've seen the Piston M27 fail in sandstorms in Kuwait when the DI M4/M16A4 carried on.

>>32753751
>Doesn't mean you can't carry the same amount
Nigger, you're missing the point. If you're weighed down to the max, you're carrying more 5.56.

>Every military uses burst
Confirmed retard. The only time infantry use automatic fire is when there's a belt attached to their weapon, or it's an M27.

>Shcok and awe
Damned skippy.

You're still so retarded you refuse to accept the fact that you can carry a lot more .223 than you can 7.62x39, even though you agreed it weighs less. This is a special kind of retardation. You're the one that refuses to acknowledge that you can 1) shoot more effectively with 223
2)at longer range
3) carry more ammo
4) can make a hell of a lot better use of ten lbs of shit you're not carrying
5) be inherently more accurate

>>32754031
only bubbas make AKs tactical

File: 14658375_228925094189377_970554658_n.jpg (71KB, 405x720px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 405x720px

>only bubbas make AKs tactical

And only fudds make that assumption.

>>32754361
confirmed bubba, that looks like shit just go get an ar if you want to be an operator

File: 16179849_281276642287555_3418670695039352293_o.jpg (57KB, 736x414px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 736x414px

>>32754398
Way ahead of you.

>>32754436
there you go, you fit right in with arg. pls dont ruin any more AKs. looks like you still got some more room for flashlights and laser sights

>>32754477
>pls dont ruin any more AKs

As though your plebeian rice farmer rifle was any good factory.

>>32754515
lets see what you made better on it
>ar stock cause 5.45 hurts your shoulder? idk
>pointless pistol grip, factory is fine
>sights for shooting at a range 100yds
>vertical grip, no improvement
>rails for absolutely no reason

so what made it better as a rifle?

>>32754619

>AR Stock for user adjustability - regular Warsaw pact length stocks suck ass

>When reloading with a stock pistol grip, your hand is brought in a downward motion due to the skinny design, an aftermarket pistol grip negates this factor.

>Not realizing you can shoot farther than 100yds with a red dot optic

>verticle grip for hand space that would otherwise be used in a traditional gravel-bellied position that's far less controllable when firing at the rapid

>Rails for a side mounted light, because it's important to not build a shitbox.

Please try and create an argument instead of acting like a child.

>>32754712
>namefag defends his bubba'd AK that looks like something an airshitter with an Amazon giftcard put together
>posts photos of a mil issue rifle in an armory and pretends that it belongs to him
Loving Every Laugh

>>32754797

>Not understanding that It's literally my issued rifle
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that's okay.

>Believing modernization of a rifle means it's bubba'd
You've brought me right back the point out that you're a fudd.

Every other rifle from the same period has been modernized in order to keep up with technology. from the M16A1 to today's M16A4 and M4, the advances on the Bofors AK-4 made in the Swedish military, advances with the AK in Russia, advances on the Galil in Israel, advances on L85 in the UK, so on, so forth.

File: 51125616451085.gif (321KB, 430x322px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 430x322px

>>32751670
k confirmed degenerate, cheeki breeki, fetal alcohol syndrome, Krocodile addicts

>Tfw 5'7" and the warsaw pact length buttstock fits me perfectly

Feels cheeki and breeki.

File: 1484979898937.jpg (34KB, 490x497px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 490x497px

>>32740927

>not having both

File: 6081876+_a82aa2ac173fba374165805156298211.png (234KB, 423x423px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 423x423px

>>32754797
everyone, look! this niggerfaggot fell out of /akg/.
point! point and laugh!

no but really /akg/ and /arg/ are all great and tct's exist for a reason. circlejerk eachother in your respective threads if you shitpost like this rather than contribute a legitimate point of view.
then again its /k/
nogunz faggot btw

File: 11501960561510451'.png (170KB, 350x280px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 350x280px

>>32757184
>not realising it's about which you'd rather take to a gunfight

File: 1477458810928.jpg (37KB, 382x597px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 382x597px

>>32757427

>not realizing the correct answer is to take every gun to a gunfight

File: IMG_0029.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

Why not both

I have both, but I just have more fun shooting my AK.

>>32741041
get off my board reeeeeeeeeeee

>>32747186
Wtf? In theater we all used CLP, almost exclusively.

>>32754712

I picked M16 but God damn this autism

>AR Stock for user adjustability - regular Warsaw pact length stocks suck ass

the M4 stock is great because its adjustable for length, but a warsaw pact length stock is fine. If you're wearing plates it all evens out anyways

>When reloading with a stock pistol grip, your hand is brought in a downward motion due to the skinny design, an aftermarket pistol grip negates this factor.

Aftermarket pistol grips help, but you also have to remember that Warsaw pact parts are designed for Eastern Euro Manlets

>>32740927
fn fal master race