If there was a limited budget and you had to decide based on the information you had, which rifle platform would you choose and why? What Makes The Best Battle Rifle: The M16 Or AK-47?
Never fired an AR or .223 that I liked, so...AK all the way. (Unless somebody has a real .308 they would like to throw in?) Honestly, what really makes me sad is that due to an infringement on my rights, we are still having to have this debate because we cannot get a real combat ready modern rifle to throw into this 'Nam era debate. And quoting military statistics on the MODERN CIVILIAN LEGAL versions is BS in it's purest form. Especially comparing a weapon designed to be an upgraded subgun to a tinker toy that replaced a real gun. And you KNOW someone is full of crap if when they say that .223 is more effective than .308, .30-06, .45-70, .58-60, or .69-godonlyknows.
It is really easy to have a 5.56 or 7.62 that is combat ready... I strongly disagree that you need a full auto for direct action.... it does have it's role, but if you train for marksmanship and accurate aiming techniques under combat stress.... you will do much better IMO. Tactical situations require instinct, proficiency with the tool at hand and physical stamina.... anything you are lacking in, you need to improve on. The caliber is just another capability in the tool within your hands..... you need to know your abilities with it... and your limitations.
I am saying two things. One, if I want it, I should be able to have a full auto firearm readily available for purchase. Two, the very concept for the AK type of rifle, in strategic concept, was to use it like a subgun that could reach out and touch them, not as a rifle that happened to be controllable on full auto. Honestly, I am a levergun, bolt action type of fighter. I know that I don't NEED full auto, or even high capacity if my system and strategy at good. You just asked my opinion on the two options (currently own neither), so for me, apples to apples, I don't like the AR, or the 5.56, or any of the other "varmint" rounds. .22 doesn't seem to cut it for opportunity shots in my AO.
I was raised when the 30-06, 45, and 50 cal were the military rounds and had been used very well for many years. During my lifetime, the 223. 9mm and the 7.62-39 keep fading in and out and the discussions never quit. The military has one advantage over this old man that will never make its choices apply to my needs. I do not now, nor will I have if the SHTF, the supply system that allows 10s of thousands of rounds to be fired for each confirmed enemy dead. The Finn who recently passed away holds the records for the most confirmed sniper deaths with a bolt action, open sight, obsolete rifle. even when he was using it. IMHO nothing beats a 12 gauge with buckshot for close encounters of the 1 st kind. nor a M14 type weapon with 308 for more distant contact. If I were to get into a shooting match with a "modern" soldier or policeman I will lose and it won't make any difference which rifle I were to use. Their body protection, optical equipment, force multipliers, eg helicopter gunships etc, high rate of semi aimed fire, and their sheer numbers will always prevail. The ar and ak platforms were designed by two different armies with two different approaches as how to use soldiers in combat and each is nearly perfect for its intended use. I also like the Finns 9 mm Soumi auto rifle, but that is another story. My biased viewpoint, not based on any combat experience, I was in the USAF and worked on airplanes, is that I would rather have a 357 revolver, 12 gauge pump shotgun, and a 30-06 rifle, semi auto or bolt, than all the new stuff for my own defense. I know these guns, have shot them for 60 years, own some of them, can repair them and have the parts to do so, have the reloading equipment to reload the ammo and the powder and components to do so. The guns are cheap, can be used for hunting, don't scare people as much as the ak or ar, the ammo is available and is easily reloaded and one is not tempted to fire 100 rounds to force them to keep their heads down. I watch the tv and see them fighting ISIS, shooting round building corners and over berms and they don't even aim. I know it is all BS, but there is a lot of noise and not much effect. Well that is probably way off topic as it said nothing about which is best, but in my mind the two platforms were designed by two different armies, with two different goals, two different sets of resources, two different sets of objectives, and each is perfect for its intended use. Which is best for you is your choice and my only hope is that whichever you choose, you will not be found dead two days after TSHF clutching a $2,000 rifle with all the bells and gimmicks, but out of ammo or killed by a sniper you never saw.
I wasn't a fan of the M16 when I was in the Corps...so the only thing it had going for it for me was familiarity...but in the end reliability and a slightly better round won out and I went with the AK for a short-range combat carbine. I also have everything I need to reload 7.62x39...but I only reload small batches for experimenting with loads and try to keep enough brass casings, bullets and powder on-hand to load up a good 1000 rounds to supplement the cheap steel-cased factory rounds that I stack and shoot. For an actual classic battle rifle, my choice would be an M1 Garand, followed by an M14/M1A. Not a fan of full auto or even 3 round burst. I'm not in the active military anymore where I can depend on resupply of my ammunition while out in the bush. I tend to get a bit overzealous with full auto or burst when my adrenaline gets to pumping and my lil Johnson starts trying to hide in my belly because the S has HTF.
I have read this debate a few times. While the M16 seems to be the easier less maintenance, the AK is more popular especially overseas. Bottom-line those that like Ak's will not be swayed. They are familiar and they know the quirks thus can deal with them effectively.
Sass likes her plow while I prefer the M16/AR15. We are truly a house divided To her credit, I can see why she along with many others in this AO prefer the AK. You will seldom get a shot much over 100 yrds unless you are in a clear cut or a power line down here. Being a son of the west, I'm used to wide open spaces and taking a 300yrd shot on deer/elk wasn't a problem. I prefer the M16/AR15 because of it's better accuracy at longer ranges and it fits me much better than the plow. I will argue with the author on the point of the M16 being the most accurate battle rife the US has fielded, and I think any real shooter that has shot the 1903 series, the M1 Garand and the M14/M1A would agree. Just had to didn't ya?
While this is cheating a bit, have any of you tried the AR15 chambered in 7.62x39? Kind of the best of both IMHO and a great hog rifle.
I'll stick with my SKS for now, but a couple things I like about the AR platform: It's easy to carry quite a few rounds of 5.56/.223 The upper is easily changed (e.g., .300 blackout, 5.45) Most have flat tops for easily mounting various optics, etc. Not sure if the AK is that flexible, but everyone respects its reliability. A cared-for AK should be very reliable and reasonably accurate. It would probably be nice to have both as a hedge for the future. BTW - what a great conversation/argument/theology discussion!
I have both. As it is, I prefer the AR if I want to hit anything, but that's a fault of the AKs sights, not the platform. (They are poorly aligned with the bore, otherwise it runs like a top. Main problem is the rear sight is not square with the trunnion. If I can find a way to fix that, I will have the best of both worlds, I think.) An AR in 7.62x39 is an intriguing idea I've not pursued. Yet.
For a MBR, I kind of lean toward the CETME, which is ugly, heavy, hard to drop a magazine out of, and inclined to eject empty casings into the next county. In .308 Win it will reach out and touch, and at closer ranges it can turn a lot of cover into mere concealment. And it makes a heavy, ugly, and non-ergonomic hunting rifle, too. Frankly, if 20 rounds of semi-auto won't do the job, I'm probably so outnumbered that both my flanks are compromised and the bad guys on both sides are drawing straws to see who gets to shoot me first. On the good side, when they pry the smoking CETME out of my cold dead hands, they'll probably just throw it away because it's ugly, heavy, etc.,etc., and etc. On the good side, it's really quite accurate...
I'm in the 7.62 camp. Shot the M1 Garand in boot, the M14 and M16 after deployment, but affordability of the semi autos leaves me with my .308 Savage FCP bolt gun. Less than $1100 with good glass, accurate to 1000 yds., even with me at the trigger. Negatives.. It is heavy with the attached bipod or without, it has a limited round capacity, ammunition is heavy after you get over 100 rounds in your pack. Pluses... You can engage at a distance, it is a good platform for big game, since the round is utilized by the military and police it will be available whether you trade for it or steal it, the long range accuracy of the round in combination with a long barreled bolt gun is something you won't find in a 16" combat carbine.
I am a bit of a Odd Duck, in this debate.... I was never a .MIL, so I never got invested in the AR/AK hardware... I learned Gunmanship from my GodFather, a WWII exCoasty, who was a Hunter, and had a QuarterSection, out near Yelm, WA.... I got my first Rifle at 12, a Winchester 69A 22LR, (I still have it) and took all my Deer with it, in the Old Man's Apple Orchard, on Opening Day, every year. My next Weapon was a Winchester 1894, in 30-30, which I packed while living in the N. Cascades, for a couple of years, with my Partner, after College.... It proved to be, light, very reliable, easy to re-supply, and enough Powder to take Anything that lived in that area.... Received my first Pistol, soon after I got Married. (Colt 1903 Pocket Semi-Auto 38 ACP) It was my Pack Gun, for a number of years, while traveling in Bush Alaska, as a Comms Tech.... Never figured that I was UnderGunned with that... When my GodFather sold the Farm, and moved into a Nursing Home, He wanted his Weapons to go to my Brother (The Engineer) and I, so I bought them ALL, from him, and Bruce's Trading Post was founded, as an FFL.... I kept most of the weapons on my Books for years, for Sentimental Reasons.... My brother and I, share the Old Man's Remington Model 10 Shotty (Browning Auto5 12 Ga) because we both grew up, wishing we owned it, when Hunting, Quacks, with the Old Man.... Never figured I need a Battle Rifle, until just a coupe of years ago. The issue came to a head, when I was considering my Bugging In, Defense Plan.... and how to defend this AoO, from outsiders.... Had some lengthy discussions with a few Knowledgeable Monkeys, ( @Falcon15 for one) and the Plan, here, was "Stop them from ever Landing on the Beach" which means "Punch Holes in the WheelHouse Windows at 1000Yds, from 10ft back in the TreeLine" to make them decide there are easier places, to scavenge.... For that Specific Purpose, a Bigger round, than .223/5.56, was required... I had all the reLoading Supplies for .308 Winchester, already, from my OEM Ammo Manufacturing Biz... so 7.62 NATO was the Cartridge that was chosen. The Weapon was a DMPS AR10, with 24" Stainless Bull Barrel, and the Optics, after long considerations, and research, is a Burris Eliminator III... (4-16X 50mm Objective, 1200Yd Laser Rangefinder, and BulletDrop Compensating Computer, Built-In) and a Harris BiPod.... I spent about 3 weeks, finding the SweetSpot Loading for that Barrel, for three different Projectiles... and I NOW, I truly have a 1000Yd Weapon, that is specifically designed for the Job at hand. Yes it isn't a PackGun... Yes, it is Heavy, and so is the Ammunition. HOWEVER I have my Rhino 660, and it can carry Me, Momma, all the Weapons and Ammo, we will likely need, to our Predesignated Firing Positions, with no hassles at all.... Oh and if one of Old Mort's Horny cousins happens to wonder by in front of the Cabin, during Moose Season, that .308 is certainly big enough to drop him, inside 1000Yds....
It really does boil down to the very reason the U.S. went to the 5.56 m-4 or m-16. You can carry more ammo. I have carried 100 rounds of 30-06 , 100 rounds of shotgun, and 210 rounds of 5.56 No comparison. The smaller rounds all packed in lightweight Magpul mags are lighter and I get 110 more rounds. If I wear my belt with my vest I can carry another 4 mags which is another 120 rounds. The range is still zero to 200 yards . The 5.56 will kill you just as dead as any other round. If Im barricaded in behind sand bags and defending? My 30-06 rifles are my one shot one kill rifles. If Im patrolling away from the house Im carrying my standard battle pack of 7 mags @210 rounds, pistol with two 10 round mags and my Gerber knife. the 5.56 is light , the rifle is light the mags are light. I love the M1A 308 bad assed rifle but the AMMO is heavy I could carry about 100 to 140 rounds in up to seven 20 round mags max. The rifle is heavy, the mags are heavy. More power is more weight. I carried a 30-06 7400 when I first joined the Militia. 100 rounds in ten 10 round plastic mags. It was heavy ,bulky and cumbersome. Ill carry an Ar into a fight any time and most anywhere. I shot against every form of ak 47 that was available up to 2013 when I left the Militia. None were accurate enough for my liking. I have heard all the claims about accuracy at 100 yards but I have never seen it. I saw over around 7 or 8 guys try to qualify using wasr 10 and other clones and fail. Level one rifleman basic shooting prone using your pack as a rest. You had to put 8 of 10 in a paper plate at 100 yards. The best I ever saw was 7 NO ONE ever qualified in my 6 years with this unit shooting an AK clone. All of these guys had to use hunting rifles to qualify. I made rifleman level three by putting 10 of 10 in a 4 inch circle . If I used my 30-06 today could put 10 of 10 in a 2 inch circle. I realize there were and are ways to make an AK more accurate. Today they make them here. I may revisit this rifle if I have the resources and the time. The round 7.62 by 39 is really not that awesome. A little less than a 30-30 . So in closing what the 5.56 lacks in stopping power it makes up for in accuracy and that matters to me. Better to wound a guy then miss him altogether. My Humble opinion.
One of the guys who was running training told us this about the Ak. He was a staff sergeant in the army and stationed in both Iraq and Afganistan. He said they feared IEDS and snipers with Mosins more than guys with AK's . He said inside of 100 yards the Ak can be effective. W e saw this as guys were much better with them at 50 yards then they were at 100. He called the AK a dirt farmers rifle. H e said he killed one dude who was like 200 yards away emptying his AK magazine at him. He made one shot and dropped him with his M4 while taking fire. I saw guys trying to bend those sights to make them work. I just never once saw one that I would own. Now to go the other way I have one neighbor who has a Bolt action .338 and another who has a Barret Light .50 That .50 was like 8 or 9 grand used. Those two rifles reach out there. But I wouldnt want to carry either into a gun fight in woods. I almost bought a shortened Garrand much like a Tanker in 30-06 That had a sporterized stock. I have also looked hard at the 6.5 grendal round. Trying to balance weight and power. Expensive ammo and I find that to be true of the 30-06 and .308 as well. Today there are SO MANY weapons out there. I looked hard at getting a Lever action .44 magnum Marlin Cowboy. Tube magazine that holds 10 rounds. You save weight by not needing magazines. Just ammo belts and you can always be adding a couple rounds as you are shooting . No one really knows when you are out. Bad assed stopping power out 100 yards and accurate. I think I could carry a couple hundred rounds of 180 grain .44 Mag. It would also eliminate the need for my Molle vest. I have the vest to carry the 6 p-mags and keep them right in front for easy reach. Tactical setup for a cowboy gun would like a lightweight camo hunting jacket with two 100 round ammo belts one over each shoulder crossed like the old Mexican banditos. My old Nam era pistol belt with suspenders to hold my Pistol, med kit, Knife, Not a bad setup if you think about it. I just could not find one when I bought my Ruger 96. The magazine drop on that gun very slow. Its hard to get it to release. I could see me struggling in cold weather trying to reload. The Marlin Cowboy today is about 800 bucks and ammo is about 30 to 40 dollars per 50. Cheaper then .308 and 30-06 but again not as effective out past 100 yards. It just keeps coming back to 5.56 Carbine . Light, accurate, good penetration and you can carry over 200 rounds easy.
One thing that NEEDS to be considered, in this discussion, IS.... Take into consideration the Terrain that one is IN, when using the Weapon... as well as if you are ON FOOT, or Mechanized.... Humping a 12# Plus Weapon, ON FOOT, plus it's Ammo, is a Young Mans duty, and certainly NOT for us Oldsters.... Why would one Need a 1000Yd Weapon, in the Woods, where the longest Shot might be 300Yds.... If one is Mechanized, then there are a lot less impediments to Multiple Weapons, and Lots of Ammo.... Which is Exactly WHY, Mechanized Infantry, was INVENTED, and introduced into Modern WarFare....
