61 replies to this topic

[AllStarZ]

Another merit of the AK: Its as solid as a rock, so if the need arises, you can bash some heads with it. On the other hand, if you try that with an M16, the plastic butt will shatter.

[Sgt. Nuker]

Again, America thought it would be better to equip a soldier with a light-weight weapon that he/she could carry for a long time in relative comfort. The AK-47 while being built to "play rough" consequent suffers from heavier building material.

That being said, here's a merit for both: should the occassion ever arise, both can mount bayonets (right?)

AK has very popular "banana" ammo clip

[AllStarZ]

M16 can't use 30 round mags. The curved 30 round mags have to be stuffed with 27 bullets instead because the mag spring ain't strong enough for full capacity of bullets.

As for the bayonet, few M16 users are issued bayonets.

Edited by AllStarZ, 21 March 2006 - 20:43.

[BillyChaka]

The current M16 can't fire in fully automatic either (It can only fire in three round burst and semi automatic). But it's a very well made weapon. Also, when the M16 was made out of fiberglass, the butt would float upwards in the water so you could recover it.

[AllStarZ]

Well made, but pathetically fragile.

[BillyChaka]

Plus, the AK is just ugly. I mean, the M16 is like the popular kid. Beautiful, popular, expensive. And the AK is like the weird kid who can beat your ass. Awesome taste in music and comes from some strange land, he's a good choice for the dodgeball game, but the M16 can perform just as well. It's a tough choice. I'd choose the M16. (I'm in it for the accuracy, not the brute strength the AK provides.)

[Whitey]

some more thoughts

the M16 isnt as fragile as its made out to be.

AK-Upsides-Accuracty, Endurance, Simplicity, Magazine capacity
----Downsides-Heavy, Loud, Less penetration. Heavy recoil

M16-Upsides-Good penetration, low recoil, light, customizability
----Downsides-Magazine capacity, Jamming, Moderately fragile

[AllStarZ]

Still, the AK is a soldier's weapon. I'd carry it with me if I were ordered to go into a swamp infested muck. And all those arguments about armour piercing capability, light recoil, and faster rate of fire mean nothing if the gun jams.

Edited by AllStarZ, 21 March 2006 - 22:30.

[BillyChaka]

But in the heat of battle, guns jamming are really much more rare than the days of old. (circa 1942) Guns barely jam these days. Not unless you seriously f***ed it up. Like, dropped it in like, a lake or something. It's not something you would worry about. Not as much as dying.

[Whitey]

and if it jams its like a 5 second quick fix

[AllStarZ]

5 seconds is an awful lot of time when you can be killed any second. Anyways, heres a list of environments in which M16s won't work well in:

Desert: Sand gets into the inner workings of the weapon better than anything else, and accumulates as well, causing blockage. It's easy to get out with regular cleaning, something that not every soldier can do.

Jungle: If the jungle is dry, the gun is fine. If it gets wet, it's as bad as a swamp.

Swamp: The muck of a swamp is very effective at clogging up the gun if it gets inside. After exposure, the gun must be immediately cleaned before the stuff inside the gun dries and hardens.

Anywhere muddy: Mud is like swamp muck

Cold: If you are using mineral based oil, the oil will freeze and seize up the interior of the M16. It will also compound any problems with any liquids that are found inside the gun.

See the M16 really comes into its own in urban warfare, the sort in a town. There are few things which can disable it in that environment, and the rate of fire makes for a superior weapon when fighting for buildings.

[Whitey]

no gun can withstand being drenched in mud for a length of time, as the 5 seconds, its called duck

[AllStarZ]

No the AK can. There is a tale of an AK being left in the mud for about 5 hours, and when the guy picked it up and fired it, the bullet pushed out the mud on its way out. As for ducking, its called a grenade

Edited by AllStarZ, 22 March 2006 - 01:38.

[Waris]

It's wonderful to think of a 1947-dated auto rifle outshines most of it competitors for the next 50 years.

[Whitey]

yep

but the key word with allstar's story is "tale"

i really doubt that is true, through the barrel, the mud would get into the inner-workings of the gun and thus literally render it useless? if iI'm not mistaking that is

[BillyChaka]

But the point of the M16 is accuracy. It's indeed much more accurate than the AK. (It's got twice the range.) The M16 is everything the AK isn't. And the AK is everything the M16 isn't. You cannot have both. Actually, why don't you just get a Galil? Those things are the best.

[AllStarZ]

I like my guns indestructable. Anyways, you said effective range. Its more accurate over longer ranges than the AK, but the bullet carries further on the AK. Anyways, accuracy doesn't really matter for the grunts of an army.

Edited by AllStarZ, 22 March 2006 - 02:09.

[MLRS]

On "the greatest ever" on the discovery channel, they did top 10 weapons, and ak-47 was 2nd or third, showed it getting run over by a truck and still firing.

[AllStarZ]

There has to be either the SMLE or the Mauser. Those were the best bolt-action rifles ever made.

[Whitey]

ah the galil, the great AK47/M16 hybrid

[BillyChaka]

AllStarZ, on 21 Mar 2006, 21:01, said:

Anyways, accuracy doesn't really matter for the grunts of an army.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Accuracy is everything for the regular grunts for the army. I know it's a bunch of movies, but watch Band of Brothers. "Crossroads". Besides, if you can't hit that one enemy that pins you down with the AK down the street, get a better gun. Like the M16.

[domisgod]

While the AR-15 type assault rifles do not have the ruggedness as it's main rival (the AK 47 Kalishnikov) over the years after it was concieved back in the
late 1940's only by the 1990's have almost all the kinks have been removed from the riffle. in it's present version the M16A3-4 with a flat top recievers which allows for the removal of the carring handle in the top of the gun to allow placment of other accesories such as a scope. The thing that the M-16 in it's modern version has over the AK it the wide array of modifications that is allowed with the rifle. almost all major components of the gun can be changed to fit almost any type of combat situation imaginable, whether your going for stealth, a sniper configuiration, or even a retractible butt and barrel for a submachine gun type configuration for urban combat operations. It has better accuracy and an effective range of 550m over the AKM which has an effective range of just 400m (although the later AK-74SU had a range of 500m but with the compromise of a less powerful bullet 7.62x39m to a 5.45x39m). Both guns are good at what they're made for: the AK for short to medium range assulting, and the M-16 for medium to semi long range engagments. Both are fine weapons and both are considered to be some of the best guns on the market today.

Edited by domisgod, 08 June 2006 - 16:57.

[Overdose]

The AK-47 is the perfect weapon. It's beautiful, powerful, efficient, durable and effective. If one day I decide to own an assault rifle, it will be the AK-47. It's incredible how weapons created nearly 50 years after it, still don't manage to completely overshadow it.

[Moosy Crisp]

AllStarZ, on 20 Mar 2006, 14:36, said:

Lets discuss the merits of these two weapons.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Depends on which models during wich time. During Vietnam, AK's beat the shit out of M16's. The reason: M16 cartridges still used ball powder, which was really messy and clogged the barrel, which didn't have a titanium coating untill near the end of the war. AK's were very reliable, but not many US soldiers used them because they would be mistaken for the Viet Cong during a gunfight.

If I were to get an assault rifle at all, I think it would be an SKS.

[Moosy Crisp]

AllStarZ, on 21 Mar 2006, 14:34, said:

Another merit of the AK: Its as solid as a rock, so if the need arises, you can bash some heads with it. On the other hand, if you try that with an M16, the plastic butt will shatter.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It ain't plastic, buddy. It's some sort of composite shit that I can't pronounce, kinda like the stuff H&K uses.

If you were going into close quarters, wouldn't you want to use a bayonet?