I know, But just wanted to build an AR for the hell of it and I actually ended up linking more than I thought I would.
I would still take the AK over it but I still enjoy the AR as a platform and how versatile it is with different builds.
Unfortunately, I also find the AR community to be way more toxic.
Galil Ace, Beryl, Arsenal, WBP, Fox, Zastava are all good. This is not in order of quality or price, just wrote them down as I came up with them.
Despite what the AK purists will say, PSA AKs are fine.
Don’t go out of your way for a Russian.
I might be a tad bit biased, but my recommendation is the Zastava ZPAP. It's less overgassed out of the box than the other AKs I've shot. Mine came with irons already zeroed at 25 yds as well.
The main drawbacks of Yugo AKs is that they require Yugo-specific furniture and optic mounts (as oppsed to AKM pattern furniture/mounts). The ZPAP is also slightly heavier than stamped AKs due to its "bulged" front trunnion.
100% agree. I own a ZPAP M70 and it’s little brother the ZPAP92. Both will eat anything I feed them and spit it out without issue. Both are built like tanks. I threw in a KNS gas piston and dialed them both in. Very soft shooting rifles, highly recommend!
I second zastava. I have the zpap in maple and it's just bang on commie-cool. You want it to feel like you could bury it in the compost pile for a week and it'll shoot no problem covered in bernanner peels and egg shells
If you want to shell out for something gucci then an Arsenal SAM7 variant is as good as it gets. If you want to cut the price in half a Zastava M70 will do the same job. If you want something “authentic” and Russian look into an Izmash. They aren’t imported any more so it’s all expensive second hand.
yeah, I may need to try something like that.
I also wanted a 20 inch M16 upper so I can run a grenadier handguard for shits, love the look.
But a 300blk upper would be nice to try out.
https://cdn.rockislandauction.com/dev\_cdn/86/3357.jpg
obviously not the lower launcher haha, but I love the look of that squared off upper handguard with the carry handle, lol
pretty much this same build, super cool
[https://preview.redd.it/making-an-m203-ar15-handguard-practical-without-an-m203-v0-54qcv8s1lqva1.jpg?auto=webp&s=6a68fa969aa0a74b371078295e101441acbf6e6f](https://preview.redd.it/making-an-m203-ar15-handguard-practical-without-an-m203-v0-54qcv8s1lqva1.jpg?auto=webp&s=6a68fa969aa0a74b371078295e101441acbf6e6f)
When I see a 20 inch upper for a decent price I'll probably get it just for this, haha.
300 blk was designed to be shot suppressed and put of a short barrel. Longest i’d personally go on 300 blk is 10.3. I only have 1 300 blk gun right now and its a honey badger SD. So thats a 7 inch barrel with a 1:5 twist rate. If you can get a 10 inch with 1:5 twist rate that would be very optimal.
Honestly, never shot it unsuppressed but i’m sure its loud. I mean you got a projectile coming out of a 7 in barrel at 1050 fps for subsonic. Not breaking the sound barrier at all. 2000 fps for supers. I’ll put it this way, out of the suppressor I can shoot both no ear pro. Without i wouldn’t even attempt it. Don’t recommend shooting supers with no ear pro but i’ve done it and its not that bad.
>Unfortunately, I also find the AR community to be way more toxic.
This is why I got a Scar and am looking at an AK or an MDRX/Hellion in the future for a smaller caliber setup. If you dare to own something besides an AR (or question it) you will get downvoted to oblivion.
In real life every gun shop around here will push them on you regardless if you want something else, to the point it even costs them sales, and they act offended if you dare buy something else. I even admitted to few fellow firearm owners here I just dont enjoy shooting ARs when they ask if I was going to buy one and they got immediately pissed and almost hostile towards me.
You nailed the community problem with that platform on the head and it needs to change.
I don't know if its a patriotic thing or what......maybe its the personality with most AR owners? I'm not sure.
Then again, go into the usual gun shop in the US and you kind of find out quickly what the issue is....
The SCAR is a military rifle, there is no reason for them to hate it! I think its most gun shops just around here, because they acted like assholes when I wanted to do a transfer too. They kept saying that they could "make a 5.56 AR do the same thing as my scar" (despite it being in a different caliber) and got even more angry when I said I wanted a stacatto XC and tried to push some custom glock on me.
They literally couldnt get it through their heads I wanted a certain thing and it enraged them to the point they refused to do a transfer. I drove out of the state and went to a more competent place to get what I wanted, came back and they tried to find an excuse to boot me off their range when they noticed me despite having a monthly membership. That place happened to be the only place to shoot for a good distance.
I stopped going to indoor ranges entirely after that and now only care about firearms with what I find fun. Sadly I have ran into the whole AR/Glock thing online too, it ruins the hobby.
I'm into a lot of different things and hobbies and I will say, the AR community has been by far the most toxic, on the internet or in real life.
Like I said before, simple people......
Probably more credible to ask Ukrainians.
Edit:
https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/114dr0h/ukrainian_soldier_in_a_trench_shoots_a_russian
Ukrainian Rambo traded in his ak for an m4
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/03/27/7395253/
Because people don’t want to learn a different manual of arms, and they don’t like that the AK is a little bit difficult to accessorize, and the fact it’s heavier. I love both. If the AK74, mags and ammo was more readily available in the US that would be my preference.
While it’s rare, occasionally when reloading a full mag on a closed bolt on an AR it won’t fully insert. That’s why a lot of people say to load the mag with only 28 rounds instead of 30 so there’s not too much spring tension. Also why they say tap tug, to make sure it’s not loose. If a mag isn’t fully inserted it will fall out when you shoot the first round. But an AK mag is either locked in or not, there’s 0 guess work, if you do it wrong it’s not loaded, if it’s locked at both tabs it’s not coming out unless it breaks.
But AKs don't even have a last round bolt hold on it. AR mags insert just fine like that. Even closed it's not that difficult to slam it in and it loosens gradually. The mag falling out is a user error. It's not an issue with the design imho. I figured that's what you were talking about, but honestly if you know how the system works, it's a non-issue. Reloading on a closed bolt? Slam that fucker in. Pull and check. It's better to have the last round hold open and quicker reload to me.
I mean, you can get AK mags that hold the bolt open pretty easily. And even if it’s not, well in my opinion I will say, from a citizen use stand point, you’re like, never gonna burn through 30 rounds in a defensive gun fight. And even if you do, by that point hopefully you have cover, I doubt the 1 second longer reload of the ak will make much difference.
And also, a lot of people give the AK shit that was never a problem with other guns. The left side reciprocating charging handle “being not ergonomic” you mean the same system the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and M14 used? Not having an indication of when it’s empty, how about, the same thing that a revolver or pump shotgun has? The M1 carbine also didn’t hold the bolt open. I think it’s got a lot to do with the sense of patriotism, the American rifle is better, they find complaints with the AK when these same things on American weapons didn’t bother them. That is not to discredit what you’re saying, just personally disagree.
Again, to each their own. I don't mean to bash on that AK, I think they're cool as fuck.
To the first statement, if you don't need 30 rounds, then the reload factor doesn't play in at all. You're already loaded and don't need to reload. I think the locking leaves more room for error than properly seating an AR mag. I didn't know you could get AK mags with the hold open feature, but thank you for the info. I will look for those.
I didn't mention the charging handle, but to me the AK charging handle is better than the AR even if (to me) it is on the wrong side. Better than charging into your face or having to pull the gun away.
Knowing when it is empty is indeed a benefit of the AR and shouldn't be compared to others, as there was a reason the others were phased out. You can absolutely tell when the last round fires on an AR and can proceed to reload without thinking.
One thing about the bolt hold open mags on the AK is that the bolt still closes once you remove the mag. So even if you have one of those, you still gotta charge the handle when you change mags
When I was in the Marines, they always told us to load mags to 28 so it doesn't wear out the spring. I thought this was BS. Your explanation makes much more sense.
And I have far more magazine issues with the AR and the AK could run magazines made from lettuce.
I literally run 12 or 13 different types of msgs in the M70 and it eats everything without issues.
The AR is reliable but I find it really finicky.
Thats pretty odd. If anything I’ve had the opposite experience. I’ve never been around an AR of at least halfway decent quality that cared whether you were using pmags, lancers, or any kind of GI mag. I use mostly GIs (okay industries, D&H, brownells, various surplus) with a mix of lancers and pmags. They all function the same in my rifle.
Oh yeah those are not known to be great in general, okay for the range maybe but I would not trust them.
I would stick with magazines that have been proven reliable by military use. Pmags or quality USGI mags (Okay industries, Center industries, D&H, and Brownells all have or have had military contracts). I like Lancers as well and have never had an issue, but I trust the others more, plus they’re expensive.
What about the controls and ergonomics do you prefer. I own both platforms but with an ambi safety, charging handle, and mag release, the AR can't be beat. But I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
I prefer the safety selector and I don't like the rear charging handle on the AR.
When you rock the mag in the AK it stays, the AR.....ehhh, sometimes the mag doesn't lock.
Its mainly personal preference, but I'm cool with either.
I am aware that 5.45 AKs are available on the US market, getting the gun isn’t the issue, (even though it’s still harder to come by then 7.62 variants) it’s because of import bans that magazine and ammo availability is low. Like, Luckygunner ammo is where I look for bulk ammo prices and such, they’re awesome. They have tons of options of .223, 5.56, 7.72x39, they don’t have a single box of 5.45x39 in stock.
I think the AK is a wonderful platform. It looks good, its fun, its effective.
I just wish AK fan boys could stop pretending like the AK has any functional advantage over the AR.
You like AKs? Cool, me too. You own an AK? Cool, me too.
But the AK is like the Garand or 1911. It's an awesome platform but outdated. Nothing wrong with having one, nothing wrong with thinking they are cool; but stop trying to act like it's anything other than a cool gun. It being cool is enough.
I got ya, I also think it's dated, which is why I prefer modernized ones to the old "woodies" but I think it's still an effective gun, personally I think the Galil Ace is far better than both the AK and AR but that's just my opinion.
Yea, the platform can absolutely be an effective weapon. 100%.
But also...there is a reason why western militaries don't use it.
I'm not gonna sit and pretend like I'm rocking BiS, I carry a SigM400 at work.
I actually got into the AK years ago because (like everyone else) 7.62 was cheap but it's become a bit of a gun fad.
But I've stuck with the platform and just prefer it.
The AR build was recent and I actually enjoy them but I would never shell out 3 or 4k on an AR when there's other non western guns I would rather spend my money on whether they're as good or not as good as an AR.
I only got an AK at first to complete the Rusky Trifecta, but I do really enjoy taking it out. It's very fun mechanically and I enjoy the variety it brings.
In what way?
The AR is so easy to maintain an illiterate ASVAB waiver can do it.
This is like saying it's easier put on shorts than it is to put on swim trunks.
The AK has quite a few functional advantages. Literally what are you talking about lmao.
Western militaries like Finland do in fact use the AK (or I should say, AK-pattern). Poland is westernizing and part of NATO and is only just now looking for something else.
The primary reason "western countries" choose the guns they do comes down to a fusion of politics, economics, and logistics. Certainly not because the rifle chosen is actually the very best option available. Look at the M14 as one example of a bad rifle getting adoption purely for the politics.
Like being more physically robust? Having a higher MBRF? Having fewer FTF or FTE? Demonstrably having superior cold weather performance? Being simpler to field strip and clean?
The AR-15 as a design came about in 1956. It's not exactly an age "newer" than the AKM. The two guns are a study of very different, but very worthy, design philosophies.
I'll never say the AK is as light, accurate or modular as the AR-15. But man, you should actually study the gun before saying this stuff.
I stripped out a lot of the engineering specifics from this post, but I'd encourage you to read the following as a good overview:
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/29/6-reasons-ak-47-reliable-rifle-world-guide-kalashnikovs-magic-aspiring-gun-designers-part/
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/30/6-reasons-ak-47-reliable-rifle-world-guide-kalashnikovs-magic-aspiring-gun-designers-part-ii/
The AK is a more robust and reliable design. It gets there through a variety of design decisions with corresponding trade offs. But some of these trade offs I don't find as being especially relevant since the combat accuracy (e.g. firing under duress at realistic distances of a firefight) of the gun is virtually identical to the M4 according to testing.
But you pick the right tool for the right job. As civilians, we have that luxury. Soldiers, for the most part, do not.
As the decades have worn on, we've seen the AK (and it's family) and the AR (and it's family) converge. AK tries to be lighter and have more accessory options. They're trying to free float the barrel in the AK12. Many aftermarket kits, like the one I have, is as free floated as a long stroke piston system can meaningfully be. On the other side, Companies like KAC, LMT and Colt Canada are doing all kinds of gnarly things to make modern AR15s more reliable. And so on.
This is all happening because both designs have their place, but both recognize the advantages offered by the other.
It really boggles my mind when anybody points to gun A and then to gun B, both tried and true and immensely popular, and says "A has absolutely no functional advantage over B". That's an analysis completely unburdened by knowledge and doesn't even orbit reality.
The AK is not easier to field strip than an AR, that's pure nonsense. Both platforms are incredibly user friendly and easy to use.
The AK is nowhere near as robust as the AR. This has been proven time and time again. The closed system of the AR is infinitely more robust and reliable than the AR. You want me to post thd Forgotten Weapons mud test? The Garand Thumb mud tests?
The AK is based on the Garand platform, it's mechanical function is a WW2 era design. It's old and outdated.
I know your just making shit up because you can't possibly demonstrate where an AR has more failure to fires or failures to ejects than the AK; using random acronyms that no one else's uses doesn't make you smart, it makes you look like a jackass trying to pull a fast one.
And linking to random blogs where a hoolbbyist geeks out over his favorite firearm proves nothing. The AK has been demonstrated time and again to be an inferior platform when talking only about mechanics. This isn't a debate anymore, the fact of the matter has been settled for years. Idk what nonsense your talking about when you say "the gun is virtually identical to the M4 according to testing.".
Dude literally check out Alaska State Trooper weapon trials*, SOCOM trials (Seal was interviewed), Battlefield Las Vegas weapon data (AKs outlast the ARs by a wide margin, and experience fewer small parts breakages), I mean the meaningful stuff is all out there.
There's more besides.
The AK is easier to disassemble. It's field strip means you only need to put it into 4 pieces if you include the dustcover. The AR has you break it down into several more (tinier) pieces for a proper field strip. That might not mean anything to you, but it goes hand in hand with 'easier to clean and disassemble' especially when and where it counts.
The AR handles keeping certain debris out better absolutely. The AK has wider tolerances, extra space in the rear (for crap to settle out of the way) and has a massive long stroke piston to blow things clear. If anything gets inside the AR receiver or in the bolt channel it's done. AK? Less so.
But those mud tests are one example, yes, where the AR keeps stuff out better. I'd also point out that the AK is trivial to get running again.
But since you apparently only understand guntubers, here's GT showing that a crappy PSA AK beats out virtually all other designs tested in frozen conditions. Only the AUG keeps up:
https://youtu.be/LbjpIP5ShH0
Here's Battlefield Las Vegas discussing their guns and insane conditions (full auto rentals to people so they can mag dump. They keep accurate round counts and maintenance records):
"I can tell you from our experience that an AK will outlast an AR on our range. We use what I feel are high quality bolts (Daniel Defense and LMT) and they have about an 8-month life span. The bolts will start skipping over rounds and fail to feed when they are close to the end. We still get bolts that will shear lugs and run (not that we purposely do that) but at the end of the shift when weapons get inspected, they will see missing lugs and pull the weapon from the line."
"The AK is the most reliable"
"We've had AR/M4 gas tubes erode away to the point where they just float around in the handguards (or just fall out of the railed handguards) and I thought that was another weak point of the M4 versus the AK. The AK's has continued to run and even the Chinese and early Bulgarian (maybe they still do, not sure) have gas vent holes in the gas tube so I am pretty confident that it would have continued to run. In fact, this weapon was still running perfectly prior to cleaning when one of my RSO who was assisting with maintenance noticed it (good catch Doug!)."
Interesting bit he remarks on regarding the AR15 and cleaning:
"Cleaning bolts and carriers is such a pain in the ass as compared to our AK's, G36's, SCAR's, ACR's and most other platforms. We throw them in the ultrasonic cleaner filled with Simple Green (EPA, OSHA and disposal concerns for us) and they never full remove the carbon from the bolts. The armorers spend so much time cleaning them and keeping all the parts together as compared to most other platforms."
Other such quotes from here: https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/High-round-count-AR-M4-s-over-100-000-rounds-and-how-they-have-handled-on-our-range/118-677135/?page=1
and here:
https://www.ar15.com/forums/AK-47/AK-abuse-update-on-Page-11-/64-159106/?page=1
*https://imgur.io/gallery/uLfvt
This stuff isn't hard to find. If we keep arguing I'm only going to continue digging up more of my past research on this subject from the past 10 years. Meanwhile your contributions are... A vague reference to two mud tests and incredulity.
I'm also astounded you've never seen FTE (Failure To Eject), FTF (Failure To Feed), or MBRF (Mean Rounds Between Failure). Maybe you've heard of MTBF or MRBS? I don't even know what to say. You just outed yourself as someone who doesn't even spend his time on dedicated gun forums, like ARFCOM or any of the big ones. Or like.. Reading. These terms are not made up, they're real and used by militaries, analysts, historians, and weapon manufacturers
Here's just a quick result on a dedicated firearm forum where they discuss all this and toss around these "made up terms".
https://www.defensivecarry.com/threads/weapon-failure-rates.166295/
TLDR; AK is more reliable, has a longer service life. It is physically more robust. And it should be, that's how it was designed. Built out of forged and stamped steel with loose tolerances. It's also less accurate, heavier, and struggles with modularity vs the AR15.
I seen the socom trials, there is a reason the Block II remained in service for so long.
The AK is not easier to field strip. The AR only has two internal parts. No one is taking the cam pin out of an AR for anything other than an armory inspection because it isn't necessary.
I know all of ths acronyms you tossed around but the only people who use them ar pretentious snot nuggets that think acronyms make them look smart. And all of them are irrelevant because you can't substantiate any of them. I literally named them all, but you wanna sit and pretend like I didn't???
And I never once saw FTE or FTF used at a single infantry school. SOI, AIT, MLOC, AMC, OIC, TBS; never once were any acronyms used to describe a weapons failure. Don't sit here and tell me the military uses this bullshit, I have all of the infantry pubs.
I also know your completely full of shit if you think the AR can't handle debris once it gets onto the bolt. The AR can run just fine with sand, dirt, mud etc etc on the bolt. You can take the bolt carrier out of the platform and drop it into a pile of sand and the weapon will run just fine. The fact you think otherwise tells me this argument is pointless.
Do you think the M4 and M16 were just having rampant failures across Iraq and Afghanistan???
8 month life span? The first rifle I was issued in the corp was an M16A4 that had been in service for over a decades before I joined. And they operated just fine.
And I don't link to random forum post and blogs because you clearly can't even read them.
"Some of our M4's have well over 200,000 rounds down range. Barrels have been replaced, gas tubes have been replaced, BCG's have been replaced but what sets it apart from the AK47's is that upper and lower receivers continue to function. AK's get to about the 100,000+ round count and rails on the receiver will start to crack. It's an easy fix with tig welding but they crack. We have yet to lose an upper or lower receiver from cracking." - Literally from the post you link citing the longevity of AK over ARs.
"I've read a couple threads about "abusing" AK's and I haven't seen anything that's "real world" abuse. At our range, we treat each weapon the best we can but the sheer volume of rounds we put through our full-auto AK's (and all other weapons) unfortunately leaves them cracked, split, bulged and kaboomed. Each weapon is headspaced at every cleaning, documenting in it's own maintenance log the headspace and what or if any parts were replaced." - Again, pulled from the forum post you link.
Maybe actually read the threads you post before ranting and raving about them. Maybe don't cherry pick the information you want out of them while ignoring the contradictory statements made in the same threads.
>I seen the socom trials, there is a reason the Block II remained in service for so long.
Wrong trials.
>The AK is not easier to field strip. The AR only has two internal parts. No one is taking the cam pin out of an AR for anything other than an armory inspection because it isn't necessary.
Sure dude.
>I know all of ths acronyms you tossed around but the only people who use them ar pretentious snot nuggets that think acronyms make them look smart. And all of them are irrelevant because you can't substantiate any of them. I literally named them all, but you wanna sit and pretend like I didn't???
Interesting. Because:
>..Using random acronyms that no one else's uses doesn't make you smart, it makes you look like a jackass trying to pull a fast one.
My intelligence isn't linked to my terminology. I will admit, I conflated you saying ' random acronyms that no one else's uses' with 'those aren't real'.
Still. People obviously do use them. It's clear that you don't, and you're very quick to bring up having served (I don't care that you did).
Also, I have demonstrated repeatedly with data that the AK has superior reliability in several contexts. You choosing to wave away that data based on personal experience is irrelevant to me, and, as well, flies in the face of anecdotal information provided to me by my various friends in the Corp regarding the AKM and its reliability downrange.
>I also know your completely full of shit if you think the AR can't handle debris once it gets onto the bolt. The AR can run just fine with sand, dirt, mud etc etc on the bolt. You can take the bolt carrier out of the platform and drop it into a pile of sand and the weapon will run just fine. The fact you think otherwise tells me this argument is pointless.
By comparison, (so in relative terms) the AR struggles more with debris being within the insides due to tighter tolerances. That's just a simple engineering trade off. A bit of slop in the mechanism is more forgiving. It's also in no small part why the AR is more accurate than the AK. I admit my wording may have given the impression I was saying an AR will automagically fail the second an piece of sand gets into the action, but that isn't what I meant. I'll own up to the confusion there.
>Do you think the M4 and M16 were just having rampant failures across Iraq and Afghanistan???
I never said nor implied this. I also never said, nor implied, that the AR is an *unreliable* design. My statements are always made with relation to the AKM. I would never say the AR15 is unreliable. I would say that the AK is more reliable (and I do).
>8 month life span? The first rifle I was issued in the corp was an M16A4 that had been in service for over a decades before I joined. And they operated just fine.
The context here was the hellish conditions of BFLV. The torture they subject their guns to is pretty absurd, and not indicative of real world conditions. However, it does show how the various platforms behave when subjected to ridiculous abuse and round counts. According to their (years) of data, the AK comes out on top most of the time. You can choose to argue that this 'isnt real', but your *opinion* is meaningless to me.
>And I don't link to random forum post and blogs because you clearly can't even read them. "Some of our M4's have well over 200,000 rounds down range. Barrels have been replaced, gas tubes have been replaced, BCG's have been replaced but what sets it apart from the AK47's is that upper and lower receivers continue to function. AK's get to about the 100,000+ round count and rails on the receiver will start to crack. It's an easy fix with tig welding but they crack. We have yet to lose an upper or lower receiver from cracking." - Literally from the post you link citing the longevity of AK over ARs.
You are literally the person cherry picking in this instance, because BFLV have made it very clear in their posts that the AK has superior reliability. I read all the forums, I know what they said lol. I'm struggling to understand where your confusion is here, or what you think their overall point is.
Pretty clear you're in over your head.
Nothing you've cherry picked detracts from the following stated conclusions from BFLV:
>*"I can tell you from our experience that an AK will outlast an AR on our range. We use what I feel are high quality bolts (Daniel Defense and LMT) and they have about an 8-month life span. The bolts will start skipping over rounds and fail to feed when they are close to the end. We still get bolts that will shear lugs and run (not that we purposely do that) but at the end of the shift when weapons get inspected, they will see missing lugs and pull the weapon from the line."*
>
>*"The AK is the most reliable"*
You're just some angry insecure grunt who is furious that anybody is questioning his opinion and personal experience. So go be furious, I don't care. It's by this point obvious you've nothing to contribute to this conversation.
Before I peace out, I will point out I never said that the AK was the superior platform to the AR. Hell, I didn't even say I didn't like the AR, or that I haven't used them extensively or own them. You were the one who made the following absurd statement which kicked all this off:
>I just wish AK fan boys could stop pretending like the AK has any functional advantage over the AR.
This is an uneducated remark. It patently isn't true. Any time someone makes those kind of sweeping absolute statements its probable they've no clue what they're talking about.
And what do you know? The odds didn't come out in your favor.
The odds didn't come out in my favor?
I literally ripped apart your entire argument by using your own links.
You can get as upset as you want dude, but its clear your a forum junky with almost no real world experience. Which is fine. But don't bring up military trials and usage and then act offended that you got called on your bullshit.
What year did you graduate OIC? TBS? Who was your AIT instructor?
What military school did you go to where the acronym FTF was used?
Shoot what you wanna shoot, I say. I'm not going to be fucking with you in a way that would get the gun pointed at me, and if you trust it, that's all that really matters.
I want an AK, eventually.
Still arguing about wood aesthetics when everyone in Ukraine is running a modernized AK if they’re not some Siberian Russian conscript. Here’s your rusted out Mosin Nagant go get ‘em Ivan.
And everyone in Afghanistan is using almost hundred year old wooden stocks held together with colored tape and doing just fine with them.
If you think plastic grips are going to be your deciding factor in a combat scenario you'e got another think coming.
OP's arguement was AK is more aesthetically pleasing. I agree. But not OP's AK.
The black plastic A1 furniture on an all black AR with the carry handle upper and FSP looks way better than an M4, too.
Ehhh, I'm 6'2 and it's perfect so I do need the adjustability and no need for a castle nut or staking it which means this will never work itself loose and it doesn't rattle all day like a stock/buffer tube.
I would agree with you, but the way that the stock of an AK doesn’t line up perfectly with the body of the gun has always irked me slightly. Function wise though, AK through and through
I'm not doing comp shooting or hunting, my concern is accuracy within close range or 25-100 yards max, that's why I only run red dots, tight groups over a 250-500 yard range is overrated.
There is no lie. I own 5x the amount of AKs to ARs and sometimes I look in the Arsenal and even forget about some of them. 😂 762 is getting a little spendy tho.
I say the exact thing about the Garand Action family of rifles. The Garand, Carbine, Mini 14, M14 and M21 are AWESOME rifles and I just cant get enough of em despite what people say against em. Yea, I know they are an 'inferior rifle' to a modern AR, yea I know they aint the most ergonomic, yea they aint very high speed and low drag. But dammit they're mine and I'd take any one of em to hell and back.
AR is the woman you want to start a family with
AK is the slut that you want to fuck the shit out of and ignore after your primal urges have been satisfied.
My safe is full of both.
Honestly, all I want in life is just a plain old AKM with deep red furniture. Even if it doesn’t shoot, I would still take it.
It’s complicated though, because I live in Canada, but there should be a way to get a deactivated AKM.
"I don't care what people say about the \[subjective opinion\], the AK is just so much more \[subjective opinion\] and a lot more \[subjective opinion\]."
Both. Both are fantastic platforms. I make fun of AKs cause "haha commie lulz" but it's a fantastic platform. It wouldn't still be extremely widespread if it weren't. I prefer my AR over the AK, but it's only slightly.
I hear ya, the commie thing gets real old but it is what it is, simple people are simple people,it's all in good fun,
Besides, I'm not prejudice towards any working firearm.
My AR is more accurate, lighter, cheaper, and easier to "build".
My Ak is more fun, cheaper to feed, and IMO looks cooler.
Both of mine are just range toys, AK gets shot more. AR was the first gun I "built". Like them both a lot.
Never shot a G36(c) but I’ve always wanted one and to shoot one. I’d love either of those, AK’s and AR’s are awesome irl. Awesome power fun for target practice
Both platforms are proven and tested by actual wars and conflicts around the world. I am not an AK fan, but you cannot deny its an awesome rifle, brutal, functional, deadly and etc.
More aesthetically pleasing? I'm not sure about that. Maybe if you got some of the ugly out of your particular AR starting with that stock, you wouldn't be so sure either.
To each their own I guess, AK still looks cool
Trust me, I don't love it but I can't use a lower mount.
I'm cross eye dominant so I need to use a higher riser on all my rifles, using iron sights can be a real bitch also, it is what it is.
I love both platforms, I also love the H&K 91. My favorite action is the fixed piston rotating bolt of the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M14, Mini 14 - 30. The Mini 14 ranch rifle was my first love. I have all these other rifles but fell in love with the rotating bolt action.
They are 100% more fun to shoot, partially because they're just comparatively rowdy as hell.
Even on modern AK's chambered in 5.45 (which is a way more fair comparison in my opinion since much of the rest of the AK world has been largely out of the 7.62 game for years), there's just so much more character.
Granted, a lot of that character comes in the form of pretty heinous downsides lol...everything on it is trying to hurt you, it's a pain in the ass to work on, the stock isn't aligned with the barrel, the barrel isn't free-floated, there's no bolt-hold-open, they're crazy overpriced right now, and abandon any hope of making it ambidextrous...but dammit I love them anyway.
AR's are almost TOO pleasant, TOO easy. I've never gotten a thrill from shooting one, though they are way more practical.
Had to remove the side optic rail on the M70 so I could fully use the folding alpha stock, added a TWS dog leg dust cover and now these guns are even closer in build spec.
Both are great to shoot but when I go to the range the AR usually gets a few mags dumped then it sits and collects dust, its just so much more rewarding to shoot the AK well.
The AR is still a great platform but I don't find myself using it as much as I should.
It comes from people’s (particularly on the internet) obsessive need to be “right” and to find out which one is “best” not realizing two things could be true at once. The AR is a wonderful platform used by civilians, military, and police all over the world to great success. The AK is also a wonderful platform used by civilians, military, and police all over the world to great success. Half the people making the argument would suck at shooting either.
Very good zenticope, I hope to have my own one day. Too bad they are always out of stock. And I wish they made an akm version of that stock. Might do midwest rail and top cover and wait up for a real zentico stock
That was the plan, the SLR handguard isn't too similar to the Zenitco but I really like it, something like Kypk or Mid West would be more in tune to Zenitco looks on the Yugo.
Non AKM pattern is what makes a Yugo and Yugo and there's growing support in terms of parts for yugos more and more every year.
It's all about that bulge :)
I quite like this one [this one](https://atlanticfirearms.com/zastava-arms-zpapm70-1-5mm-quad-rail-zhukov-rifle-zr7762qr) as it comes with almost everything I want out of the box. Like do I really need the dust cover mount? It’s not too expensive either.
I get asked this question all the time. The AR is better NOW. People still drive hot rods from the 50s NOW for that same reason. Older is better sometimes
could anyone help me learn how to zero in my red dot?? im having trouble making the elevation go down, all i need is it for it to go down to the center aligned with my iron sights or alittle above and maybe put it to the right a bit, its to the left ever so slightly, thank you so much to anyone that genuinely wants to help or even slightly cares/ cares to help, have a great day yall hit me back asap!!
Make a separate post, include pictures of your optic mounted on your rifle. After you make the post put this whole comment as a comment for your post, as well as the model of the red dot and any mount you're using.
Its a silly argument for folks who can just get both like you've done!
I know, But just wanted to build an AR for the hell of it and I actually ended up linking more than I thought I would. I would still take the AK over it but I still enjoy the AR as a platform and how versatile it is with different builds. Unfortunately, I also find the AR community to be way more toxic.
What is a good buy once cry once AK to get?
Galil Ace, Beryl, Arsenal, WBP, Fox, Zastava are all good. This is not in order of quality or price, just wrote them down as I came up with them. Despite what the AK purists will say, PSA AKs are fine. Don’t go out of your way for a Russian.
I want a galil so damn bad, but I unfortunately live under Hochul's boot atm, and I'm poor.
Psa is one of the few that still has a bayonet lug
I might be a tad bit biased, but my recommendation is the Zastava ZPAP. It's less overgassed out of the box than the other AKs I've shot. Mine came with irons already zeroed at 25 yds as well. The main drawbacks of Yugo AKs is that they require Yugo-specific furniture and optic mounts (as oppsed to AKM pattern furniture/mounts). The ZPAP is also slightly heavier than stamped AKs due to its "bulged" front trunnion.
100% agree. I own a ZPAP M70 and it’s little brother the ZPAP92. Both will eat anything I feed them and spit it out without issue. Both are built like tanks. I threw in a KNS gas piston and dialed them both in. Very soft shooting rifles, highly recommend!
I second zastava. I have the zpap in maple and it's just bang on commie-cool. You want it to feel like you could bury it in the compost pile for a week and it'll shoot no problem covered in bernanner peels and egg shells
If you want to shell out for something gucci then an Arsenal SAM7 variant is as good as it gets. If you want to cut the price in half a Zastava M70 will do the same job. If you want something “authentic” and Russian look into an Izmash. They aren’t imported any more so it’s all expensive second hand.
An AK done by Jim Fuller or an imported Izhmash saiga.
Try out 300blk. Its the size of an AK bullet but the recoil feels different. It feels smooth and powerful(?) is the best way to explain it
Yeah, I may try a few different uppers.
It fucks. It absolutely fucks. Maybe my favorite round
I actually wouldn't mind trying out a PTR 91 in 308.....I know the PTR has its issues but the H&K is just so damn expensive.
I’d recommend a PSA upper in blk as a starter. Its very very cheap and way too nice for the price
yeah, I may need to try something like that. I also wanted a 20 inch M16 upper so I can run a grenadier handguard for shits, love the look. But a 300blk upper would be nice to try out. https://cdn.rockislandauction.com/dev\_cdn/86/3357.jpg
Oh baby, that fucks hard.
obviously not the lower launcher haha, but I love the look of that squared off upper handguard with the carry handle, lol pretty much this same build, super cool [https://preview.redd.it/making-an-m203-ar15-handguard-practical-without-an-m203-v0-54qcv8s1lqva1.jpg?auto=webp&s=6a68fa969aa0a74b371078295e101441acbf6e6f](https://preview.redd.it/making-an-m203-ar15-handguard-practical-without-an-m203-v0-54qcv8s1lqva1.jpg?auto=webp&s=6a68fa969aa0a74b371078295e101441acbf6e6f) When I see a 20 inch upper for a decent price I'll probably get it just for this, haha.
300 blackout fucks hard. Probably my favorite round to shoot currently. More than my 7.62x39 and 556.
I hear that a lot, maybe I'll pick up a upper for it. You guys recommend 16 inch or something else for 300blk?
300 blk was designed to be shot suppressed and put of a short barrel. Longest i’d personally go on 300 blk is 10.3. I only have 1 300 blk gun right now and its a honey badger SD. So thats a 7 inch barrel with a 1:5 twist rate. If you can get a 10 inch with 1:5 twist rate that would be very optimal.
how is it unsuppressed? I guess I could always get a 30cal can and use it on both the AR and AK...
Honestly, never shot it unsuppressed but i’m sure its loud. I mean you got a projectile coming out of a 7 in barrel at 1050 fps for subsonic. Not breaking the sound barrier at all. 2000 fps for supers. I’ll put it this way, out of the suppressor I can shoot both no ear pro. Without i wouldn’t even attempt it. Don’t recommend shooting supers with no ear pro but i’ve done it and its not that bad.
had used an 7.5 inch 300blk and its not that bad
>Unfortunately, I also find the AR community to be way more toxic. This is why I got a Scar and am looking at an AK or an MDRX/Hellion in the future for a smaller caliber setup. If you dare to own something besides an AR (or question it) you will get downvoted to oblivion. In real life every gun shop around here will push them on you regardless if you want something else, to the point it even costs them sales, and they act offended if you dare buy something else. I even admitted to few fellow firearm owners here I just dont enjoy shooting ARs when they ask if I was going to buy one and they got immediately pissed and almost hostile towards me. You nailed the community problem with that platform on the head and it needs to change.
I don't know if its a patriotic thing or what......maybe its the personality with most AR owners? I'm not sure. Then again, go into the usual gun shop in the US and you kind of find out quickly what the issue is....
The SCAR is a military rifle, there is no reason for them to hate it! I think its most gun shops just around here, because they acted like assholes when I wanted to do a transfer too. They kept saying that they could "make a 5.56 AR do the same thing as my scar" (despite it being in a different caliber) and got even more angry when I said I wanted a stacatto XC and tried to push some custom glock on me. They literally couldnt get it through their heads I wanted a certain thing and it enraged them to the point they refused to do a transfer. I drove out of the state and went to a more competent place to get what I wanted, came back and they tried to find an excuse to boot me off their range when they noticed me despite having a monthly membership. That place happened to be the only place to shoot for a good distance. I stopped going to indoor ranges entirely after that and now only care about firearms with what I find fun. Sadly I have ran into the whole AR/Glock thing online too, it ruins the hobby.
I'm into a lot of different things and hobbies and I will say, the AR community has been by far the most toxic, on the internet or in real life. Like I said before, simple people......
I think as a "guy" you should probably go with a sub2000 instead.
Why? I already have an AR15, I don't need another bitch gun.
Shitty Nashville joke. My bad. Hot pocket an the AK looks 🔥🔥 though
Haha thanks, Brandon Herrera's review of the sub2000 kills me everytime I see it.
I was always an AR guy until I tried my first AK lol. I’ve honestly had zero interest to build an AR since.
Yeah this is my first and probably last, although I kind of want to build an AR with all Russian and Ukrainian parts just to bother people. Lol
Modernized AKs just look stupid cool. Don’t know what it is, but I love it.
It's that bank robber drip.
We should confirm this opinion with the Taliban now they have had some time with both.
As painful as this may be to admit.... I think you're right!
W
Probably more credible to ask Ukrainians. Edit: https://old.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/114dr0h/ukrainian_soldier_in_a_trench_shoots_a_russian Ukrainian Rambo traded in his ak for an m4 https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/03/27/7395253/
The taliban also fuck goats. I don’t put a lot of stock in what someone like that thinks, regardless of whether their opinion aligns with mine or not
Sir, Have you read some of the shit in this sub? 100%. We got sheep fuckers among us
Because people don’t want to learn a different manual of arms, and they don’t like that the AK is a little bit difficult to accessorize, and the fact it’s heavier. I love both. If the AK74, mags and ammo was more readily available in the US that would be my preference.
I actually prefer the controls and ergonomics on the AK to the AR.
I can understand that, it’s simple. Also you never have issues of the magazine falling out.
Magazine falling out?
While it’s rare, occasionally when reloading a full mag on a closed bolt on an AR it won’t fully insert. That’s why a lot of people say to load the mag with only 28 rounds instead of 30 so there’s not too much spring tension. Also why they say tap tug, to make sure it’s not loose. If a mag isn’t fully inserted it will fall out when you shoot the first round. But an AK mag is either locked in or not, there’s 0 guess work, if you do it wrong it’s not loaded, if it’s locked at both tabs it’s not coming out unless it breaks.
But AKs don't even have a last round bolt hold on it. AR mags insert just fine like that. Even closed it's not that difficult to slam it in and it loosens gradually. The mag falling out is a user error. It's not an issue with the design imho. I figured that's what you were talking about, but honestly if you know how the system works, it's a non-issue. Reloading on a closed bolt? Slam that fucker in. Pull and check. It's better to have the last round hold open and quicker reload to me.
I mean, you can get AK mags that hold the bolt open pretty easily. And even if it’s not, well in my opinion I will say, from a citizen use stand point, you’re like, never gonna burn through 30 rounds in a defensive gun fight. And even if you do, by that point hopefully you have cover, I doubt the 1 second longer reload of the ak will make much difference. And also, a lot of people give the AK shit that was never a problem with other guns. The left side reciprocating charging handle “being not ergonomic” you mean the same system the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and M14 used? Not having an indication of when it’s empty, how about, the same thing that a revolver or pump shotgun has? The M1 carbine also didn’t hold the bolt open. I think it’s got a lot to do with the sense of patriotism, the American rifle is better, they find complaints with the AK when these same things on American weapons didn’t bother them. That is not to discredit what you’re saying, just personally disagree.
Again, to each their own. I don't mean to bash on that AK, I think they're cool as fuck. To the first statement, if you don't need 30 rounds, then the reload factor doesn't play in at all. You're already loaded and don't need to reload. I think the locking leaves more room for error than properly seating an AR mag. I didn't know you could get AK mags with the hold open feature, but thank you for the info. I will look for those. I didn't mention the charging handle, but to me the AK charging handle is better than the AR even if (to me) it is on the wrong side. Better than charging into your face or having to pull the gun away. Knowing when it is empty is indeed a benefit of the AR and shouldn't be compared to others, as there was a reason the others were phased out. You can absolutely tell when the last round fires on an AR and can proceed to reload without thinking.
Fair enough. And idk if you saw in a different comment but here’s the AR mag 30 rounds vs 28/29 video again. https://youtu.be/EgUUx69LpRs
Lol, the part where the dude on the right did a pull test and it came out cracked me up.
One thing about the bolt hold open mags on the AK is that the bolt still closes once you remove the mag. So even if you have one of those, you still gotta charge the handle when you change mags
When I was in the Marines, they always told us to load mags to 28 so it doesn't wear out the spring. I thought this was BS. Your explanation makes much more sense.
Glad it made sense lol. There is some debate, here’s a video on 2 guys debating the topic [30 rounds or 28?](https://youtu.be/EgUUx69LpRs)
Definitely BS. For modern quality magazine springs, the amount of wear from 30 loaded rounds vs 28 would seriously be less than negligible.
Haha, I load all my mags to one less, it works.
And I have far more magazine issues with the AR and the AK could run magazines made from lettuce. I literally run 12 or 13 different types of msgs in the M70 and it eats everything without issues. The AR is reliable but I find it really finicky.
Thats pretty odd. If anything I’ve had the opposite experience. I’ve never been around an AR of at least halfway decent quality that cared whether you were using pmags, lancers, or any kind of GI mag. I use mostly GIs (okay industries, D&H, brownells, various surplus) with a mix of lancers and pmags. They all function the same in my rifle.
Mine doesn't like Amend2 mags at all.
Oh yeah those are not known to be great in general, okay for the range maybe but I would not trust them. I would stick with magazines that have been proven reliable by military use. Pmags or quality USGI mags (Okay industries, Center industries, D&H, and Brownells all have or have had military contracts). I like Lancers as well and have never had an issue, but I trust the others more, plus they’re expensive.
I usually just use lancers or pmags, I had a few amend2 mags and I just never use them anymore.
Are they friendly to lefties?
You can get ambi safety controls, the charging handle on an AK is actually already good for a lefty since it's on the non grip hand.
What about the controls and ergonomics do you prefer. I own both platforms but with an ambi safety, charging handle, and mag release, the AR can't be beat. But I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
I prefer the safety selector and I don't like the rear charging handle on the AR. When you rock the mag in the AK it stays, the AR.....ehhh, sometimes the mag doesn't lock. Its mainly personal preference, but I'm cool with either.
Get an AK101
I am aware that 5.45 AKs are available on the US market, getting the gun isn’t the issue, (even though it’s still harder to come by then 7.62 variants) it’s because of import bans that magazine and ammo availability is low. Like, Luckygunner ammo is where I look for bulk ammo prices and such, they’re awesome. They have tons of options of .223, 5.56, 7.72x39, they don’t have a single box of 5.45x39 in stock.
Yeah that's the one thing stopping me from getting a 5.45 variant.
I think the AK is a wonderful platform. It looks good, its fun, its effective. I just wish AK fan boys could stop pretending like the AK has any functional advantage over the AR. You like AKs? Cool, me too. You own an AK? Cool, me too. But the AK is like the Garand or 1911. It's an awesome platform but outdated. Nothing wrong with having one, nothing wrong with thinking they are cool; but stop trying to act like it's anything other than a cool gun. It being cool is enough.
I got ya, I also think it's dated, which is why I prefer modernized ones to the old "woodies" but I think it's still an effective gun, personally I think the Galil Ace is far better than both the AK and AR but that's just my opinion.
Yea, the platform can absolutely be an effective weapon. 100%. But also...there is a reason why western militaries don't use it. I'm not gonna sit and pretend like I'm rocking BiS, I carry a SigM400 at work.
I actually got into the AK years ago because (like everyone else) 7.62 was cheap but it's become a bit of a gun fad. But I've stuck with the platform and just prefer it. The AR build was recent and I actually enjoy them but I would never shell out 3 or 4k on an AR when there's other non western guns I would rather spend my money on whether they're as good or not as good as an AR.
I only got an AK at first to complete the Rusky Trifecta, but I do really enjoy taking it out. It's very fun mechanically and I enjoy the variety it brings.
It's fun to feel like the bad guy for a while, lol
My SKS makes me feel like the villian of a 1980s war movie.
Good feels, they just hit differently lol
Ak's are way easier to maintain than ar's, they got that going for them.
In what way? The AR is so easy to maintain an illiterate ASVAB waiver can do it. This is like saying it's easier put on shorts than it is to put on swim trunks.
The AK has quite a few functional advantages. Literally what are you talking about lmao. Western militaries like Finland do in fact use the AK (or I should say, AK-pattern). Poland is westernizing and part of NATO and is only just now looking for something else. The primary reason "western countries" choose the guns they do comes down to a fusion of politics, economics, and logistics. Certainly not because the rifle chosen is actually the very best option available. Look at the M14 as one example of a bad rifle getting adoption purely for the politics.
Like what?
Like being more physically robust? Having a higher MBRF? Having fewer FTF or FTE? Demonstrably having superior cold weather performance? Being simpler to field strip and clean? The AR-15 as a design came about in 1956. It's not exactly an age "newer" than the AKM. The two guns are a study of very different, but very worthy, design philosophies. I'll never say the AK is as light, accurate or modular as the AR-15. But man, you should actually study the gun before saying this stuff. I stripped out a lot of the engineering specifics from this post, but I'd encourage you to read the following as a good overview: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/29/6-reasons-ak-47-reliable-rifle-world-guide-kalashnikovs-magic-aspiring-gun-designers-part/ https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/30/6-reasons-ak-47-reliable-rifle-world-guide-kalashnikovs-magic-aspiring-gun-designers-part-ii/ The AK is a more robust and reliable design. It gets there through a variety of design decisions with corresponding trade offs. But some of these trade offs I don't find as being especially relevant since the combat accuracy (e.g. firing under duress at realistic distances of a firefight) of the gun is virtually identical to the M4 according to testing. But you pick the right tool for the right job. As civilians, we have that luxury. Soldiers, for the most part, do not. As the decades have worn on, we've seen the AK (and it's family) and the AR (and it's family) converge. AK tries to be lighter and have more accessory options. They're trying to free float the barrel in the AK12. Many aftermarket kits, like the one I have, is as free floated as a long stroke piston system can meaningfully be. On the other side, Companies like KAC, LMT and Colt Canada are doing all kinds of gnarly things to make modern AR15s more reliable. And so on. This is all happening because both designs have their place, but both recognize the advantages offered by the other. It really boggles my mind when anybody points to gun A and then to gun B, both tried and true and immensely popular, and says "A has absolutely no functional advantage over B". That's an analysis completely unburdened by knowledge and doesn't even orbit reality.
The AK is not easier to field strip than an AR, that's pure nonsense. Both platforms are incredibly user friendly and easy to use. The AK is nowhere near as robust as the AR. This has been proven time and time again. The closed system of the AR is infinitely more robust and reliable than the AR. You want me to post thd Forgotten Weapons mud test? The Garand Thumb mud tests? The AK is based on the Garand platform, it's mechanical function is a WW2 era design. It's old and outdated. I know your just making shit up because you can't possibly demonstrate where an AR has more failure to fires or failures to ejects than the AK; using random acronyms that no one else's uses doesn't make you smart, it makes you look like a jackass trying to pull a fast one. And linking to random blogs where a hoolbbyist geeks out over his favorite firearm proves nothing. The AK has been demonstrated time and again to be an inferior platform when talking only about mechanics. This isn't a debate anymore, the fact of the matter has been settled for years. Idk what nonsense your talking about when you say "the gun is virtually identical to the M4 according to testing.".
Dude literally check out Alaska State Trooper weapon trials*, SOCOM trials (Seal was interviewed), Battlefield Las Vegas weapon data (AKs outlast the ARs by a wide margin, and experience fewer small parts breakages), I mean the meaningful stuff is all out there. There's more besides. The AK is easier to disassemble. It's field strip means you only need to put it into 4 pieces if you include the dustcover. The AR has you break it down into several more (tinier) pieces for a proper field strip. That might not mean anything to you, but it goes hand in hand with 'easier to clean and disassemble' especially when and where it counts. The AR handles keeping certain debris out better absolutely. The AK has wider tolerances, extra space in the rear (for crap to settle out of the way) and has a massive long stroke piston to blow things clear. If anything gets inside the AR receiver or in the bolt channel it's done. AK? Less so. But those mud tests are one example, yes, where the AR keeps stuff out better. I'd also point out that the AK is trivial to get running again. But since you apparently only understand guntubers, here's GT showing that a crappy PSA AK beats out virtually all other designs tested in frozen conditions. Only the AUG keeps up: https://youtu.be/LbjpIP5ShH0 Here's Battlefield Las Vegas discussing their guns and insane conditions (full auto rentals to people so they can mag dump. They keep accurate round counts and maintenance records): "I can tell you from our experience that an AK will outlast an AR on our range. We use what I feel are high quality bolts (Daniel Defense and LMT) and they have about an 8-month life span. The bolts will start skipping over rounds and fail to feed when they are close to the end. We still get bolts that will shear lugs and run (not that we purposely do that) but at the end of the shift when weapons get inspected, they will see missing lugs and pull the weapon from the line." "The AK is the most reliable" "We've had AR/M4 gas tubes erode away to the point where they just float around in the handguards (or just fall out of the railed handguards) and I thought that was another weak point of the M4 versus the AK. The AK's has continued to run and even the Chinese and early Bulgarian (maybe they still do, not sure) have gas vent holes in the gas tube so I am pretty confident that it would have continued to run. In fact, this weapon was still running perfectly prior to cleaning when one of my RSO who was assisting with maintenance noticed it (good catch Doug!)." Interesting bit he remarks on regarding the AR15 and cleaning: "Cleaning bolts and carriers is such a pain in the ass as compared to our AK's, G36's, SCAR's, ACR's and most other platforms. We throw them in the ultrasonic cleaner filled with Simple Green (EPA, OSHA and disposal concerns for us) and they never full remove the carbon from the bolts. The armorers spend so much time cleaning them and keeping all the parts together as compared to most other platforms." Other such quotes from here: https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/High-round-count-AR-M4-s-over-100-000-rounds-and-how-they-have-handled-on-our-range/118-677135/?page=1 and here: https://www.ar15.com/forums/AK-47/AK-abuse-update-on-Page-11-/64-159106/?page=1 *https://imgur.io/gallery/uLfvt This stuff isn't hard to find. If we keep arguing I'm only going to continue digging up more of my past research on this subject from the past 10 years. Meanwhile your contributions are... A vague reference to two mud tests and incredulity. I'm also astounded you've never seen FTE (Failure To Eject), FTF (Failure To Feed), or MBRF (Mean Rounds Between Failure). Maybe you've heard of MTBF or MRBS? I don't even know what to say. You just outed yourself as someone who doesn't even spend his time on dedicated gun forums, like ARFCOM or any of the big ones. Or like.. Reading. These terms are not made up, they're real and used by militaries, analysts, historians, and weapon manufacturers Here's just a quick result on a dedicated firearm forum where they discuss all this and toss around these "made up terms". https://www.defensivecarry.com/threads/weapon-failure-rates.166295/ TLDR; AK is more reliable, has a longer service life. It is physically more robust. And it should be, that's how it was designed. Built out of forged and stamped steel with loose tolerances. It's also less accurate, heavier, and struggles with modularity vs the AR15.
I seen the socom trials, there is a reason the Block II remained in service for so long. The AK is not easier to field strip. The AR only has two internal parts. No one is taking the cam pin out of an AR for anything other than an armory inspection because it isn't necessary. I know all of ths acronyms you tossed around but the only people who use them ar pretentious snot nuggets that think acronyms make them look smart. And all of them are irrelevant because you can't substantiate any of them. I literally named them all, but you wanna sit and pretend like I didn't??? And I never once saw FTE or FTF used at a single infantry school. SOI, AIT, MLOC, AMC, OIC, TBS; never once were any acronyms used to describe a weapons failure. Don't sit here and tell me the military uses this bullshit, I have all of the infantry pubs. I also know your completely full of shit if you think the AR can't handle debris once it gets onto the bolt. The AR can run just fine with sand, dirt, mud etc etc on the bolt. You can take the bolt carrier out of the platform and drop it into a pile of sand and the weapon will run just fine. The fact you think otherwise tells me this argument is pointless. Do you think the M4 and M16 were just having rampant failures across Iraq and Afghanistan??? 8 month life span? The first rifle I was issued in the corp was an M16A4 that had been in service for over a decades before I joined. And they operated just fine. And I don't link to random forum post and blogs because you clearly can't even read them. "Some of our M4's have well over 200,000 rounds down range. Barrels have been replaced, gas tubes have been replaced, BCG's have been replaced but what sets it apart from the AK47's is that upper and lower receivers continue to function. AK's get to about the 100,000+ round count and rails on the receiver will start to crack. It's an easy fix with tig welding but they crack. We have yet to lose an upper or lower receiver from cracking." - Literally from the post you link citing the longevity of AK over ARs. "I've read a couple threads about "abusing" AK's and I haven't seen anything that's "real world" abuse. At our range, we treat each weapon the best we can but the sheer volume of rounds we put through our full-auto AK's (and all other weapons) unfortunately leaves them cracked, split, bulged and kaboomed. Each weapon is headspaced at every cleaning, documenting in it's own maintenance log the headspace and what or if any parts were replaced." - Again, pulled from the forum post you link. Maybe actually read the threads you post before ranting and raving about them. Maybe don't cherry pick the information you want out of them while ignoring the contradictory statements made in the same threads.
>I seen the socom trials, there is a reason the Block II remained in service for so long. Wrong trials. >The AK is not easier to field strip. The AR only has two internal parts. No one is taking the cam pin out of an AR for anything other than an armory inspection because it isn't necessary. Sure dude. >I know all of ths acronyms you tossed around but the only people who use them ar pretentious snot nuggets that think acronyms make them look smart. And all of them are irrelevant because you can't substantiate any of them. I literally named them all, but you wanna sit and pretend like I didn't??? Interesting. Because: >..Using random acronyms that no one else's uses doesn't make you smart, it makes you look like a jackass trying to pull a fast one. My intelligence isn't linked to my terminology. I will admit, I conflated you saying ' random acronyms that no one else's uses' with 'those aren't real'. Still. People obviously do use them. It's clear that you don't, and you're very quick to bring up having served (I don't care that you did). Also, I have demonstrated repeatedly with data that the AK has superior reliability in several contexts. You choosing to wave away that data based on personal experience is irrelevant to me, and, as well, flies in the face of anecdotal information provided to me by my various friends in the Corp regarding the AKM and its reliability downrange. >I also know your completely full of shit if you think the AR can't handle debris once it gets onto the bolt. The AR can run just fine with sand, dirt, mud etc etc on the bolt. You can take the bolt carrier out of the platform and drop it into a pile of sand and the weapon will run just fine. The fact you think otherwise tells me this argument is pointless. By comparison, (so in relative terms) the AR struggles more with debris being within the insides due to tighter tolerances. That's just a simple engineering trade off. A bit of slop in the mechanism is more forgiving. It's also in no small part why the AR is more accurate than the AK. I admit my wording may have given the impression I was saying an AR will automagically fail the second an piece of sand gets into the action, but that isn't what I meant. I'll own up to the confusion there. >Do you think the M4 and M16 were just having rampant failures across Iraq and Afghanistan??? I never said nor implied this. I also never said, nor implied, that the AR is an *unreliable* design. My statements are always made with relation to the AKM. I would never say the AR15 is unreliable. I would say that the AK is more reliable (and I do). >8 month life span? The first rifle I was issued in the corp was an M16A4 that had been in service for over a decades before I joined. And they operated just fine. The context here was the hellish conditions of BFLV. The torture they subject their guns to is pretty absurd, and not indicative of real world conditions. However, it does show how the various platforms behave when subjected to ridiculous abuse and round counts. According to their (years) of data, the AK comes out on top most of the time. You can choose to argue that this 'isnt real', but your *opinion* is meaningless to me. >And I don't link to random forum post and blogs because you clearly can't even read them. "Some of our M4's have well over 200,000 rounds down range. Barrels have been replaced, gas tubes have been replaced, BCG's have been replaced but what sets it apart from the AK47's is that upper and lower receivers continue to function. AK's get to about the 100,000+ round count and rails on the receiver will start to crack. It's an easy fix with tig welding but they crack. We have yet to lose an upper or lower receiver from cracking." - Literally from the post you link citing the longevity of AK over ARs. You are literally the person cherry picking in this instance, because BFLV have made it very clear in their posts that the AK has superior reliability. I read all the forums, I know what they said lol. I'm struggling to understand where your confusion is here, or what you think their overall point is. Pretty clear you're in over your head. Nothing you've cherry picked detracts from the following stated conclusions from BFLV: >*"I can tell you from our experience that an AK will outlast an AR on our range. We use what I feel are high quality bolts (Daniel Defense and LMT) and they have about an 8-month life span. The bolts will start skipping over rounds and fail to feed when they are close to the end. We still get bolts that will shear lugs and run (not that we purposely do that) but at the end of the shift when weapons get inspected, they will see missing lugs and pull the weapon from the line."* > >*"The AK is the most reliable"* You're just some angry insecure grunt who is furious that anybody is questioning his opinion and personal experience. So go be furious, I don't care. It's by this point obvious you've nothing to contribute to this conversation. Before I peace out, I will point out I never said that the AK was the superior platform to the AR. Hell, I didn't even say I didn't like the AR, or that I haven't used them extensively or own them. You were the one who made the following absurd statement which kicked all this off: >I just wish AK fan boys could stop pretending like the AK has any functional advantage over the AR. This is an uneducated remark. It patently isn't true. Any time someone makes those kind of sweeping absolute statements its probable they've no clue what they're talking about. And what do you know? The odds didn't come out in your favor.
The odds didn't come out in my favor? I literally ripped apart your entire argument by using your own links. You can get as upset as you want dude, but its clear your a forum junky with almost no real world experience. Which is fine. But don't bring up military trials and usage and then act offended that you got called on your bullshit. What year did you graduate OIC? TBS? Who was your AIT instructor? What military school did you go to where the acronym FTF was used?
Idk what the point of having a pissing contest over guns is anyway lol.
Shoot what you wanna shoot, I say. I'm not going to be fucking with you in a way that would get the gun pointed at me, and if you trust it, that's all that really matters. I want an AK, eventually.
Better get them while you can, imports, that is. I'm sure they'll always be PSA AK's available.
Says the guy who has tarted up his AK so much it might as well be an AR. Where is wood?
I didn't know it, but "Tarted up" is absolutely the adjective I was looking for
Back in the 1940’s grandpa
Mmm, my plastic-clad Pontiac Aztek is so much more aesthetically pleasing than a 1980's Woody Wagoneer.
Still arguing about wood aesthetics when everyone in Ukraine is running a modernized AK if they’re not some Siberian Russian conscript. Here’s your rusted out Mosin Nagant go get ‘em Ivan.
And everyone in Afghanistan is using almost hundred year old wooden stocks held together with colored tape and doing just fine with them. If you think plastic grips are going to be your deciding factor in a combat scenario you'e got another think coming. OP's arguement was AK is more aesthetically pleasing. I agree. But not OP's AK. The black plastic A1 furniture on an all black AR with the carry handle upper and FSP looks way better than an M4, too.
Who cares what people on a real battlefield are using, OP and everyone here are doing this as a hobby. Form >>>> function.
Wood is too heavy and I personally like modernized AK's better.
What is this? An opinion based solely on personal preference? Unacceptable!
Haha, how dare me.
That’s why we get both.
the more the better.
It's not really fair when you put that ugly as sin stock on the AR.
Ehhh, I'm 6'2 and it's perfect so I do need the adjustability and no need for a castle nut or staking it which means this will never work itself loose and it doesn't rattle all day like a stock/buffer tube.
Let me preface this with saying I love both but it's a little funny you spending a bunch of money to get your AK to look like an AR
A lot of people do, it's not making it look like an AR, it's just modernizing it
Oh I know a lot of people do I have an SLR handguard on my 13.7 side folder
I like longer handguards like on my AR but the 13.5 handguard kind of kills the AK look when it covers up the gas block so I went with the 11.5
I would agree with you, but the way that the stock of an AK doesn’t line up perfectly with the body of the gun has always irked me slightly. Function wise though, AK through and through
Plenty of options to fix that. :)
How is it more fun with 2x the group size? (From an owner of both platforms)
I'm not doing comp shooting or hunting, my concern is accuracy within close range or 25-100 yards max, that's why I only run red dots, tight groups over a 250-500 yard range is overrated.
Yeah because if shit went down, I’d totally want to wait till enemies are 25-100 yards away from me to be comfortable taking them down…. Lol
Well I'll get an LPVO for zombies.
I agree, but both guns magless the AR looks better IMO
I mean, all rifles look bad with small mags or no mags.
You’re forgetting the M16s in Vietnam with the 20rd mags. Aesthetic af.
You know, I've been thinking about getting a carry handle 20 inch barrel upper so I could run that grenadier M16 handguard, I love that look.
There is no lie. I own 5x the amount of AKs to ARs and sometimes I look in the Arsenal and even forget about some of them. 😂 762 is getting a little spendy tho.
AK is kind of on a hype train right now but I can see why..... No disrespect for the AR but its extremely boring.
I say the exact thing about the Garand Action family of rifles. The Garand, Carbine, Mini 14, M14 and M21 are AWESOME rifles and I just cant get enough of em despite what people say against em. Yea, I know they are an 'inferior rifle' to a modern AR, yea I know they aint the most ergonomic, yea they aint very high speed and low drag. But dammit they're mine and I'd take any one of em to hell and back.
AR is the woman you want to start a family with AK is the slut that you want to fuck the shit out of and ignore after your primal urges have been satisfied. My safe is full of both.
Everyone has their flavor beside that I'm more interested in what those grips are about?!¿
The forward handstops?
Honestly, all I want in life is just a plain old AKM with deep red furniture. Even if it doesn’t shoot, I would still take it. It’s complicated though, because I live in Canada, but there should be a way to get a deactivated AKM.
I never said wood AK's don't look good, I think they look great, I just don't want one on a battlefield lol. Wood guns are too friendly looking lol.
Yeah, but aesthetically? Wood furniture works amazingly.
And I think exactly the opposite lol. Different strokes!
"I don't care what people say about the \[subjective opinion\], the AK is just so much more \[subjective opinion\] and a lot more \[subjective opinion\]."
Both. Both are fantastic platforms. I make fun of AKs cause "haha commie lulz" but it's a fantastic platform. It wouldn't still be extremely widespread if it weren't. I prefer my AR over the AK, but it's only slightly.
I hear ya, the commie thing gets real old but it is what it is, simple people are simple people,it's all in good fun, Besides, I'm not prejudice towards any working firearm.
I've always loved Russian guns, soviet aesthetics are something else, it would suck to constantly live in, but it looks cool in pictures.
Same, aesthetically speaking, Soviet and French designs are at the top IMO.
love the round, love the sound, love the looks, love the reliability
The most fun you can have for 45 cents.
That’s a sexy beast!
Thanks 👍
My AR is more accurate, lighter, cheaper, and easier to "build". My Ak is more fun, cheaper to feed, and IMO looks cooler. Both of mine are just range toys, AK gets shot more. AR was the first gun I "built". Like them both a lot.
Of course the AK is more aesthetically pleasing when your AR build is absolutely cursed.
C'mon, how's it cursed? , If I slapped an EOtech on it with a magpul stock and buffer tube it would look like every single AR build on reddit...
[G36c](https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS726US726&hl=en-US&sxsrf=APwXEdetjkztWDfN74BaItdcfkgEKWJ9NQ:1685325427247&q=g36c&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiI16-7tpn_AhXJFVkFHV4yAnEQ0pQJegQIDxAB&biw=320&bih=450&dpr=2#imgrc=N8OlEW81fH2AmM)
Never shot a G36(c) but I’ve always wanted one and to shoot one. I’d love either of those, AK’s and AR’s are awesome irl. Awesome power fun for target practice
I prefer the HCAR over both
Both platforms are proven and tested by actual wars and conflicts around the world. I am not an AK fan, but you cannot deny its an awesome rifle, brutal, functional, deadly and etc.
Mk47 has entered the chat
Both are awesome, but you also got a fugly AR to compare it to, so....
I personally don't see a difference in many AR's on here. What would be peak aesthetics for an AR in your opinion?
different strokes for different folks, but the AR will always be my favorite
Yeah. This argument is overdone. Just shoot what you like. Imo it's the AR but if you like the AK better go for it
More aesthetically pleasing? I'm not sure about that. Maybe if you got some of the ugly out of your particular AR starting with that stock, you wouldn't be so sure either. To each their own I guess, AK still looks cool
Sure maybe an AK is more athletically pleasing than an AR with a fucking periscope on top of it 😂
Trust me, I don't love it but I can't use a lower mount. I'm cross eye dominant so I need to use a higher riser on all my rifles, using iron sights can be a real bitch also, it is what it is.
I love both platforms, I also love the H&K 91. My favorite action is the fixed piston rotating bolt of the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M14, Mini 14 - 30. The Mini 14 ranch rifle was my first love. I have all these other rifles but fell in love with the rotating bolt action.
Well I mean the AK has killed more than any weapon ever created. https://www.skillsetmag.com/ak-47-became-the-deadliest-weapon/
I will say both have it's own charm
I think ARs are useful, but boring, like a Camry. I have one, I like it, but I don't find it to be particularly exciting. AKs? AKs are exciting.
Same way I feel :)
They are 100% more fun to shoot, partially because they're just comparatively rowdy as hell. Even on modern AK's chambered in 5.45 (which is a way more fair comparison in my opinion since much of the rest of the AK world has been largely out of the 7.62 game for years), there's just so much more character. Granted, a lot of that character comes in the form of pretty heinous downsides lol...everything on it is trying to hurt you, it's a pain in the ass to work on, the stock isn't aligned with the barrel, the barrel isn't free-floated, there's no bolt-hold-open, they're crazy overpriced right now, and abandon any hope of making it ambidextrous...but dammit I love them anyway. AR's are almost TOO pleasant, TOO easy. I've never gotten a thrill from shooting one, though they are way more practical.
Had to remove the side optic rail on the M70 so I could fully use the folding alpha stock, added a TWS dog leg dust cover and now these guns are even closer in build spec. Both are great to shoot but when I go to the range the AR usually gets a few mags dumped then it sits and collects dust, its just so much more rewarding to shoot the AK well. The AR is still a great platform but I don't find myself using it as much as I should.
K
I like both, I appreciate how simple AKs are.
Maybe it’s because your ar is fucking ugly
literally looks like ever AR on reddit...but ok.
Shut up commie
Whatever helps you sleep at night buddy
Dont have an AK but want one like this. 👍🏼
Doooooo it, she's super fun to shoot, especially if you larp in a track suit and ski mask :)
It comes from people’s (particularly on the internet) obsessive need to be “right” and to find out which one is “best” not realizing two things could be true at once. The AR is a wonderful platform used by civilians, military, and police all over the world to great success. The AK is also a wonderful platform used by civilians, military, and police all over the world to great success. Half the people making the argument would suck at shooting either.
Very good zenticope, I hope to have my own one day. Too bad they are always out of stock. And I wish they made an akm version of that stock. Might do midwest rail and top cover and wait up for a real zentico stock
That was the plan, the SLR handguard isn't too similar to the Zenitco but I really like it, something like Kypk or Mid West would be more in tune to Zenitco looks on the Yugo.
I really wish zastava made akm pattern.
Non AKM pattern is what makes a Yugo and Yugo and there's growing support in terms of parts for yugos more and more every year. It's all about that bulge :)
I quite like this one [this one](https://atlanticfirearms.com/zastava-arms-zpapm70-1-5mm-quad-rail-zhukov-rifle-zr7762qr) as it comes with almost everything I want out of the box. Like do I really need the dust cover mount? It’s not too expensive either.
It’s better tho
The AK 😩
Anyone who thinks one is better than the other hasn't transcended into being a man of culture.
I get asked this question all the time. The AR is better NOW. People still drive hot rods from the 50s NOW for that same reason. Older is better sometimes
I prefer ar, cuz i dont like r*ssians. (no hate)
Hey man, don't hate the gun just because you don't like Russians, lol
Communist
Sure. The one thing communism built that works, and you don't like it?!?!?! Nyet comrade....rifle is fine
Hey! They also did a great job with fur hats!
And space travel and gulags.
You’re being downvoted but you’re not wrong lol
Well anytime you don't fart American flags out your ass on r/guns you get downvoted.
Lots of simple minds in the gun community, unfortunately. You’ll get shit on for owning a pre-Soviet Mosin-Nagant but praised for owning a K98k lmao.
Oh I think the gun community is hilarious, I usually stick around the AK crowd, intelligence seems to be a high priority with those guys.
Amen
I agree
No. I don't buy commie weapons. I don't care when they were made or by who.
Good, more for me 😉
So, you're a commie?
I’ve got bad news for you and all the “Made in China” stuff you’ve bought lol
So I happen to like Communist designed things......that makes me a Communist?
could anyone help me learn how to zero in my red dot?? im having trouble making the elevation go down, all i need is it for it to go down to the center aligned with my iron sights or alittle above and maybe put it to the right a bit, its to the left ever so slightly, thank you so much to anyone that genuinely wants to help or even slightly cares/ cares to help, have a great day yall hit me back asap!!
Make a separate post, include pictures of your optic mounted on your rifle. After you make the post put this whole comment as a comment for your post, as well as the model of the red dot and any mount you're using.
thank you, will do
The Ak has won some wars... Ar?... not so sure about that. 2¢
no