<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Skorzeny:
However, design-wise, the AR-15 does blow the gas straight back onto the bolt (hence the chamber as well), does it not?
This makes the action of the AR-15 more prone to fouling than another design (more widespread) that uses a system with gas being diverted to operate on a piston, no?
The AR-15 is reliable to the extent that the action is cleaned fastidiously. One cannot say the same about, say, an AK or a Mini-14.
[/quote]
Yup, it sure does dump the gas right into the action. Dumb design. And if you're in a firefight shooting thousands rounds of ammunition without having a chance to clean it, then maybe it will be an issue. But it's my understanding that the US military is not having any problem with their M16s. In fact, they're among the more reliable assault rifles being used right now (the new British Enfield being noted as a particular dog).
You don't have to be fastidious about cleaning your AR15. Really, I mean it, you don't.
Even in a defensive situation, how many rounds would you envision shooting before the police arrived? You can put hundreds of rounds through an AR15 without cleaning it. I know, because I've done it.
Yes, the AK is likely more reliable. But the AR15 is reliable enough. The AK also has terrible sights. Reliable AK mags are cheap and available. I don't like the push in and rotate design (shared by the Mini-14, M14, etc.), as I find it to be much more fumble-prone than the push straight-in AR design. The AR is certainly more accurate, but that's probably not an issue out to 100 yards or so. Beyond 200 yards, the AR accuracy is certainly an advantage, but I have a hard time envisioning a defensive shooting at that distance.
The AR sights are quite nice. Haven't seen the sights on the mini-14.
I've got two ARs and two AKs. I shoot the ARs. The AKs mostly take up space in the safe.
M1911
[This message has been edited by M1911 (edited October 10, 2000).]