The IDF's take on the AK-47 vs M16 debate

Have no experience in real combat with either. And maybe plenty of M16's cut it reliability wise. Have owned a couple of each, and witnessed a couple dozen of each in use. Well the semi-auto AR and Ak anyway.

Have never seen an AK jam or fail to function. I know it has to have happened, but I haven't seen it. And most are using whatever cheap ammo you can get.

More than half the AR's I have seen jam. Some quite often. Others only now and then. Main thing AR's have going for them are ergonomics. I don't think the accuracy difference is enough to matter in combat. 1 inch groups @100 yards, vs. 3 inch groups @100 yards. Neither of those were shot offhand or during a fire fight. In other words both are accurate enough for the job.

And nobody has seen a working AK that couldn't group better than 15 inches. If it was shooting that poorly something was wrong with it.
 
More than half the AR's I have seen jam. Some quite often. Others only now and then.
Click to expand...

Then either the people you hang with don't know how to maintain their weapons or they buy substandard equipment. I've fired tens of thousands of rounds from both AR15's and M16's in both semi-auto and full auto, and if the weapon is up to par (5.56 chamber, chrome lined barrel, good and aligned gas rings, etc.) the AR/M16 platform can be very reliable. Even with cheap ammo like Wolf. I've only rarely had a jam or malfunction and most of the time when I have encountered a problem, it was due to other factors (bolt bounce, worn out or broken parts, wrong parts for the intended barrel length/function, improper timing, etc.)
 
What a crappy choice. Commie designed crap that will actually work versus low-bid committee designed crap that will work as long as you have a pit crew with you.

There's a guy on this board whose screen name I can't remember ("Greg" something...) who's always launching into rants about folks who've received all their information from the Errornet nattering on about topics they have no real personal experience on. He has a real derogatory term for them, too; hopefully he'll never get hoisted by his own petard.

Personally? My HK's? Gone. AK's? Gone. Daewoo? Gone. FAL? Gone. Beretta AR-70? Gone. M14/M1A's? Gone. Still have an AR as my go-to gun, and in the build process on two more. Thankfully, my rifles can't access the Disinformation Cowpath, so they remain blissfully unaware of how they are supposed to (mal)function. Must be that awesome pit crew I keep on hand...
Click to expand...


There is a gal on this board :D, who is always pontificating about this or that gun being the best (which usually happens to be the gun she just became infatuated with). This person is clearly stalking me. If I go missing, look for my body near a mountaintop in Tennessee! :eek:
 
More than half the AR's I have seen jam. Some quite often. Others only now and then.
Click to expand...

I have owned 4, still have three. I had an Olympic Arms CAR 15 that I traded for a gun safe. Still have a Colt's SP1 carbine and a Colt's SP1 rifle, as well as a Colt's M4. All three guns are all Colt's parts. They have never jammed, failed to feed, or otherwise malfunctioned.

The Olympic Arms carbine never failed until I introduced it to a magazine made by a company called Triple K. With that magazine in that rifle, it would jam five times in thirty attempts.

Cabelas refunded the price of the magazine; I used mags by Bushmaster, Thermold, Colt's, Adventureline and others and never had a problem.

There are quite a few guns out there that were built at home by ordering parts from Model 1 Sales, or Rock River or who knows where. Were they headspaced properly? I don't know.

Are these guns being built to the same specifications as the weapons supplied to our military? Doubtful.

And the homebrew guys doing this; are they as well trained as a Marine armorer?

Hmmph.

So the Israeli IDF, the United States Army, and the United States Marine Corps have got it all wrong, and a few folks on the Internet have got it figured out. :rolleyes:

Dear Mom,

Today in marching practice, everyone was out of step except me.

Your loving son,


(sign here) :p
 
So the Israeli IDF, the United States Army, and the United States Marine Corps have got it all wrong, and a few folks on the Internet have got it figured out.
Click to expand...

I was always reminded that my rifle was made by the lowest bidder.
:)
 
Shaggy, the low price of the M-16 is immaterial when you have the other three guns in storage. They are essentially free.

Boomhauer,
When the lowest bidder are companies like FN and Colt, I'm not sure how bad off you are.


Aside from the US and Israel, the M-16 is the weapon of choice of the SAS, Canada (C7) and one of the Scandanavian countries (also a C7). Canada also employs a version with a heavy barrel as their LMG. Those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.


You know, I don't even like the AR15 - and sold mine. But the amount of foolishness surrounding this 40 year old weapon system is really astounding. I very much doubt this rather heavy duty Israeli example will slow down the "Yeah, but...", but some of you nay sayers should reflect a moment on whether your limited experience really trumps that of the many first-rate armies who prefer it.
 
When the lowest bidder are companies like FN and Colt, I'm not sure how bad off you are.
Click to expand...

I’ll take my trusty ole M14 any day over the M-16/AR-15.

From actual first hand experience as well as keeping in touch with friends, those who are presently in harms way, the consensus is still the same. If your issued an M-16 that works you are one lucky MF.

The replacement for this Byzantine POS will not come fast enough.
 
Yes, it will be a fine day when we get rid of the Mattel rifle for an XM-8, which is actually made entirely of plastic, like Barbie.
 
Wow, a plastic barrel, bolt, and everything eh, in the XM8? Man, that'd be light to carry around. IOW, whatchutalkinboutwillis?

Just an observation from listening to these debates for years - lots of accuracy snobs, who tend to be general gun snobs as well, seem to pontificate endlessly about how the AR is flawless, but these are doubtlessly the people who keep their weapons clean enough to eat off of, or they'll say the AR is flawless *IF* x, y, z, a, b, c are all present, and the moon and the north star are in line. If not, you'll get a few jams. But, OTOH, here you have people with actual real world experience saying the thing is a POS when the chips are down, dirt and dust are flying around, and they don't clean their weapon 3 times a day on the battlefield like they maybe oughtta (big surprise - like the Walgreen's commercials, the average soldier don't live in the place called "Perfect"). And so Handy, if the US Mil made the decision, it must be correct? Just like the decision not to field the BAR in WWI - instead making our boys use the Cheaucheat? If they feel they made the right decision with the M16 & M4, then why are they even considering the XM8 at all? Militaries and governments make the wrong decisions all the time, much to the chagrin of the grunts on the ground - but it certainly seems that the MAJORITY, and I daresay the significant majority (though not overwhelming majority) of those who have used the M16 in actual combat and training, and particularly in combat, don't like it (assuming they're telling the truth on the net about their experience), not for it's failure to incapacitate, but for it's unreliability. But I'm just observing - I too am an armchair quarterback. But, to imply that if countries x, y, and z chose it, it can't be wrong - that's absurd. The big dog (USA) could easily make a bad choice, and then inertia, economies of scale, etc, causes other countries to follow in our footsteps.

From actual first hand experience as well as keeping in touch with friends, those who are presently in harms way, the consensus is still the same. If your issued an M-16 that works you are one lucky MF.
Click to expand...

Go back and re-read that and re-read that - assuming boomhauer is telling the truth, he's talking about himself and others who are *presently* in harm's way, and if the *consensus* is that it's a POS. (paraphrasing, emphasis mine).

Now, who do we have on the other side, at least in this thread: Extraordinarly knowlegeable gun people (Handy, Tamara), but with how many days on the battlefield? (I'm guessing 0), and they probably keep their ARs immaculately clean, or Handy surely did when he owned one, because that's the kind of gun enthusiasts they are, unlike the rank and file soldier, who either won't or doesn't have time to clean the damn thing all the time - that's just not practical when there's a lot of shiz going down. And obiwan, if it stays clean when the dust cover is closed and the mag is in, then how would you suggest that our boys kill the enemy, since the dust cover flies open and lets in dust when fired, and mag changes are going to require that the mag be out for a couple seconds each time? Gimme a VEPR baby!
 
AK lucky if you can keep it it a 15" circle at 100 yards. AR easy to hit a target the size of a 50 cent piece every time.
Click to expand...
I have more than a few of both AK's and AR's and my worst Ak will shoot 6" or so at 100 yards and my best about 2". My best AR will shoot them into one little hole, and my worst is about equal to my WASR10 at about 4". If you were shooting my Armalite M15A4(T) with a 1.5x5 scope on it, from a bipod, prone, I'd say you could hit that 50 cent piece evey time using my reloads that it likes and actually you could easily do it with a dime. Shoot the same gun with good USGI ammo and you wont. Best it seems to do with that is 2" or so. I've yet to see an issue M16 shoot into a 50 cent piece with GI ammo. Can you even see 50 cent piece at 100 yards with open sights? And if so, where do you aim? :)
 
So the Israeli IDF, the United States Army, and the United States Marine Corps have got it all wrong, and a few folks on the Internet have got it figured out.
Click to expand...

Actually, the U.S. military is looking for something to replace it (See XM8). It seems to me that it is actually some folks on the internet who see no problems with a deeply flawed weapon versus the military and all those troops who have died over the years a trying to clear their M-16s (I seem to remember a fairly famous incident just recently where EVERY M-16 jammed for one group of soldiers. Of course, the M16 crowd usually blames the troops.)

Between the two the AK wins hands down for their intended purpose: being an assault rifle. The AR, however, is a much better rifle for shooting paper at the range(and for playing dress-up) :D
 
FF,

The world consists of more than this thread. This forum alone also contains many combat veterens, like Blackhawk6, who would strongly disagree with Boomhauser.

I did a sorry job cleaning my AR. Have you owned one?

What I think you are missing here is that there is not such thing as a perfectly working machine in combat conditions, and soldiers will bash any piece of equipment that fails them, especially when they've been led to believe they were issued junk. But nearly zero Americans have ANY combat experience with AKs, which we all hold to be unstoppable. That is pure poppycock. No one on this board has the credentials to speak about the reliability of the AK in combat. How do you compare, with only half the data?


This thread was started by pointing out some facts that are incontrovertible: Israel, having it's choice of 'superior' weapons, leaves its AKs, FALs and Galils in storage, then buys M-16s. No one seems to have an answer to why the most paranoid military in existance does this (except for the obvious).

It doesn't matter what the agreeably foolish US procurement people do - in this instance they have some very good company.

Greg,
(I seem to remember a fairly famous incident just recently where EVERY M-16 jammed for one group of soldiers. Of course, the M16 crowd usually blames the troops.)
Click to expand...
The "M16 crowd", and Congress, never blamed the troops. They blamed the Army for changing the propellent in the ammo. That's well documented history.

What combat experience do you have to judge the AK more reliable? How about your friends? Any of them serve in an AK carrying combat troop?
 
I would prefer an M14 to an AK-47 any day and I’d prefer an AK-47 to any variant of the M-16.

I don’t need to go around bragging about my military exploits as many on the web do.

I personally have 0% combat experience with any type of AK; most of the AK’s I encountered in the field were in much, much worse condition than the oldest most beat up M-16 in any countries issue inventory.

Sand, time and the USAF tend to do that to weaponry.

Since we give Israel somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 billion dollars a year to subsidize their military one would be foolish to think that had zero to do with their choice regardless of what the arm chair commandos are saying.

No one led me to believe I was issued junk, except the junk itself. One poster reminded us about a highly publicized event which resulted in several dead or captured in which a great number of the M-16’s issued to those poor souls failed to function. Blame was laid everywhere except on the gun.

When the chips were down and I knew my @$$ was going into harms way I requested and was given a standard M14 as did many I walked into combat with.

nearly zero Americans have ANY combat experience with AKs, which we all hold to be unstoppable. That is pure poppycock. No one on this board has the credentials to speak about the reliability of the AK in combat. How do you compare, with only half the data?
Click to expand...

That’s a pretty board statement you make, having no first hand knowledge yourself. How do you know me, who I am, what I have done in my past, or the guy lurking and smirking to him as he reads this post.


As I pointed out I have no first hand experience with the AK in combat but I do know many who do, it’s no big secret, our guys who are in the middle of it all right now, especially those who are working hand in hand with Iraqi regulars or the Iraqi Provincial Police are carrying AK’s, not just our A-types but the regular MP’s who are tasked with training the IPP and I guess those CIA types crawling all over Afghanistan carrying AK’s just don’t count, or do they just not exist?

Remember Johnny Micheal Spann?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...8dec08,0,6456252.story?coll=la-home-headlines
 
None of them are posting here, unfortunately. Browsing quite a few boards, I have yet to come across anyone who has actually used the AK in combat. It certainly has happened, but not by anyone who likes to state their opinion on the matter.

When Spec Ops guys wanted to be able to use local ammo and mags in Afganistan, some nut job at Knight went as far a redesigning an AR to take AK mags. These guns were bought at great expense and issued to the people that requested them. It seems that fools also pervade out Spec Ops communities as well.

Or does the smirking guy have experience with one of those, as well? :rolleyes:
 
I carried m16a2's and m4's for my entire 4 year enlistment. We all had failure to fire, failure to feed, and other various problems. My main beefs with the ar platform are (for civilian use) cost, difficulty to clean (its a pain to get that bore clean), and cost. Give me a quality ar15 for $350 and ill buy it, because for my needs it will work just fine. That said, the problems with the ar in vietnam were due to the powder used, in combination with the weapon (since it uses gasses directly from the barrel to cycle the action). It is easily dirtied up by dirt, etc, but every weapon used by infantry is subject to this problem. 90% of the time a weapon is not in operation, therefore the dust-cover and magazine suggestion is a good one, as it keeps stuff out of the gun for the ammount of time they are closed (most of the time). Maybe its not perfect, but it has its pros and cons over other designs. More accurate, lighter, but more touchy to debris.

Personally, for my needs, (less than 50 ft) I would pick an ak for sheer $ savings.
 
Abelew,

What leads you to believe that AKs are necessarily much cheaper than M-16s for a first world country? You can buy all the parts for a fine quality AR-15A2 for $500. The current retail cost of AKs reflects the economic state of the countries dumping them into the surplus market, and they're still less than $200 retail different.

The gov't. pays about $300 per FN M-16. With modern C&C machining, is a brand new AK really going to cost much less?
 
Guys I knew several of you would have AR's that never malfunctioned. And would talk about poor maintenance. I don't even disbelieve you or the comments.

But the AK47 will function without the maintenance.
It will function if built in Russia, China, Egypt, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria or anywhere I have seen them from. Yeah, magazines are important for proper function. But any cheap mag from all over the world seems to work in an AK. From all the above countries and more, places not much known for quality work in most cases.

The point being, I haven't seen AK's jam, and AR's will if you aren't careful. Lots of people seem to have grasped this idea. It even is predictable from the accuracy advantage of the AR. AR's take more looking after for reliability than AK's. They still may be reliable enough. But that reliability advantage seems pretty large in combat to me.

Imagine having to scrounge for weapons. You grab whatever AR is laying in the dirt. Did the other guy maintain it, or clean it? How much dirt got in it? What
magazine is it holding?

Then imagine grabbing an AK laying in the dirt. Much more likely that it will simply function than an AR I believe.
 
AK lucky if you can keep it it a 15" circle at 100 yards. AR easy to hit a target the size of a 50 cent piece every time.


I will agree that with a AR15 you can probably hit a 50 cent peice about every time at 100 yards.
I dont agree with your statement about the AK though. The worst I have ever seen was my brothers SAR1. Even it would still shoot every shot into 6" at 100 yards. His Arsenel SAM7 is good enough to hit a clay pigeon with every time at 100 yards and he had a vepr 223 that would shoot 10 shots into an inch and a half at 100 yards.
I still think it depends more on the shooter than the gun.
 
esldude,

The point being, I haven't seen AK's jam, and AR's will if you aren't careful.
Click to expand...

You need to shoot both more.

I have, over the past fifteen years, owned (and shot extensively) examples from Eagle Arms, Norinco, Bushmaster, Polytech, Colt, Romarm, and Rock River. The failure rate has been pretty much the same amongst them all...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top