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

how does an M16 "jam" without a shot being fired
Click to expand...

USMCbulletsponge ,

I think we both know the answer to that. ;). More than 'once an inspection' cleaning is probably a good thing, as even the folks in her unit who fought back discovered. The AR isn't a great single shot manually operated gun. But then, neither is an AK. And while I agree that the 'hero' business was way overdone, I also agree that at least she was there, not 'here'. I know what you are saying. She was 'cute', though, and it made good copy.

Having humped an AK a bit, I have to disagree with Chindo18Z in that taking 2-3 seconds to take the safety off an AK requires a level of stupidity or physical handicap way beyond that I anticipate in people who are serious about going into a fight. But thats probably just nitpicking. He made good comments, otherwise.

It (the AK) was handy in a vehicle. It's nice to have a cut-down gun in them, but that really short stuff loses it's utility exponentially with the range beyond 15-25 yards (once out of the IED magnet). I much preferred the M4, or even an MP5 for the car only stuff. The MP5 on open ground leaves one feeling somewhat inadequate, though, as I found out.

In the end, given a choice, I'd take the AR as the best all-around, any situation shooter, if I had to pick just one.
 
CJ, you're missing the point. Don't worry, a lot of people have. They already have all four. Bought, paid for, and sitting in the warehouse. It will not cost them more to use one instead of another, so they can pick a weapon based on combat virtues, not accounting virtues. They picked the M16. So back to the original question, why?
 
To summarize, the IDF chose the M16 over the AK47/Gail because the M16 is the better assault rifle in all parameters that matter.
Click to expand...

I’ve never doubted this for a second, I’ve fired the Galil and didn’t like it.

However, the catch is that most of this money must be spent in Dollars back in the U.S. Also, for several reasons most of the IDF orders are registered as U.S. Army orders.
Click to expand...

This why they buy the US rifles it’s politics and economics, and you or I can read all the articles we want written by authors that agree with our position.
My position on this is yes, I prefer the 16 and it’s variants over the AK and it’s cousins, but given the choice I wouldn’t choose either one of them.
 
Maaaan, Bulletsponge, don't hold back about Lynch, let us know how you REALLY feel....... Course, I don't disagree with you. The higher-ups in the chain of command were responsable for that travisty, dirty weapons aside, (which is a point I won't even begin to bi**h about!) the brass completely ignored the soldiers that continued to fight in the face of long odds, with single shot weapons!
Anyway, keeping with the topic, I concur with many here that the M16 series is a more effective weapon for trained troops than the Ak line. Just look at the many accounts of US troops engaging the enemy with single aimed shots and then look at the casualty rate of GG vs BG. The ability to accurately engage the enemy at distance is not only obviously unhealthy, but also a psycological victory as well. Clearly the M16 is a more appropriate platform for a well trained army.
 
M4 sure

lets just say i were going to walk out of camp today, and go hunt some badguys. at the foyer of my hooch there is an AK folder, and an M4. with all the ammo and accessories i could ever want. Which would i place my trust in? The M4. Why? I can carry more rounds of 5.56 than 7.62. I can easily attatch different optics or lights/lasers. Its fairly lightweight, and convenient to use. I prefer the surehandedness of its selector switch. The AK is a bit shakey on this ground, and the IDF are notorious for NDs. Maybe it is their lack of training, but even basic recruits don't have that many NDs. The M4's recoil is fairly controllable, allowing for very fast aqcuisition of your next target, or even the same target if the first one didnt drop him. And in a vehicle, its easy to get in and out. This WAS an issue when i was using the full sized M16. Also, she is very accurate. It often gives me the sensation of threading a needle.
 
Forgive me for playing devil's advocate for a moment.

So. . . .

a) If the AK was chambered for 5.56mm or 5.45mm; and
b) If the AK had a rail fore-end; and
c) If the AK had a thumb selector; and
d) If the AK had a folding or collapsible stock; and
e) If the AK had better iron sights conducive to better accuracy. . .

Then all other things being equal, it seems like it's a wash, based on your analysis.
 
Mak4

a) If the AK was chambered for 5.56mm or 5.45mm; and
b) If the AK had a rail fore-end; and
c) If the AK had a thumb selector; and
d) If the AK had a folding or collapsible stock; and
e) If the AK had better iron sights conducive to better accuracy. . .

Then all other things being equal, it seems like it's a wash, based on your analysis.
Click to expand...
hmmm. then you'd have an M4!!!!! hahaha.
ok, seriously, sure, if an AK had the features i trust, why not. the thing that the AK has going for it is its guts. the are hardy and reliable. an AK will operate with garbage inside its action. this is true. if you could magically put an AK bolt into an M4 and get that kind of no nonsense reliability, hey! that would be sweet. Why don't we make one and get really really rich, and attend presidential dinners, together.
 
or...

if i could have anything at all it would be an M4 bullpup type carbine. even shorter, but same barrel length.
I would love to fieldtest FN's P90. i saw some italians carrying them the other day. neat weapon.
 
Somebody already makes THAT gun!

Krebs Custom, Inc. makes something called the KTR-03 that has all the features mentioned. Mine has a side folding stock like a Galil, and it's 5.56mm. It's also as or more accurate than five (or was it six) service grade AR-15's and M4-gerys that I've compared it to.

But that's beside the point. I thank you for your frankness, you've given me a better insight into the whole AR v. AK debate.
 
Gosh did this thread go off the deep end into the typical AR vs AK abyss.

I have an AR-15 Bushy shorty, a SAR-1 AK, and a Mini-14.

I like them all but:

The most accurate by far is the AR-15.

The AR-15 given good magazines and proper maintenance is pretty much as reliable as auto-loaders get. The ergos are outstanding. First class.

The AK is very crude and not all that accurate. Despite legend, it will jam on occasion. Good for home defense. Just so damned crude! Ugly too.

The Mini-14 might be the compromise that the casual home defense afficionado is looking for in an auto-loading rifle. Very reliable. Accurate enough. The stainless version with plastic furniture is indestructible. And it is sort of pretty too.

For well trained combat troops I have to think the AR-15 system is the best.

For skinny's in Somalia, the AK-47 does the job.

For everyday home defense I would say the Mini-14 is the way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top