Seaman calling Wirehead an airsoft fag... LOL... nicely done cadet. DOH!!!

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Seaman calling Wirehead an airsoft fag... LOL... nicely done cadet. DOH!!!

Well It's not cadet anymore, I have graduated to a full blown Auxiliary of the Air Force.

So, shouldn't you change your avatar to something more appropriate like a light blue desk? Or a stack of paper with the USAF logo on top?

The M16A1 was infact a nice lightweight rifle... Been thinking of building a civvie version of it.

Why the hell is this thread alive?

It's like 1911 VS GLOCK

Originally Posted by AussieNick

The AK was designed with heavy volumes of automatic fire in mind. It was designed during the height of Soviet atrition warfare. It was intendend for large numbers of poorly trained conscripts to fire from the hip as they ran across the snowy steppe towards the Nazis as they yelled "Urah!".

In fact, AK-47 was designed over the influence of Nazi German SturmGewehr-44. With full-auto mode as primary, because of experience of war (WW2). The density of fire was (and still is!) factor which helps infantry to suppress enemy better than near-sniping, single-shot firing with higher accuracy.

Question to men, who have been in combat with M-16 family weapon in their hands - does full auto or semi mode dominated in firefights You experienced?

Actually the M-16 family is more accurate in automatic fire than the AK-47 is. There's far less recoil. So what if the AK-47's order of the safety select is Safe-Auto-Semi and the M-16's is Safe-Semi-Auto?

Originally Posted by bulldogg

So, shouldn't you change your avatar to something more appropriate like a light blue desk? Or a stack of paper with the USAF logo on top?

hahahahaha





No need to thank me.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Actually the M-16 family is more accurate in automatic fire than the AK-47 is. There's far less recoil.

Without doubts.

Again kind of repeating myself here but the AK-47 is excellent for what it's good for.
You got a group of untrained or under trained angry guys who don't know or don't have the means (actually, ways of improvising are infinite) to clean and properly maintain their weapons who don't know how to hit anything further out than a 100 meters, then the AK-47 is exactly what you want.

As said on website http://www.sokoly.ru/war/m16_ak.html, dedicated to comparision of AK and M-16:

Considerable advantage of M-16 in accuracy on distance of 300m can be eliminated by climate, daytime and weather on the battlefield. While reliability of AK does not give any advantages to poor trained or untrained soldier.

Translation mine

The reliability of the AK gives the advantage to poorly trained soldiers over those armed with an M-16 who are also poorly trained.

In conditions poor enough to seriously affect M-16 accuracy, chances are you can't even see up to 300m. And on top of that the AK can't hit crap at 300m on a good day anyway.

If you maintain your rifle well, it won't fail you and a trained soldier will know how to take care of his weapon.
Unless I knew I'd be operating for several years in the jungle with very little resupply, I would pick the M-16 class of weapons over the AK. Although I've never fired a real AK47, I have tried the automatic BB gun versions (Exact replicas). Though this is no real measure of the real weapon, it does give you the feel for the sighting system. In a game where I could hit 50/50 with an M-4 or MP-5, I would miss considerably more with an AK model because of the sighting.
Like I said, when I've done the hard part of sneaking to a good position, I need to know my bullets will hit where I'm aiming it.