AK47 vs M16

I found the text in Hack's page on wikipedia:

"One of the bulldozers uncovered the decomposing body of an enemy soldier, complete with AK-47. I happened to be standing right there, looking down into the hole and pulled the AK out of the bog. 'Watch this, guys,' I said, 'and I will show you how a real infantry weapon works.' I pulled the bolt back and fired 30 rounds — the AK could have been cleaned that day rather than buried in glug for a year or so. That was the kind of weapon our soldiers needed, not the confidence-sapping M-16."
 
Well, if i was to walk into a jungle or a city filled with hostiles, id bring the Ak-47 with me, not the M16.

Ak-47 barely ever jams, and the rounds can rip through two bricks and still be lethal [As i watched on a youtube video]

But, the sights on the Ak-47 were not designed for long range use. The M16 has pretty good sights.

Also, the fire mode switches for the Ak-47 in order:

-Safety
-Automatic Fire
-Single shot

For the M16 in Order:

- Safety
-Single shot
-Burst/Automatic fire [cant remember which]
 
I have used the Chinese version of the AK47 and without a doubt its one of the most reliable assault rifles ever built.

As I have stated previously, I did some work with the South African Police Ballistic unit a few years ago. They buried an AK47 in mud, dug it up and it fired, ran over it with a pick up truck and it fired. The only way they could kill it was to jam the muzzle into mud, tie the rifle to a post and fired via a piece of string. The rifle then blew apart.

What I don't like about the AK47, its not very comfortable to fire, its a spiteful cartridge, the sights are not that wonderful and the butt is far too short. I'm not a particularly big fella, all I can say is, for such a short butt the average Chinese soldier must be about as big as a gnome. No disrespect to either Chinese soldiers or gnomes intended.

I did fire a M16A1, it was extremely comfortable to fire and quite accurate, but I cannot confirm or deny its reliability.
 
I once spoke to an Australian Vietnam war veteran about the Ak-47 and M16

He got a M16, and after every patrol he did he would have to clean the M16 for two hours before it would fire again.

Then he replaced the M16 with a captured Ak-47 for one patrol, where he dropped it on a rock accidentally on the 2 hour walk.

When he got back, it was as if nothing happened to the Ak-47.

Pretty reliable :rockin:
 
In my opinion: if you have enough recources (money), buy another weapon- because they are both old and unprecise (compared to modern weapons).
But if i had to chose i'd take the M16, just because i'm used to G36 and it is quite similar shoting with it.
 
ObjSRgtLw said:
In my opinion: if you have enough recources (money), buy another weapon- because they are both old and unprecise (compared to modern weapons).
Click to expand...

Not wishing to be a smart arse, the old Lee Enfield 303 bolt action is still being put to good use by the Afgans. I've got one made in 1918, it will take the pimple off a pigs bum at 100 yards. Old or not, they still do the job
 
As some of you might know, finnish army uses AK variant called RK 62 (and RK 95, But we don't have too many of those). Both are VERY high quality steel, very reliable and accurate up to 300 meters. Both guns have diopter sights just like M16. Neither has too bad recoil as the muzzle brake is properly made.
 
BritinAfrica said:
Not wishing to be a smart arse, the old Lee Enfield 303 bolt action is still being put to good use by the Afgans. I've got one made in 1918, it will take the pimple off a pigs bum at 100 yards. Old or not, they still do the job
Click to expand...
As I said, if you have the money, visit heckler & Koch shop ;)
 
I guess everyone has his weird fantasies... though i doubt you'd have a chance against my G36-combat with red dot vision ;) (but we're getting off topic)
- back to older rifles... why not take the G3 into consideration when it comes to cheap, reliable weapons its amongst the best- also modern infantry uses G3 with telescopic sight for urban terrain, it should be named with AK and M16...
 
ObjSRgtLw said:
I guess everyone has his weird fantasies... though i doubt you'd have a chance against my G36-combat with red dot vision ;) (but we're getting off topic)
- back to older rifles... why not take the G3 into consideration when it comes to cheap, reliable weapons its amongst the best- also modern infantry uses G3 with telescopic sight for urban terrain, it should be named with AK and M16...
Click to expand...

I agree, the G3 was/is a very good rifle, as I have a lot more experience with the L1A1, thats what I'd go for. The British L1A1 was fitted with a very good optical sight called the SUIT or Sight Unit Infantry Trilux and above all, proven on operations around the world.

I owned an ex German G1 FN FAL rifle years ago in UK before it was banned, I fitted a 3-9x40 scope using a spare dust cover on to the rifle. It proved to be extremely accurate.

I suppose what it boils down to, is what the rifleman is happiest using. I wouldn't be surprised if some British troops are even happy with the SA80, a rifle I dislike intensely.

However, my choice between the AK47 and M16, I'd have to go for the AK47 for its reliability and larger calibre.
 
Last edited:
I live in a world full of automobles, 5.56 does a really poor job of stoping them compared to a 7.62x39. I love my AR's but I servived the monsoons of vietnam with a M-14 an AK would have worked well also. I'm just glad I did not have an M-16 then. You may of fired over a thousand rounds through your rifle without cleaning it and have it do just fine, But that is no test compared to carring it day and night in mud, sand or dust for weeks at a time without the ocasional chance to sit down in a nice sheltered dry place and clean it.

My question is how well do you trust your rifle if you cleaned it while sitting in mud or driving sand and then carried it all night and fell in mud several times and yes even dropped your rifle when you fell and then crawl around the mud on your hands and knees feeling for it. Then when you found it all that you were able to do was stick a small stick in the flash hider to see if it was full of mud. If you had to get out your cleaning rod, you would hold up the patrol. after several hours of this you might have to fire several magazines through it.

so choose wisely, especialy if your choice is to do more than just be a range queen

__________________________
he went into younder village and never returned.
 
I love the AR-15, the civilian version of the M-16, as I found it reliable and accurate. Maybe for jungle shots the AK is the best. I think that for more desert-like shots the AR-15/M-16 is the best.

I heard people talk of how the AR-15 will jam up after a 2,000 rounds fired without cleaning. So on a dare I went for close to a week without cleaning mine, put over 1,000 rounds per day through it, it didn't jam.

There was a fluid, I forget the name, that worked great for cleaning the AR quickly. I have been told that human urine is nearly as good.

And in the case of the week long duration, that is the only time it took a couple hours cleaning it.

If I have a choice of any weapon for combat, IF automatic, I'd go M-16. Otherwise I'd rather go Mauser K98/8mm Magnum. I have used the K98, and I have seen it out perform the .30-06.

Something I'm sure we will all agree on is different guns of different calibers for different jobs.
 
The problem with AK-47 and all of its grandchildren is it kicks like a mule and is goddamn uncomfortable, its accuracy gets horrible beyond 300 feet BUT there's no such thing as soft cover against AK (forget hiding behind car doors, planks or brick walls, its going to shoot through them, your vest, you and go out the other side).

Also anyone hit by it will have huge holes in him, M-16 is much more accurate but very often one shot is not enough to immidiately incap/kill your enemy and it doesnt pierce much.

AK-47 = conscripts rifle.
M-16 = professional army.

In urban combat i'd go with an AK even though its uncomfortable.
 
Panzercracker said:
The problem with AK-47 and all of its grandchildren is it kicks like a mule and is goddamn uncomfortable, its accuracy gets horrible beyond 300 feet BUT there's no such thing as soft cover against AK (forget hiding behind car doors, planks or brick walls, its going to shoot through them, your vest, you and go out the other side).

Also anyone hit by it will have huge holes in him, M-16 is much more accurate but very often one shot is not enough to immidiately incap/kill your enemy and it doesnt pierce much.

AK-47 = conscripts rifle.
M-16 = professional army.

In urban combat i'd go with an AK even though its uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

also i think a ak is very comfortable and they have new versions like the ak-100's series and the aek-971, that more accurate , the AN-94, which is no way connected to the AK is more advanced they any western rifle, it shoots a two round burst so fast that it hit in the same spot as the first shot with only one felt recoil and penentrates any body armor. Very expensive and complex, by russian standards, is in use by spentaz special forces.
 
Bacara said:
also i think a ak is very comfortable and they have new versions like the ak-100's series and the aek-971, that more accurate , the AN-94, which is no way connected to the AK is more advanced they any western rifle, it shoots a two round burst so fast that it hit in the same spot as the first shot with only one felt recoil and penentrates any body armor. Very expensive and complex, by russian standards, is in use by spentaz special forces.
Click to expand...

Umm hmm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top