Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Poll [144 votes]: AK-47 or M16 Platform?
  • Poll [144 votes]: AK-47 or M16 Platform?
Subject: AK-47 or M16 Platform?

Poll: AK-47 or M16 Platform?  [closed]
AK-47:  46%
(66 Votes)
M16:  54%
(78 Votes)
Total Votes: 144

Each of these platforms are fathers of many modern firearms, and have been proven worthy in battles and wars over and over again.Buy platform I mean any and all guns that have spun of because of the original model. Like an m4 or an ak-74u. Wich one do you prefer?

NOTE: Your COD or Xbox weapon Traning DOES not count

[Edited on 12.26.2012 2:19 PM PST]

  • 12.26.2012 8:16 AM PDT

GAAAAYYY

M16 has more votes because RACIST.

  • 12.26.2012 8:19 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Legendary Member
  • gamertag: Koolen
  • user homepage:

O o
/¯_____________________
| BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!!!!
\_¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ;¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯

m16 proven worthy in battles and wars? Have you ever shot with one? Have you ever operated one in (simulated) combat? They jam the whole time and are pretty much useless with even a slight amount of sand in the valve. I consider them more accurate then the AK-47 but that's about it.

  • 12.26.2012 8:19 AM PDT

**Devil's advocate of the Flood. My posts may or may not represent my personal opinion, I just enjoy disagreeing with people. None of my posts are representative of the official view of the Navy or any government agency.

Non Sibi Sed Patriae
Homework questions? Forget the Flood, join The Academy.
I've got a fan!

M16 because it doesn't totally suck.

  • 12.26.2012 8:20 AM PDT

They both handle very much the same, with the m16 being a bit more accurate.

MY vote goes to the Ak because of the "use whenever, where ever" features that comes included.

  • 12.26.2012 8:22 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

I would not want to be downrange of either. Especially if it were in the hands of a competent adversary.

I am more practiced, comfortable, familiar and therefor, more competent an operator of the Stoner design.

  • 12.26.2012 8:23 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

I understand nothing because my life is a conspiracy.

The AK jammed less, shot 7.62 rounds, and is just beautiful. The original M16 sucked compared to it. I'd rather shoot the M16, though, due to the kick of the AK.

Also, the AK-74u is an airsoft gun.

[Edited on 12.26.2012 8:26 AM PST]

  • 12.26.2012 8:25 AM PDT

Wasn't the AK specifically built to prevent bullets from jamming or something? I go with the AK.

  • 12.26.2012 8:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Posted by: CharlesBrown33
Wasn't the AK specifically built to prevent bullets from jamming or something? I go with the AK.

I was specifically designed to be easy/cheap to mass produce and easy/cheap to train non-soldiers to use/maintain. It was a weapon designed to defend and extend the People's Revolution. It was a solid and ingenious design that fulfilled its purpose.

The Stoner action was designed to maximize a new cartridge based on US Army studies that showed combat rifles based around a core .30 caliber hunting cartridge were not matched well to the needs of typical combat troops and their most common engagement distances. The cartridge was intended to be smaller, lighter (allowing a soldier to carry both more ammunition and a lighter rifle) and that relied on the terminal ballistics of a less stablized (low twist rate rifling) but hyper-velocity (>3,000fps) small caliber projectile and the hydrostatic shock damage of that combination to be lethal, rather than the traditional formula of large diameter, heavy bullet for energy transfer into the target. As such, the Stoner design addresses and focused on a completely different challenge/desire than the Kalashnikov design.

  • 12.26.2012 8:45 AM PDT

ooga booga boooh


Posted by: Recon Number 54
I was specifically designed to be easy/cheap to mass produce and easy/cheap to train non-soldiers to use/maintain.


inb4edit.

I'd go with the AK if I had the chance. Not sure I'd be able to competently use a M-16.

  • 12.26.2012 8:47 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.


Posted by: jacob crawford

Posted by: Recon Number 54
I was specifically designed to be easy/cheap to mass produce and easy/cheap to train non-soldiers to use/maintain.


inb4edit.

I'd go with the AK if I had the chance. Not sure I'd be able to competently use a M-16.

Meh, it's just a "T". I missed it, oh well.

  • 12.26.2012 8:47 AM PDT

BTW Elites rule!

And I am probably just trolling you right now....especially if it is a controversial thread


Posted by: Recon Number 54

Posted by: jacob crawford

Posted by: Recon Number 54
I was specifically designed to be easy/cheap to mass produce and easy/cheap to train non-soldiers to use/maintain.


inb4edit.

I'd go with the AK if I had the chance. Not sure I'd be able to competently use a M-16.

Meh, it's just a "T". I missed it, oh well.

Just a "T" you say?

Anyway, I am not sure what I would take since I love accuracy and I love the M4.

  • 12.26.2012 8:49 AM PDT

About me: I am a vicious wolf of a man.

But really am sweet at heart. =)


Posted by: Koolen
m16 proven worthy in battles and wars? Have you ever shot with one? Have you ever operated one in (simulated) combat? They jam the whole time and are pretty much useless with even a slight amount of sand in the valve. I consider them more accurate then the AK-47 but that's about it.



Yeah...much more accurate. It has an effective range of about 3 times that of an AK platform. I would never take one of those hunks of metal with me into combat.

AKs can jam just as often as an M16, considering that the machining on them is subpar at best, when fired rapidly they can double feed almost every other burst, yeah they're durable, but their worthless for that reason as well.

Look at it this way, in Afghanistan, troops are engaging targets something like 1000 meters to 2000 meters away, and an AK47 or AKM has an effective range of 400 meters, compared to an M16's 1500 to 3000 meters, and that's only of the Marine or soldier doesn't have a zoom optic or ACOG, which makes it much easier to engage.

In addition, the M16 platform can adopt many more optics and systems than the AK47, which is limited to a few Soviet era optics, and being able to tape two magazines together.

Finally, it is much easier to stay on target with the M16 because the 5.56 round is based on .223 civilian, which kicks like a .22LR, while it's nearly impossible to stay on target with the awful Soviet 7.62 and 5.45.

In the end, not even "jamming" can be used as a measure to discuss which is better because any self respecting soldier will clean his weapon, even Taliban run motor oil through their AKs every once in a while because they jam too. Oh, and that "dust in the valve" can be stopped by closing this thing called a "dust cover" on the right side, that has been on the weapon since the A2.

  • 12.26.2012 8:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Who in the hell engages targets at 1,500 to 3,000 meters with a 5.56?

  • 12.26.2012 8:57 AM PDT


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Who in the hell engages targets at 1,500 to 3,000 meters with a 5.56?
Clever people. Durhh

  • 12.26.2012 8:59 AM PDT

M16! With a bipod and extended mag it's really useful while the AK 47 has really bad recoil.

  • 12.26.2012 8:59 AM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Who in the hell engages targets at 1,500 to 3,000 meters with a 5.56?

Yea, I was wondering if those were typo's.

  • 12.26.2012 9:00 AM PDT

Currently studying Computer Science & Software engineering. Hope to work on mobile devices of the future! When a certain game's credits roll, look out for my name! ;)

You will -blam!- bricks when you see what game it is! =)

Just watch this.

  • 12.26.2012 9:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.


Posted by: St Major Dan

Posted by: Recon Number 54
Who in the hell engages targets at 1,500 to 3,000 meters with a 5.56?
Clever people. Durhh

I would have chuckled, but let it slide if the measure had been in feet, but in meters? No. Even 3,000 feet is a very long shot for a 5.56.

  • 12.26.2012 9:02 AM PDT

The AK is a more reliable gun, in my opinion. I wish they would implement some form of it into the U.S. military.

  • 12.26.2012 9:03 AM PDT

Isn't it the AR-15 platform? Not M-16.

  • 12.26.2012 9:03 AM PDT

Country: United States.
State: Pennsylvania.
County: Warren.
I graduated from high school on June-11-2011. I'm 19 right now. I'm turning 20 in December. I like playing video games, and board games. I like reading Sci-Fi, and World War II novels, and what not.

"There is nothing better in the world than being better at a video game than someone else....oh wait"

AK-47:
-It's a far more reliable gun. You can pick the gun up from a corpse that's been laying in the mud. And it can still be fired.

-It looks a lot better. It looks like the weapon you want to take into battle. The M16 looks like it's made out of plastic.

-The weapon is able to support the weight of someone using it to do pushups. All that weight is supported on the magazine lock. Can you do the same with an M16?

[Edited on 12.26.2012 9:11 AM PST]

  • 12.26.2012 9:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Spear FTW.

  • 12.26.2012 9:09 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Rk-95 is better than both. I wish they would start implementing them in games.

  • 12.26.2012 9:14 AM PDT

**Devil's advocate of the Flood. My posts may or may not represent my personal opinion, I just enjoy disagreeing with people. None of my posts are representative of the official view of the Navy or any government agency.

Non Sibi Sed Patriae
Homework questions? Forget the Flood, join The Academy.
I've got a fan!


Posted by: BerzerkCommando
AK-47:
-It's a far more reliable gun. You can pick the gun up from a corpse that's been laying in the mud. And it can still be fired.

-It looks a lot better. It looks like the weapon you want to take into battle. The M16 looks like it's made out of plastic.

-The weapon is able to support the weight of someone using it to do pushups. All that weight is supported on the magazine lock. Can you do the same with an M16?


Probably; what does that have to do with it's effectiveness?

" You can pick the gun up from a corpse that's been laying in the mud. And it can still be fired. "

You hear stuff like this all this time during these discussions, and the truth is, no you can't. AK's are susceptible to jamming just like any other rifle, and their cheap, imprecisely manufactured parts are much less reliable than an American made, cleaned and maintained weapon. Ruggedness is not the only qualification for being a decent weapon system.

[Edited on 12.26.2012 9:16 AM PST]

  • 12.26.2012 9:15 AM PDT