Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: AK-47 or M16 Platform?
  • Subject: AK-47 or M16 Platform?
Subject: AK-47 or M16 Platform?

Yes, I'm a furry. And yes, I like men. So what?


Posted by: AgentCOP1
When you're in basic training, they will usually give you .22 long rifle rounds. The M16 is meant to use the .223. The 22s are smaller than the .223s and can jam in the clip mechanism as it comes to the breach. If you would just get the appropriate .223s, this problem would be greatly reduced.


Wrong. They give you solid tip 5.56 NATO rounds in BMT. Also, the M-16 was designed to use the 5.56 instead of the Remington .223 because the cost of production for the NATO round was cheaper per bullet.

  • 12.27.2012 12:16 PM 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: Divine Silence
If I was in combat for whatever reason, I'd probably go with the AK 47 because I don't want to deal with cleaning that garbage jam magnet that is the M16.


Obviously you wouldn't be cleaning your weapon during a firefight.
Posted by: Divine Silence

Posted by: Mr Reaganomics

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
M16 because it doesn't totally suck.

Gets their information from Call of Duty and ignore the fact that the M16 is a jamming piece of trash.

It only jams if you don't clean it, like every other gun. It is superior to the standard AK in every way.

[Edited on 12.27.2012 12:22 PM PST]

  • 12.27.2012 12:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.


Posted by: Divine Silence

Posted by: Mr Reaganomics

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
M16 because it doesn't totally suck.

Gets their information from Call of Duty and ignore the fact that the M16 is a jamming piece of trash.
What is this, the 1960s?

  • 12.27.2012 12:20 PM 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: Divine Silence

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey

Posted by: Divine Silence
If I was in combat for whatever reason, I'd probably go with the AK 47 because I don't want to deal with cleaning that garbage jam magnet that is the M16.


Obviously you wouldn't be cleaning your weapon during a firefight.

Combat isn't always being in a firefight.


I don't understand what you're saying, but given that rifle maintenance is a huge aspect of weapons training in the military, your point has been moot for about 45 years now.

  • 12.27.2012 12:22 PM PDT

AK-47 hands down.
M16 can suck it.

  • 12.27.2012 12:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: milla da killa

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.



That's bull-blam!-. The M-16/M-4 is extremely proven in battle. It's low recoil aids in quick sight picture adjustment, to allow more rounds accurately to go down range, along with using the 5.56x45mm and a 1/7 r/ht barrel which gives it accuracy up to 600m. Not to mention they hardly jam unless you're doing training with blanks (who's sole purpose is to jam that thing).

I had the same M-4 for ~3 years, you know how many times it jammed? Twice. That's after putting hundreds and hundreds of rounds through it. Proper care and maintenance are key with it. The only two times it did jam were because I had to hand it off to someone else, and when I got it back they didn't clean it.


As for my actual answer.

I'ld take an M-4 anyday over the AK-47. After handling both, and seeing both used in combat by equally trained soldiers, the M-16 series has always been the victor. The fact is the AK vs. AR debate is no different than the 9mm vs. .45 debate.

The .45 side says, "well mine has more knockdown power!" and the 9mm says "I have more ammo!" but what nobody seems to ever know about, or factor in is COMBAT ABILITY. Seriously, it's so overlooked it's ridiculous. A .45 in combat is less useful than a 9mm, just as an AK is less useful than an AR.

The fact, quite simply, is during a gun fight your first instinct is to simply make a louder bang, and more bangs than the other person. This inevaditably results in you emptying your entire first mag in the shortest time possible. For an M-4, that typically sits around 45 seconds (on semi). The big thing to overcome that is training, and training isn't something most people possess.

Then the issue becomes reload time, figuring you're under stress that's a feat. Especially reloading the AK which under stress takes twice as long as the M-16 series, even with equal training on both weapon systems. This is because of the M-16's simple slip up method, compared to the AK's angled way (hard to explain, those who've used both know what I'm saying).

The final issue once you get past that intial surge of adrenaline is to kill your opponent before they kill you (figuring you didn't kill them already). This is done by efficient, well aimed rounds, which in no doubt goes again to the M-16 series. The AK, sadly, barely meets the minimum requirements of the modern battlefield.

The majority of modern firefights occur from 100-500m, and often extend even past that. To put into perspective the ranges involved, hold your hand in front of your face and look at your pinky, then look at your nail. That's roughly how tall someone is at 400m. For an M-16 that's no big deal, but for an AK-47 who's max effective range sits around 300m, that's a toughy, especially while under fire.

The only real thing the AK has over the M-16 is "stopping power" which isn't as big of a deal as you may believe. As an experiment for yourself, go to your head, hit him in the chest with your fist. It'll probably knock him back a bit, but not much else. Now take your pointer finger, and slam it's knuckle into him 10 times as fast as you can. Chances are he's on the ground writhing in pain.

The reason that works is because an AK's accuracy greatly affects it, and in combat it will typically be used with the full automatic mode engaged. Even with the single fire on, going off that rule I stated before, you'll be disregarding aimed shots and try to match every time he shoots, since it takes longer to reaquire your target with a larger caliber weapon such as the AK, you'll never match him.

The AK might get lucky and get a hit in, and while it'll do some damage, it still won't match the same damage a M-16 can do in the same time. In the time 1 round will hit vitals wih the AK, 5-6 accurate rounds can be put in the vitals with an M-16 (tested this, actually). This means more holes, more gore, more death. Not to mention that the modern rounds used actually transfer MORE energy through a 5.56 than a 7.62.

The fact is, while the AK is a long lasting weapon, it's one only good for small countries until it's entirely re-worked. There are some very good variants of it out there (such as the Polish Beryl) but as the standard AK design is the biggest one out there, it can't compare to the M-16.




-Max Eff Range of AK - 300m, M-16-500m

7.62x39mm (AK) Facts
Energy (Muzzle) - 1,525 ft/lbs
@100m - 1,200
@200m - 915
@300m - 690
@400m - 515
@500m - 395
@600m - 280

5.56x45mm (AR) Facts
Energy (Muzzle) - 1,250 ft/lbs
@100m - 970
@200m - 735
@300m - 550
@400m - 405
@500m - 290
@600m - 172




tl;dr - M-16 wins, read facts below.


Quoting this just because of the amount of information it does have in it so it isn't looked over so to add it to the debate. Sorry for double posting, but I feel this is one of those times where it could be considered acceptable.

  • 12.27.2012 12:29 PM 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: Divine Silence

It says a lot about a weapon when you have to constanty clean it. You don't have that problem with the AK47. Get some sand or mud on that M16, well you better hope you don't have to use it anytime soon.


It's adorable that you're one of those people that thinks you can slather dust and mud all over an AK and have it still work effectively.

  • 12.27.2012 12:29 PM PDT

Do everyone a favor, get some intelligence, grow a set, bust a nut, and shut the fu­ck up.
Posted by: Anto91
you're retared for not knowing inside jokes
retard


Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey

Posted by: Divine Silence

It says a lot about a weapon when you have to constanty clean it. You don't have that problem with the AK47. Get some sand or mud on that M16, well you better hope you don't have to use it anytime soon.


It's adorable that you're one of those people that thinks you can slather dust and mud all over an AK and have it still work effectively.


Only glocks operate that well baby.

  • 12.27.2012 12:31 PM 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: Divine Silence

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey

Posted by: Divine Silence

It says a lot about a weapon when you have to constanty clean it. You don't have that problem with the AK47. Get some sand or mud on that M16, well you better hope you don't have to use it anytime soon.


It's adorable that you're one of those people that thinks you can slather dust and mud all over an AK and have it still work effectively.

I know for a fact that it'll fare better than the M16.


Super secret tip that only top military personnel are given about combat: Don't get your weapon dirty, and if you do, clean it when you get a chance.

Obviously you can fire a dirty M16 without expecting frequent jamming. Your only argument is that it may not work as well when you don't take care of it...which is a moronic statement considering how much effort infantry put into maintaining their weapons. Read Milla's post.

  • 12.27.2012 12:35 PM PDT

so you want a source?


try this

true story

both.

they have different uses and different philsophies of use.

also untrained vs trained is not a fair comparison. trained vs trained is.

  • 12.27.2012 12:37 PM PDT

signatures are for fa- wait

AR-15 series have more customization,also has less of a damn kick,more ergonomic,also it only jams a -blam!- load if you suck at cleaning it.

[Edited on 12.27.2012 12:40 PM PST]

  • 12.27.2012 12:40 PM PDT

so you want a source?


try this

true story


Posted by: Divine Silence

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey

Posted by: Divine Silence

It says a lot about a weapon when you have to constanty clean it. You don't have that problem with the AK47. Get some sand or mud on that M16, well you better hope you don't have to use it anytime soon.


It's adorable that you're one of those people that thinks you can slather dust and mud all over an AK and have it still work effectively.

I know for a fact that it'll fare better than the M16.
ha, day/k/are.

  • 12.27.2012 12:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
Super secret tip that only top military personnel are given about combat: Don't get your weapon dirty, and if you do, clean it when you get a chance.

Obviously you can fire a dirty M16 without expecting frequent jamming. Your only argument is that it may not work as well when you don't take care of it...which is a moronic statement considering how much effort infantry put into maintaining their weapons. Read Milla's post.


I'm amazed anyone even noticed my post. Usually I post something more than 1000char's and it gets overlooked...

  • 12.27.2012 12:48 PM PDT

The Spartan Special Ops - Now with more LOLgasms!

Posted by: EnragedElite67
"The problem with quotes on the internet is 95% are made up." - Socrates


Posted by: DreadKlaw68
The Kalashnikov and AR-15 platforms are -blam!-. I prefer the SKS design.


You mean the design that lasted only a year and never saw front line use with Soviet troops?

Don't get me wrong, I like the SKS, I want an SKS, but it's not battle proven like the AR-15 and AK-47 are.

  • 12.27.2012 1:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: ALI217
one of the reasons the Viet Minh won the vietnam war was because the AK-47 outperformed the M16


First, we fought the Viet Cong, not the Viet Minh- even then, the VC was effectively destroyed as a fighting force by the Tet Offensive.

Second, the US and its allies technically won the war itself. It is only due to the failure of Congress to support the Republic of Vietnam against the Communist invasion in 1975, after the war, that ANYONE believes we lost.

EDIT: Back on topic, M16/AR-15 any day. Improved accuracy, more affordable/manageable round, wide range of optics and accessories, and better manufacturing quality.

[Edited on 12.27.2012 4:45 PM PST]

  • 12.27.2012 4:43 PM PDT

Posted by: Happy Tissue
Posted by: Set Sail Armada
Why didn't Frodo just stick the ring up his ass?

Because Sam would keep turning invisible.

Posted by: Vinny White
Sex with highschool jailbait
and stamp collecting


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.

About right.

  • 12.27.2012 4:45 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Halo 2 isn't dead jorge...... its just missing in action.
MnF Elite Force <>Brigadier<>

Brown coat 'till the day I die.
Sheningans!
Wake me...when you need me.

depends on the situation. I prefer the look on the M16, and hate the look of the AK. I have never fired either, this is just based off of what I know of the two.

  • 12.27.2012 4:49 PM PDT

I'm an Anarchist. I don't need a government to be a good person, but I'm glad it's here because some of you clearly do.

AK-47

And this is coming from someone with legitimate Marine Corps training with the M16.

The reason being is that if I were to ever need a gun, I probably wouldn't have the time to clean it and focus on maintaining it, and the AK platform is famous for reliability.

If I have an M16, and I end up having to go through a swamp, there's a good chance it won't be working once I come out the other side. If I have an AK47, I'll still have confidence that it'll work when I pull the trigger.

  • 12.27.2012 4:50 PM PDT

so you want a source?


try this

true story


Posted by: RedneckHamster

Posted by: ALI217
one of the reasons the Viet Minh won the vietnam war was because the AK-47 outperformed the M16


First, we fought the Viet Cong, not the Viet Minh- even then, the VC was effectively destroyed as a fighting force by the Tet Offensive.

Second, the US and its allies technically won the war itself. It is only due to the failure of Congress to support the Republic of Vietnam against the Communist invasion in 1975, after the war, that ANYONE believes we lost.

EDIT: Back on topic, M16/AR-15 any day. Improved accuracy, more affordable/manageable round, wide range of optics and accessories, and better manufacturing quality.
>AR15/M16
>more affordable ammo

uhhh what planet, bro?

$5-$7 for 20 rounds 7.62x39mm FMJ steelcase is pretty standard...vs $20 for 20 of popular brand brass case 5.56x45mm FMJ.

  • 12.27.2012 6:13 PM PDT