Poll – Military Assault rifles?
in your opinion, which would the american military have more luck with?
M4 – the standard issue as of now. usually a fine gun in forest conditions but prone to frequent jamming in the sandy desert
AK-47 – every terrorist’s favorite. i have seen people in afghanistan dig up a couple from over ten years ago, pour a little motor-oil on it and put 500 rounds though it without a problem. somewhat bulky though but parts are dirt cheap, plentiful, and easy to repair.
please state which you think and why.
i say the AK-47 because, first off, its idiot proof. all of the mechanisms are made out of stamped metal, the barrel is chromium lined and there is just a level for a fire selector. also, it fires the heavy 7.62 cartridge, which is capable of punching through the ceramic armor plating on an average infantry man, plus the wall behind him. and the cartridge itself is much more compatible with self-disintigrating rounds, HE, and tungsten core armor piercing. And the ammunition is more widley available on the modern battlefield if the soldiers were to be cut-off from supplies
i do agree with all of you saying that the M4 is more accurate. its just that to get that accuracy, you have to trade off ease of maintainence. it requires many specialised tool, brushes and picks whilst the AK-47 only needs at most a paint brush and a bootlace
Posted in Military Rifles
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
The AK-47. Because when you absolutly positivly have to kill every mother @#$%^& in the room accept no substitute.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Not this debate again….
I prefer the AR-15 type rifle. They’re more accurate. Only hits on a target will affect the target. The "jamming in the sandy desert" problem is solved by performing routine cleaning, lubrication and maintenance.
The AK-47 rifle’s virtues do not include accuracy.
If you want, have an AR-15 chambered for 7.62x39mm ammunition and enjoy a mix of "both worlds".
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
i don’t think it would really matter. it all comes down to training, and the US military has some of the best training around. you could give our boys a bunch of ruger 10/22s and they’d still be more effective than a group of undisciplined insurgents with the latest-greatest tacticool ARs.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
The HK416 will be the replacement for the AR15.
I find it hard to believe that anyone who was REALLY in the military would say the M4 is prone to frequent jamming or even think the AK47 is in the same class as the M4/M16. Dating back to LSA in the 60s, there’s been a prevention for that. The Red Army hasn’t even used the AK47 since 1977.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
the m4
the m4 will function just fine, you just have to clean it which is easy to do and the stuff is readily available to the military, also 1 mag for an m4/m16/ar15 weighs half to a third of a mag for an ak47, they can carry more ammo for the m4, the m4 is also more accurate
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
The AK is an acceptable weapon to issue to a bunch of poorly trained "soldiers" who will not maintain it. Either because they don’t know how, or they don’t have the equipment to. Beyond that the M4 is a FAR superior weapon. And since the U.S. Military has no problems as far as training and equipment goes they would be incredibly stupid to issue the AK.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
.30 Carbine
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
First, I flat refute the term Assault. Any firearm and any other thing picked up and used against someone else can be termed an "assault" weapon. Anyway…moot point. To answer?
M4 doesn’t jam up like it’s Vietnam era father. That’s where that old rumor came from. That problem has been worked out decades ago. The cartridge is accurate and nasty. Go in your foot and come out through your head. In general? You get hit, you’re dead. Or, darn near wish you were. Anyone can pick up the M4 and be familiar and decently accurate in short order.
AK-47? It takes an expert to handle one to get the accuracy of the M4. The cartridge is not as accurate. Doesn’t tumble upon entry like the M4′s. It’s only virtue is the penetration power and mass. Yes, a deathless and cheap rifle. It’s other virtue.
I vote for M4. I’d take my chances against a nimrod with an AK47. Against a nimrod with an M4? I’d just be sensible and put up my hands.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
I will trade pushing a pin and wagging a brush for 3 minutes a couple of times a day for 300-400 meter accuracy and enough cyclic rate of fire to keep the bogies head’s down when we need to move. Our Army still has supply chains, doctrine, training, tactics and leadership along with individual initiative in the field. If we HAD to dig our gear out of the ground and douche it in a oil barrel the AK would be ideal. We don’t… we fly in, ride in, walk in and have folks who keep the chain moving forward
I like the AR rifle… I like the Mini 14 better.. but the AR/M16/M4 is ok. About the only thing I never liked about either is the 5.56×45 NATO caliber… we should have gone with a 6 or 6.8 mm round years ago.
Besides…when we go to a AK country and need a few for spec ops… we just pick up what we need off the ground.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
I’m in the Army. The AK47 carries a lot more fire power and requires a lot less maintenance, but for today’s battlefield the M4 is better. The 5.56 round is more conducive to clearing rooms and buildings because, among other things, you are a lot less likely to shoot through a wall and hit someone you didn’t mean to. The compact size also makes it much lighter and more manageable (although enlisted Marines still use the M16A2). If I had to carry a 7.62 rifle, I’d want the M14.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
I own semi-auto variants of both and I say M14.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
You shouldn’t bury your rifle in the dirt if you expect to use it. An AK is mostly something for the gun fodder to hold. They are spray and pray. The M4 is much more accurate and can engage the enemy before the bayonets on the AKs would be useful.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
AK all the way bro, pleasent accuracy, dont really like the kick though, shot my uncles at a shootin range and i held down the trigger and i blew 5 holes in the roof, :\
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Well… in 1917, my Springfield Armory M1903A1 was considered an "assault" rifle.
You kids can sit back with your M4-gerys and AK’s…
I’ll be 1000 yards away thinning the "stack o’ cards".
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
M4, because this is America, not Russia
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Yawn. The only reason you see so many rag heads with AK’s is they are cheap and easy to produce. And these people use the "Spray and Pray" form of shooting.
Notice you never, ever, hear of our guys getting killed by long range gun fire? There is a reason you don’t hear it – because – an AK can’t do it.
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
More luck with?…. We rolled in to Baghdad and took a whole city in a few short days with M4 and M16 rifles…. That says it all!…..
I own both AR and AR type rifles… You are giving the AK rifle too much credit… They are not infallible… They do jamb, get gunked up, get cartridges stuck in the chamber with the extractor ripping the cartridges rim off and they DO Blow Up! – Yup that personally happened to me…. yes the AK is a fine rifle but this bury them in the sand for 10 years and pulling them out to use is a myth…..
My personal favorite?… The Ruger Mini 14…..
I will let you folks argue about whether the AK or AR is better…. Most of the time mine are left in the safe and I just grab a Ruger and go have fun…….
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-Mini14Tactical.htm
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-NEWMini14.htm
January 31st, 2010 at 6:44 pm
* The M-14 or the M-1 Garand.*