Can't decide on an AK or an AR?

[Cerberus]

As a personal preference, I like the 7.62 X 39 round far more than the 5.56mm. Although the chart shows the "range" of the AR VS the AK, our army boys are picking up AK's and using them due to the fact the AK will penetrate at a few hundred yards and the AR won't!

I've heard some anecdotal stories about this happening, but little beyond. The x39 round looses it's "umpf" pretty quickly.

Looking at the plastic features of the AR, and the reliability built into the AK design, I personally believe the AK will outlast the AR by several years. Don't really understand where the people that built the chart believe otherwise. (I always believe what the internet says- NOT).

Looking at a few thousand dug up from caches, would probably change your mind. Rifles that last more than a couple of decades in completely harsh environs have usually been well cared for, even if they get very worn.

To me effective range should be the range at which a bullet does the job intended - not the distance where it will print on a paper target. I have a few SKS's, AK and LR-308. I did buy a couple of lowers for AR's, and will probably build at least one up into a rifle, but probably will build it into a 450 Bushmaster, 6.8 SPC, 458 Socom or similar. May build one up into 5.56 later - not sure. I do have a lot of high power military rifles - 6.5 X 55, 7.5 Swiss, 303, 8 mm, 7.62 X 54, 30-06 (Garands & US Enfield) and others. Also have .243, .308's and even a little M1 carbine (30 cal.)

I Just like a Rifle that can reach out and do what it is supposed to do every time!

Then get an 5.56 AR, at least you will have some effective range.

.

 

[Cerberus]

There are enough domestic producers where parts and ammo arnt an issue and it costs about the same. The only reason 545 hasn't caught on with most domestic producers is because the surplus is so cheap there's not enough profit margin. Once the surplus dry's up there would be an open market and a strong demand for producers to fill the void.

So are you saying there is a domestic source for ammo that is as affordable as the imported fodder? So far the "cheap ammo" has been one of the selling points of the AK. When that is no longer valid, I'll spend my money on ammo that vastly out performs it.

 

[Marine1]

I have both but I like to shoot the AR

 

[MadTownGunny]

Such a tough decision. I was once in this same pickle. I bought both

 

[weedsnager]

Ar just looks better!

 

[rhslover]

If my AR ever shoots a 7moa group I am going to throw it away! I have had cheap AR's that never ever shot that bad.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If my AR ever shoots a 7moa group I am going to throw it away! I have had cheap AR's that never ever shot that bad.

Why do that when you can put it on gunbroker for twice what it's worth?

 

[Hoosierman]

If my AR ever shoots a 7moa group I am going to throw it away! I have had cheap AR's that never ever shot that bad.

No kidding! Lot of misinformation on that picture. My mosin shoots better than 6-8 MOA, and if my AR 15 was able to shoot 750 rounds per minute i'd be a happy camper. Alas, they are talking about a different gun.

 

[Niles Coyote]

Commie guns are fun to play with provided the price is right on both the gun and ammo.

That was my feeling back when SKS's were going for 100-200 and AK's about 150-200 more and ammo was around 3-5 bucks for 20. I used to blast ammo on weekends when I was younger and ammo was cheaper, for that the AK/SKS/AR all are great. With the edge going to the 7.62x39 because of the ammo price...Those days seem to be over.

So I guess it depends on what you are after, as the cheap fun gun aint so cheap any more and nor is the ammo. If you want that look, nothing is going to suffice until you have one.

Many say the AK is just so much more reliable but that has not been my experience. Whether from bad mags or other parts, the cheapest guns are cheap for a reason. I and a close friend have had issues. Once corrected, yup, they ran fine.

Until two years ago (when he retired from our dept) I worked with a retired Vietnam vet who was a “real” SF guy and by real I mean pictures, uniform and news clippings to prove it and quite a war room/personal achievement wall at home I might add. We’d often talk guns and while he used AK’s different times it was not out of dislike for the AR nor do I recall him having more than a health respect for AK’s. I have two cousins (USMC & USN) and two close friends (both Army) who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan; none of them ever talked of using an AK in a combat situation... Nor have they talked down the AR when conversations turned to firearms. The only issues I have heard were on the internet or third/forth person accounts “a friend of a friend of a friend (that was inevitably someone in a special team/group) said”... Personally, I could see carrying one along for a “in case of emergency brake glass” moment that you knew to be maintained, because you did it, as well as where it shoots. But I don’t know if that would even be allowed... and I certainly would not stake my life on a rifle found in the field when I have a working weapon that I know intimately.

With the exception of one bad mag, I have not had any issue/stoppage with my AR's that I did not create myself. And those stoppages all stemmed from inexperience reloading rifle rounds many years ago when I first started hand loading. I have not shot a F/A AK but I have an AR for about three 30 round mags. First one full mag, the next two in bursts of 4-6 rounds... no issues on the department owned gun.

Some say the AK is just designed better to run in all conditions, with little to no maintenance. Maybe so, but I live in a house as opposed to a cave or foxhole nor do I store my rifles or ammo in the dirt or outside in the weather. Both rifles get cleaned occasionally, and the cleaning I do is equal on both. So reliability is a wash for me.

Stopping power, the AK has it. But my bullets are going to do a lot more damage than ball 5.56. Nor will I have the over penetration issue a 7.62 will, ball or soft point.

Now that I am older, I want more challenge than blasting cans or bowling pins at 100 yards and here is were the AR excels. You are not going to be hitting 2-3 moa targets with a AK at distances over 250 yards, at least not very often. Nor are you going to shoot "Groups" at 600 with a AK. Years ago I patterned my AK at 450y it was something like 40+ inches for ten shots and I dont think I had ten holes in my 5x4 foot place of cardboard. That was with irons sights and decent Lapua ball ammo, the winchester ball ammo and iron sights from my AR was about a thrid or less that size. Going from paper to coffee can at that distance between my buddy and I in a healthy informal competition, who ever had the AR would win. It quickly turned into who could score the most hits within the confines of the 20 round mag we were using, while swapping the AR between us. Then the 38/357 revolvers came out for giggles...

Now that I load my own 223 ammo and moved more into precision shooting I dont get excited until I am printing moa or better at whatever distance I am shooting on steel and/or paper. The AK need not apply, it wasn’t designed for it. The AR's we have today are, provided the right ammo or load is used. Even the light weight bottom of the barrel AR's will get you darn close with a scope and if the shooter has the skill.

Then there is the ability to modify the AR. Yes, you can change a few things on an AK... but you won’t be pulling two pins and replacing your close range home defense upper with a 1000y capable target upper of a different caliber in under ten seconds.

The AK has its place as a close range combat carbine in a combat setting and limited use as a 1-200y deer/hog rifle if you are so inclined. The AR has found a home with deer/hog hunters as well in that 1-200y range and varmint/predator hunters at greater distances.

So to answer "Can't decide on an AK or an AR", it just depends on what you want and your requirements. Both have there place, buy both.

 

[M67]

Very good post ^^

I have an AR-10, AR-15, and 2 AKs. The AR-10 has jammed on me before, but that was during handload development and also using a 5 round C Products magazine (which falls apart easy). So out of 600 rounds maybe 10 instances. The 15 has been flawless besides 3 rounds of Federal 193 bulk duds. Has had about 930 rounds through it, no cleaning, just lube (Slip2000EWL). Shoots smooth, very fun, accurate, just great.

I haven't had a problem out of the AKs either, but the round count isn't as high as the AR-15.

I have both because well, I like guns, I'm a shooter, and both are easy to find parts and ammo for. The 7.62x39 does whack a steel target a lot harder, but the smoothness, accuracy, and feel of the AR are way better IMO. Lighter, shoulder better (for me), plus reloading for the AR-15 is easier which I like just in case I can't find ammo when another run happens.

AKs have a lot of empty space and overpowered springs, so they can go through a lot of crud. Plus the original design was that if your rifle stopped working, pitch it and get another, they're cheap and not made for repair. I know several gunsmiths who don't work on AKs for that reason.

ARs are tighter tolerance, and require good lube. But close the dust cover and not a lot of crap gets in the action. The AR-15 doesn't deserve the bad rap it still carries. Shoot it, lube it, screw cleaning it, you'll be fine.

AK forearms and receivers can heat up very quickly during rapid fire, and they stay hot. Wood forearms can catch fire, polymer can melt, metal can stay damn hot. ARs the polymer can catch fire but it takes a lot, and there is some heat transfer to the rail but nothing close to the AK.
Both rifles can fail, they're man made, nothing is perfect. Barrels can split, rust out, become bent, parts of trigger groups can break, firing pins can break, etc. Like said above, "both have their place, buy both".