AR versus AK - which is better? Why?

[Steve_In_29]

Who is making the fluted chamber?

POF is from what I recall.

[Tim McBride]

LOL, plenty of ARs can shoot steel cased ammo all day long.
And you don't need a spray bottle of CLP to keep one functioning.

I'm interested in knowing which ones can shoot steal cased ammo all day long without problems. Do you have a list. I do distruction testing for Elftmann Tactical Trigger and brass cases ammo is expensive. Now that I know I won't have a problem with steel I will start buying it, just need to know those barrel manufacturers you are talking about.

How many rounds in one shooting session would make you believe that an AR can fire steel cased ammo as well as brass cased ammo?

[17-21-23]

How many rounds in one shooting session would make you believe that an AR can fire steel cased ammo as well as brass cased ammo?
[/quote]
I can shoot 20, 30 round mags out of my Del-ton or the DPMS. These are factory guns. I only say 20 mags because I do not reload at the range and I only have 20 mags.

[harleypower69]

AK is generally a better battle rifle at closer ranges. I find the AK to be more forgiving in harsh environments such as mud or sand. Easier to train an operator on usage and cleaning procedures.
The AR, in my experience, is a better battle rifle for longer range engagements where accuracy is crucial. I have owned some AR's that ate any and all ammo and then some that are so tight they are picky (my LMT mod is picky due to tight tolerances as an example).

[Ranger1]

The whole lineup of the AK is better than the AR line up on the battle field. You want long distance go for a Dragunov sniper rifle. Cheep and very accurate.

[Shoot th3 moon]

I like my AR but.... the AK has a nice bark

[lew]

The whole lineup of the AK is better than the AR line up on the battle field. You want long distance go for a Dragunov sniper rifle. Cheep and very accurate.

An SVD will hit a man-sized target out to about 800m, but it's no sniper rifle, nor was it intended as such. Also, at least in this country, "SVD" and "cheap" don't belong in the same sentence. The AR series has the AK whipped for versatility- CQB-oriented models, to DMR's, and all the way to genuine sniper rifles.

[Ranger1]

The whole lineup of the AK is better than the AR line up on the battle field. You want long distance go for a Dragunov sniper rifle. Cheep and very accurate.

An SVD will hit a man-sized target out to about 800m, but it's no sniper rifle, nor was it intended as such. Also, at least in this country, "SVD" and "cheap" don't belong in the same sentence. The AR series has the AK whipped for versatility- CQB-oriented models, to DMR's, and all the way to genuine sniper rifles.

That's just your opinion against my opinion. Nothing special. Just another day

[Ranger1]

O by the way, the accuracy of the SVD is farther than 800. Some say 1000 meters. I guess its , again , who is behind the weapon and what ammo you use. Cheap? I call $1500 cheap

[lew]

The whole lineup of the AK is better than the AR line up on the battle field. You want long distance go for a Dragunov sniper rifle. Cheep and very accurate.

An SVD will hit a man-sized target out to about 800m, but it's no sniper rifle, nor was it intended as such. Also, at least in this country, "SVD" and "cheap" don't belong in the same sentence. The AR series has the AK whipped for versatility- CQB-oriented models, to DMR's, and all the way to genuine sniper rifles.

That's just your opinion against my opinion. Nothing special. Just another day

Aside from the first sentence, you would be correct, but the SVD was developed as what we know as a designated marksman rifle, and the AK lineup is not terribly accurate compared to an AR chambered in a comparable cartridge. No opinions involved there. Choose the rifle that works best for you.

[Steve_In_29]

O by the way, the accuracy of the SVD is farther than 800. Some say 1000 meters. I guess its , again , who is behind the weapon and what ammo you use. Cheap? I call $1500 cheap

I think you are confusing "accuracy" with "effective range".

[Ranger1]

I'm sorry u have seen some of the not so great ones. There has been a lot of copies from different countries. But a true SVD not shot out but new from the mother land is a very effective weapon to and possably past 1000 meters. Now back to the OP's question, which one is better and why. There is no one answer to this question. Everyone thinks they are in the same category. They are not. The rest of the world uses the AK or copied AK line up. They kill just like any other weapon. But for someone to say the AR is more superior than the AK, they are very delusional. They both have there pros and cons. If you are working in a theater of war that uses either one of them you pick up the enemies weapon and you will learn it and be proficient with it. That's just the way it is. If you don't think the Ak is good just go ask all the soldiers that died by it. O another thing. How many of the enemy do you think we find using our AR15's?

[Tim McBride]

How many of the enemy do you think we find using our AR15's?

Well, plenty in Iraq and Afghanistan...

[Ranger1]

Well I will give you that. Everyone we trained got a Ar15 to play with in the desert. Most of the people I had seen gave them to their wives because they were sh$t and went back to there AK's. If they were given an ar15 they would sell them and go back to the AK. Like I said the ar15 is not a very good rifle in the desert. To much maintenance involved in keeping it running compared to a AK.

[Viper 1-26 INF]

I'm sorry u have seen some of the not so great ones. There has been a lot of copies from different countries. But a true SVD not shot out but new from the mother land is a very effective weapon to and possably past 1000 meters. Now back to the OP's question, which one is better and why. There is no one answer to this question. Everyone thinks they are in the same category. They are not. The rest of the world uses the AK or copied AK line up. They kill just like any other weapon. But for someone to say the AR is more superior than the AK, they are very delusional. They both have there pros and cons. If you are working in a theater of war that uses either one of them you pick up the enemies weapon and you will learn it and be proficient with it. That's just the way it is. If you don't think the Ak is good just go ask all the soldiers that died by it. O another thing. How many of the enemy do you think we find using our AR15's?

I've seen a lot more people put down with M4s overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan than I saw with AKs. Most of the deaths my company took in the Korengal were from IEDs, DShKs, and PKMs and M4s and M14s that were taken from the SEALs and Rangers in Operation Red Wings... They had US PVS-14s and PEC-15s as well. 3 of our guys died from headshots from a US M-14 EBR-RI. The enemy loves to get their hands on US weapons and they are held as prized possessions in battle by them, they'll drop an AK in a second for an M4 or M-14.

I never had any problems with my M4, M249, or M-14 when I was in Afghanistan and I was in a lot of firefights. I would take an M4 over an AK anyday, though depending on the situation I may opt for an upper in 300 BLK or 6.5 Grendel.