AR all day everyday but don't dismiss the Galil Ace. It's basically a modernized AK. There are rails at 3, 6 and 9 under the covers.
AR versus AK - which is better? Why?
- Thread starter admin
- Start date
Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!
Join today!
- Joined
- May 15, 2018
- Messages
- 202
Right now i will have to go with AK over AR for the niche I shoot in for competition and primary "serious purpose" rifle. I bought a Galil ACE 7.62 x51 rifle in January and have put around 800-900 rounds through it with no issue except a case sticking that I highly suspect was due to some old Malaysian surplus that was tarnished/slightly corroded. It uses PMAGs, is friggin reliable, and I am getting great accuracy out of it. I added a Midwest Industries handguard that greatly improves the ergonomics, takes off 4 oz weight, and allows more accessories. Just don't put a Trijicon MRO on it. Recoil will kill it, but that is another story...
I'm big fan of the .308 cartridge. Love the terminal effects of the cartridge. Don't even need to step into the 5.56 vs 7.62 x39 debate. Yeah, I know the rounds weigh a lot more, and you don't have as much capacity as with the regular AR or AK. Additionally, I know that I will kill everyone in my neighborhood due to over-penetration if I use it for home defense. Well in response, since I have approximately 19,000 days experience in this world I'm not likely to be required to hump my gear in the mountains of some foreign land. Therefore I don't need to carry 240 rounds. I am a relatively fit guy who can carry the weight of the rifle, ammo, and gear during a summer two-gun match at Cowtown. Even helped put out a brush fire there while wearing rifle plates loaded down with .308 mags. I digress but that sucked ass.
As for over-penetration, my "duty" mag that is in the rifle while in an urban environment is loaded with Hornady 110gr TAP. It has low flash powder, moves approximately 2900 FPS, and only penetrates 10" in gelatin.
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/308-win-tap/110-gr-tap-urban
If my karma is exceedingly bad and I have somehow fallen into "John Wick 3" in my hypothetical home defense scenario then I guess I will have to go with the couple spare mags loaded with the 168gr match and try not to kill all my neighbors along with the 15 or 20 bad guys assaulting my house.
So in summary, for the relatively small practical shooting niche that is .308 semiautomatic rifles I would go with the AK. The .308 ARs are too temperamental and the Galil, which is a highly refined AK, has proven itself to me.
P.S. If I have to give my opinion on standard caliber rifles then I am going AR over AK
P.P.S. Included pic shows the Galil with MWI handguard installed with the original in the picture for comparison
I'm big fan of the .308 cartridge. Love the terminal effects of the cartridge. Don't even need to step into the 5.56 vs 7.62 x39 debate. Yeah, I know the rounds weigh a lot more, and you don't have as much capacity as with the regular AR or AK. Additionally, I know that I will kill everyone in my neighborhood due to over-penetration if I use it for home defense. Well in response, since I have approximately 19,000 days experience in this world I'm not likely to be required to hump my gear in the mountains of some foreign land. Therefore I don't need to carry 240 rounds. I am a relatively fit guy who can carry the weight of the rifle, ammo, and gear during a summer two-gun match at Cowtown. Even helped put out a brush fire there while wearing rifle plates loaded down with .308 mags. I digress but that sucked ass.
As for over-penetration, my "duty" mag that is in the rifle while in an urban environment is loaded with Hornady 110gr TAP. It has low flash powder, moves approximately 2900 FPS, and only penetrates 10" in gelatin.
http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/308-win-tap/110-gr-tap-urban
If my karma is exceedingly bad and I have somehow fallen into "John Wick 3" in my hypothetical home defense scenario then I guess I will have to go with the couple spare mags loaded with the 168gr match and try not to kill all my neighbors along with the 15 or 20 bad guys assaulting my house.
So in summary, for the relatively small practical shooting niche that is .308 semiautomatic rifles I would go with the AK. The .308 ARs are too temperamental and the Galil, which is a highly refined AK, has proven itself to me.
P.S. If I have to give my opinion on standard caliber rifles then I am going AR over AK
P.P.S. Included pic shows the Galil with MWI handguard installed with the original in the picture for comparison
Attachments
Steve_In_29
Member
Poor attempt at deflection there. I never said that was all you were doing. However the facts remain that for 70 years the AK has shown itself to function in the real world much more reliably then the AR.Tim McBride said:
And 17+ years in the Marines showed me how finicky the AR could be. We cleaned them constantly for a reason.
Not trying to hijack the thread OP. Your choice of MWI rail over RS? Price? or is there something more? I'm about to buy one or the other for mine.Limper said:
https://rsregulate.com/product/gar-10m-r/
Tim McBride
Moderator
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 586
:handgestures-thumbupright:Steve_In_29 said:
Our anecdotal experiances differ.
Gratefully Deadly
New member
The first rifle I ever bought was a Chinese AK from Dealer's Outlet in Glendale. My intent was just to shoot some rocks in the desert and have some fun. I think the gun was $299, you could get a giant tuna can of ammo for under $75, and 30 rounders were plentiful and cheap. So it was not a big risk to try it. It was loud, loose, and a lot of fun to shoot. It was accurate enough, and ran even when very dirty. The hand guard got very hot when we did some bump-shot ammo dumping. Designed so a peasant (like me), with a little training, could disassemble, clean, and shoot it. Never seemed to me to be a high quality or accurate gun, but certainly worth the money. The sights always seemed to be a suggestion of where the shot might hit. Having an under folder made for a short, handy sized rifle.
When the cheap ammo and under folders got banned from import and prices crept up, I had to reevaluate it. A Norinco or even a fancy Poly Tech were still just a 40's design to reliably launch an intermediate cartridge. Rifles like this are only as good as their magazines, ammo and parts availability. For a while it looked like all of that might end for the 7.62x39. I decided not to keep this, or any other AK's, especially when their costs approached that of an AR.
Going over to a Colt AR15 government carbine was a big jump. For me it was about being able to shoot an American gun, using NATO ammo, with assured availability or parts, mags, and ammo. It was about pride in owning the real deal, and not supporting the made-in-china communists. You meet and talk to guys like Ken Elmore or Nelson Ford and these things make more sense. The difference in quality of the build, tolerances, and accuracy, were worth the extra costs. As fun to shoot as an AK, but requiring a little more upkeep. Because the gun is a modular design, lots of options and choices in outfitting it, that aren't really available on the AK platform, like flat tops for scopes and sights, and rails for lights and lasers. The explosion of the AR's popularity allows so many choices, and shows you that the public has chosen the answer to the question posed in this thread.
When the cheap ammo and under folders got banned from import and prices crept up, I had to reevaluate it. A Norinco or even a fancy Poly Tech were still just a 40's design to reliably launch an intermediate cartridge. Rifles like this are only as good as their magazines, ammo and parts availability. For a while it looked like all of that might end for the 7.62x39. I decided not to keep this, or any other AK's, especially when their costs approached that of an AR.
Going over to a Colt AR15 government carbine was a big jump. For me it was about being able to shoot an American gun, using NATO ammo, with assured availability or parts, mags, and ammo. It was about pride in owning the real deal, and not supporting the made-in-china communists. You meet and talk to guys like Ken Elmore or Nelson Ford and these things make more sense. The difference in quality of the build, tolerances, and accuracy, were worth the extra costs. As fun to shoot as an AK, but requiring a little more upkeep. Because the gun is a modular design, lots of options and choices in outfitting it, that aren't really available on the AK platform, like flat tops for scopes and sights, and rails for lights and lasers. The explosion of the AR's popularity allows so many choices, and shows you that the public has chosen the answer to the question posed in this thread.
40mike-mike
Member
Which one is better, obviously the AR for all the positive reasons of ease of changing out calibers. I’d hope if SHTF that I could grab one of each most important calibers, at the ready to go on the run.
Now, choosing only one gun to grab & run would be my AK47. Suppose if you remembered most of the basics for bug out, I truly believe if I forgot only one thing & sadly it was the cleaning kit, then the AK would run for weeks filthy from internal gases & debris due to its loose tolerances, JMHO.
Now, choosing only one gun to grab & run would be my AK47. Suppose if you remembered most of the basics for bug out, I truly believe if I forgot only one thing & sadly it was the cleaning kit, then the AK would run for weeks filthy from internal gases & debris due to its loose tolerances, JMHO.
I ended up going with the RS Regulate handguard on my 7.62mm. I also added magpull rail sections at 3,6 and 9. It's extremely light. When I received the package, it felt like an empty box.Limper said:
View attachment 1
azatty480
Member
AR all the way.
AKs are antiquated and obsolete. They were great in their time. I have a couple and they are fun to shoot. But they are not in the same class as the AR. I have always wanted to get a good quality underfolder for the collection.
AKs are antiquated and obsolete. They were great in their time. I have a couple and they are fun to shoot. But they are not in the same class as the AR. I have always wanted to get a good quality underfolder for the collection.
AKs are antiquated and obsolete. They were great in their time. I have a couple and they are fun to shoot. But they are not in the same class as the AR
Might mention this to the boys and gals over in the sand box, and see what they think, , yep
Might mention this to the boys and gals over in the sand box, and see what they think, , yep
Tim McBride
Moderator
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 586
knockonit said:
I have a sandbox in my yard...
knockonit said:
They're also using Lee Enfields. Just because it's what they have and use to some good effect does not make it more suitable.
JMpcc17 said:
Not sure how that has any bearing whatsoever on the topic of their respective performance.
Isn't the Tavor a better combination of both rifles together?
Thom
Thom
I own quite a few ARs of many calibers. I do not own any AKs. That being said, The AR platform is an easy gun to work with, Its Like a Glock. all calibers are basically the same. However they need to be fired wet and if they are not wet they will lock up and freeze. An AK can be shot wet, dry, full of dirt etc and are notably more reliable. You will however learn from experience how not to burn yourself with the AK.
The new tavor ,X95, have features like more similiar to an AR, and the actions of an AK, I thought. Along with having a 16 inch barrel.lew said:
Ok. I have read all of this. It's a loaded question. Here are the facts
1. Ar platforms are yes easier to work on and change into any configuration you want.
2. Ar platforms are more finicky with ammo. Brass only no steel.
3. We all know, well at least us veterans. Ar15's run wet. That means you use oil a lot.
4. Parts are everywhere. I mean all over the place. Every Tom, Dick and Harry have parts.
5. They are weather and terrain finicky as well.
Now the AK
1. Hard to work on.
2. Special tools more so than the AR15
3. You will need a 2 to 8 ton press
4. Parts are harder to come by.
5.AK rifles eat any ammo you put in them they don't care.
6.Jungle, Desart, swamp and mud it just keeps on going. You can run it dry or pee on it for lubrication.
Usually the understanding is when you get into country ,you pick up whatever they are using. That way when they hear it going off they think it's one of their own.
In the end if you are in a dry, clean place and have oil use a AR15. If you are outside in the mud or sand and it's raining pick up the AK
1. Ar platforms are yes easier to work on and change into any configuration you want.
2. Ar platforms are more finicky with ammo. Brass only no steel.
3. We all know, well at least us veterans. Ar15's run wet. That means you use oil a lot.
4. Parts are everywhere. I mean all over the place. Every Tom, Dick and Harry have parts.
5. They are weather and terrain finicky as well.
Now the AK
1. Hard to work on.
2. Special tools more so than the AR15
3. You will need a 2 to 8 ton press
4. Parts are harder to come by.
5.AK rifles eat any ammo you put in them they don't care.
6.Jungle, Desart, swamp and mud it just keeps on going. You can run it dry or pee on it for lubrication.
Usually the understanding is when you get into country ,you pick up whatever they are using. That way when they hear it going off they think it's one of their own.
In the end if you are in a dry, clean place and have oil use a AR15. If you are outside in the mud or sand and it's raining pick up the AK
Similar threads
