I... can't... resist....

[Doktor_Jeep]

AK versus AR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's yer opinion?

[STRATIOTES]

The AK 47 is a communist rip off of the Nazi's design using stamped sheet metal receiver and gas piston that flexes the thin barrel when fired, making a inaccurate firearm with very poor ergonomics.

The AK-47 is used by losing combatants the world over, while every special warfare team the world over chooses the AR platform.

Do you want me to go on ?;)

[Doktor_Jeep]

Yeah but....

the AR has yet to win a war without arty and air support.

So there. Nya nya nya.

[STRATIOTES]

Yeah but....

the AR has yet to win a war without arty and air support.

So there. Nya nya nya.

No war is won with just rifles, as with Viet Nam the U.S. won every battle and lost the war and so with the war in Iraq the AR continues to win every battle while the war is lost.

Rifles are just tools to win battles, just as Wisdom is the ideal used to win wars.


ECC 9-18 Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good.
Sin is defined as to miss the mark which is what AK's do most the time and why losers choose them.;)

[rePAULblican]

I like them both. While both rifles are similar they are also different. I carried a M16 for several years in the Army and I own a AK47 variant now. Personally I don’t have a problem with either one. I have put over 2, 500 rounds through my AK and have not had one single problem or issue with it. I even skipped cleaning it and made it dirty on purpose to try to get to malfunction, but to no effect, it still goes bang. Out to 100 yards my AK is combat range accurate. Anything further and you will want an AR. Here are some more points below. As for stealing from the Nazis, we stole plenty of designs too (rockets, airplanes, machine guns). I will be getting me an AR later this year, but it will in .308 caliber and of gas pistion design.

M-16 Pros & Cons
Pros
-It's lighter,
-more accurate,
-more versatile,
-allow numerous modifications to be made
such as mounting various uppers
Cons
-The 5.56 ammunition
reliable with proper maintenance

AK-47 Pros & Cons
Pros
-The AK-47 is a very effective weapon with great power
-It has a very high rate of fire
-comes at a very reasonable price.
-select-fire
-simple to operate, clean, and repair
-reliable
Cons
-Very loud noise
-it's heavy
-not as accurate as most military rifles
-any optics require special adapters
-Many people don't like the AK safety mechanism

[Mr.mark]

i like how this video sumed it up

http://youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0

do you want a rifle or a machine gun?

[Razmear]

As the owner of 3 SKS's I'd put my money on them any day of the week over an AR.
If you want to spend all day cleaning and preening your rifle, get an AR, if you want something that will shoot every time even after years of neglect, get an SKS.
And regarding accuracy, I've shot skeet with my SKS with iron sights, try that with an AR.
I agree with the scope mount issue, but I don't use them anyways as I think it increases time on target.

I can't say if the same goes for an AK as I never owned one, but I wouldn't trade an SKS for an AR, unless it was to sell the AR and use the cash to get 10 more SKSs.

eb

[Luft97]

As the owner of 3 SKS's I'd put my money on them any day of the week over an AR.
If you want to spend all day cleaning and preening your rifle, get an AR, if you want something that will shoot every time even after years of neglect, get an SKS.
And regarding accuracy, I've shot skeet with my SKS with iron sights, try that with an AR.
I agree with the scope mount issue, but I don't use them anyways as I think it increases time on target.

I can't say if the same goes for an AK as I never owned one, but I wouldn't trade an SKS for an AR, unless it was to sell the AR and use the cash to get 10 more SKSs.

eb

Hmm, SKS is an ok weapon. I own one.. I also own a Rock River LAR-15. Rock River picked up a huge contract with the DEA over more well known AR-15 makers.. This is what Rock River's LAR-15 had to pass in order to get the contract with the DEA:


The Rock River Arms LAR-15, after being so configured, was delivered to the “trials” held by the DEA/FBI team which are simply brutal. The trial consists of two parts. The first phase should be termed, “Let’s see if we can break it” or “Is it ‘Marineproof’?” Technically, this phase determines durability and reliability. Of note, after the completion of each segment, the rifle is required to feed and fire 20 rounds from the magazine without malfunction.

As I understand it, the tests begin with a number of sample rifles from the same manufacturer being disassembled. The parts are mixed, the guns are reassembled; then they’re shot. I do not know the exact order, but, at some point, the rifle undergoes the FRISBEE® test, where a sample is thrown 15 feet to land on concrete – once on each side and starting from a height of four feet. After this, the gun, held at the same height, is dropped six different ways on the concrete.

In addition, the rifle is cooked and chilled. It’s put in a box and the temperature is raised to 120° F and lowered to -20° F. Each temperature is then held constant for an hour, after which the previously mentioned function test must be passed. The rifle also gets a saltwater and a sand test – then it is function fired again.

The second part of the test mandates that the rifle fire 5,000 rounds; again, without malfunction. Accuracy, velocity and bullet dispersion are monitored during this test and must stay within prescribed ranges. The Rock River Arms LAR-15 passed every test and Rock River was awarded a five year contract to supply both agencies.


My RR has a quad rail and EOTech holo sight.. I would use it any day over the SKS.. Not that the SKS is bad I just prefer it... My RR fires the 5.56 NATO round whereas the SKS 7.62x39. Depends on what you want to have and what you have to spend think about what kind of ammo is going to be readily available if TSHTF?

My 2c.

[Razmear]

Luft,
Just out of curiosity, what did that RR cost?
I paid an average of $175 each for the SKSs.

Back when I owned land in Vermont, we'd go thru a 1000 round case a weekend between the 3 rifles of cheap Wolf ammo with no jams (note: don't use soft tip ammo, or you will have jams and feed issues) and only the very rare misfire (usually the ammo's fault), and we were not kind to the rifles and hardly ever cleaned them (took away from beer drinking time).
I'm sure there are better rifles than the SKS, but for a low cost reliable rifle I don't think it can be beat.

My 3 are all Norinco, I can't attest to any other brand.
Also, I should clarify that there were occasional mag issues with the round springing up to high and getting above the breach, but that only happened in one of my 30 rnd mags if I loaded it full. Putting in 27 rounds instead of 30 resolved that issue, so I don't blame the rifle for those jams as they only happened on the first couple of shots from a full mag.

eb

[Luft97]

Luft,
Just out of curiosity, what did that RR cost?

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj25/luft97/DSC_4987.jpg

$1350 equiped as shown. No doubt the SKS is a great low cost solution. You can pick up some AR at a lower cost as well, there are many great makers out there. I was impressed by RRA's reliability so I spent a little extra to get what I wanted ;)

[Razmear]

Pretty. Lots of drool factor :D

I never shot with a front pistol grip, I think that would mess me up a bit. Is the front grip of any benifit?

side thought:
can a red dot scope be set with a prism to be used while the gun is at waist level?

eb

[GunnyFreedom]

I own a Colt Sporter Match HBAR (AR-15 variant, preban) That outclasses the M-16 I was issued in the USMC in every way except the lack of select-fire. Mind you, I wouldn't use a burst option except for one or two specific circumstances out of the thousands of possible scenarios. about 99.9% of the time anything above semiauto is a waste of ammo for a MBR (Main Battle Rifle).

My next MBR investment will either be an M1 Garand, or a Benelli R1 with two uppers, one in 30-06 and one in .308

I am actually leaning towards the Benelli R1

http://www.benelliusa.com/firearms/r1rifle.tpl

You can get an aftermarket detachable mag for the R1 in 30-06 that holds 10 rounds. I imagine within 18 months there will be a 15 round mag for the R1 in 30-06.

Other than the 1) battle tested status of the M1 Garand, and 2) the Benelli R1's slightly stricter requirements for cleanliness and maintenance, the R1 outclasses the M1 in every way (once you get the aftermarket high capacity magazine)

[Razmear]

http://razmear.us/3sk_sm.jpg (http://razmear.us/3sk_big.jpg)

Heres a pic I just took of my 3 SKSs, total cost for all of them was about $500.
clicking on the pic should bring ya to the full size pic.

eb

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm a little OCD about certain things, especially my rifles. I fully stipulate that the AK and the SKS have a good, strong, and valid place in the arsenal of a group of folks who hold the Thomas Jefferson view of the 2nd Amendment.

As for myself, however, I just couldn't bring myself to shell out my hard earned (but mostly worthless) Fed notes for a MBR that was incapable of hitting a pie plate at 500 yds.

1.5 MOA (Minutes Of Angle) is the minimum standard that I could possibly tolerate. Sub 1 MOA is where I feel comfortable with the precision of a MBR.

The AK is a 3-4 MOA gun, and the SKS ranges from a 2 to 3 MOA gun.

1 MOA = 1" per 100 yards. at 300 yards, the AK has a mechanical group between 9" and 15" at 300 yards, the SKS has a mechanical group between 6" and 9"

My Sporter is a .75 MOA gun, which at 300 yards has a mechanical group of 2.25" and at 500 yards, a mechanical group of 3.75"

As long as I can weild the skill, that AR is capable of a headshot at 500 yards. IE - I can hit a pie plate at 500 yards with it.

the SKS at it's very best end of the spectrum is 10" at 500 yards, or just BARELY within the pie-plate requirement, but at the wider end is 15" at 500 yards.

The AK, however, spreads to a 20" mechanical group or worse at 500 yards. because of my USMC influenced OCD, you couldn't pay me to own an AK.

PS - I was being very generous to the AK above. The reality of the AK-47 is probably more like a 5 to 10 MOA mechanical group. IE - 15 to 30 inches at 300 yards. (shudder)

[Luft97]

Pretty. Lots of drool factor

I never shot with a front pistol grip, I think that would mess me up a bit. Is the front grip of any benifit?

I like the front grip, not sure that it adds much benefit, but I think it is more comfortable to hold than the rail when firing alot of rounds ;)

Those are nice rifles the bottom one looks alot like mine, although mine is Chineese surplus.

[Razmear]

Those are nice rifles the bottom one looks alot like mine, although mine is Chineese surplus.

The Norinco is Chinese surplus, so its probably the same as these 3.
I can mix and match any part from any of these 3 rifles and changing stocks or switching from fixed to detach mags takes less than 10 minutes.

eb

[Razmear]

the SKS at it's very best end of the spectrum is 10" at 500 yards, or just BARELY within the pie-plate requirement

At 500 yards I'd be satisfied with center mass over a pie plate.
At 100 yards I can shoot 3" groups with iron sights with the middle rifle all day.

eb

[GunnyFreedom]

At 500 yards I'd be satisfied with center mass over a pie plate.
At 100 yards I can shoot 3" groups with iron sights with the middle rifle all day.

eb

That's some strong shooting. I'm assuming you are shooting from a supported position. 3" at 100 yards unsupported would make some highly ranked USMC marksmanship instructors very jealous...

Of course, real world shooting is never as good as mechanical groups, and supported positions bring you closer to mechanical groups than unsupported. 3" at 100 would put you around 15" at 500 if the ammo maintains stability beyond 300. I'm thinking the middle SKS that gives you 3" at 100 is accurized? The best (non-accurized) SKS's in the world usually have a 1.5 to 2" mechanical group at 100 yards, which would put YOUR hold around 1.5 to 1 MOA. If it's not accurized, then you should compete for money.

Well, I have also heard that the ammo makes a HUGE difference with an SKS.

I figure that one must be accurized, it's maybe a 1 MOA gun, which puts your hold at 2 MOA variance - still more skill than most shooters on the planet. The standard for USMC Rifle expert is around 3.75 MOA groups, and US Army expert around 4 MOA groups. You are talking about a 3 MOA shot there above. (those standards are NOT with a benchrest, mind you - and I have no idea if you were using a benchrest or not)

With my AR, I usually get around 2.75 to 3" supported at 100 yds, around 1.5 to 1.75" on a benchrest, and about 1" clamped and sandbagged. (also on ironsights, of course). and the mechanical group on that rifle is 3/4" at 100 yards.

Looking on the stock on your middle gun, (Is that a Yugo? Yugoslavian SKSs are some of the very-most accurate ones) I can see that whether you know it or not, it is to at least some extent accurized. At the very least the play has been taken out of the stock by unitizing it.

Usually, a lot of work has to be done to an SKS to get it reliably to 3" at 100 yards. A few (especially Yugoslavian made) SKSs do show up with exceptional precision. I'd say you got lucky with that one. It was either accurized at great expense before you bought it, or it is one of those rare jewels that fit's together well enough to put it around 1 MOA mechanical precision.

[Razmear]

The middle one is Norinco, just like the other two.
The heavy stock does help with accuracy. Also the scope mount on the middle one is the kind you can see under so it gives me a 4 inch sight tube of sorts that helps for some reason.
Being able to hit a 3 inch target doesn't seem like a tough challenge with this rifle, I usually shoot either standing or kneeling with elbow on knee.
I've even shot skeet with this rifle with relative ease.

eb

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

comparing apples to oranges here man. Both guns are great in their own respect and for different reasons in my opinion

[GunnyFreedom]

The middle one is Norinco, just like the other two.
The heavy stock does help with accuracy. Also the scope mount on the middle one is the kind you can see under so it gives me a 4 inch sight tube of sorts that helps for some reason.
Being able to hit a 3 inch target doesn't seem like a tough challenge with this rifle, I usually shoot either standing or kneeling with elbow on knee.
I've even shot skeet with this rifle with relative ease.

eb

3 MOA groups from offhand? :eek: That's enough to get you a high ranking spot on the US Olympic shooting team!

If I were you, I'd start signing up for some NRA high-power competitions. If you can drill 3 MOA groups from offhand, you could easily make better than $80k a year just from the cash prizes alone. Nevermind the paid endorsements etc. Heck, with that kind of shooting you could be clearing $200k a year between competitions, endorsements, etc.

Not kidding. 3 MOA groups from offhand is...well... I'd bet good enough for a gold medal in the olympics. If I could reliably hit 3 MOA in offhand, I'd be shooting for a living. Seriously. Look into it.

[Matt]

The Rock River Arms LAR-15, after being so configured, was delivered to the “trials” held by the DEA/FBI team which are simply brutal. The trial consists of two parts. The first phase should be termed, “Let’s see if we can break it” or “Is it ‘Marineproof’?” Technically, this phase determines durability and reliability. Of note, after the completion of each segment, the rifle is required to feed and fire 20 rounds from the magazine without malfunction.

As I understand it, the tests begin with a number of sample rifles from the same manufacturer being disassembled. The parts are mixed, the guns are reassembled; then they’re shot. I do not know the exact order, but, at some point, the rifle undergoes the FRISBEE® test, where a sample is thrown 15 feet to land on concrete – once on each side and starting from a height of four feet. After this, the gun, held at the same height, is dropped six different ways on the concrete.

In addition, the rifle is cooked and chilled. It’s put in a box and the temperature is raised to 120° F and lowered to -20° F. Each temperature is then held constant for an hour, after which the previously mentioned function test must be passed. The rifle also gets a saltwater and a sand test – then it is function fired again.

The second part of the test mandates that the rifle fire 5,000 rounds; again, without malfunction. Accuracy, velocity and bullet dispersion are monitored during this test and must stay within prescribed ranges. The Rock River Arms LAR-15 passed every test and Rock River was awarded a five year contract to supply both agencies.

Heh, even the crappiest WASR can do all that. :p

Just sayin, there's no doubt that the AK is a more inherently reliable design. I'm not bashing AR pattern rifles though, I'm thinking of getting a DPMS Panther .308 for my battle rifle. Does anyone here have experience with these? They seem like a real bargain being over $800 less than a DSA FAL.

[RedLightning]

AK versus AR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's yer opinion?

Both, I have an AK that I bought for relativly low cost ammo accurate enough with stardard(30rd) capacity mags. The sights suck for precision shooting, but are great for aquiring a target fast.

I also have an SKS, which has some things I like about. It will feed any type of ammo(FMJ HP SP) and you don't need mags, just stripper clips. Where my AK, doesn't feed SP well(destroys the tip) and depending on the Hollow point hole size the AK sometimes damages it.

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

Both, I have an AK that I bought for relativly low cost ammo accurate enough with stardard(30rd) capacity mags. The sights suck for precision shooting, but are great for aquiring a target fast.

I also have an SKS, which has some things I like about. It will feed any type of ammo(FMJ HP SP) and you don't need mags, just stripper clips. Where my AK, doesn't feed SP well(destroys the tip) and depending on the Hollow point hole size the AK sometimes damages it.

agreed except swap the sks for a FAL. 762x54 is a devastating round and is nice for dropping things at a distance.

[Doktor_Jeep]

I used to shoot the AK variants exclusively. That was back in the day. I returned on leave from Europe to get one before the ban and stock up on $3 magazines. I would later get a SAR-1 to accompany my MAK-90.

But as a competition shooter and match director for IPSC 3-gun matches, I was watching the AK variants get smoked by equal shooters using ARs. From 2001 to 2007 I watched the AK guns slowly get taken out of competition and replaced by the AR. Regardless of pros and cons the accuracy and controllability of the AR won out. Those who did not go AR got into rare space guns or went into the He-Man division using M1As, Garands, and FALs. By 2006 the AK was a rare sight indeed.

And when the ammo for it got expensive - thanks to the neocons - it was no longer possible to get a case of 7.62X39 for 80 bucks. That was also the end.

I have seen the SAR-3 in .223 do very well however.

[GunnyFreedom]

Now, while I myself am looking at acquiring an MBR in .308 or 30-06 (because of those cartridges increased anti-equipment value) I do want to make a point about the 5.56 NATO cartridge.

Historically, the original 55 grain 5.56 issued in Vietnam was pathetic and horrible underpowered. The current NATO spec 62 grain round was a little better, but anecdotal evidence from Iraq revealed that at distance it was inadequate.

So some units were issued 77 grain Black Hills Gold Match Grade JHP rounds. Apparently (again, by way of anecdotal evidence) the 77 grain rounds had terminal ballistic performance at an order of magnitude better than the issue 62 grain rounds. Where antipersonnel shots at 400 yards with the 62 grain rounds had a better than even chance of disabling an enemy combatant, apparently the 77 grain rounds were almost guaranteed to kill out beyond 500 yards.

So what I'm saying is that the known weaknesses of the 55 grain and 62 grain 5.56 NATO rounds in the area of terminal ballistic performance are certainly good reasons to look elsewhere, the simple matter of using 75 through 77 grain rounds seem to overcome those weaknesses significantly.

Therefore, the 5.56 NATO chamber is plenty sufficient for antipersonnel purposes at extreme range, but I recommend chambering at least a 75 to 77 grain round for that purpose. Anything over 77 grains is too long to fit into the magazine, though 80 and 90 grain rounds are available to single-feed, and they are effective to 1000 yards.

Another strong recommendation here, is that you will require a 1:7 twist barrel to properly stabilize a round that heavy. the NATO 62 grain round had been chosen as a round that would function in a 1:12 a 1:9 or a 1:7 barrel, though it performs best in a 1:9. If you DO get a 1:7 barrel, don't expect great performance from a 55 grain round - they over stabilize and you loose accuracy beyond 300 yards. Anything lighter than a 55 grain round from a 1:7 and the bullet will shred to confetti within about 100 yards.

[Dequeant]

I can't say if the same goes for an AK as I never owned one, but I wouldn't trade an SKS for an AR, unless it was to sell the AR and use the cash to get 10 more SKSs.

Granted, the AR costs about 4x as much as an SKS(now, since sks's did go up in price since i bought the two i own for $99 each).

However, you can only shoot one rifle at a time. You may have 10 SKS's, but i'd have one AR........and i would still have the advantage at every range. Not to mention, the 30 rnd duckbill mags for the sks's are extremely hard to use and very prone to jamming, whereas the AR doesn't have that problem.

[JRegs85]

In my opinion, the AR is a better RIFLE than the AK. When I think rifle, I think accurate from a couple hundred yards away. As we can all agree, the AR is a more accurate gun.

However, the AK is more reliable, more powerful, requires far less cleaning, etc. It depends on what you are looking for in a rifle. If I could own one rifle, it would probably be an AR, but if I could own two, it would probably be an AK and a .308/.30-06.

[krott5333]

skip them both and get a FAL

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

skip them both and get a FAL

i have a fal and an ak and like them both. i'm not gonna lie. i've shot AR 15s and they are amazing weapons. i will be adding one of those to my arsenal at some point, not that it would take the place of my ak. when it comes to reliability, it'll always be my personal choice.

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

can you get an AR chambered for the 762x39?

[jason43]

AK versus AR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's yer opinion?

Alaska vs Arkansas?

I'd go with Alaska, eskimos are fierce fighters.

http://www.alaskool.org/LANGUAGE/manytongues/Images/Hunter.jpg

[GunnyFreedom]

can you get an AR chambered for the 762x39?

Not that I have seen, but the new model AR-10's in .308 are simply amazing.

Again, I want to recommend that everyone looking at a 30 cal MBR at least take a passing glance at the Benelli R1. sure the mags that come with it stock only hold 4 rounds, but you can get aftermarket mags that hold 10.

10 rounds of 30-06 in a detachable mag, fired from a semiautomatic gas-piston operated weapon with HALF the perceived recoil of an M1 Garand, and more accurate than an accurized bolt action? Yeah, maybe it never fought in a war, but it's sure worth a look. It just has STUPID amounts of accurate firepower.

Not to mention the fact that it has interchangeable multiple caliber barrels/upper receivers. Having this rifle and keeping one barrel in 30-06 and another barrel in .308, allows for it's continued usefulness in the event of ALL KINDS of battlefield ammo pickups.

That's Benelli R1

LOVE that weapon. As soon as I can afford one, it will be my first weapon purchase since 1991.

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

conversion kit for AR15 to shoot the 7.62x39

this is the route i'll probably go... i love this round for accuracy and availability. what do you all think?
the only reason i'd go this route and not the .308 is simply because i have a FAL shooting the 762x54 and i feel that it's sufficient for any of my long gun needs... any thoughts? suggestions? thanks in advance guys.

[SWATH]

I own a Colt Sporter Match HBAR (AR-15 variant, preban) That outclasses the M-16 I was issued in the USMC in every way except the lack of select-fire. Mind you, I wouldn't use a burst option except for one or two specific circumstances out of the thousands of possible scenarios. about 99.9% of the time anything above semiauto is a waste of ammo for a MBR (Main Battle Rifle).

My next MBR investment will either be an M1 Garand, or a Benelli R1 with two uppers, one in 30-06 and one in .308

I am actually leaning towards the Benelli R1

http://www.benelliusa.com/firearms/r1rifle.tpl

You can get an aftermarket detachable mag for the R1 in 30-06 that holds 10 rounds. I imagine within 18 months there will be a 15 round mag for the R1 in 30-06.

Other than the 1) battle tested status of the M1 Garand, and 2) the Benelli R1's slightly stricter requirements for cleanliness and maintenance, the R1 outclasses the M1 in every way (once you get the aftermarket high capacity magazine)

Garands anyone? I happen to know of a few really nice ones for sale:D

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=7&f=131&t=515298

[tommyzDad]

AK versus AR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's yer opinion?

Neither!

The only true choice is a phase plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.
http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/6982/phaseplasmarifleinthe40nx2.jpg

[Hawk45]

Not that I have seen, but the new model AR-10's in .308 are simply amazing.

Again, I want to recommend that everyone looking at a 30 cal MBR at least take a passing glance at the Benelli R1. sure the mags that come with it stock only hold 4 rounds, but you can get aftermarket mags that hold 10.

10 rounds of 30-06 in a detachable mag, fired from a semiautomatic gas-piston operated weapon with HALF the perceived recoil of an M1 Garand, and more accurate than an accurized bolt action? Yeah, maybe it never fought in a war, but it's sure worth a look. It just has STUPID amounts of accurate firepower.

Not to mention the fact that it has interchangeable multiple caliber barrels/upper receivers. Having this rifle and keeping one barrel in 30-06 and another barrel in .308, allows for it's continued usefulness in the event of ALL KINDS of battlefield ammo pickups.

That's Benelli R1

LOVE that weapon. As soon as I can afford one, it will be my first weapon purchase since 1991.

Only problem is ANY 'sporting' rifle loses its accuracy after 10 rounds or so when fired rapid fire. While it IS a great deer rifle, it is NOT a combat weapon.

Also the 308 is 7.62x51 and NOT 7.62x54. The 7.62x54 is also a rimmed round and is impossible to be fired in a FAL. FAL is the 7.62x51 NATO round that the M-14 and CETME/H&K 91 also use.

Yes there are AR that fire the 7.62x39 AK round. One is made by Colt and takes only mags made by them for it. There is another now made that takes regular AK mags but it is not made by Colt. For what either costs you can buy 3 regular AKs though.

[GunnyFreedom]

Only problem is ANY 'sporting' rifle loses its accuracy after 10 rounds or so when fired rapid fire. While it IS a great deer rifle, it is NOT a combat weapon.

Also the 308 is 7.62x51 and NOT 7.62x54. The 7.62x54 is also a rimmed round and is impossible to be fired in a FAL. FAL is the 7.62x51 NATO round that the M-14 and CETME/H&K 91 also use.

Yes there are AR that fire the 7.62x39 AK round. One is made by Colt and takes only mags made by them for it. There is another now made that takes regular AK mags but it is not made by Colt. For what either costs you can buy 3 regular AKs though.

I have a hard time believing that a cryogenically treated heavy barrel would suffer from the kind of temperature based variance you suggest. Do you have test data from the R1 that would back up your statement?

And my primary round for the MBR would be 30-06; the .308 barrel would be for battlefield pickups mainly.

And even though the 7.62 x 39 may be the most common round outside of CONUS, if I had to rely on finding random high powered rifle cartridges to feed my weapon INSIDE the United States, I would feel FAR more comfortable relying on finding .308

[GunnyFreedom]

A few of my own:

http://i30.tinypic.com/nzfuaf.jpg

[wv@SC]

A few of my own:

http://i30.tinypic.com/nzfuaf.jpg

Bulgarian Makarov???

[GunnyFreedom]

The pistol is a WW2 era Walther P32 .32
The top rifle is a Remington model 721 30-06
and the bottom rifle is a Colt Sporter Match HBAR 5.56

Sorry about the quality, my digital cam is busted. this was from my cellphone

[Hawk45]

I have a hard time believing that a cryogenically treated heavy barrel would suffer from the kind of temperature based variance you suggest. Do you have test data from the R1 that would back up your statement?

And my primary round for the MBR would be 30-06; the .308 barrel would be for battlefield pickups mainly.

And even though the 7.62 x 39 may be the most common round outside of CONUS, if I had to rely on finding random high powered rifle cartridges to feed my weapon INSIDE the United States, I would feel FAR more comfortable relying on finding .308

No I have NOT personnally tested a R1 for this, BUT all sporting rifles are made for just that and NOT combat. The be accurate a sporting rifle is made for closer tolerances that a military rifle is not and for the very reason of accuracy and reliability. I don't care how much you freeze a barrel it will NOT help it when firing in a combat situation and basically that is what cryogen treating a barrel does. It does help by making the barrel easier to clean, but does nothing to help it in combat where anywhere from 100-1000 could be fired. If you want a 30-06 for combat then buy a Garand as there is no finer rifle for combat made in that caliber. I will agree with you that finding 308 in the US will and is easier to find than 7.62x39. personally I like and use the 308/7.62 NATO more than the AK round as it is harder hitting and has a much longer effective range.

Now if you are basing your 'opinion' on the R1 by what you have read in gun magazines then know they will NOT bad mouth them as they are dependant on the various manufacturers for advertising dollars to stay in buisness. I base my views on H&K products from having worked for them as a consultant on their sniper rifles. While they are good guns, they are way over priced here in the US due to the fact they care not for the average American sport shooter. They make their main money from government contracts. BTW they have two price schedules for the same gun. One for the Gov and one for us peons. Prime example is the MP-5 SMG when they were allowed to be sold to the American citizens. Citizen price was $2500+ where as the gov price for one was $550.

Now for a real world test take out any sport rifle you choose. Fire it slow to establish its accuracy. Let it cool completely. Now fire 50 rounds thru it as fast as you can. Then reload it without letting it cool and see if it hits anywhere close to when it was fired cold. More than likely it will be hitting about 6 to 8 inches from where it should be hitting. The group will also look like a shotgun pattern.

[GunnyFreedom]

No I have NOT personnally tested a R1 for this, BUT all sporting rifles are made for just that and NOT combat. The be accurate a sporting rifle is made for closer tolerances that a military rifle is not and for the very reason of accuracy and reliability. I don't care how much you freeze a barrel it will NOT help it when firing in a combat situation and basically that is what cryogen treating a barrel does. It does help by making the barrel easier to clean, but does nothing to help it in combat where anywhere from 100-1000 could be fired. If you want a 30-06 for combat then buy a Garand as there is no finer rifle for combat made in that caliber. I will agree with you that finding 308 in the US will and is easier to find than 7.62x39. personally I like and use the 308/7.62 NATO more than the AK round as it is harder hitting and has a much longer effective range.

Now if you are basing your 'opinion' on the R1 by what you have read in gun magazines then know they will NOT bad mouth them as they are dependant on the various manufacturers for advertising dollars to stay in buisness. I base my views on H&K products from having worked for them as a consultant on their sniper rifles. While they are good guns, they are way over priced here in the US due to the fact they care not for the average American sport shooter. They make their main money from government contracts. BTW they have two price schedules for the same gun. One for the Gov and one for us peons. Prime example is the MP-5 SMG when they were allowed to be sold to the American citizens. Citizen price was $2500+ where as the gov price for one was $550.

Now for a real world test take out any sport rifle you choose. Fire it slow to establish its accuracy. Let it cool completely. Now fire 50 rounds thru it as fast as you can. Then reload it without letting it cool and see if it hits anywhere close to when it was fired cold. More than likely it will be hitting about 6 to 8 inches from where it should be hitting. The group will also look like a shotgun pattern.

I completely agree that MOST hunting rifles will not handle such temperature variance accurately.

However, there are a very very few hunting rifles that I would think would be able to handle it, and I think the R1 is one of them.

And no, I am not basing this on any reviews, but on an examination of how the rifle is built, from an engineering standpoint.

I happen to love the Garand, and am currently in the process of brokering a purchase of one for my stepfather.

But based on the engineering specs of the R1, I will not dismiss it's potential ability to outperform the M1, simply because it's marketed at hunters.

The notion that a rifle cannot handle such temperature extremes accurately BECAUSE it's marketed at hunters, is a non sequitur, even if it can be demonstrated that most rifles marketed at hunters were not designed to be capable of such.

Wasn't the BAR *originally* designed to be a hunting gun, before it was realized that it's true purpose was combat?

Having looked at the engineering specs of the R1, I will not be so dismissive until I actually see it tested under such extreme conditions.

And a cryo treated barrel does a LOT more than make it easier to clean. It also aligns the molecules of alloy in the barrel, making it less likely to "travel" under extreme heat variance.

Engineering is engineering. Engineering does not CARE whether the final product is marketed to military or hunters.

So yes, you are correct from the standpoint of nearly every rifle marketed to hunters since the dawn of time was not engineered to handle such extremes. I believe, however, that the R1 was.

[Athan]

I'm a little OCD about certain things, especially my rifles. I fully stipulate that the AK and the SKS have a good, strong, and valid place in the arsenal of a group of folks who hold the Thomas Jefferson view of the 2nd Amendment.

As for myself, however, I just couldn't bring myself to shell out my hard earned (but mostly worthless) Fed notes for a MBR that was incapable of hitting a pie plate at 500 yds.

1.5 MOA (Minutes Of Angle) is the minimum standard that I could possibly tolerate. Sub 1 MOA is where I feel comfortable with the precision of a MBR.

The AK is a 3-4 MOA gun, and the SKS ranges from a 2 to 3 MOA gun.

1 MOA = 1" per 100 yards. at 300 yards, the AK has a mechanical group between 9" and 15" at 300 yards, the SKS has a mechanical group between 6" and 9"

My Sporter is a .75 MOA gun, which at 300 yards has a mechanical group of 2.25" and at 500 yards, a mechanical group of 3.75"

As long as I can weild the skill, that AR is capable of a headshot at 500 yards. IE - I can hit a pie plate at 500 yards with it.

the SKS at it's very best end of the spectrum is 10" at 500 yards, or just BARELY within the pie-plate requirement, but at the wider end is 15" at 500 yards.

The AK, however, spreads to a 20" mechanical group or worse at 500 yards. because of my USMC influenced OCD, you couldn't pay me to own an AK.

PS - I was being very generous to the AK above. The reality of the AK-47 is probably more like a 5 to 10 MOA mechanical group. IE - 15 to 30 inches at 300 yards. (shudder)

Fux! What twist rate is your AR? 1/8? And what ammo do you use? Horniday Vmax? Or do you go with the M855 5.56?
Tell me Mr. Tight pants = tight groupings!

[Darguth]

To me the whole question of AK vs. AR is incomplete unless you define the parameters in which you're comparing them. For instance I was recently looking for a SHTF rifle to bug-out with. Given that scenario the lighter weight of the AR, the increased capacity of ammo I could carry, and the increase range/accuracy (which might be needed more in an outdoor scenario) really swung in it's favor. If I was looking for a home-defense rifle for bugging-in against aggressors where the weight, ammo capacity I could carry, and long-range accuracy were less of a factor I might have swung for the AK instead.

[Barrex]

Dont like 5.56 ammunition..."grass deflected".