The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Vaunted M4 & the 5.56mm need new Weapon & larger rounds 20% of Troops say.

tirod · March 5, 2011, 11:04 PM

I'm building a 6.8, I won't argue it could be better. What I do question is why we need to move the existing piston out of the bolt carrier and put it on the barrel. It's been tested more than once in the last five years, and remains the same - the DI system doesn't clog up with gas residue and is not the source of stoppages. It's not where the piston is, it's not gas residue, and there isn't anything more to the AK being "reliable" except constant repetition by uninformed posters. Soldiers using the AK get jams,too.

The AR doesn't have tighter tolerances, or tightly fitted parts, what it has is a tight fisted, stingy government who won't spend money on replacing parts, issuing lube, or proper marksmanship training. The AK doesn't have uniquely designed parts that are inherently resistant to corrosion, or loose tolerances that allow dust to keep from jamming it, or even a decent amount of power and accuracy. The .30-30 is better. What it has is a strong spring and heavy bolt to force rounds chambered, and an excellent magazine design.

This is the whole point of the vaunted AK reliability, and you can see the proof in one example - a 7.62X39 conversion of an AR15. Feed ammo through a dogleg magazine into a straight mag well, it's the real jammomatic. A reliable magazine is the ultimate Holy Grail item for that combination. What the AK has is a great magazine, the rifle, it's ok. What the AR has is a great lightweight action, the magazine, it's just ok. The change to the PMag should be a major hint.

Another is that any government who can make an independent decision about which firearm to purchase doesn't choose the AK. Their delegated experts choose something else. Not even China has issued it since 1995. The biggest area of AK activity and adoption is YOU, shooters in the US, based largely on price alone. Certainly the rumors of it's reliability aren't justified by the constant posting of disappointed owners unhappy with it's lack. There's even long lists of incompatible parts and which importer/kit builders to avoid like the plague.

For a foolproof, nearly indestructible, and utterly dependable weapon to have any "don't buy from these guys" recommendations is evidence enough the gun suffers a lot with poor assembly and a lack of how to make it run right. Obviously, a $400 AK isn't the best example of the breed.

March 5, 2011, 11:04 PM	#95
tirod Junior member Join Date: January 21, 2009 Posts: 1,672	I'm building a 6.8, I won't argue it could be better. What I do question is why we need to move the existing piston out of the bolt carrier and put it on the barrel. It's been tested more than once in the last five years, and remains the same - the DI system doesn't clog up with gas residue and is not the source of stoppages. It's not where the piston is, it's not gas residue, and there isn't anything more to the AK being "reliable" except constant repetition by uninformed posters. Soldiers using the AK get jams,too. The AR doesn't have tighter tolerances, or tightly fitted parts, what it has is a tight fisted, stingy government who won't spend money on replacing parts, issuing lube, or proper marksmanship training. The AK doesn't have uniquely designed parts that are inherently resistant to corrosion, or loose tolerances that allow dust to keep from jamming it, or even a decent amount of power and accuracy. The .30-30 is better. What it has is a strong spring and heavy bolt to force rounds chambered, and an excellent magazine design. This is the whole point of the vaunted AK reliability, and you can see the proof in one example - a 7.62X39 conversion of an AR15. Feed ammo through a dogleg magazine into a straight mag well, it's the real jammomatic. A reliable magazine is the ultimate Holy Grail item for that combination. What the AK has is a great magazine, the rifle, it's ok. What the AR has is a great lightweight action, the magazine, it's just ok. The change to the PMag should be a major hint. Another is that any government who can make an independent decision about which firearm to purchase doesn't choose the AK. Their delegated experts choose something else. Not even China has issued it since 1995. The biggest area of AK activity and adoption is YOU, shooters in the US, based largely on price alone. Certainly the rumors of it's reliability aren't justified by the constant posting of disappointed owners unhappy with it's lack. There's even long lists of incompatible parts and which importer/kit builders to avoid like the plague. For a foolproof, nearly indestructible, and utterly dependable weapon to have any "don't buy from these guys" recommendations is evidence enough the gun suffers a lot with poor assembly and a lack of how to make it run right. Obviously, a $400 AK isn't the best example of the breed.