AK VS AR

[ed308]

The AR is very much like the 1911 in that it has very passionate followers that tinker with the design with the hopes of reliability that is never 100% there.

Hmm..., and the 1911 has been around how long? I guess if you compared it to a revolver, then not as reliable. But pretty dam reliable if you ask me. AR too.

[Mobuck]

"The AR is very much like the 1911 in that it has very passionate followers that tinker with the design with the hopes of reliability that is never 100% there. "

The 1911 IS reliable until you start trying to "accurize" it. A well broken in 1911 IS reliable but may not have the accuracy for precision shooting(more like the AK actually).
From a civilian standpoint, the AR is adequately reliable unless/until someone starts tightening tolerances or modifying in search of more accuracy/range/power.

[agtman]

Based on this thread's title, "AK vs AR", I was gonna say that I prefer Alaska over Arkansas.

I agree, and I'm rooting for Heimo Korth.

But, since it's about rifles and I own both types: I'll say that up here, I depend more on my AK due to wicked weather, remote location, larger predators, and proximity to Russia.

For remote, cold, Alaskan-type environs, I'll take any of my M1s or Mini-Gs (in 30-06 or .308, take your pick) over an AK, which in my view is still inaccurate Commie junk no matter how you dress it up with modern rails or red dots.

If restricted to the environs of just the lower 48, then it's the AR all day every day.

There's just no question the AR is more accurate and ergonomically-friendly than any AK, plus you can easily source - at least for now - all critical AR parts, mags, 5.56 ammo, optics & mounts, and any other ephemeral accessory you deem immediately needful for hanging on your weapon.

The AK, with its 19th Century sights and classic Teak wood furniture, might make a Hollywood 'action-movie' producer drool like a conscripted Serf at Siberian boot camp, but at the end of the day it's still 1930s junk compared to the modern AR built to Mil-Spec standards.

[Art Eatman]

Back around 1950 my uncle got to talking about guns he thought of as good for "social work". Schmeissers, Thompsons, M2 Carbines.

Fast forward to today's world and for most of us civilians, it's semi-auto. Leading the chase one finds the AR and the AK.

Me, I'm mostly a hunter when it comes to rifles. Bolt gun, blue steel and walnut. Okay, that's me. But I've messed with Minis and ARs; several of each. I still have a Colt AR. It's a one-MOA shooter, which ought to be good for any social occasion.

Aesthetically, the ARs and AKs are ugly. I don't care for ugly. But the AR is, IMO, less ugly than the AK.

[stagpanther]

Aesthetically, the ARs and AKs are ugly. I don't care for ugly. But the AR is, IMO, less ugly than the AK.

TOTALLY disagree with that! I only have one AK compared to gobs of AR's but the AK is FAR more good looking IMHO.

[Erno86]

I believe the predominant firearm used by elephant poachers in Africa is the AK47. And I definitely would not want to take a 5.56X45 AR-15 on a elephant hunt, for fear of being stomped an pulverized into dust by a raging bull elephant --- Even though both are illegal to use against elephants. Given the choice...I would still pick the AK47 over the AR15 on elephants; any day of the week --- Both for reliability and lethality.

[darkgael]

That is mostly because the AK47 is much more available in third world countries. The use on elephants is full auto slaughter. You are not talking about surgical brain shots but magazines emptied at the animals.
BTW: did you ever read George Orwell’s essay “Shooting an Elephant”?
Interesting story on a number of levels.

[Art Eatman]

It was during the ascension to power of Idi Amin in Uganda that the slaughter of elephants via full-auto AK 47s was first reported. He became dictator in 1971.

[Erno86]

Originally Posted by darkgael

That is mostly because the AK47 is much more available in third world countries. The use on elephants is full auto slaughter. You are not talking about surgical brain shots but magazines emptied at the animals.
BTW: did you ever read George Orwell’s essay “Shooting an Elephant”?
Interesting story on a number of levels.

No...I haven't read Orwell's book on "Shooting an Elephant" yet.

But I'll check it out.

Thanks...

Erno

[Fishbed77]

Hmm..., and the 1911 has been around how long? I guess if you compared it to a revolver, then not as reliable.

Depends on the revolver. I've encountered plenty of revolvers (most Taurus and "Staturday Night Specials", but also the occasional Ruger and S&W) that were unreliable.

A quality AR will be reliable and a quality AK will be reliable. A bargain-bin AR or US-made commercial-grade AK can't be expected to be as good.

[dean1818]

I started to reload and accurate guns became the "thing" for me

I had an SKS that I could get to 1.5 to 2.5 inch MOA, with some Hornady bullets..... the cheap stuff was worse...... It was sold a few years ago

Ended up with AR varients that are 1 MOA

Didnt really find an AK that I fell in love with

[COSteve]

Originally Posted by stagpanther

TOTALLY disagree with that! I only have one AK compared to gobs of AR's but the AK is FAR more good looking IMHO.

Course, he also thinks she's a beauty queen.

[Art Eatman]

Ah, a betel nut lady!

https://www.healthline.com/health/betel-nut-dangers

[Skans]

I believe the predominant firearm used by elephant poachers in Africa is the AK47. And I definitely would not want to take a 5.56X45 AR-15 on a elephant hunt,

I live in the United States and have never seen a wild elephant while hiking in the Appalachians nor Colorado or even in Alaska (although, I'm sure some folks in those states have seen some crazy looking elephants). Africans used to hunt Elephants with spears too.

None of this makes me believe an AK is a more formidable weapon than an AR. AR's can be configured to shoot many different types of rounds, 300 blackout being just one of them, if you want to replicate the 7.62x39 cartridge in an AR without the "banana" effect. What are my choices in an AK? How quickly can you reconfigure an AK to fire 5.56?

As far as jungle warfare goes? Maybe I'd be a tad more concerned about this if I thought I would soon be going to some jungle across the globe to fight angry Elephants.

[Willie D]

This was a harder question a few years back when ARs were expensive and AKs cheap.

Today, if you want a better, easier shooter that's more fun at the range and better at HD - AR all the way.

If you want a stupidly reliable survival weapon, that can take nearly all North American game and will last till the end of the world (provided you saved enough ammo), AK.

[Baba Louie]

Both have evolved into fine weapons and fun range arms. Maybe a little varmint shooting. Or big varmints.

Could even hunt birds and deer and such, sure.

Both come in a variety of rounds and bbl lengths, and now pistols (handrifles have been around for a while, true).

You can buy AR & AK clones in .22lr up to .30-06 and 12 gauge if one wants. Nice to have options.

Tolerance stack differs in them (as others have mentioned). Kinda matters, kinda doesn't.

Suppressing each has joys and sorrows, challenges whilst dealing wid da gas.

Chivers' book is worth the read. A time or two...

I think it worthwhile for all American riflemen (rifle-women as well) to be able to use either to good effect if need be. Simple glass or red dot atop either do help older eyes enjoy both and get on target quick. Amazing to ring steel at 600 yds using 5.45 or 5.56 with no real recoil.

Both Fun n Effective (w/ limitations & tradeoffs).

[Ignition Override]

One issue with AKs designed in 5.56/.223 is that a magazine designed for one specific rifle, such as the Norinco, seldom seems to fit at all or functions in another type, such as the Russian Saiga (I owned) or Romanian .223 AK.

At least that's my impression from reading a good bit on AKfiles.

A year ago at the huge Tulsa Wanenmacher's gun show--while twice scanning all of the tables with rifles (did a steady walk)--saw only a single .223 AK, and it was a Norinco.

[tanker2000]

Many great and informative responses. I own both types and enjoy them, but... I truly have a deep appreciation for the ruggedness and brilliantly “simple” AK design. A properly cared for AR is extremely reliable. An AK that’s run hard and treated badly is still extremely reliable. I have more fun with AKs. I guess it comes down to individual preference. There’s lots of hype about the pros and cons of both types. My take: own and shoot what you like! P.S. I own a 5.56 AK and love it. Have had 0 issues after 3,500+\- rounds.

[Fishbed77]

A properly cared for AR is extremely reliable. An AK that’s run hard and treated badly is still extremely reliable.

This is a myth that just won't die. Both the AR and AK (assuming both atre from quality manufacturers) are mature and very reliable designs that can take a lot of abuse (Google "Filthy 14"), but both absolutely need maintenance, even the AK.

[Bart Noir]

modern AR built to Mil-Spec standards

Considering that the M-16 was adopted in the very early 1960s, the mil-spec design standards for them will be capturing the affordable tech of the late 1950s.

But, as has been pointed out, there has been significant improvement in the AR design through the commercial, competitive, and military use of them. I'd prefer the standard AR over the standard AKM (stamped receiver) but I have both.

And what I'd really like to get is a Galil Ace in 5.56 since it uses STANAG 5.56 magazines and has a bolt hold-open feature. This weapon overcomes every problem that I have with the standard AK design.

Bart Noir

[Black Wolf]

Originally Posted by keithdog

I apologize if this has already been discussed.....

Might've been, once or twice

I've had a few of each, over the years. My (LE) "Personnel File" actually had "AK 47" listed under my "weapon qualifications" and, for a brief period, actually carried one as my patrol rifle. Before I get corrected, NO it was not an AK47 but rather an AKM, that is just how it was listed.

I have a soft spot for AK's. I like building them (from flats), carrying them, and shooting them. However, I have no illusions - the AR is a superior weapon system.

According to the internet, the AR is more accurate and the AK is more reliable when not maintained correctly. The second part has not been my experience. I took HORRIBLE care of my AR. It had so much lime dust (and so little lube) that it sounded like sandpaper on concrete when the bolt was racked. It still had the exact same number of failures my AK did - zero.

The only AK I have ever been accurate with is my Yugo M92 with a Primary Arms Micro Dot on it. Whereas, during day light, I don't need an optic on an AR to shoot just as accurately. Gimme irons on an AK and I'm printing 10" groups at 100m. So.... as someone who genuinely loves the design and WANTS to prefer it, I have to honestly say - I don't. If I could only have one (luckily that is not the case) it would be an AR.

Back in the 80's an 90's, you got an AK because AR's were pricey. There has never been a better time to get an AR. I worry one day I will tell my grandkids - heck we paid more for a tank of gas than a stripped lower.

Speaking of stripped lower - do yourself a couple favors: (1) assemble your own. If you can pay attention to a video, you can assemble (not "build") an AR (2) do not buy into the hype on branding. Go with decent mil spec parts, if you want a piece of equipment. Only go with the top names, if you need to prove you have disposable income.

[Fishbed77]

Considering that the M-16 was adopted in the very early 1960s, the mil-spec design standards for them will be capturing the affordable tech of the late 1950s.

The TDP has been updated over the years as the M16 and M4 have progressed though different variants.

[SIGSHR]

IMHO the AK is sort of a PPSh/PPS on steroids-designed to be quickly manufactured and used by conscript troops rushed through training and driven, not led into combat. In WWII the Soviets realized the Germans did not like close combat, hence Soviet doctrine was, as Chuikov said at Stalingrad, to make every German feel "he is living under the muzzle of a Russian gun."
In Vietnam we pretty much used our M-16s like PPShs-thick jungle canopy, poor visibility, combat at night, etc.

[HistoryJunky]

I don't have any scientific data to back either rifle. I do own 2 AKs (rifle and 10.5" pistol), and used to own an AR. Both AKs are made by Zastava in Serbia, 7.62x39. The AR was some budget upper and a Poly Lower. Not the best representation.

I had no issues with the AR but I found my AK(rifle) to be more fun to shoot. I have owned about 4 different AKs and I still see myself buying more in the future. I have always liked AKs.

I have personally witnessed more failures in ARs, but that's just from being at a range or when shooting with friends.

I only shoot with iron sights so I don't really worry a whole lot about AKs being harder to put optics on. I usually don't shoot past 100 yards so no issues there. There are plenty of people that can shoot decently past 100 with iron sighted-AKs. You just have to put in the time.

I guess I enjoy the whole "experience" of shooting AKs as some others have said. To me shooting my AR wasn't much different than my .22LR.

[hdwhit]

keithdog asked:
I am curious as to what the differences would be in the AK platform vs the AR platform for todays modern sporting rifles?

Before answering the question, did anyone ask you what you were wanting to do with the rifle? Or what attributes you were most concerned with the rifle possessing?

Since both the AR and AK "platforms" are available in either 22 or 30 caliber (there are even AK pattern rifles that will fire the same 5.56x45 cartridge as the AR-15, thereby eliminating much of the discussion of superiority of various cartridges) and in various buttstock configurations, it really seems to come down to assessing what it is you want the rifle to do before weighing various attributes.

For example, several responses have mentioned "modularity", "flexibility" or "adaptability" as attributes that favor the AR. Several years ago, we bought ARs for both our sons. They haven't made any significant changes to the rifles. So, if a person isn't going to replace parts on their rifle, "modularity" becomes a meaningless attribute.