AR 15 NATO Vs. AK 47

#1

Accuracy
Reliability
Travel Distance

#2

Oh boy this discussion is going to open up a can of worms. I choose the AR platform because im familiar. But the best option in my humble opinion is the M1A. That is, if you can handle carrying the weight.

4 Likes
#3

I love this debate simply because everyone ALWAYS leaves out the one rifle that is the best of both worlds.

I won’t ever get rid of my AR and I’m not a fan of AK’s, tho i understand their role. But if someone is looking for their first magazine fed semi auto rifle. Go with an AK 74 chambered in 5.45

1 Like
#4

Whats the one rifle everyone leaves out?

#5

The Magic Word (Weight) is a major problem.

#6

@James
The AK 74 is always left out of the discussion

#7

I used the Russian AK (Kalashnikov) for years, it is simply a garbage.
It is only good for door to door asult rifle and after firing 300 rounds, expect number 301 round to drop 1 foot away from you.
You wont believe if I tell you, I used to put a bucket of water next to me to cool the barrel. I kid you not😆

#8

The 74 is pretty sweet, it has a good weight and good accuracy. My buddy owns one. For the most part if asked to choose between the 47 and AR, I let people argue and keep shooting my M1A. This conversation like 9 vs 45 never leads anywhere good. Lol.

1 Like
#9

Oh that’s easy go with the 40

Lol. Just kidding thats always as far as that argument goes.

Just like any other firearm choose the platform that works for you and what you need it to do. I feel the more productive conversation would be manufacturers and at what point it goes from a fun range gun to one you’d trust your life too. I should state that a conversation is not a bunch of loyal fanboys getting mad not everyone ones brand X…

1 Like
#10

For fun watch Gunny evaluate both

2 Likes
#11

That was fun, just watch the AK47 barrel when he is in fully auto how it bends.

#12

I run with both. I love both platforms. I don’t compare either of them to one another. I love the modular aspects of the AR, and I love the simplicity of the AK. Both are designed to run. The AK is cheaper to shoot, since 7.62x39 prices are pretty cheap. I have 2 AR’s, and 1 AK. Bushmaster, PSA. My AK is the dreaded and controversial Century Arms RAS47. I’m about run 3K rounds through it, and have had not one issue. My AR’s are lighter to run, even with minimal furniture. I keep it simple, they all perform perfectly. Despite price difference with ammo or accessories, I still like them equally. To me, it proves nothing to compare them, so I let the horse sleep.

2 Likes
#13

Great analysis Matthew, like I mentioned previously I used AK47 in active service for 10 years (The real Kalashnikob) and found that there was a lot of myth behind it.
Its a great assult rifle no doubt.
Thank you for sharing your input.

#14

Thanks, Joseph! Many say that the AK is not accurate. Well, wrong! If they weren’t, there would not be so many countries who have adopted and utilized them in combat. Granted, the AR can shoot farther out but, you can get an AK to throw ammo past 300 yds if you know how. The AK hits hard, and the 7.62x 39 round proves it. The AR15 is an ingenious and proven design, and can hit hard a wee bit further out. Both platforms are excellent for their purpose.

2 Likes
#15

I agree and both have pros and cons, as for my preferred style here is what I look for.

Penetration
Accuracy
Weight (as I am getting older. Lol)
Travel & effective distance

Great conversation Matthew✔

#16

My preferences are the same. All aspects are necessary, or it’s useless. AK’s and AR’s were not designed to fail, unless manufacturers cut corners in the building process. My AK is heavy, and I have a shoulder injury that can flare up, if I am not careful. So I dig the stock into my armpit, and dig in and lock it. Try that.

1 Like
#17

I will second this.

1 Like
#18

Having fired the M16 in combat and captured AK-47s I would take an AR or M16. Not one of the first M 16s however. But for me the M-14 was a better gun if you wanted to reach out and touch someone lets say at 1000 yards.

Still in close combat both the AR and AK do what they are supposed to do. The are isn’t quite as accurate but it doesn’t have to be. For jungle fighting or clearing a building both will work very well. The AK rattles like a kids toy and just about any part from any gun will fit in a gun made by any country. That is an advantage for untrained people using an AK. Ammo is lighter for the AR and most of the guns can punch a 2 inch MOA without a lot of work. I am not sure you can get a AK down to a 2 MOA. Maybe there are some after market people that can tune a AK up I don’t know.

Now with a M-14 you can make a pretty good sniper rifle. Not as good as a Bolt action 700 Remington that will touch someone out to 1200-1500 yards but better than a AR or AK.

To be fair I cannot testify how well taken care of the AKs I shot were. they were picked up off the ground after the people that owned them didn’t need them and I have never had a new one.

#19

I totally agree, I personally used the original AK (Kalashnikov) for almost a decade.
I would take an AR that I build anytime over AK.
I don’t want to sound redundant here, but one of the major problems that AK has is heat, after 200- 400 rounds expect the bullet to fall 100 feet away from you. Another fact is watch the Ak barrel in slow motion when it’s shooting, it rattles like a rubber, which makes it inaccurate.
However, short distance and door to door combat it just work fine, especially the short or foldable version.

1 Like
#20

Wow. I just read all this and learned a good bit about the two rifles. I’m actually wanting to dive into rifles next. I’m actually looking to save up for a Springfield SAINT. I would build one but it’s just that I have no idea what I’m looking for in a rifle other than anti-predators (I live on my parents’ farm), defense and maybe hunting (I think I’ll get a different rifle for hunting like a Remington 700 that was mentioned earlier).

2 Likes