Poll: ak47 vs m16

[Theron Julius]

AK-47. Two reasons. First, it's brutally effective. The 7.62mm round is devastatingly effective and the AK-47 is one of the toughest guns in the world. You can drag it from mud, sand, and water and the thing will still pretty reliably fire. Secondly, the AK is one of the most common weapons in the world. Ammo and replacement parts will never be in short supply in the foreseeable future.

 

[toastmaster2k8]

Im sorry my M16, But if given the choice, AK47. Bigger round and simple Break down can mean all the difference in a fire fight. ( Ak uses 7.62 and M16 Series uses 5.56 )

P.S. Personally I would reach for an M1A

Bigger round doesn't mean shit if the enemy can kill you from a range that you can't touch him at.

The AK's round is big, it kicks like a donkey, its terrifyingly inaccurate even up close, its sight rail is way WAY to close together so even if you think your on target you probably aren't, the balance is way to far forward, and did I mention that since most of the ammunition for the ak was made in soviet puppet states a lot of the bulk ammo has a horrible habit of not fucking firing.

The M16A4 has an effective range over 200 yards longer than the AK, it uses a much higher velocity round so even though its smaller it has better armor penetration characteristics, and best of all, since the 5.56 round tumbles when it hits water (flesh is mostly water) it causes horrific wounds on impact and best of all the spring system is all in-line so the recoil is lateral meaning you have almost no kick from the weapon.

I know all these things, But some the advantages it brings are good. but like I said. If anything id take the M14 as it is good up to 300 Yards and Field stripping is basically yanking out the receiver. But I agree, The M16 kicks ass in more ways than 10. more Rails, better handling and good range makes it a devastating weapon ( Iv handled all 3 and have 2 of them)But being able to bury that thing for weeks at a time and then still being able to fire the thing with out cleaning would be helpful in a messy situation. But in the end , Yes I think they are both capable of Knocking the S*** out of a Towel Head

 

[toastmaster2k8]

Im sorry my M16, But if given the choice, AK47. Bigger round and simple Break down can mean all the difference in a fire fight. ( Ak uses 7.62 and M16 Series uses 5.56 )

P.S. Personally I would reach for an M1A

That totally depends on what you are shooting at. For a person the 7.62 round typically penetrates 12 inches of flesh before it yaws. Which means it can pass right through a person still carrying a substantial amount of its energy. While the hole will likely kill eventually, you want stopping power as well. I have fired near on 700 rounds through an M16, and not good rounds either, dirty rounds. The weapon still functioned perfectly. That's more reliability then you are likely ever going to need. The smaller rounds means you can carry far more ammo as well.

I don't know why people are so eager to believe videogames portrayal of the weapon over real world facts and evidence. Hardly and military forces that can afford it have stopped using the larger 7.62 rounds and started using rounds similar to the 5.56 round used by the US military. Even the Russian military.

This generally why I dont Pick the AK in these conversations as it will always lead back to the whole being in a video game. I give lectures on that stuff to my class mates ( es, im in high school, but I actually know what the hell im doing) as most of what they see in a video game is epic bull shit inaccuracy, and I explain how often jamming can occur, barrel over heat, recoil, wind, and sights and how there called Iron sights not hard scopes and that they never try to do that in real life. And yea, I know 5.56 will shatter inside of you, but still, firing on a vehicle with the 7.62 will get your targets hit, the 5.56 isnt going to penetrate heavier armor as well as it would with the 7.62, but on a side note how many of todays enemy's in the middle east wear body armor? ( not meaning to sound like a douch bag)

 

[manaman]

Im sorry my M16, But if given the choice, AK47. Bigger round and simple Break down can mean all the difference in a fire fight. ( Ak uses 7.62 and M16 Series uses 5.56 )

P.S. Personally I would reach for an M1A

That totally depends on what you are shooting at. For a person the 7.62 round typically penetrates 12 inches of flesh before it yaws. Which means it can pass right through a person still carrying a substantial amount of its energy. While the hole will likely kill eventually, you want stopping power as well. I have fired near on 700 rounds through an M16, and not good rounds either, dirty rounds. The weapon still functioned perfectly. That's more reliability then you are likely ever going to need. The smaller rounds means you can carry far more ammo as well.

I don't know why people are so eager to believe videogames portrayal of the weapon over real world facts and evidence. Hardly and military forces that can afford it have stopped using the larger 7.62 rounds and started using rounds similar to the 5.56 round used by the US military. Even the Russian military.

This generally why I dont Pick the AK in these conversations as it will always lead back to the whole being in a video game. I give lectures on that stuff to my class mates ( es, im in high school, but I actually know what the hell im doing) as most of what they see in a video game is epic bull shit inaccuracy, and I explain how often jamming can occur, barrel over heat, recoil, wind, and sights and how there called Iron sights not hard scopes and that they never try to do that in real life. And yea, I know 5.56 will shatter inside of you, but still, firing on a vehicle with the 7.62 will get your targets hit, the 5.56 isnt going to penetrate heavier armor as well as it would with the 7.62, but on a side note how many of todays enemy's in the middle east wear body armor? ( not meaning to sound like a douch bag)

Well it really depends on which round you are using. The standard 5.56 round actually penetrates a little to much in softer spots in the body, while it does have a tendency to yaw when it encounters a density change (going from air into a person) in many cases (like gut shots) the bullet will pass straight through a person. The military has developed a handful of other rounds to counter these problems and uses them as needed, including armor piercing rounds M855 (65 grain steel tip) and it's companion M855 lead free (tungsten penetrator). These rounds can tear right through a vehicle or most body armors especially then new M855A1 they started to ship to combat zones midway through last year. All tests indicate it performs better then 7.62 rounds at penetration especially through steel.

In other words, bullet tech has come a long way, and carrying smaller rounds is far more effective then larger rounds, most of the reliability issues people bring up only crop up after 1000+ rounds of ammunition fired. That's far more ammo then you can ever carry with either weapon, and if you are not field striping and cleaning an actively used service weapon whenever possible you will run into those problems no matter what weapon you are using. In other words reliability differences are mostly the product of myth, and the ammo is superior on the M16. The military isn't exactly stupid, or worried about money at all costs. The US military does have a $300 billion budget after all.

 

[SovietX]

Katana for me please.

Guns for show, knives for pros.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

...so when your M16 gets dirt on it and misfires, I'll take yours off your corpse. The original M16 had a lot of reliability issues, ALOT. If the poll, had been M4 or the M16A2, that'd be a different story. Now if this was a post-apocalyptic game, 5.56mm NATO (or .223 Remington for those of us who dwell in the US) would be much more plentiful as pretty much every western military uses the round. However, for the punch and reliability you can't beat an old fashioned Automat Kalashnikov.

I apologize if you feel insulted, that was not my intention, I just feel that neither rifle is accurately represented in any shooter or game. Also, why isn't there any representation on the AK variants, like the Israeli made Galil, or Saiga variant(which makes a really sweet semi-auto shotgun that looks and uses the same parts as an AK). I know they're not what everyone recognizes, but wouldn't be fun to put some new weapons into everyone's games.

Galil is in Black Ops, and the Saiga 20 shotgun is in Bad Company 2, IIRC.

And the question was about games, and very few FPS games have weapon degradation or jamming. So its a moot point.

 

[BrionJames]

Galil is in Black Ops, and the Saiga 20 shotgun is in Bad Company 2, IIRC.

And the question was about games, and very few FPS games have weapon degradation or jamming. So its a moot point.[/quote]

Your right. It just seems kind of stupid, when games tout realism as one of there "features". The only games I've played that featured any sort of weapon jamming, were, System Shock 2 and Far Cry 2.

 

[punkrocker27]

AK. It's damage is higher and the accuracy isn't bad when crouched.

On expert or advanced the M16 just doesn't do enough damage to kill in one shot.

Cookie for having a clue what I'm on about.

It's a little late, but is that a L4D2 reference? Yeah, I'll just take my cookie now anyways.

 

[Aurora219]

AK. It's damage is higher and the accuracy isn't bad when crouched.

On expert or advanced the M16 just doesn't do enough damage to kill in one shot.

Cookie for having a clue what I'm on about.

It's a little late, but is that a L4D2 reference? Yeah, I'll just take my cookie now anyways.

It's a little stale now, but go ahead.