AK-47 was never the most accurate but its reliability is unmatchable!
To be honest i would prefer to be in a battlefield with a less acurate rifle that wouldn`t let
me down in a critical moment.
Dolphins dominate (Login Kafkas-Azeri) The Conquerors (Turkey)
Re: AK47 vs M16
October 25 2009, 2:59 PM
Ak-47 is stronger but its not as accurate.
Also anyone can use Ak-47 but thats not the case with M16. M16 requires alot of knowledge to function. Do anything with Ak and it will still work. Thats the advantage of Ak.
So it really comes down in what army your talking about and what conditions.
This message has been edited by Kafkas-Azeri on Oct 25, 2009 3:00 PM This message has been edited by Kafkas-Azeri on Oct 25, 2009 3:00 PM
Let's also not forget that the AK-47 is about two decades older than the M-16. Russkies design a GREAT fvcking rifle that's unmatched anywhere in the world and then 20 odd years pass and the Americans come up with the M-16.
The AK probably get's the nod. It's more durable, easier to take down and anyone can be trained on it in less than an hour. This is why it is the most widely used and produced firearm in the world.
The AR-15/M16 family is also a good firearm but it is not as durable, a bit harder to take down and clean (not hard though)and it's round is probably not as damaging as a 7.62. However, there is something to be said about 5.56 which gives it advantages with this weapon. It is more accurate, a troop can carry alot more rounds. The M16 is also a bit lighter and has a more effective range.
Durability of the AK though is just too much to overcome. You could leave that thing in a swamp for days and pick it up and it will still fire. We cannot say the same for the M16. I believe that in the same conditions, it would not fire or it might fire the first round then jam immediately after that taking in the debris into the upper reciever.
This message has been edited by Fantaros on Oct 26, 2009 7:45 PM