The Army switched to faulty ammo and then refused to issue cleaning kits. Even AK-47s would jam under those conditions. The improved M16A1 is said to be as reliable as the AKM.
FPBP. Same reason why Glocks became popular. I'll also add that ARs are available chambered in a lot of different calibers and that the aftermarket is huge. It can also be made much more accurate than most semi auto rifles, to the point where a good AR-10 can shoot consistently sub-moa. Try that with an AK.
>and they just work.
So was that why they kept fricking up in Vietnam?
The A1 probably had issues but I never had a single problem with my AR. As long as the BCG is well oiled it will chug through thousands of rounds without needing to clean it.
All the reliability issues that people talk about in regards to the M16 in Vietnam were earlier models that had the misfortune of being issued with shit mags/ammo and zero cleaning kits, along with actual flaws in the rifles like no chrome lining in the bore, flash hiders that snagged on everything, no fencing on the lower that made accidental depression of the mag release button easy, suboptimal buffer design and other little things. The A1 fixed all this.
AK's are crap, there's too many webm's of Ukrainians and Russians mag dumping 50 rounds in someone to just have them get back up and still remain a threat for a few moments. Terrants stream proved that AR's kill and incapacitate with just a few hits
Same reasons IBM PC/AT became default desktop:
1. It works.
2. Its performance is good, even record in some areas (weight). Deficiencies are bearable.
3. It is open platform so everyone can make it.
4. It is open platform so everyone can mod it, it became "constructor for adults".
Yes its like perfect proved open source platform with parts and equipment available all over the world. Any small arms company can start making their own
It's light, they are easy to shoot and most shooters need all the help they can get. I skipped ar's alltogether because of the the DI system, t-charging handle and the absence of a good folding mechanism. The whole idea of housing buffer springs inside the buffertube/buttstock is moronic too. All in all it works good even tho it has some shortcomings
Oh absolutely, nothing is perfect. AK's maintenance, reliability, and ability to withstand abuse is it's selling point, of course you lose some ergonomics and accuracy compared to AR's
the only real alternative to the AR-15 is the AR-18/AR180 and its offshoots, not the AK
[...]
It solves these shortcomings while retaining most of the good features about the AR-15.
Agreed. AR18 variants and other newer piston rifles are the future
The problem is that the AKM, the AK that was produced the most, was made out of stamped parts where as the M16 is always made of milled parts or at least parts that can be milled out. This means if you end up with a part actually breaking you can usually make a new one at any mom and pop machine shop. For an AKM, a broken part means you have to throw the rifle out or cannibalize another AKM for parts.
>Everyone who has a choice of weapon chooses an AR over an AK
I politely disagree.
if a real certified SHTF happened I absolutely would grab my AK over an AR. Muh penetration through barriers is significantly better.
not like I'd last more than a couple weeks or months at best anyway so at least I'd die holding my preferred weapon.
I should add I have nothing against ARs, just aren't favorite
the only real alternative to the AR-15 is the AR-18/AR180 and its offshoots, not the AK
It's light, they are easy to shoot and most shooters need all the help they can get. I skipped ar's alltogether because of the the DI system, t-charging handle and the absence of a good folding mechanism. The whole idea of housing buffer springs inside the buffertube/buttstock is moronic too. All in all it works good even tho it has some shortcomings
It solves these shortcomings while retaining most of the good features about the AR-15.
Because they're ubiquitous, standardized, and they just work.
lol they're dirt cheap
>and they just work.
So was that why they kept fricking up in Vietnam?
Damn, imagine if we had a rifle that worked? Vietnam would be non-existent lmaoo
You know as well as I do what that statistic includes.
Well this thread isn't about the Colt 1911
Napalm sticks to kids
That was legitimately an Army problem.
Not a design flaw.
I cant even imagine how underaged and/or moronic you are to even think this was even somewhat of a relevant argument.
The Army switched to faulty ammo and then refused to issue cleaning kits. Even AK-47s would jam under those conditions. The improved M16A1 is said to be as reliable as the AKM.
FPBP. Same reason why Glocks became popular. I'll also add that ARs are available chambered in a lot of different calibers and that the aftermarket is huge. It can also be made much more accurate than most semi auto rifles, to the point where a good AR-10 can shoot consistently sub-moa. Try that with an AK.
The A1 probably had issues but I never had a single problem with my AR. As long as the BCG is well oiled it will chug through thousands of rounds without needing to clean it.
The A1 is the variant that fixed everything and is the start of the AR as we know it today
>The A1 is the variant that fixed everything
What do you mean ? It was the variant used during the Vietnam war, it wasn't perfected yet.
All the reliability issues that people talk about in regards to the M16 in Vietnam were earlier models that had the misfortune of being issued with shit mags/ammo and zero cleaning kits, along with actual flaws in the rifles like no chrome lining in the bore, flash hiders that snagged on everything, no fencing on the lower that made accidental depression of the mag release button easy, suboptimal buffer design and other little things. The A1 fixed all this.
The M16 was the slick side rifle with no FA and the 1:14 barrel. The A1 addressed the teething issues in Vietnam.
By 1968 most soldiers said they'd prefer the M16 to AKMs or M14s.
AK's are crap, there's too many webm's of Ukrainians and Russians mag dumping 50 rounds in someone to just have them get back up and still remain a threat for a few moments. Terrants stream proved that AR's kill and incapacitate with just a few hits
This is just cherry picking. Not even a good example because mass shooters using ARs have something like a 25% fatality per wounded ratio.
People complained about the M-16s lack of stopping power and lethality when it came out, and have continued to do so with the M-249.
Both are plenty lethal. There are just a frick ton more AR manufacturers so they are easier to customize, and have lots of other benefits over AKs.
That said, I have used the new Galils, although not extensively, and they are pretty nice. The old ones were too.
I do want to get a classic AK-47 with wood furniture at some point.
Same reasons IBM PC/AT became default desktop:
1. It works.
2. Its performance is good, even record in some areas (weight). Deficiencies are bearable.
3. It is open platform so everyone can make it.
4. It is open platform so everyone can mod it, it became "constructor for adults".
Yes its like perfect proved open source platform with parts and equipment available all over the world. Any small arms company can start making their own
LRBHO
They are black.
It's light, they are easy to shoot and most shooters need all the help they can get. I skipped ar's alltogether because of the the DI system, t-charging handle and the absence of a good folding mechanism. The whole idea of housing buffer springs inside the buffertube/buttstock is moronic too. All in all it works good even tho it has some shortcomings
>most shooters need all the help they can get
Could argue the exact same for the AK in terms of maintenance, reliability, and ease of fixing.
Oh absolutely, nothing is perfect. AK's maintenance, reliability, and ability to withstand abuse is it's selling point, of course you lose some ergonomics and accuracy compared to AR's
>lose some ergonomics and accuracy
>some
That's a funny way to spell "all"
Low IQ bait attempt...
Agreed. AR18 variants and other newer piston rifles are the future
The problem is that the AKM, the AK that was produced the most, was made out of stamped parts where as the M16 is always made of milled parts or at least parts that can be milled out. This means if you end up with a part actually breaking you can usually make a new one at any mom and pop machine shop. For an AKM, a broken part means you have to throw the rifle out or cannibalize another AKM for parts.
Spareparts for ak's are cheap as frick, same for the ar
Only because so many AKMs were produced. The problem is that if you're cut off from the markets you're SOoL.
>muh manly AK
>bottom of the barrel morons actually believe this shit
Everyone who has a choice of weapon chooses an AR over an AK
>Everyone who has a choice of weapon chooses an AR over an AK
I politely disagree.
if a real certified SHTF happened I absolutely would grab my AK over an AR. Muh penetration through barriers is significantly better.
not like I'd last more than a couple weeks or months at best anyway so at least I'd die holding my preferred weapon.
I should add I have nothing against ARs, just aren't favorite
Except of course for the Utter Chads who choose the XCR.
How does it feel to be a special snowflake?
the only real alternative to the AR-15 is the AR-18/AR180 and its offshoots, not the AK
It solves these shortcomings while retaining most of the good features about the AR-15.
it just works