close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

SHTF- AK or AR??

Discussion in 'The Kalashnikov Klub' started by Teej, Feb 4, 2010.

  1. CarlosC

    CarlosC AK Fanatic

    2,880
    6
    Jan 4, 2000
    DFW area, TX
    Have you guys read the link from Teej?? Here are some excerpts...

    "The M4 and 3 competitors, including one M4 variant that can be converted from existing rifles, come out of a sandstorm reliability test – and the M4 finishes dead last, with more than 3.5x more jams than the 3rd place finisher."

    "After Action Reviews done by the Marines after the early phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom revealed that urban warfare scenarios made employment of the M16A2 difficult in some situations; Marines were picking up short AK-47s with collapsible butt-stocks, or scrounging pistols for use inside buildings."

    "Failure to maintain the weapon meticulously can lead to jams, especially in sandy or dusty environments. Kalashnikovs may not have a reputation for accuracy, or lightness – but they do have a well-earned reputation for being able to take amazing amounts of abuse, without maintenance, and still fire reliably. The Israeli “Galil” applied these lessons in 5.56mm caliber, and earned a similar reputation. Colt’s M16 and M4 have never done so."

    “USMC officials said the M4 malfunctioned three times more often than the M16A4 during an assessment conducted in late summer 2002 for Marine Corps Systems Command at Quantico, VA. Malfunctions were broken down into several categories, including “magazine,” “failure to chamber,” “failure to fire,” “failure to extract” and “worn or broken part,” according to the briefing documents. During the comparison, the M4 failed 186 times across those categories over the course of 69,000 rounds fired. The M16A4 failed 61 times during the testing."

    "Soldiers had their own comments, however, which were also included in the report and relayed in the magazine article:

    3rd ID soldier: “I know it fires very well and accurate [when] clean. But sometimes it needs to fire dirty well too.”

    25th Infantry Division soldier: “The M4 Weapon in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan was quick to malfunction when a little sand got in the weapon. Trying to keep it clean, sand free was impossible while on patrols or firefights.”

    82nd Airborne Division soldier: “The M4 is overall an excellent weapon, however the flaw of its sensitivity to dirt and powder residue needs to be corrected. True to fact, cleaning will help. Daily assigned tasks, and nonregular hours in tactical situations do not always warrant the necessary time required for effective cleaning.”

    75th Ranger Regiment member, SOCOM: “Even with the dust cover closed and magazine in the well, sand gets all inside; on and around the bolt. It still fires, but after a while the sand works its way all through the gun and jams start.”

    "A December 2006 survey, conducted on behalf of the Army by CNA Corp., conducted over 2,600 interviews with Soldiers returning from combat duty. The M4 received a number of strong requests from M-16 users, who liked its smaller profile. Among M4 users, however, 19% of said they experienced stoppages in combat – and almost 20% of those said they were “unable to engage the target with that weapon during a significant portion of or the entire firefight after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage.” The report adds that “Those who attached accessories to their weapon were more likely to experience stoppages, regardless of how the accessories were attached [including via official means like rail mounts].” Since “accessories” can include items like night sights, flashlights, et. al., their use is not expected to go away any time soon."
     
  2. Joshhtn

    Joshhtn The eBay Guy Silver Member

    11,578
    5,781
    Mar 31, 2009
    Middle Tennessee

    I love how you keep referencing this one video... 1 video means NOTHING!... A Honda is known to be a reliable car, but I guarantee I can find a video of one not starting.
     


  3. JBJ16

    JBJ16

    744
    2
    May 9, 2007
    YOUR BLINDSIDE
    Well it is just a good feeling to have love, love , love isn't it:hearts:

    That video shows only what it shows:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqRwx4wtmms

    the AR will fully function while the AK will fail, after shoveling dirt on top of both while in the ready state right-side up

    seems like a fair assessment isn't it.:tongueout:
     
  4. JBJ16

    JBJ16

    744
    2
    May 9, 2007
    YOUR BLINDSIDE
  5. my762buzz

    my762buzz

    1,551
    0
    Mar 21, 2007
    No feathers ruffled.
    You just reminded me why the AR15 platform is more prone to failure by dusty conditions and thats why it absolutely needs to have a sealed ejection port area. A little dust that actually gets inside and the fat lady sings at the ball game. My active duty marine brother in law has also reminded me that his experiences with M16s in dusty conditions was less than favorable.
    The need to keep a weapon clean and wet in a desert becomes a liability.
    Say what you want but for a shtf platform not needing to keep things sterile and lubed to absolutely work reliably is an asset for surviving. You might not always have access to supplies to keep it going reliably. Take hurricane katrina for example. If you were trying to leave that hell hole with an AR15 and accidently dropped it in the sewage most everyone was walking through, crap is likely to seep into the action. At that point, its not going to matter if you can't engage armed bad guys at 1000 yards because your Ar15 might not even cycle at all. It would really suck to die because you don't have time
    to clean your weapon 5 times a day. No thanks. If I absolutely got to shoot something 600 to 800 yards away, I am grabbing my bolt rifle in a much more terminally effective caliber which is far more accurate than most AR15s anyhow. Who exactly wants to argue bolt guns are inherently less accurate that AR15s? :whistling:
     
  6. Nestor

    Nestor Lean & Mean

    12,514
    1,484
    Jul 13, 2003
    Canada
    That's why I went with CZ vz.58 :)
    No such problem as the safety works different way.
     
  7. JBJ16

    JBJ16

    744
    2
    May 9, 2007
    YOUR BLINDSIDE
    A ha . . .an enlightened one. Good for you! :cool:

    But we sure have to give credit to the AK design. Simple, robust, reliable blaster. . . just like any other long serving military rifle :cool: I want one despite that Youtube video. I already have a fullauto M4gery.:cool:
     
  8. Nestor

    Nestor Lean & Mean

    12,514
    1,484
    Jul 13, 2003
    Canada
    You won't be disappointed.
    I'm pretty sure about it.
    I'm just one of the few members on this board that have a service related experience with this platform, but in the long run it doesn't mean much.
     
  9. riddleofsteel

    riddleofsteel Pulpa est valeo

    380
    0
    May 24, 2002
    above ground
    I think a better topic may have been; "What rifle for a SHTF situation?"

    Neither the AK nor the AR is the first or last word in battle rifles.

    Given the current info and experience available we could make an argument for a variety of fine rifles. The AR and the AK may be near the top of the list due to the availability of parts, ammo, magazines ect.

    However, until not long ago the price of the weapon, parts, mags and ammo figured heavy into my stockpile choices. That is why SKS and AK guns and ammo populate my stash of SHTF weapons.

    Truth is in the kind of senerio you are the implying the AK SKS family would do very nicely.
     
  10. AnimalK

    AnimalK Kilted Muppet

    The AR is like a prom queen.
    The AK is like a biker chick.
    Treat each accordingly.
     
  11. my762buzz

    my762buzz

    1,551
    0
    Mar 21, 2007
  12. adamg01

    adamg01

    3,513
    212
    Jul 10, 2007
    va
    I am going to chime in and I am not even sure what is going on really. 40,000 through an AR without cleaning.....BS! :rofl:
     
  13. extremus

    extremus

    28
    0
    Oct 23, 2003
    KCMO
    This is a trick question, right?

    The correct answer is you use the one you train with. If you train with an AK, you use an AK. Ditto AR.

    Probably not one person in 5000 has the time, money or an occupation that would allow them to become proficient enough to trust their lives to more than one platform.

    Find what works for you and train with it as much as you can. I want something that works and that I can shoot well. I'll occasionally take a wheel gun or my Garand to the range, but I shoot and train with an AK, a Mossberg and a G19.
     
  14. hank327

    hank327

    58
    0
    Oct 5, 2004
    Texas
    Here's a video showing that the AK isn't completely useless at over 200 yards.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/hickok45#p/u/20/kwMmhSWRu3Q

    Personally, I'll take an AK over an AR for a SHTF situation. I carried an M16 for most of my four years as an infantryman and I was less than impressed with its reliability. I'll take a rifle with acceptable accuracy that I can count on to go bang over a tack driver that may or may not fire when I most need it to.
    I'm not very concerned of my AK's accuracy or inaccuracy at 600 yards. In my area you would seldom get to see a target at 200 yards much less 600.
     
  15. Joshhtn

    Joshhtn The eBay Guy Silver Member

    11,578
    5,781
    Mar 31, 2009
    Middle Tennessee
  16. deMontacute

    deMontacute NRA Member

    1,046
    0
    Oct 15, 2007
    Louisiana
    I assume he is talking about Pat Rogers and his several T/E guns that have gone without cleaning. All have run several thousand plus. Of course he keeps them well lubed... Its well documented from one of the best instructors out there, and he brings them out to many of the classes he teaches as an instructing tool. Pat Rogers religiously documents his shooting and classes in a log book, including all failures/what brand/when cleaned or lubed/etc...

    I can't find the direct thread on ARF or M4C at the moment, but my search fu is weak. Here is one thread where the results are discussed
    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=262924&page=2 (start 2nd post 2nd page)

    Here is another thread about a guy going over 5000 without cleaning
    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=209609

    An AR will run fine dirty and wet, but you gotta keep it wet...

    As for the OP, I own and like both weapons. Both have their place. Personally I feel more comfortable with an AR, but would not complain if I only had an AK....
     
  17. Alaskapopo

    Alaskapopo NRA ENDOWMENT

    6,545
    2
    Feb 6, 2000
    Alaska
    Yes it is Pat Roger gun. Its a well known experiement. I agree with your comment about prefering an AR but not complaining if I only had an AK. (as long as it was set up properly.
    Pat
     
  18. my762buzz

    my762buzz

    1,551
    0
    Mar 21, 2007
    Basing an overall reliability comparison on one indicated feature such as the
    gap with the safety down is a bit silly. If I were to hand pick another feature and do basically the same thing those guys did in that video, it might seem just as deck stacked. Suppose it were the last round hold open of the AR design versus the closed bolt of the AK. Lets say we assume that someone might potentially drop their gun during a battle if they were to get overwhelmed by artillary and the gun drops right as the last round was fired.
    The AR lands ejection port face up and the AK does also. Then sand happens to mound on top of both guns. Dry dessert sand piles inside of the bolt opened AR infesting the inner action , but the AK closed bolt has much less sand creep in. Ok now shake things out and try and see which works.
    I think this is fair game for a comparison. It might make an interesting video
    comparison.
     
  19. my762buzz

    my762buzz

    1,551
    0
    Mar 21, 2007
    The dichotometric relationship of cleaning versus lubing is essentially fogged by hosing parts down with CLP. To clean means to remove. To lube is adding something. Cleaning solvent-lube cleans as it loosens and flushes things away and adds lubrication. I honestly don't think you can have that much
    wet goo caked on there and survive a desert sandstorm fully operational.
    Thats a silt magnet. And in freezing weather that dirty-lube crap is going to gel up and become like molasses. Its interesting but its beyond the realm of practical.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2010
  20. deMontacute

    deMontacute NRA Member

    1,046
    0
    Oct 15, 2007
    Louisiana
    Honestly I don't understand the need to denigrate either platform. Both are far more effective and reliable than 95% of users will be able to wring out of them. In a SHTF situation a well made one of either type is far less likely to fail in the long run than their owner is...

    ETA: IOW work on yourself, and don't worry about your gear so much. You are likely the weak link in the chain, not your rifle...

    (I am speaking of YOU in the broad sense, not you 762buzz or OP)
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2010