Falling In Love with the AK, Losing that Loving Feeling for

[Bret]

CZ Bren series, Radom MSBS, B&T APC, HK 433, and lastly the FN SCAR.

At the current two times or more expensive, I don't see them unseating the AR15/M16 due to the value proposition. That's what made the AK such a great seller. For what you paid, you got the best value. Now that's not so much, but I still buy them anyway.

[MountainRaven]

The AK set the bench mark for simplicity and reliability. The AR introduced modern ergonomics. However the AR design as good as it is, is till limited due to it's direct gas system. These new designs coming out of Europe are utilizing attributes from both weapons in many ways; AR modern ergonomics with AK piston fed reliability. I would say the most advanced weapons adhering to these principles are the CZ Bren series, Radom MSBS, B&T APC, HK 433, and lastly the FN SCAR. The Steyr AUG is somewhat of an evolutionary step with adjustable piston but they neglected the bolt release until recently and the weapon isn't very ambidextrous. Overall though for me personally, I still prefer the AK.

The AR-15's gas system is not a limitation. It is an elegant, lightweight, and simple solution, every bit as much as the Kalashnikov. The differences are more due to the backgrounds of the weapons' designers - and the technical limitations in which they worked - than anything else.

The new designs coming out of Europe are not - at this time - markedly superior to the AR-15/M16 FOW. They are basically spending a lot of money to make heavier, more complicated versions of the AR-15/M16 FOW - in essence, they are adding a piston to the AR-15/M16 and then making everything else ±1-2% better/worse.

At the current two times or more expensive, I don't see them unseating the AR15/M16 due to the value proposition. That's what made the AK such a great seller. For what you paid, you got the best value. Now that's not so much, but I still buy them anyway.

The AK is not a cost effective weapon in a world bereft of Communist Workers Paradises that give the weapons out for free to anyone willing to agitate on behalf of the cause of international communism, if you do not already have the machinery and infrastructure in place to support their manufacture.

[RetroRevolver77]

The AR-15's gas system is not a limitation. It is an elegant, lightweight, and simple solution, every bit as much as the Kalashnikov. The differences are more due to the backgrounds of the weapons' designers - and the technical limitations in which they worked - than anything else.

The new designs coming out of Europe are not - at this time - markedly superior to the AR-15/M16 FOW. They are basically spending a lot of money to make heavier, more complicated versions of the AR-15/M16 FOW - in essence, they are adding a piston to the AR-15/M16 and then making everything else ±1-2% better/worse.



The AK is not a cost effective weapon in a world bereft of Communist Workers Paradises that give the weapons out for free to anyone willing to agitate on behalf of the cause of international communism, if you do not already have the machinery and infrastructure in place to support their manufacture.

I don't mind paying for quality rifles.

[Feline]

The AK-103 series give the AR a run for its money.

[Kevslatvin]

The AK-103 series give the AR a run for its money.

In what way? I'm an AK guy( though this post may be deceiving) but the AK-103 really is just a polymer sidefolder stock, polymer hand gaurds, side optics rail and a 74 muzzle brake externally. I know the bolt is like the 74 bolt and manufacturing processes were updated but that's transparent to the user. Ergonomically pretty much the same as an AKM. I would argue its the AK-101 in 5.56 that is more likely to give the AR a run for it's money. At least in the sense it eliminated the "5.56 is a more accurate round than the 7.62x39" argument from the debate. It like the AK74 also lets you use a VFG on a railed fore end without getting in the way of mag changes like on the 47.

[eodinert]

The AK-103 series give the AR a run for its money.

The AR is not competing in the 'Obsolete rifles that should be appreciated for what they are, not what they wish they were' category.

[RetroRevolver77]

The AR is not competing in the 'Obsolete rifles that should be appreciated for what they are, not what they wish they were' category.

Reliability never goes out of style.

[Kevslatvin]

Reliability never goes out of style.

I was just thinking on the way into work about something similar to this. Seems as long as you buy an AK clone made in a former combloc country it's pretty solid goes bang every time. Even the lowly Romanian WASR is solid with canted sights being the only real issue. From what I gather on here that's not so with the AR. Buy a low/mid tier AR at your own risk. They apparently fall apart once you put a couple hundred rounds through them.

I think the AK platform is great as long as you accept it for what it is and can live with it's perceived short comings.

[Bret]

From what I gather on here that's not so with the AR. Buy a low/mid tier AR at your own risk. They apparently fall apart once you put a couple hundred rounds through them.

Over the last 20 to 30 years, the quality and reliability of the low/mid tier AR15's has improved tremendously, so they are much less of a risk. The vast majority run and run and run. That said, you can currently buy a high tier Colt 6920 in the $750 range. AR15's are now the good deals that AK's were 20 to 30 years ago.

[RetroRevolver77]

That said, you can currently buy a high tier Colt 6920 in the $750 range.

I agree with this. I bought AK's back when they were relatively cheap. Now I've been buying AR's because they are relatively cheap. A well rounded collection.