2006-06-19 00:28:00 · 16 answers · asked by Cadpigfriend 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
both have their good points but they are really different in design. the AK is built to require very little care and still shoot. it is not overly accurate and had perhaps the worst safety selector in the world. the thing is awkward and very noisy. the magazine requires an odd rocking motion to install or remove which can cause problems. the curvature of the mag and the length of the larger ones can cause problems as well. but the damn thing will always shoot and its easy to maintain. the M16 is designed as a more precise weapon. it requires more care and cleaning but is also fairly easy to maintain. its more user friendly to fire and points better. the round is somewhat less powerful at longer ranges but its also lighter so you can carry more ammo. today it and its clones are perhaps the most issued rifle in the world but there's still millions of AKs around. personally i would not feel underarmed with either for the most part but i prefer the M16 as the better of the two
2006-06-19 00:43:28 · answer #1 · answered by glen t 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The AK47 is reliable, accurate, and the ballistics of the round will knock the opponent off their feet as well as ripping a large hole in them and killing them. Downside is that it is very heavy.
The M16 has matured with age and is now reliable (the early ones were not) and versatile. The high velocity small calibre round will cause a lot of damage to human organs and tissue but will not always physically knock the bad guy off his feet, although it may kill him later.
This is a downside as in the heat of battle the adrenalin rush can keep a dying man fighting, wheras if the guy gets knocked off his feet he will be out of the action quicker.
The M16 is very light as many parts are made of plastic.
A better comparison would be between the latest M16 and the AK74 which uses the same 556 round.
2006-06-19 12:05:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on what battle your fighting. The M-16 showed its flaws in Vietnam, first from needing to be cleaned due to gun jamming, to get dirty to easy. The range though on a M-16 is better along with the accuracy. The round is also only a 5.56mm which is smaller than the 7.62mm from the AK-47. In more of an open combat scenario the M-4(modified M-16) and M-16 would be best. The AK-47 you could bury in mud for a month pick it out and it will still fire. Drawbacks are as such once the weapon is fired it tends to kick skyward and not being able to hit the target even at short range. But in jungle and some urban battles the AK-47 would be best.
2006-06-19 09:28:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
M16!!!!!!!!!!It's very accurate,has a great rate of fire and little recoil when compared to the AK-47.
AK-47 is a powerful gun,but also very cheap,that's why guerilla and insurgency groups use them.
The one plus about the AK is that mud,dirt,water,it can take a lot of abuse.But if your using one you better be able to too because you have no chance against a M16.
2006-06-19 17:40:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
M16
2006-06-25 22:59:08 · answer #5 · answered by Dani 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For reliability and knock down power, I'll take the AK-47.
For accuracy and weight, I'll take the M16.
2006-06-19 10:20:02 · answer #6 · answered by My world 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would take an M16 or M4 any day. You have 100 extra yards to kill the guy with the AK before he can kill you.
2006-06-19 07:34:01 · answer #7 · answered by MP US Army 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
M16 or M4 are much more accurate arms.
2006-06-19 08:33:55 · answer #8 · answered by spineminus2 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
AK47
2006-06-19 08:17:16 · answer #9 · answered by Perawan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
M 16 it's all about plastic.Only good for long distance fight.
AK 47 the old style tough gun.Best for short distance and hand to hand combat.
2006-06-19 23:25:40 · answer #10 · answered by Eldha'sfather 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋