Ak-47 versus M-16?

Question

Whats the best rifle in your opinion...both have pluses and negatives

Answer 1

Its comparing apples and oranges. The AK is an old reliable full auto baby. We have a couple guys who like them. To me they are heavy very inaccurate at anything over 50 meters. The M16 when maintained is 10 times more accurate. Who ever says 5.56 mm doesn't have knock down power hasn't seen the cavitation damage the high muzzle velocity is doing to the Taliban here in Afghanistan. They mostly AKs we have mostly M4 (shorter version of M16) and we maintain a must higher hit and kill ratio. I can't wait to get a SCAR.

Answer 2

The M-16 was designed as a wound weapon. My dad uses that same round (and even the 6mm which is bigger) to kill 4" long squirrels at 500 yards. The idea was developed as a Cold War weapon. The idea was to wound the enemy and the enemy would try to help his buddy and have three or four guys leave the battle. It was also designed for use in Europe use hence the lack of detail with sand and mud. It's a lighter gun than the M-1 and the soldier can carry more rounds. Only when it was used around the world that the problems came up. It also doesn't help the U.S. soldier when the enemy's buddies don't bother to help.

The U.S. has tried to replace the M-16 with a "better" weapon. Problems that have prevented a replacement were the weapon was too heavy, too complicated, used the same round, too expensive ect. Also Colt has a big lobby so any replacement would probably be through Colt. Right now the M-16 is in it's 4th design. The M-16 has a rail system which lets a soldier put parts on it like a Mr. Potato Head. So you could put a flash light on it, a grenade launcher in the same slot and use a variety of sights by just sliding it in.
The AK-47 is cheaper, more durable and has more stopping power. The AK-47 is also no longer made by the Russians. They have gone to fiberglass and plastic. The AK-103 uses a rail system for their scope and their is a rail for the grenade launcher. The AK-47 actually is fairly accurate with 3/4" groups at 100 yards being expected.

Answer 3

The AK-47 (and the AK-74/AKM, which use a 5.54mm as opposed to 7.62mm cartridge), is an excellent weapon. It is extrememly durable, easy to maintain. Unfortunately, it is not as accurate at the M-16. The maximum effective range for the AK is somewhere around 600 yards, while the M-16A2 is accurate to over 800 yards. The M-16 is a lighter weapon, but is also a little more delicate than the the AK.

Both rifles have served well throughout their service lives, but I would have to vote for the AK family of rifles, just based on longevity alone. The AK-47 was so named because it first saw production in 1947(if not for the SKS semi-automatic rifle, it would have been the AK-43) and it is a well built and well designed firearm.

Answer 4

The M-16 does not have the same fire power as the AK-47. The M-16 lacks the power punch of the AK-47. The AK-47 lacks the accuracy of the M-16. I've seen tests being done on these weapons. You don't have to clean the Ak-47 as often. It won't jam even if you get some sand or mud into it. But, it does weigh more and it jerks more when fired. But, if you drop it. It works fine. The M-16 is less durable. It can malfunction from being droped and it supposedly jams more often. The M-16 accuracy saves you bullets though. The AK-47's bullets wlll shoot through both sides of a car., M-16 won't fom the same distance. I've seen this happen. When there were two bank robber gunmen in L.A who were shooting at the Police. They were kicking their *** with the AK-47's. The M-16 is better for one shot one hit sniper operations. The AK-47 is better for assured destruction incase of obstacles infront of selected target operations. It depends what effect you want.

Answer 5

AK-47 is a lot more powerful than M-16, but a lot less accurate. The AK-47 can fire full auto but the M-16 can fire bursts.

You should have a look at the new generationof Kalashinikovs, especially the AK-101. Its the same as the AK-47 but is more accurate, and fires 5.56 ammo, rather than 7.62 like the AK-47.

I think that AK-101 rifle might be the best. But, we never really know, different rifles are best in different situations.

Answer 6

Currently using both, I would say the AK-47, a good quality one not some Pakistan made piece of junk. The rounds are bigger, higher capacity mags malfunction less, it operates completely filthy and has less moving parts to malfunction. The M-16 although a nice weapon has a long history of malfunctions usually at the most inappropriate times too. Just look at the modification history. The M-16 has gone through at least 5 changes to fix problems or address other issues. I would switch to an M-4 if given the chance. The AK-47 hasn't changed at all except to add rail systems for sights or scopes.

Answer 7

Good question. I would have to say that both are excellent weapons. The M16 lost the edge because in the beginning, it was rammed down the militarys throat and it performed poorly due to design flaws. After enough bitchin by our boys using it, they did a re-design and it took care of the problems. It is much more accurate than an AK, but on the battlefield, who the hell takes the time to aim anyways. The AK from the start was rugged and reliable albeit slightly inaccurate. A sniper weapon it isn't. I guess if I had to pick one today to do battle with it would be the M16, only because I was trained with it and carried it for so long.

Answer 8

now this is my type of question.
I own both rifles, Or something real close to them.
I will tell you that the better rifle is the Ak-47
I was in the military for 5 years and saw combat the m-16 is the biggest POS i have ever shot, it jams, it sucks in inclimate weather and sand, really does not have any real knock down power about the only thing good about it is that it is light. MATEL is what we called them a plastic toy.
However the AK-47 is by far the greatest fire arm on the market in my opinion. it will fire with sand, water or mud in it. it has power i've never had one jam on me. Its cheaply made but it works like no other.

Answer 9

Back in the 1950s the US ARMY realized that with new powders, they could get the same performance out of a smaller cartridge. So they looked at the 30-06 which had been the standard rifle round since 1903 and downsized it to the 308. Almost identical performance with a much shorter case. Then the US Army had a competition to find a rifle that fired that round to replace the M1 Garand. One obvious choice was to make the M1 in a smaller format. That was the M14 design. Then along came Stoner with his AR 10. It lost. So did other prototypes so the US Army chose the M14 and that is what got issued. Jump ahead a few years. They needed a smaller rifle for non-combat troops who drove trucks and tanks and etc. Same idea as the M1 Carbine. So Stoner reworked his AR design and came up with the M16. It won that competition as the requirements were not so strict. Then along came a business bean counter named Robert MacNamara. He saw the new gun and how much less its ammo cost and he made a business decision, everyone would get the new gun. So based upon a purely $ and Cent decision, our troops got stuck with the M16 Jam-o-matic. It was a piece of junk. How many troops died due to it jamming up in the field was never revealed but if you talk to any Vietnam combat vet of the time, they probably know of at least one buddy who was killed due to the gun. Jump to today.. After 45 years they finally got most of the bug worked out of the gun. But talk to the combat troops of today. Not enough stopping power. Many units are getting reworked M14s back so they got the ability to reach out and stop someone. I certainly hope that when the US Army goes with a new rifle it will have some decent stopping power and is picked because it won the competition and not because some dumb civilian was counting beans. Now you have the facts..... As far as the M16 vs the AK47. The M16 was suppose to be a rifle that could be used as a machine gun. The AK was a machine gun that could be used as a rifle. So the M16 was more accurate at a distance, the AK more dangerous close up. If I had to go to war right now and had my pick of gun and ammo, I would go with the M14 in 308. If I could not have that, I would go with the AK using the Russian round. My last choice would be a Stoner....anything.....

Answer 10

M16's are for rifle ranges & punching holes in paper.
The AK is a weapon for killing. It is the most popular rifle in the world hands down for a reason. Cheap, simple, Nothing fancy (like M1913 rails or even plastics or optics), has a round that will kill a Man or Deer sized game, Plentyfull ( You can find a Ak easier then toliet paper or A HIV free hooker in most of the world). Is still the standard all guns try to meet. Not bad for a self educated Russian tank guy in 1940's Russia......