2007-01-20 21:20:53 · 11 answers · asked by LynX 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Allot of soldiers in Vietnam threw down there M16 and picked up a AK 47. However I prefer something more like the FN 2000 but I highly down the enemy would have one of them lying around.
Sometimes special forces are sent in with foreign weapons(like the AK 47) so they don't have to carry ammo and can just use the ammo off the people they killed.
I personally like it. But it's accuracy kind of stinks...
2007-01-20 22:23:05 · answer #1 · answered by AlienJack J 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
every weapon is perfect for a specific purpose, place and time.
the AK is perfect for people that cannot maintain or afford other sorts of weapons to fill a small arms role in a militia. this is because you can buy them by the bunch, they are generally accurate, with decent penetrating power and moderate effective range. Maintenance is a complete non-issue with this weapon. That and again its cost to manufacture is what makes it so prolific. This is what makes it overall, for all intensive purposes a device that has had probably had more impact in the world than any other device of its type. However, technically speaking, for 'ultimate' weapons there is a tool for every job. This has good general purpose battle rifle flexibility, but i wouldnt be caught dead trying to sharp shoot with one, or implementing it in close quarters either because of its encumbrace and recoil when fired in automatic. It would be much more clumsy to use moving room to room than just a basic pistol would. It can fill a supressive fire role just fine however.
2007-01-20 21:33:00 · answer #2 · answered by jorluke 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends, it's a strong and powerful weapon but the accuracy on it, isn't perfect. By strong, I mean strong, compared to an M4, the AK-47 would beat it in power, but the M4 would beat it in accuracy.
2007-01-20 21:44:12 · answer #3 · answered by D.O... 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was designed to be very ruggad and cheap,yes you can drive a tank over it and still fire it but unless it has a new barrel and better protected sight system I'd have to say th AK-74 is better.I perfer a large cal. to anything small,I was always in love with the US M-14.
2007-01-20 23:10:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would rather have the AK-74 smooth long range.Probably be a good hunting rifle.I have fired the 47 it is an excellent weapon.The Russian Model,not the Chinese version.
2007-01-20 23:22:32 · answer #5 · answered by one10soldier 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not perfect, just inexpensive. That weapon has changed the face of warfare, today.
You can get one in Iraq for about $100. They're the primary weapon of insurgents. You should see the collection of them we have that we have taken from bad guys. We could start our own small army.
Too bad we're going to destroy them.
It's not as accurate as my M4 but the way these guys in Iraq, "Spray and Pray", it really doesn't matter.
2007-01-20 21:27:17 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
SURE IF YOU HAVE THE UPPERHAND BUT NO WEAPON IS REALLY THE PERFECT WEAPON WHEN SOMEONE CAN JUST AS EASY SHOOT YOU WITH A MEASILY 22............THEN WHAT IS THAT AK 47 DOING FOR YOU........NOTHING! ITS NOT THE WEAPON ITS WHO IS THE QUICKEST THE MOST SKILLED THE BETTER KILLER! GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE DO! SO ITS NOT ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE ITS HOW U USE IT!
2007-01-20 21:26:38 · answer #7 · answered by blaqfoxx240sx 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
i think other then the M4 yes
the ones the birtish are using now are ****. they are expensive, jam and are unreliable. i dont understand why they dont just use the cheaper AK 47
2007-01-21 01:14:30 · answer #8 · answered by frostyg02uk 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All round i would say yes. Lots of fun useing 1- ive only used a semi automatic but it was still a lot of fun.
2007-01-20 21:48:10 · answer #9 · answered by Shaggy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure for the untrained insurgent fighter who is skilled at the spray and pray method.
2007-01-20 21:28:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋