Which of these assault rifle is the best one?

Question

which is the better An AK47 or M16

Answer 1

m16 is better by far no comparrison

Answer 2

everyone here is talking about reliability and cost and whatnot, and yeah, the M-16 line (most of our guys are using M-16A4s now) sure weren't built for the desert. AKs might be cheaper and maybe more reliable in the sand, but it's probably because the round is bigger and means it doesn't need the smaller moving parts that the M-16 does.

HOWEVER and here is something that I don't think has been mentioned yet, is that if you're shooting at something beyond 300 meters or so, the AK is useless. It isn't very accurate to begin with, but it's max effective range is about 300m. The M-16 can shoot accurately up to around 550m, but the smaller round doesn't do as much damage.

Outside of desert warfare, I'd take an M16 over an AK any day, it's very reliable and very accurate. However, I'm sure I'd take an M14 or an M1 over an M16 any day too. All depends on what you're going after.

Answer 3

The AK47 is great for poorly trained and poorly disciplined troops in a jungle or urban environment where ranges are a matter of feet. The M16 is distinctly superior, despite being a 22 caliber poodle-shooter, in the hands of well-trained and disciplined troops, especially in a more open environment. There cannot be a perfect rifle or round for all situations, so the best compromise depends on your expectations.

Answer 4

With some serious research there are some pro's and cons for each.
AK47 cheap as crap and over 100 million made and in use today around the globe compared to the 8 million M16's.

AK 47 Effective range is 300 m (330 yd)
M16 Effective range is 550 m (600 yd)

AK 47 Rate of fire 600 rounds/min
M16 Rate of fire 750 to 900 round/min, cyclic

It compares very favourably with the 5 kg (loaded) AK-47. M16A2 and later variants weigh more (8.5 lb or 3.9 kg loaded) because of the adoption of a thicker barrel profile

So in essence i would probably opt for the M16 as it gives a better rate of fire, greater range, better optical sighting and under slung grenade launcher optimisation.

Answer 5

M16 - The AK47 is fine but the M16 has the stock and barrel aligned such that the weapon shoots straight even on full auto.

Answer 6

The AK-47 is simple, inexpensive to manufacture and easy to clean and maintain. Its ruggedness and reliability are legendary, although poor if used by poorly trained personnel.

The M16 equals greater accuracy.The carrying handle makes it more comfortable to carry in the battlefield. Rifle is well balance, and has very weak recoil. But poor design and tendency to jam.

I'd go for the M16 for accuracy, but the AK47 for equipping a lot of people quickly and cheaply

Answer 7

The Kalashnikov is by far the superior firearm. Holds more ammo, fires more powerful ammo, shoots further and straighter, takes a beating because it's made of wood and high strength steel not stamped steel and plastic. Drop it in a swamp or freeze it in the winter and you won't have to worry about it cocking and firing. The M16 of today is far better than the early models but the AK47 has outsold it, out shot it, out performed it in every way and it'll most likely outlast it. A better question is, which is better the AK47 or the AK74?

Answer 8

The AK 47 is more reliable, more powerful, and easier to use/clean.

the M16 is more accurate, and can take accessories and modifications.

If you are an American Soldier with all kinds of suppies and support available to you, then the M16 is better.

If you are in any other part of the world, the trusty AK 47 is better.

Answer 9

M16 can be zeroed in better than the AK, but the combat doctrines
in which the weapons are designed to be used are very different.

I'd select the older FN/MAG 7.62 SLR for accuracy and stopping power, but I'd also carry an Ingram MAC 10 for close combat.

Answer 10

Neither the Steyr AUG is tops.

Actually as previously stated if you have a largely untrained force in hostile conditions and a tight budget the AK-47 is the way to go.

The M-16 is more configurable but things like the fire rate mean nothing, you can't shoot accurately at that volume of fire. I would rather shoot accurately at 1 round per minute than miss at 900. What was that stat about vietnam 50,000 rounds fired per enemy casualty? Talk about over engineering a solution.

Answer 11

depends on what you define as better?

More accurate? more deadly round? accessory acceptance? shooting trajectory? range? weight? appearance? reliability/tolerance of dirt and conditions? rate of fire?

Firearms are a very, very subjective subject. I have an old Chinese rifle similar to an AK47 (it's an SKS). At the time I bought it it was like $100. I never have to clean the thing. The only downside is that it only holds 10 rounds and the way you reload is a little annoying. Other than that, $100 for a gun to put holes in paper targets on the weekend was/is hard to beat. For me, it was 'better' than a lot of other rifles that cost more money.