English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why do all americas enemies use ak's. are they the cheapest? who makes them and why dont we target stoping the production of such weapon while were targeting nuclear explosives. the m16 is a way finer rifle, wouldnt it be better for the opponent to use the same weapon as us?

2007-05-01 03:49:05 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

13 answers

I love it when people slam on the M16. The problems it had in Vietnam are not the same problems they have today, so get over it. Prone to double feeds you say? I had an AK-47 give me a stove pipe malfunction yesterday, and my M4 has never done that to me (I'm in Iraq right now, stationed in Taji with the First Cav Division). How's that for dependable? Lets be clear, I'm not saying AKs as a whole are not reliable, that would be foolish. The design is simple and effective, but most of the AKs out there are cheaply made. You can hit people with an M16 while you are well outside of the AK-47s effective range. I keep 2 AKs on my vehicle just in case, but I have never grabbed for one in a moment of need. The rudimentary sights are not very user friendly, and the bolt doesn't lock back when you run out of ammo, so you end up pulling the trigger and finding out you have no round loaded. As far as the russians making the AK-47, they gave those up for the 74 a long time ago. Good luck finding a Soviet weapon over here. Most are cheap Iraqi Tabuk knock offs, or come from some other satilite country. The other fault with the AK-47 is the lack of easy modifications. The M16A4/M4 modifications make them far more user friendly. When it's dark and the guy with the AK can't see the infrared laser on him from my PEQ2, while looking through a PVS-14 night vision monocular, you tell me if his "superior weapon" has the advantage? While the AK-47 is not a better weapon overall, I do understand why it's the weapon of choice for insurgents and 3rd world countries. It's cheap and takes like 5 minutes to learn how to use and clean. That alone and it's rugged reliability have got it a well earned reputation for being a rifle that changed the world. But better than my AR? I'm sorry but Eugene Stoner's design has got me through one and a half Iraq deployments (and hopefully it gets me through the rest of this one). If that makes me biased, then so be it. If you clean your M16, it will kill for you. And don't bring up Jessica Lynch, because all their M249 SAWs failed too, and that's a great weapon. People who can't take care of weapons will screw up any weapons, even an AK.

2007-05-01 04:38:05 · answer #1 · answered by 63Mike20 1 · 2 0

The AK47 is by far the greatest modern fire arm around. The design is such that a farm worker can repair it in country with out any special tools.
The stock and fore end are made from wood so if all else goes wrong you can use it as a club.
The internals have such large clearances that there is no issue with dirt contamination fouling the weapon.
A good friend had one in south africa from our time in the army, the weapon was fully automatic and the police had told him that he had to hand it in.
Instead of handing it in he decided to destroy the weapon by blowing it up. We smashed the barrel with a hammer until it was flat and then loaded it with a standard soviet ball round.
After putting the gun under a pile of sand bags and using a piece of string to fire it, to our amazment after the dust cleared we found that the barrel had returned to its normal profile will no visable damage to the bore of muzzel.
If a weapon can take this kind of punishment with out self destructing the avarage terroriest need never worry about stoppages.
The M16 is a fine weapon but it is also a high maintanance weapon requiring frequent cleaning. The stock and forend are made from plastic that can break under combat conditions.

2007-05-02 06:42:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The M16, while more accurate, would not be better suited then the AK in the hands of the enemy. The AK can handle much more abuse without cleaning, is cheaper, lighter, and smaller then the M16. The 5.56 ammo however, penetrates better then the 7.62x39, is lighter per round, and takes up less space. The problem with stopping production of the AK is that there are many different manufacturers now and most of them are more then willing to sell to terrorist groups.

2007-05-01 11:15:57 · answer #3 · answered by Art I 3 · 1 0

The AK is produced primarily by the stamping process. This is unlike the fabrication of the M-16 system that requires precision milling that is both costly and time consuming.

The Chinese Type 56 version of the AK was churned out in ghastly numbers during our involvement in Vietnam and has not slowed any during the intervening years. This includes the 74 and 94.

Also, every Soviet satellite country made an industry of creating the Kalashnikov. These are the reasons why the AK is so prevalent: they are cheap to make and already exist in multitude.

But I'll still give the nod to Eugene Stoner. I am an American!

2007-05-01 11:07:41 · answer #4 · answered by ? 2 · 1 0

The M16 is a piece of junk. The AK is for superior. The AK will keep firing long after the M16 is jammed. When they tried to give my squad the M16 we refused and kept our M14s. The only benefit of the M16 is you can Cary a lot more ammo as it's smaller. But all that ammo is useless if your weapon is jammed. I know, been there. But it makes a difference where your AK was made. The Russian and Chinese AKs are the best. A friend of mine had an AK made in Chechlasavakia and it was not as good as a Russian are Cinese one.

2007-05-01 11:04:59 · answer #5 · answered by c321arty 3 · 1 2

AK's had no accuracy and are easy to use thus the Iraqis uses it. yet it is way better than the m-16 cuz they don't ******* jam all the time, the Chinese and the Russia have the best AKs

2007-05-04 19:28:49 · answer #6 · answered by DA BEAST!!! 3 · 0 0

The Ak47 stands up to abuse FAR better than the M16, the ammunition is cheap and abundant, and the Soviet Union made a living off producing and supplying them to third world countries.

2007-05-01 10:53:57 · answer #7 · answered by Armed Civilian 4 · 2 1

The m16 is not entirely superior to the AK47. The AK47 is dirt cheap to mass produce, and will fire religiously in adverse conditions (rain,snow,sand etc.). The m16 is prone to double feeds and misfires in these same conditions. And all American soldiers (myself included) feared being hit with a 7.62x39MM round.

2007-05-01 10:57:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

If you're out in the Bush and all you have is a M-16, you better make sure you have a handy repair kit and a master's degree in keeping the weapon operational under duress...it jams. I know people will say M16A2 blah blah blah, guess what... it still jams. When Jessica Lynch and those mechanics were attacked in the opening days of the Iraq war, their M-16's jammed in numerous situations while under fire.
AK's don't jam, they rock n roll.

2007-05-01 12:11:44 · answer #9 · answered by bettercockster1 4 · 0 2

The AK-47 is Russian made and possibly the finest assault rifle available. It is sheer simplicity. easy to field strip and clean & very reliable. Sorry to burst your bubble but the M-16 is one of the worst assault rifes available. It is complex, has jamming issues and requires continual maintenence just to stay operating. I would trade a dozen M-16s for one AK-47.

2007-05-01 11:03:22 · answer #10 · answered by Alan S 7 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers