AK-47 Vs. M16?

Question

letting everyone know that an ak-47 hits harder. a local police officer tested one out and told me about it. he took it 900 ft. away from the target and shot. the target was a tree with the kevlar and metal plate on it and behind it was a big bucket of water and behind that a levee. he shot it and it went through the metal plate then the kevlar than the tree through the other side of the kevlar through the bucket of water and the bullet got lost in the levee somewhere. hope that helps

Answer 1

I'm sorry...was there a question in there? Or are you just trolling for an argument?

Both of them are fine weapons, for their respective purposes.

The AK-47 will work when it's stuffed with mud and dust, and never needs cleaning. But I'll bet your police officer friend did NOT hit a torso-sized target at 900 ft. The AK-47 is not accurate enough for engagements at that distance.

The M16, however, in the right hands, can rip the middle out of a pie plate at that range all day long. The trade-off is that it's a bit more finicky, and needs to be cleaned more often. And while the bullet it shoots is smaller than the AK's, it can still rip through a kevlar vest with ease.

Answer 2

Hmmm I could see that happening. The "kevlar" was early model stuff rated for handguns, the metal plate was a trama plate, which again the early ones are cheap thin pieces of metal, the "tree" was not that big, 4" - 6" in diameter, and the water bucket, is plastic...

Did he try the same test with a 20" ar15 shooting m855? I doubt that was a good vest, it seems the ones we shoot are all the old cheap ones. Vests are expensive!!

The important part here is that the Ak47 does carry a bigger bullet, but the way it wounds is not as effective as the fragmentation of the 5.56mm in an M-16/AR15.

The reliability issues were due to the fact that the early testers resented being forced to adopt the rifle. and changed the powders used in the cartridges, did not chome line the barrel as suggested by the creator and did not issue cleaning kits with the rifle. THOSE PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN SOLVED.

The strength of the AK is in it's penetration of hard cover. It is a hundred yard gun that will punch through 8" of pine. No the 5.56 will not go through quite as much. BUT IT'S OTHER CAPABILITIES FAR OUTWEIGH THIS SINGULAR ISSUE.

The replacement of the 5.56 and it's failures in Somalia are due to the ever increasing trend of shortened barrels that don't generate the needed velocity for reliable fragmentation.
Also the shortened gas system is hurting the M4 style carbine is hurting longevity. But in a mid length system, with slightly lighter bullets for the short barrels, SHE DOES JUST FINE!

Answer 3

Ak-47

Answer 4

Shot my sks at 400 yards once to check what kind of groups I could achieve, the results were more of a pattern... I had a difficult time keeping the groups under 30 inches. I believe the ak would be worse due to the gap between the front and rear sights being even less.
But just for sake of argument, 7.62x39 FMJ will not penetrate my 3/8 inch Armour plate back stop. It will leave a large crater and show a small dent on the opposing side.

Answer 5

jimi l. you ruined a great answer with ignorance. your information is mostly correct and obviously done your research. however the U.S.A. although powerful is not the most powerful country in the world and although rich is not the richest country in the world, it may house the richest people, but overall standard of living is i think currently third. and we would be in so much trouble if China's powerhouse of a military (carrying their ak-47s) decided to invade, comparably our forces are minute. also the only reason our military uses the m4 is the 5.56 or 223 round and our NATO agreement.

to answer the kid's question(?) what everyone else is telling you is true the cop is a bullshit artist, however every test comparison or guide ever made by competent military or civilian weapons experts puts the ak-47 at the #1 spot for a combat weapon. for me personally if i was going to shoot some beer cans @ 300 yards i would like to be armed with a m16 if i was going into battle, i would hope to have an ak-47.

Answer 6

AK47 is better than the M16, M16 is complicated and jams(early versions did more so) if they are dirty or fatigued. AK47 is simple in design, easy to clean, will fire dependably if dirty, and are so simple to use children can and do use them. In combat this are the variables that decide a good weapon. Not this Nationalism or personal feelings. A lot of hate for that AK has developed in the western world for the simple fact we hate communism. Give credit where credit is due, Mr.Kalashnikov developed an outstanding weapon that is used today and has been replaced by the AK74, which is the same design for a smaller caliber.

Answer 7

That local police officer would be lucky to do that at about 350 yards. The AK just doesn't have that high of a potential for accuracy, neither does 7.62X39 mm ammo, or the AK's crummy sights. Even the commies switched to a 223 type round (5.45 mm) during their Afghanistan campaign. They were much more effective with that than they were the 7.62 which is best suited for close quarters combat.

Answer 8

The people who answer questions on this sight are making me insane!!

I know you like to get points for answering but PLEASE know something about what you are pretending to talk about.

Neither a 7.62x39mm M43 or a 5.56mm M855 or M193 will have the terminal performance you speak of.

But at least the M16 will have a chance of hitting the target at 300yds.

You can argue that the Kalahnikov operating system is better but you can absolutely not shove it full of mud and sand and expect it to work!!

it will not!

Any weapon must be relativley clean to operate properly

The Israelis used to field a 5.56mm Ak type (Galil)
But most are now retired and the IDF issues armalite type rifles

WHY?

The United States has an enormous defence budget but issues issues the M16/M4 even though we can afford AKs
(I know the AK is cheaper)

WHY?

Answer 9

ok the U.S. rounds are smaller than the Ak's and the m-16 is also a lot more complicated to put together and clean, overall i like the ak's because they are more durable and cheaper and have been in service since 1947 as the primary weapon of many countries. But the m-16 is more accurate and once they worked out the kinks its almost flawless....... they are both guns that are probably at the top of their game, and look at some of the new urban weapons the u.s. is designing its frighting how amazing they are becoming

Answer 10

Did you actually see this officer perofm this magik trick??LOL>>No way that would have happened. The AK47 has been proven tpo be the combat weapon of choice for decades,even by US NAVY SEALS, primarily because its durable..you can drop it in a river and a puddle of mud and it will still perform, the M16 is a fine weapon also and is alot more accurate than the AK47 due to barrel climb of the AK 47 that the M16 doesnt posses. but at that distance I find it difficult to believe any of that story