which is tougher an ak 47 or m16?

Answer 1

i would have to give that one to the AK due to it's ability to continue to work no matter how dirty it is.

Answer 2

The AK-47 is the toughest gun ever made. You can jam the barrel full of mud, sand, dirt, whatever and the gun will fire. The M-16 on the other hand is a relatively fragile rifle that has to be kept almost immaculately clean. Also in a last resort situation if you smash a M-16 over someones head, that's all your doing... smashing it. The AK on the other hand just keep on going. If you want a firearm that is going to keep on shooting no matter what the situation is... only an AK will do.

Answer 3

The AK is tougher.I have seen videos in the past where a guy put sand in the reciver and the weapon still worked.You dont have to clean a AK regularly.Now the M16 on the other hand requires cleaning after so many rounds have been fired.We found this out in Vetnam.The first few years were hard on the weapon and troops as well.After some time they devolped the forward assist on the M16 that really helped,But the weapon still had to be cleaned.

Answer 4

Everybody is going to say the AK because the tolerances are so loose they can be shot with tremendous amounts of fouling, while the M-16 must be cleaned regularly. The loose tolerances, however, lead to the parts (usually poorly made from substandard materials to begin with) wearing out and breaking faster than the parts on an M-16. Believe me, the only reason people use AKs over M-16/M-4 weapons are because of cost. A semi-auto M-16 costs $900-700, vs a semi-auto AK at $400-300.

Answer 5

My brain hurts after reading SuperPoolGod's jibberish.

I think that as far as reliability, the AK47 is a bit better of a rifle. The simpler lock up mechanism means that dirt will not play as much of a part in stopping the action. The AK's bolt/receiver interface is also a bit looser than the M16's as well. This will allow the action to shed dirt and grime as well.

But the major issue is with the direct gas impingement system utilized in the M16 that throws hot gas and fouling directly into the action of the firearm. Personally, I think it was an interesting design, but one that can be improved by using the newer gas piston driven designs that have come out from a number of companies.

I think the rotating bolt, tighter tolerances and threaded barrel/receiver (compared to the AK's pressed/pinned barrel) interface lead to a better, more accurate design in the M16, but it also is a problem in how it allows the rifle to shed dirt and grime. The dirt seems to accumulate in the barrel extension of my rifles, which definitely can lead to a failure to lock into battery.

Anyway, if I had to take a rifle into combat in hostile conditions, (swamp, desert, etc) I'd take either an FAL or my Vepr AK47. They are both heavier than a regular AK or M16, but the added reliability means more to me than firing MOA accuracy.

Also....if the AK47 had the accurate loads that the M16 has, the accuracy potential would be much greater. My Vepr AK will shoot around 1.5" @ 100 yards with Remington UMC 7.62x39. I'd only dream of Lake City providing match ammo for my AK...I may just sell my AR's!

Answer 6

Tougher? Hands down AK-47 and its variants. There's no contest between the two!

Answer 7

One of my compadres was sent to Egypt when the Ruskies pulled out. He had an officer tell an Egyptian officer that we would be sending them M-16s. The Egyptian officer took an AK47 from a soldier, threw it on the ground, kicked sand over it, jumped on it, then kicked the sand off and made sure the barrel was clear and fired off a magazine of shells. He asked the American officer if he would do likewise with an M-16; to which the American officer replied "Are you nuts!!!". The AK is well made, very accurate and very reliable. There have been enough of them made to arm one of every thirteen people on planet Earth; now all we have to do is figure out how to arm the other twelve.

Answer 8

Neither. It's the nutcase of the person using these equipments!

Hahaha... kidding...

An AK 47 has a preloadable cartridge with mX finish, which means, the detonator has more time in doing it's work. As a result, the pre-shot relapse time is higher which generates more kinetics, aka, force. Also, there is no RXA connector in the magazine anymore, as opposed to previous machine guns in it's genre. So practically there is almost zero ammo-reload delay time, making the AK 47 a deadlier device and yes more "tougher" as u may call it. lol...
However, the M16 has one major advantage which no other guns in it's category have. Durability! It never conks out even under the toughest of physical endurances. More used in covert missions over the desert ranges.

So what you get is, a deadlier AK-47 and a more dependable M16.

Answer 9

I’m not a AK47 fan, but it works with out the dust cover and forward assist that Must be on the M16 just to make it ½ way through a fire fight.

Give me the M14 and I’ll show you “Tough”
That puppy did not need a dust flap or forward assist to work in all terrain.
Plus it out ranged both M16 and AK47.

He11 even the Mini 14 did not need a dust flap or forward assist to work in all terrain.

D58


Hunting with Rifle, Pistol, Muzzle loader and Bow for over 3 decades.
Reloading Rifle, Pistol and shotgun for over 3 decades.

Answer 10

AK-47 is more dependable than the M-16 for jungle warfare.But for accuracy and velocity and more fun to shoot the M-16.

Answer 11

In many respects the AK47 is a better rifle. However, it's one drawback is it overall lack of accuracies. The country of Yemen has more AK47 than the military or the number of people in that country. A very popular weapon. It is even being used by some American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.