AK-47 or M-16?

Question

Which one would you like to have?

Answer 1

First, every red, white and blue blooded American should be carrying a gun...and should be versed on how to operate and maintain one! The M-16 is more accurate, reliable and a hell of a lot more fun to fire!!! The AK, I believe(never fired), is deadly, when hit with, but not accurate at all...

Answer 2

I would rather have an M-16. With the different accessories available today, you can configure your weapon for whatever you wanted to do, from hunting to house-to-house fighting.

The AK is no more reliable than the M-16, if you know how to clean a weapon, and the AK has so loose tolerances that the parts wear out far faster than even the cheapest M-16. When I went through Army boot camp in 1991, I had an M-16 from the early 70s, and I would have qualified sharpshooter if the targets were better.

Answer 3

Well, I've fired an AK-47, and that was a heck of a lot of fun. The M-16 is the better gun from a technological point of view, but an AK-47 is easy to use, easier to repair, easier to make bullets for (as far as I've heard), and operates under the worst possible conditions.

I've found that I value things that are hard to break. So, yeah, I'd totally like an AK-47 if I had to choose between the two.



Saul

Answer 4

Given that the M-16 only fires a 5.56mm round, (effectively a 22 long rifle bullet) and that the AK fires 7.63mm (30 caliber), plus the jam-o-matic penchant of the 16 Vs the never-jam AK, guess which I'd want in MY hands, if it was a firefight twixt those two weapons?? Yup, the AK-47.

Answer 5

The M-16 is made with higher standards than the AK47. That is where the accuracy comes in to ply. The AK is well know for having less exacting standards, but that is what makes it so durable when exposed to sand, dirt, mud, and carbon build up. I guess it depends on what you're looking for. A weapon you can use and abuse, and not worry about fouling, or something that is alot more accurate. Even though the .223 round is not as devastating, I would have to take it for the accuracy stand point.

Answer 6

The AK is reliable and very powerful but the M-16 has got more power and it's even more reliable so I'd go for the M-16.

Answer 7

It depends. If I was going over rugged terrain and i needed a tough, dependable gun that wouldnt jam or break along with some heavy firepower, i'd choose the AK, if I wanted a less powerful gun with much better range and accuracy, I'd go with the 16. Overall, probably the AK

Answer 8

Ever think of this?...........I would go in with one of the newer Gas-Piston operated M4(M16). Same gas piton system as the AK, so it runs cleaner, cooler, and is more tolerant. With those HK, or SIG gas-piston hammer forged barrels you get more accuracy than the standard M4 (which is more accurate by design than an AK anyway). Currently US special forces units are using the HK416 a gas piston M4. Not to mention the mission adaptability of the M4, it has more accessories available than James Bond's car.

See the YouYube video of the Discovery Channel special: "AK47 vs. M16" That ole AK barrel flops like a wiener on a hangar in full auto.

Answer 9

If you want to make a lot of noise, choose the AK. If you want to hit your target, the M-16. The AK on full auto is about as dangerous as a squirt gun.

Answer 10

I will settle this issue. Viet Nam vet 11b10 infantry 101st Airborne division 1968/1969 Camp Evans (Hue PHu Bai). 11 months 29 days in Viet Nam and fired both weapons and fired at. The Ak-47 is the most durable infantry weapon I have ever seen and had a tremendous phychological effect on American infantry in Viet Nam since it had a banana clip that held 30 rounds. M16s in Viet Nam only had the 20 round magazine. If I were a military General I would politic to convert all American infantry to the Ak47 and do not care if we had to buy them from China, or Russia.