The Gunny Ends the Debate

[Half-cocked]

I would have liked to see a Garand, or Mosin-Nagant, up against those cinder blocks as well, for comparitive purposes.

 

[alucard0822]

He has also settled the 9mm vs 45 debate, 9mm is superior hearing protection

 

[hairba111]

They can take that candy ass commie terrorist gun and put it where the sun don't shine. Give me an M-14 everytime. (yeah, I meant M-14).

Redcobra has a point there. I'm very partial to an M14 but who the hell can afford one? M1As just don't get it.

I'll admit I have a converted Saiga 308. It's an AK kinda, but it throws 7.62 NATO at a lot cheaper price.

 

[Fire-4-Effect]

You guys defending the AK do not get it... IT IS A JOKE!!!!!

I caught the AK bug once. After getting it and realizing that it was primitive, lacked good optic mounting options and the whole thing rattled around when you pulled the trigger I sold it. (no, this is not a joke)

Not sure why so many people get jazzed by them. It stops being fun when the guy next to you with the AR keeps hitting what he is aiming at and your AK struggles to hit it 25% of the time...

Phil

 

[Nemesis]

now now...we all know what the best rifle is...and if you dont know, then you're a loser.

You guys defending the AK do not get it... IT IS A JOKE!!!!!

I caught the AK bug once. After getting it and realizing that it was primitive, lacked good optic mounting options and the whole thing rattled around when you pulled the trigger I sold it. (no, this is not a joke)

Not sure why so many people get jazzed by them. It stops being fun when the guy next to you with the AR keeps hitting what he is aiming at and your AK struggles to hit it 25% of the time...

Phil

its funny, because there have been several times at the range where i've shown up ARs in the accuracy department with my SGL21...2 ACR's as well...well, no...one of the ACRs / the shooter was pretty much on par with my groupings.

 

[hairba111]

LOOSER?

 

[Nemesis]

LOOSER?

HEY! dont point out my typos!

 

[querty]

Easy tiger, it was meant for a laugh - Not as an indictment of AK fans.

The gunny made me laugh, and I thought it would be fun to share with the forum.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[clandestine]

Its supposed to be a joke but theres alot of truth to jokes.

Im a HUGE AK fan, but IMO the AR15/M16 is definately a better weapon.

-AR generally has better Accuracy

-AR has better Sights

-AR has less recoil (The AK74 gives the AR15 a run for the money here)

-You can carry more 5.56 Ammo than 7.62x39 (The AK74 gives the AR15 a run for the money here)

-The AR Suppresses Better then the AK

-Mag Changes are faster and require less training with an AR

-One AR lower receiver can be made into countless calibers and various barrel lengths in a matter of seconds.

The AK does win in the simplicity department. The AK is easier to field strip and maintain. The AK is also much less sensitive to being absent of lube than an AR.

Both AR's and AK's jam.

 

[Robert]

lol

 

[camotruck]

The Gunny Slant but all in all just Infotainment

 

[DarthZed]

The AK is an iconic platform. They are cheap to buy, easy to maintain, and very cheap and fun to shoot. The guns also have an rugged, functional beauty about them. In the end, we all acquire and shoot the guns that appeal to us. I'm not saying that its better than an AR, but my go-to gun (the one that has loaded mags next to it in the safe) is an AK. It might not be quite as accurate as an AR (ammunition and typical "built-to-a-low-price-point" build quality {I'm looking at you Century} probably plays a big part in that), however, since I don't plan on engaging targets at 3-400m; its accurate enough for me.

 

[hvymax]

.223/5.56 only exists so they could let women and gays in the military. The cinder block showed what a joke it is. 7.62 wether nato or x39 is far more effective. I think a Tech sighted AK would also give the AR more of a run for it's money in the accuracy dept as well. Of course the M14/M1A or AR10 eats either of their lunches.

 

[BradMacc82]

.223/5.56 only exists so they could let women and gays in the military. The cinder block showed what a joke it is. 7.62 wether nato or x39 is far more effective. I think a Tech sighted AK would also give the AR more of a run for it's money in the accuracy dept as well. Of course the M14/M1A or AR10 eats either of their lunches.

I'll only argue the first sentence there hvymax, 5.56 was introduced more for the sheer volume that can be comfortably lugged around by the guy in the field. That said, load up 1500 rounds of 5.56 (which was a not so uncommon load-out for guys in Vietnam) in mags and 1500 7.62 in mags and strap them on, what would you rather hump around for hours to days at a time. 5.56 vs 7.62 though, I won't even try to argue that, 7.62 wins.

 

[DarthZed]

1500 rounds of 5.56 (which was a not so uncommon load-out for guys in Vietnam) in mags and 1500 7.62 in mags and strap them on

Where did you get this info? That seems excessive. You're talking about 50 30 round mags, or 75 20 rounders. This should weigh over, what? 40-50lbs for the 5.56 and god knows what for the 7.62?

 

[BradMacc82]

That comes from an interview with Dr. Atwater, Vietnam vet and a historian at Aberdeen if I remember correctly, he was saying that guys in his unit routinely carried 12-1500 rounds on them while on patrol.

Excessive, yes...., but look at the Jar-head quote in my signature by Maj. Holdridge of the USMC and it all starts to makes sense.

 

[DarthZed]

My god. How could anyone carry 50-75 mags and still function? Where would you carry them? Not doubting your claim. Just saying....how? Even carrying nothing but ammo, and filling your pack with mags, it just seems undoable. I mean you still need to carry your normal kit as well. You can't just carry nothing but ammo.

this is gonna bother me. Off to google. lol

 

[hvymax]

If you have somebody behind a tree doing reacharound magdumps at you from 200yds all 1500rnds of 223 wont do you any good. All you would need is 1rnd of 7.62nato and x39 would do it in 200 or less.

 

[clandestine]

My god. How could anyone carry 50-75 mags and still function? Where would you carry them? Not doubting your claim. Just saying....how? Even carrying nothing but ammo, and filling your pack with mags, it just seems undoable. I mean you still need to carry your normal kit as well. You can't just carry nothing but ammo.

this is gonna bother me. Off to google. lol

I have read the same as wel but I wasnt there so I have to go by stories.

I dont believe all of that if carried was loaded in mags but I do buy carrying all that ammo. I know I would because every gunfighting nightmare I have ever had was about running out of ammo. I would say that you could comfortably carry 8-12 mags, possibly 15 30 rounders. Thats almost 500 loaded rounds and 500-1000 loose rounds. I dont think resupply was always possible and they tended to overprepare.

 

[DarthZed]

Everything I've found points to infantry commonly using 7 pouch cotton bandoliers for carrying mags in Vietnam. (I even found a few for sale)Pics of these indicate they only hold one mag per pouch, and that troops typically carried between 2-4 bandoliers. So typical loadout is 14-28 mags and about 300-550 rounds. But Clandestine is right, they could and probably did carry more ammo to reload in the field.

Many interesting period pictures here.
http://david.brubakers.us/Vietnam/Vietnam_Equipment_page_3.htm