AK best ever period. Would you rather have a reliable weapon or one that jams in a firefight? a 7.62 provides more stopping power than a 5.56. Besides, AKs aren't that inaccurate if you know how to use it properly
@joint42000 you don't know a lot about ballistics huh? 7.62x39mm doesn't penetrate Interceptor body armor... nor does a 5.56x45mm. However a 5.56x45mm in 75gr or even 62gr kills very well.
ehhh....i bought me an ar-15...i should of bought a mini 14...i swear..id just about give it away for free or throw it in the trash if i didnt pay so much for it...MAYBE...i might do a giveaway contest....OR better yet...ill raffle it away...tickets for a dollar each!...how about that...win an ar-15 for a dollar (plus cost of transfer and shipping..duh).
Kinda like what SurvivalistCrutch said: It doesn't matter. AK, Mini-14, m4, m16, ar-15, UZI, MP5, HK91, Mossberg, Winchester, Remington, Ithaca, Beretta, Glock, Colt, Kimber, SIG, FN, Walther, Desert Eagle, blonde, brunette, red-head, big, small, just right, bitch, hot-loyal-wife (those last 3 DO matter), etc. If China or NK invade by surprise, if our military's been obliterated, then it's down to us. Grab the nearest gun, then Lock-N-Load with R. Lee Ermey, (Jk but still).
I think at this point an AR-15 with a 416 upper receiver is the best rifle available these days. The original colt design is far inferior to the 416's piston driven system. You get the accuracy with the reliability.
most of the top weapons experts agree that if they had to choose one rifle, it would be an AK, but it would be an AK-74, so your all wrong, SNAPPERS!!!!!
I think this is the best weapon want a 6.8 piston pop 2 pins ak knock down power reliable like the AK and accurate as a AR15 because it is a ar15 20 inch to 10.5 2 pins away
You're ignorant and naive PERIOD. There both GREAT rifles but you can't just say one is better than the other. They both have there advantages but the ak has a lot more. It's more reliable than an AR (fact). It's almost as accurate as an AR (AK 74) . I can hit targets at 500meters with my AK so nuff said about accuracy. AKs are a lot easier to maintain and field strip (fact). AKs are a quarter of the price of an AR and will do as much and more. It's just a more practical rifle overall (fact).
Well I will prove you all wrong, I have an AK that shoots 1 MOA and 10'000 yards and an AR that can shoot 1million rounds without ever having to be cleaned or jamming. You fan boys on both sides make me sick with all the lies and bullshit you post. Just shut up already. The real truth is, both guns shoot well, they both are reliable and they both have their merits. Although ARs are more accurate, sorry to say, that just truth. Don't fight it, just let it burn and get over it.
Here's the bare truth. If you've ever had your feet on foreign soil and been engaged in combat, the Colt will let you down when the AK won't. Period. I have many many many of BOTH, they have overlapping strengths but not overlapping weaknesses. My best AK is 4 MOA at 800 yards, my best AR is 1 moa at 1000. I'll take the superior knockdown and dependability every time-I don't need to pick an eye socket at 1000 yards when I can hit the head with a bigger bullet.
I like firearms that dont jam and shoot a superior round, Also anyone that says Ak's are inaccurate is an ignorant tool my Ak-74 shoots just as good as almost any Ar. And after 5000+ rounds i have never had a failure to feed stove pipe or jam of any kind! Not many Ar owners can say that!
@pac6010 Really? because i have bought 3 2160 Cases from ammoman.com I got about 1000 rounds sitting in my safe waiting for the next range/camping trip. I am sure most Ar fan boy's find it hard to believe a firearm can shoot that many round's without jamming but guess what? The Ak platform can easily do that with or without any proper cleaning. Deal with it.
@joint42000 lol no, every gun will jam in it's lifetime, and you can avoid it by knowing how to use it. And it shoot's the 5.56x45mm NATO or .223 which is bigger and has more powder. And the 5.56x45mm is more than capable of taking out a man with one shot, if you don't believe me, go take a 5.56 to the chest.
In the hands of somebody competent with maintaining weapons the AR is not particularly prone to jamming as what many people believe. My complaint with the AR is it's most common caliber, 5.56mm. I think a better caliber could have been found rather easily (.243 Win). The 5.56mm can be effective at a certain range but it's not consistent effectiveness for all ranges. With FailZero, lube and a stronger buffer spring+quality magazines and decent ammo an AR is going to be very reliable.
I will never understand why people are so fascinated with the AK-47. It is practically WWII weapons technology, just put together in the 70's, and has not been improved or modified in 40 years. The AR-15 has experienced constant evolution in its design, and with the new piston systems as in the HK416, jamming is a thing of the past. Even the Russian army is trying to move away from the AK line, since even the AK-74 has major issues. The AR-15 is more modular, and more versatile.
ak47 have range up to 400 meters and its best weapon because can be used in any place in the word and not like ar15/m16 its do not have problem with sand get to it so its not jamming so often. After that the ar15 its good fun.
@BusinessKi11ER Actually when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they lost to untrained mujahideen with AK clones made in Czechoslovakia and Lee Enfield bolt action rifles. Saddam Hussein's military used the AK 47 and other AK models and look where he ended up. Dead with his whole regime toppled. Or what about the Taliban in Afghanistan? Sure we haven't stamped them out but wherever they pop up we squash them. Oh dear I'm out of characters, well I think I gave enough examples.
@JTWilliams74 A war is not won by who has an ak or ar/m16. I guess you haven't served in the military. Ground forces rely heavily on air support, technology (drone planes), clearing mass areas with bombs and cruise missiles etc, etc. We have body armor most insugents don't have armor. I know some of our gunners had an AK as a backup beside the 50 cal in their humvees. If I had to take a weapon for patrol I would take an AK or even AK74 with a red dot sight..
@flyskater I was pointing out to the person above that armies who have used the AK-47 have actually lost unlike what he said. And I understand that, trust me I'm enlisting in the Air Force as a CCT straight out of high school and preference is preference when it comes to weapons. Neither weapon is perfect but at least they aren't a Chauchat.
@JTWilliams74 Sorry but the Afghans were still using AK's and USA was still in Iraq after Saddam's regime and look AT THEM now, almost being toppled by rusty AK's from the untrained, in Hollywood you may crush them but in reality you can crawl back :)
@BusinessKi11ER haha I think you need a history lesson bud. Both Saddam and Osama's regimes have been collapsed, both men have been found and killed by the US. All that is left to fight the US is small pockets of insurgence hiding wherever they can. And whenever they show themselves they get crushed by the superior training, accuracy, precision and skill of the US military and they're weapons. Plus the Air Force overhead has air supremacy and the Taliban can't do anything to stop them.
@BusinessKi11ER Correct but it has been undeniably going heavily in the favor of the US. Both of the leaders have been found and killed and their regimes are destroyed.
Its not the weapon..its all about the operator. AK is accurate in a hands of a shooter that knows how to properly shoot an AK. And M16 runs reliably in hands of operator that knows how to maintain the M16.
All depends on situation. Jungle=AK Mountains=M-16 Body Armor involved=AK Sniping=M-16.
I do think the AK is better though. Excluding Reliability and cost for the moment, it actually goes full auto, uses more penetrating bullet, and when are you going to actually need to hit something 500 yards away? Thats why we dropped the full-sized cartridge in the first place.
"god help the terrorist if they ever invade the usa."
Typical stupid thinking of an American !
Youre the ones who invade other countrys and provoking wars, nobody would be stupid enough to invade the most battle experienced, most weaponized country in the world, only stupid americans think that way. Period
@TheSensismoker Of course the German says "you're the ones who invades other countrys and provoking wars" oh well Germans are awsome, I feel bad that World War 2 has scared German history so much. Now what associate Germany with the Nazi's and the shamwow guy.
Look at the U.S. Mexico border its a joke millions of illegal aliens have already crossed into America. America has already been invaded by illegals.
@buckwheat40 Same here in Europe, but its the politicians WHO WANT IT LIKE THAT ! And its a huge difference if the Germanz come with their u-boats and Sturmgewehrz to attack you, or if Immigrants ( which, by the way, made your country what it is today!) come to your country ! Huge f***ing difference...
@TheSensismoker Hey pal. While we do have the battle experience, it is not by choice. You can thank the rogue government for what happens these days and has happened in the past. The population of a country does not take countries to wars. The "leaders" of said country take it to war. And the only ones that make good of war are the banksters whom finance the wars. I can't ever recall hearing an American face to face saying we should invade this or that country.
Having 12 years of service and vast experience with the AR15/M16 platform, I agree that this platform, if maintained properly, is a great firearm in ideal conditions. By ideal, I mean garrison and urban environments. Great for homeland security and police special weapons forces.
That being said, in a combat environment (desert, jungle or woodland), this weapon system is prone to jamming. Dump a handful of sand in the chamber and try to fire. It will malfunction everytime.
@zabrak69 I'll wager that bet. /watch?v=xRjy5S1-yMg
I know the guy shooting that Rifle and he is also a combat vet. We shoot in competitions year round and have never had any real malfunctions with our firearms. granted we aren't putting it through the abuse combat would, a lot of guys intentionally neglect and abuse their rifles to see it's fail points and so far we are all very impressed.
@LegendofHogger A lot of weapons work when they're not cleaned. The G3, AK-47, G36, L85, FAMAS, all these weapons work just fine when they're not properly cleaned. You have to neglect these rifles for VERY LONG TIME to make them not work anymore. The AR-15, on the other hand, can fail you after just one day of abuses.
@LegendofHogger Reliability means that the weapon should work PRECISELY WHEN IT'S NOT CLEANED AND TAKEN CARE OF. You can't say a weapon that is constantly cleaned and taken care of is reliable... Unless you don't understand what the word "reliable" means.
The AR15 is like a high class women you must take care of her and show her love and affection and there is no better. The AK is like a tough fuck buddy that you don't talk to for months then you just pop up say high and get to it.
@ChinaLakeNATIC Very smart this analogy with a woman... It definitely makes people love the AR-15. But the reality is that a weapon that needs the same attention that you give to your sweetheart just to make it run, it's not a weapon designed for war.
@StiviGun1 Yeah AR15 is wonderful for the range but in a warzone I would choose and AK or something more durable just because I like it a little rough.;)
@ChinaLakeNATIC I don't know what you refer too when you say you like it a little rough... But in a war, I prefer a weapons that I can rely on in any combat conditions. G3 is my favorite combat rifle and it's the weapons that I would choose if I fought in a war.
@StiviGun1 I a reffering to the fact that I am rough on my stuff so an M4 would break in record time with me. Also if i had to choose a gun it would be the M14e2.
@ChinaLakeNATIC Well, the AR-15 is a fragile weapon. That's why I'm saying is not suited for war.
As for the M14, I recently argued with some folks that that was the weapon that should've been kept in service. Make it in a straight line shape and chamber it for a lighter round. It would've been much better than the AR-15 and it would've also been cheaper. Of course, the possibility for an M14 replacement was very great and so was the US military industry capability to deliver a replacement.
@ChinaLakeNATIC Of course, the US military industry capability to develop and deliver weapons was never utilized at its full potential. Who knows what weapons would've been developed if all arms manufacturers would've received requests for an M14 replacement. The truth is the AR-15 had no competition and that's basically why it was selected.
@ChinaLakeNATIC The fact that Curtis LeMay had on crush on the AR-15 did have a contribution for the AR-15's adoption, that's true. But the total lack of interest on the part of military and political officials was what allowed the AR-15 to be adopted. There should've been a competition between all American arms manufacturers and the best product should've been selected. But the process through which the AR-15 was selected was completely twisted and very suspicious.
@LegendofHogger The HK is pretty front heavy, plus it requires specific optic mounts. I'm also not too big on the lower receiver in general. It requires a tool for the push pins, the grip is awkward, and the stock is not too great either. Oh, and it doesn't work with PMAGs. I've just been looking for an upper for under $2.5k without luck. I have an LWRC M6A3, they're very well built rifles. I'd say the LWRC rifles have better barrels, the HK has a better bolt. They're both great, though.
@LegendofHogger You are correct, the Army had Remington package a lot of the early M193 and other 5.56mm rounds with really nasty powder that it had in stock instead of the IMR developed powder Stoner specified. It was dirty, it did cause some fouling, but that wasn't the big issue with it. The big problem with it was that it caused the weapon to cycle at over 1000 rounds per minute, much too fast for the magazine to properly feed.
@LegendofHogger yea true i mean it is all personal preference i mean i'm an AK guy but i'm flexible too, i like the AR too, most people are one sided a lot of times on the concept of AK vs. AR.
Great Video! It never fails to amaze me how many different company's make AR and M style guns! And the after market parts available is just incredible! It is no wonder to me why the AR and M Rifles are the patriots weapon of choice!
That is definatly not a sound amplifier. That is a close quarters barrel surpressor. They are extremely useful when used with a 10 inch barrel because if you need a suppresor AND you need to go room to room then you don't want a 4 in long standard suppresor on the front.
just to add, by design i mean the way it feels to fire, not the fact it cant handle more then 3 rounds before it has a brain fart and jam's its self for shits and giggles
the 5.56 dont have enough punch, passes through and not always a clean kill, a good design but not the best, take the Barrett Rec7 in 6.8mm SPC, now thats a good weapons system
Well, the problem with this "best weapon ever made" is that it jams to fucking much. If this weapon is not maintained like a princess, it will jam on you and it will get you killed. That's exactly what happened in Vietnam and Iraq. (many times). Firefights that lasted for hours didn't give soldiers the time to clean their rifles, the rifles were jamming and they got killed. This weapon is not suited for war. The M14 and the AR-18 were much better suited for this purpose.
@WalkinDeath1997 The ammo just made matters worse, but it was not the root problem. The root problem of the AR-15's high jamming rate is the way it operates. The fact that it uses the burned propellant to cycle causes to jam much more often than any other assault rifle. This is a fact. If this weapon is not cleaned and taken care all the time, it will fail. That's not how a weapon designed for war should behave.
@StiviGun1 the use it for rapid target accusation, easily controllable from the low recoil. Firing 5 rounds quickly into a target 100 yards away is much easier with a 5.56 than a 7.62. The thing is I don't see any decent suitable replacements. Is the M4 the best weapon ever made? Absolutely not. the HK416 seems to be a better replacement.
@MetalSights Look, just go make some research on how much ammo the soldiers in Iraq were wasting. That quick target acquisition of yours doesn't actually work in real combat situations and that's not even the reason why they adopted the 5.56. They adopted it because it allowed fully auto fire at much higher rates of fire while it was very controllable. No one even thought about what you say. And the concept the 5.56 was adopted for is not being scrapped since the M16s and M4s the US army and
@MetalSights marines are using don't even have the full auto capability anymore. Furthermore, go ask the soldiers what they want. Why do you think the SEALS ordered an AR-15 variant that fired the 7.62 NATO round and they use it both for sniper and CQC. Your acquisition theory actually works better with a higher caliber round that can knock down the target.
As for replacements for the AR-15 platform, there are many other options there not just the HK416.
@MetalSights "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", well, the thing with the M16 was that it was never a weapons suited for war. This weapons only works if it's cleaned all the time and who the hell has the time or the mood to clean it 10x/day in real war conditions? Ask the soldiers in Iraq about this, who ate every end of the day, tired and hungry, they had to clean up their sweet 16... Go ask them how they really feel about the M16.Of course, there are also exceptions.
@StiviGun1 Wrong wrong wrong. The AR doesn't jam more than most assault rifles. The additional carbon build up or heat also doesn't cause any issues as far as operation is concerned. This crap gets parroted in every AR thread in the history of the internet. What causes problems is lack of lubrication. If the weapon is properly lubed, it will run, end of story.
@Nater245689 Hmm... Everything you said here is bullshit, really. The build up of carbon and heat is exactly why the AR-15 jams so much. Because of DI operation system it needs much more maintenance than other assault rifles that use other operating mechanisms. And your lube makes matters even worse if fouling builds up inside the operating mechanism. An assault rifle made for war should work in any conditions, in specially when it's not properly maintained. Just ask the soldiers in Iraq.
@StiviGun1 See, because I've owned several DGI ARs (for that matter, a piston gun as well) and know goddamn well that carbon fouling doesn't cause it to jam. I've seen the things run just fine with the barrel extension coated in carbon. Being dirty doesn't cause it to jam. Lack of lube, on the other hand, can cause problems.
@Nater245689 I wouldn't know if what you say you know about these weapons from 1st hand experience is true because you're definitely biased. But the excuse about the lack of lube is bullshit. Lack of lube doesn't make the AR-15, G3 and other battle rifles jam. A lot of assault work in conditions that are less than ideal but not the AR. The AR-15 needs to be taken care of ten times/day just to make sure it runs. That thing is not suited for war.
@StiviGun1 No, it doesn't need to be taken care of ten times a day. It doesn't need even to be cleaned once a day. You lube the gun properly and you're good for at least a few thousand rounds. We'll be conservative and say two thousand, that's 10 combat loads of ammunition. Lack of lube certainly can cause the AR to malfunction, if you actually knew anything about the weapon, you'd know this. But you don't.
@Nater245689 OK, then let me ask you something. How do you know that the AR can fire 2000 rounds non-stop without jamming? Have you ever done this? The AR-15 needs to be cleaned after every firefight, just to be completely sure that it will not jam. No other assault rifle needs this kind of maintenance. Just ask the soldiers in Iraq who were too tired to clean their weapons after a day of fighting an the next day, their weapons were jamming.
@StiviGun1 Yes, I have. I fired 1,980 rounds over the course of three days, never did anything but lube the carbine daily, and only had 4 malfunctions. They were all double feeds. The AR does not need to be cleaned after every use. Bias isn't knowing what the facts are and stating them. It doesn't need more maintenance than most other assault rifles. I needs more than an AK, but so does every other rifle on the planet. T
@Nater245689 "only had 4 malfunctions"... I really laughed at this 1... When I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army, I fired my AK daily & only cleaned it 3-4x in 1 year & never had any malfunctions. & you call 4 malfunctions in 3 days, reliable... What you don't seem to understand (because you're biased) is that in a real war situation any of those malfunctions would've endangered your life.
@StiviGun1 I find that both highly unlikely (firing it 'daily') and that you never cleaned it. Furthermore, the number of malfunctions compared to the amount of time isn't important. It's the number of malfunctions compared to the number of rounds fired. Lastly, they were double feeds. You, being such a rifle expert, must know that double feeds are not a rifle induced malfunction. But you didn't, and you're not.
@Nater245689 Yes, I fired that AKM every day and I only cleaned it 3-4 times in 1 year. It never jammed from any reasons.
As for the double feeds, this just shows how many problems the AR system has. Problems with the mags, with the extractors, problems with fouling and heating caused by the DI system. The weapons performances really don't mean shit if the weapon is not reliable. Sure, if you clean it every day after every gunfight, it'll work. But the idea of an assault rifle made for war is
@Nater245689 Yes, I fired that AKM every day and I only cleaned it 3-4 times in 1 year. It never jammed from any reasons.
As for the double feeds, this just shows how many problems the AR system has. Problems with the mags, with the extractors, problems with fouling and heating caused by the DI system. The weapons performances really don't mean shit if the weapon is not reliable. Sure, if you clean it every day after every gunfight, it'll work. But the idea of an assault rifle made for war is
@Nater245689 that it should work in less than ideal conditions and when it's not properly taken care of because these are the situations you're most likely to encounter in a real war. And the M16 simply doesn't fit this essential criteria.
@Nater245689 Well, that's the thing. It only performed well in the official reports which are known to be forged. The soldiers though, come with completely different stories. Why don't you try to perform a reliability test on your AR-15 and post it on YT and show us all how reliable this weapon is. If you trust it that, this shouldn't be a problem for you.
@StiviGun1 Oh, and for the record, I own AKs and have owned AKs. They're dead reliable, but that's about all they can be commended for. In ever other aspect, the AR is vastly superior and it's also more than reliable enough. There is a reason why a lot of Western SOF units use the M16/M4 instead of their own country's service rifle. The British SAS/SBS, Australian SASR, New Zealand SAS, French Special Operations, ect all use the M16/M4.
@Nater245689 A weapon that's very accurate doesn't worth shit if it jams on you. I'm not saying that you should sacrifice accuracy for reliability, but reliability is the most important feature of an assault rifle.
As for why many SF units in many countries use the M16/M4, that's probably political. But from what I know, the British SF use their L85, they stopped using the M4 along time ago. I don't know about the others, but I find it hard to believe that they would choose the M4 over the AK-47
@StiviGun1 The SAS don't use the L85, talk about a piece of shit rifle. They all choose the M4 over the AK. The only reason an AK would be used would be to blend in with locals and/or leave little evidence of being in an area (ie leaving spend 7.62x39 cases instead of 5.56x45). It's not a political choice to use the M4, they use it because it's the best. The French use it instead of the FAMAS, the Aussies instead of the F88, the Brits instead of the SA80.
@Nater245689 The SAS use the L85. If you want to make your point, at least stop coming with such misinformation. They stopped using the M4 a long time ago. The French also use the FAMAS in every units. The French are well known 4 their patriotism & claiming that they would use an American weapon over a French weapons is just lame... As for the Australians, I really don't see why they would choose the M4 over the Steyr AUG, which is better in every way. U're starting to be not worth paying
@StiviGun1 No, they don't use the L85 and don't use it for a very good reason. Try shooting an L85 around a barricade with your weak/support/reaction shoulder. It's not happening. I'm sure the rifle is available to the SAS, they might even use it on occasion, but rarely. You look at any pictures of British SOF in Iraq or Afghanistan, they're packing M4s.
@Nater245689 Well, I don't know what you mean by firing a weapon with the "weak/support/reaction shoulder", but I didn't see any SAS soldier carrying the M4 in Afghanistan. Andy Mcnab also talked about the L85 and how good the weapon is. The British use the SA80. They used the M4/M16 when they didn't have their own rifle. But since they've adopted the SA80, they use it for all their units, including the SAS.
@StiviGun1 Well that's interesting that you don't know what that means, it should be self explanatory. It means firing the rifle both left and right handed, on the fly. That's something you can't do with most bullpups unless you want brass in the face. The SAS use the M4 in Afghanistan, the SAS use the M4 in Iraq. Look at any pictures of British SOF operators and you'll see them carrying a SOPMOD M4.
@Nater245689 Yeah, that's what I said when I talked about the bullpups only problem. However, this can be fixed relatively easy and it's well worth all other advantages, like lighter weight, more compact. And this design also makes a more ergonomic design (despite of what you said). The only "disadvantage" is that you have to modify it to eject the shells from the other side if you fire it left handed. But this issue can be fixed so easily that it's actually a non issue.
@StiviGun1 Bullpups are ergonomically inferior to traditional rifles. They're harder to get prone with, slower to reload, and you can't rapidly switch from right to left handed shooting with them. The British, Australian, NZ, French SOF units use the M4 because it isn't a bullpup and is at least, if not more reliable than their standard service weapons.
@Nater245689 Hard to get prone with, harder to reload? Where do you get this. The bullpups are more compact, thus they're much easier to handle and operate. They're also lighter than conventional rifles. The bullpups have a lot of advantages, the only disadvantage being that it can't be fired by left handed people without some simple modifications.
And again, the Australian, and the French don't use the M4. The M4 is far less reliable than the Steyr AUG and FAMAS so stop this bullshitting.
@StiviGun1 I get this from actually shooting one. You obviously have not. A bullpup is an ergonomic mess. Ideally you want most of a rifle's weight between the operator's two hands, slightly biased towards the front. Most of a bullpup's weight is in the stock. A bullpup has one advantage over a conventional rifle, it's more compact. In every other measure of a rifle, it's inferior.
@Nater245689 Again, I don't know if what you say it's true. Your opinions on the L85 may be the result of the fact that you're biased. I, for one, don't see how it can bee so heavy in the stock that will affect its performances or the way it can be handled. Frankly, this seems to be a biased opinion. And of course, let's not forget that the L85 is much more reliable than the M4. So I really don't see why the SAS would use the M4 over the L85.
@StiviGun1 The FAMAS has very stringent ammunition requirements due to it's blowback operation and it's generally very finicky. The French call it a 'range rifle'. Figure that one out. The AUG is reliable, for a bullpup. The Australian and NZ SAS use the M4 in it's place and for good reason.
@Nater245689 What are those "very stringent requirements" for its ammunition? The blowback operating system can work with any type of ammo. And the French always said about it that it's a very reliable rifle. They wouldn't use it for such a long time if it wasn't good.
"The Australian and NZ SAS use the M4 in it's place and for good reason". Maybe you'd like to explain what is that "good reason".
@StiviGun1 The ONLY 5.56mm rifles that I have shot that I can definitely say are better than the AR-15 are...gas piston AR-15s (HK and LWRC's rifles). I'd also say that the SCAR-L is at least as good as the AR-15, better in some aspects and weaker in others. Everything else (AR-18, AKs in 5.56, G36, AUG, ACR, ect) is not as good.
@Nater245689 Well, what you say here only reflects that you're biased and it doesn't prove anything. I don't know what "good" means for you, but to me, a weapon that you'll never be sure if it works or not, it's not a weapon suited for war. Piston operated variants are better, but in my opinion, the blowback operated systems are the best.
@StiviGun1 How thick are you? You have zero experience with an AR and really little knowledge of it, or of the AK for that matter. There is a good reason why the M16 has been in service for over 40 years, it works and it works well. How many weapons that were supposed to have replaced it have come and gone? SALVO/SPIW, the ACR, the OICW, the XM8, the SCAR-L.
@Nater245689 I have a pretty vast experience with the AKM. I fired it a lot when I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army. I never fired an M16, but that weapon is famous for its unreliability.
As for why the M16/M4 were never replaced by any of the weapons you mentioned, even though they were much better than the AR, again, that is purely political, it has nothing to do with the weapons' performances. It also has to do with business.
@Nater245689 And how was the XM8 a "step backwards". Every single weapon tested to replace the AR-15 was superior from reliability point of view. The reason why the AR-15 was not replaced was because it always had political backup. That's the real reason, not because the AR-15 was better.
@StiviGun1 Well, lets see. It melts under sustained fire. If it got hot enough it would also cause the trunion position to shift, giving up a wandering zero (the G36 has the same problem). It has no rail space. It has a reciprocating charging handle. It has proprietary magazines. It has a non-removable carry handle. Any optics mounted to it have a higher height over bore than optics mounted on an M4. A 12.5" barrel is too short for a general purpose carbine.
@Nater245689 The XM8 proved to be the most reliable weapon in the reliability tests they performed to determine which weapon would replace the M4. The M4 got the most jams by the way. Melting is a problem with a weapon that uses composite materials in every sensitive area. Heat is also a problem for the bolt carrier parts in the AR. The XM8 did have a reciprocating charging handle and it had problems with sights mounting. The AR-15 should employ either a piston operated system or a blowback
@Nater245689 operated system. I would opt for the second. It's a much simpler design that keeps the weapon light in front and it also keeps it very reliable while very accurate.
@StiviGun1 To that I would say try one of the new Nickel Born plated receivers and carrier groups, makes them run 1000s of rounds without having to clean and no jams. I have seen it in person myself. Also allot of the early AR jamming crap isn't valid. I mean they used to say it never needed cleaning and it ran dry without oil lol. For every one person I hear saying they are Jam-o-Matics I hear two say they never have problems. Its like Bigfoot, people just jump on the train I think to bash ARs.
@pac6010 1000 rounds. OK, but after that, you have to clean it to be sure the next time it won't jam. Ask the soldiers in Iraq who had to clean their weapons after a day of gunfights what they thing of that. There's some1 above who said the M16 needs constant attention and carrying in order to work. That's the thing. A weapon that's made for war shouldn't need this kind of attention. It should work no matter what, regardless of how abused an neglected it is.
@StiviGun1 There's no machine mankind makes that doesn't need to be maintained or cleaned and Guns are just one of those. Even the AK needs to be cleaned after a hard day in the field, sure maybe you don't have to and it will run, but would you really bet your life on that ? With the proper tools and experience it takes about 25 mins to really clean an AR pretty good. You're not gonna shoot 1000s of rounds on a day in a war zone unless its an actual war, I don't know of any of those going on.
I didn't say a weapon can be 100% reliable when it's never cleaned, I just said the AR-15 needs too much maintenance just to make run. This is a problem that most assault rifles don't have. And yes, I'd bet my life on an AK. When I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army, I only cleaned my AK 3-4x in 1 year & it never suffered any malfunction. That's reliability.
& in a war, you could fire even more than 1000 rounds/day. Ask the soldiers in Iraq what they think abt those 25 min of yours after a
@StiviGun1 In fact they only carry at most like 20 mags on their vest with 30 rounds each, you do the math. I don't even think a solder has fired that many rounds in a day that's not a machine gun operator. Its just not feasible. I have torture tested ARs and you can see videos on here with it being done, you really have to work to make them fail. Also if a guy payed less that $1000 for an AR and hes having problems he just has to stop taking because the gun is crap and it should fail lol.
@pac6010 In In a war, you can fire much more than just 600 rds/day. I don't know about numbers, but you can talk with a soldier that fought in the early years of the Iraq war. He will tell you that 600 rds r not enough & wven after 600 rds, the guns sometimes were jamming.
As 4 the price, well, I can find an AK or a G3 for 300-400$ and thy're solid as a rock. So from what you say, the AR-15 is just not worth it.
@StiviGun He musta been shooting at air then, or operating for a very long period with lots of battles, Its believable, but like I said its very unlikely. Certainly not happening that much right now that we are in police mode over there. As far as a good $400 AK, its not mil spec, or its fake mil spec. They might start out just fine, but put em to the test and fire hundreds of rounds every day and they stat to fall apart on ya. I know I owned a $450 one before I bought my arsenal M-7.
This has been flagged as spam show
@69mrcrash totaly agree
wunnderwaffe13 1 month ago
@69mrcrash totaly agree
wunnderwaffe13 1 month ago
AK best ever period. Would you rather have a reliable weapon or one that jams in a firefight? a 7.62 provides more stopping power than a 5.56. Besides, AKs aren't that inaccurate if you know how to use it properly
asianpwnyourbigass 2 months ago
@joint42000 you don't know a lot about ballistics huh? 7.62x39mm doesn't penetrate Interceptor body armor... nor does a 5.56x45mm. However a 5.56x45mm in 75gr or even 62gr kills very well.
kyoukan91 2 months ago
@kyoukan91 He was referring to Call of Duty, with his "FN FAL" and "ak 47"
weenershnitzel336 2 months ago
ak 47 better than trash ar 5.56 trash round cant penatrate a bullet proof vest my ak 47 can so can my fn fal
joint42000 2 months ago
AA-12 is better. >:D
AlekTheNerd 2 months ago
Boo! No armalite variant will be the best weapon ever in my books, sorry.
Zaspor 2 months ago
Maybe you cant hit an elephant at 300yards .
I can (and many aders much bether then me ) hit a man size target at 300 metrs with an old yugo AK no problem .
SwanKobal 3 months ago
Here it is 11-15-11 and this is still my FAVORITE AR-15 video!!
Stephen
83VF750F 3 months ago
ehhh....i bought me an ar-15...i should of bought a mini 14...i swear..id just about give it away for free or throw it in the trash if i didnt pay so much for it...MAYBE...i might do a giveaway contest....OR better yet...ill raffle it away...tickets for a dollar each!...how about that...win an ar-15 for a dollar (plus cost of transfer and shipping..duh).
andrademeza 3 months ago
@andrademeza You must have bought a crap AR. You need to speck out a good one. I will put up any of my ARs in competition vs a mini 14.
83VF750F 3 months ago
Kinda like what SurvivalistCrutch said: It doesn't matter. AK, Mini-14, m4, m16, ar-15, UZI, MP5, HK91, Mossberg, Winchester, Remington, Ithaca, Beretta, Glock, Colt, Kimber, SIG, FN, Walther, Desert Eagle, blonde, brunette, red-head, big, small, just right, bitch, hot-loyal-wife (those last 3 DO matter), etc. If China or NK invade by surprise, if our military's been obliterated, then it's down to us. Grab the nearest gun, then Lock-N-Load with R. Lee Ermey, (Jk but still).
ShadyWillKilBieberXD 3 months ago
ak47, ar15, HK91, M1 Garand, Blonde, Brunette, red head? Why worry about which is the best? If given the choice, try to have all of them!
One might be better than the other, sure... but aren't they all fun? Wouldn't you like to have all of them?
SurvivalistCrutch 3 months ago
@SurvivalistCrutch I got to agree with you on that one. As a matter of fact I whent to buy a ak this week and walked out with a ar-15.
epicfailureinc 3 months ago
I think at this point an AR-15 with a 416 upper receiver is the best rifle available these days. The original colt design is far inferior to the 416's piston driven system. You get the accuracy with the reliability.
TheFatAssCat 3 months ago
i love the ar 15 but i like my ak a lot more.
lolKaBooMlol 3 months ago
most of the top weapons experts agree that if they had to choose one rifle, it would be an AK, but it would be an AK-74, so your all wrong, SNAPPERS!!!!!
THE1212HURRICANE 3 months ago
I think this is the best weapon want a 6.8 piston pop 2 pins ak knock down power reliable like the AK and accurate as a AR15 because it is a ar15 20 inch to 10.5 2 pins away
tfoshohoe 3 months ago
only a toy soldier like this fag would think the colt AR is the best gun ever - thumbs down
svbummin 3 months ago
@svbummin I guess it depends on your home, I like the mini 14 and a shotgun
chbtrucker 3 months ago
"god help the terrorist if they ever invade the usa" ROFL that is the single most stupid thing I heard, kthxbye
sovietrat 3 months ago
You're ignorant and naive PERIOD. There both GREAT rifles but you can't just say one is better than the other. They both have there advantages but the ak has a lot more. It's more reliable than an AR (fact). It's almost as accurate as an AR (AK 74) . I can hit targets at 500meters with my AK so nuff said about accuracy. AKs are a lot easier to maintain and field strip (fact). AKs are a quarter of the price of an AR and will do as much and more. It's just a more practical rifle overall (fact).
steffen3443 3 months ago
Well I will prove you all wrong, I have an AK that shoots 1 MOA and 10'000 yards and an AR that can shoot 1million rounds without ever having to be cleaned or jamming. You fan boys on both sides make me sick with all the lies and bullshit you post. Just shut up already. The real truth is, both guns shoot well, they both are reliable and they both have their merits. Although ARs are more accurate, sorry to say, that just truth. Don't fight it, just let it burn and get over it.
pac6010 3 months ago
I like the song in the vid what is it called?
damiion666 3 months ago
@damiion666 Id Rather Die Than Be Your Slave by poker face (dot) com
pokerfacecom 3 weeks ago
Here's the bare truth. If you've ever had your feet on foreign soil and been engaged in combat, the Colt will let you down when the AK won't. Period. I have many many many of BOTH, they have overlapping strengths but not overlapping weaknesses. My best AK is 4 MOA at 800 yards, my best AR is 1 moa at 1000. I'll take the superior knockdown and dependability every time-I don't need to pick an eye socket at 1000 yards when I can hit the head with a bigger bullet.
uku4ase1 3 months ago
@uku4ase1 1 moa at 1k HOLY SHIT not bad.
tfoshohoe 3 months ago
I like firearms that dont jam and shoot a superior round, Also anyone that says Ak's are inaccurate is an ignorant tool my Ak-74 shoots just as good as almost any Ar. And after 5000+ rounds i have never had a failure to feed stove pipe or jam of any kind! Not many Ar owners can say that!
LompicoEletronics 4 months ago
@LompicoEletronics i know, at 600 yds my valmet can out shoot the old colt sp1's
sgtsnipe99 4 months ago
@LompicoEletronics You haven't shot 5000 rounds out of any gun I can guarantee that......
pac6010 3 months ago
Comment removed
LompicoEletronics 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pac6010 Really? because i have bought 3 2160 Cases from ammoman.com I got about 1000 rounds sitting in my safe waiting for the next range/camping trip. I am sure most Ar fan boy's find it hard to believe a firearm can shoot that many round's without jamming but guess what? The Ak platform can easily do that with or without any proper cleaning. Deal with it.
LompicoEletronics 3 months ago
nothing can beat the looks of an AK. ar15s look like airsoft guns.
MattsMisc 4 months ago
i like the m14 better then both
born2kill93 4 months ago
ar15 jams all the time and accuracy is not the best at least the ak47 doesnt jam and the m1a1 has the best accuracy for a rifle
deathtrapalan 4 months ago
yea but ar 15 trash guns jam and only shoot a high powered 22
joint42000 4 months ago
@joint42000 lol no, every gun will jam in it's lifetime, and you can avoid it by knowing how to use it. And it shoot's the 5.56x45mm NATO or .223 which is bigger and has more powder. And the 5.56x45mm is more than capable of taking out a man with one shot, if you don't believe me, go take a 5.56 to the chest.
JTWilliams74 4 months ago
In the hands of somebody competent with maintaining weapons the AR is not particularly prone to jamming as what many people believe. My complaint with the AR is it's most common caliber, 5.56mm. I think a better caliber could have been found rather easily (.243 Win). The 5.56mm can be effective at a certain range but it's not consistent effectiveness for all ranges. With FailZero, lube and a stronger buffer spring+quality magazines and decent ammo an AR is going to be very reliable.
oeyesea 4 months ago
I will never understand why people are so fascinated with the AK-47. It is practically WWII weapons technology, just put together in the 70's, and has not been improved or modified in 40 years. The AR-15 has experienced constant evolution in its design, and with the new piston systems as in the HK416, jamming is a thing of the past. Even the Russian army is trying to move away from the AK line, since even the AK-74 has major issues. The AR-15 is more modular, and more versatile.
usmc6152 4 months ago
ak47 have range up to 400 meters and its best weapon because can be used in any place in the word and not like ar15/m16 its do not have problem with sand get to it so its not jamming so often. After that the ar15 its good fun.
Ptak0076 4 months ago
Hi-tech
Chaanee 4 months ago
piece of junk, looks stupid, probably jams, overall sucks
rollthelosingdice 4 months ago
Not the BEST weapon ever made but probably the MOST innovative.
SlimGun009 4 months ago
The AK-47 never lost in a war, sorry buddy but USA doesn't ALWAYS win!
BusinessKi11ER 4 months ago
@BusinessKi11ER Actually when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they lost to untrained mujahideen with AK clones made in Czechoslovakia and Lee Enfield bolt action rifles. Saddam Hussein's military used the AK 47 and other AK models and look where he ended up. Dead with his whole regime toppled. Or what about the Taliban in Afghanistan? Sure we haven't stamped them out but wherever they pop up we squash them. Oh dear I'm out of characters, well I think I gave enough examples.
JTWilliams74 4 months ago
@JTWilliams74 A war is not won by who has an ak or ar/m16. I guess you haven't served in the military. Ground forces rely heavily on air support, technology (drone planes), clearing mass areas with bombs and cruise missiles etc, etc. We have body armor most insugents don't have armor. I know some of our gunners had an AK as a backup beside the 50 cal in their humvees. If I had to take a weapon for patrol I would take an AK or even AK74 with a red dot sight..
flyskater 4 months ago
@flyskater I was pointing out to the person above that armies who have used the AK-47 have actually lost unlike what he said. And I understand that, trust me I'm enlisting in the Air Force as a CCT straight out of high school and preference is preference when it comes to weapons. Neither weapon is perfect but at least they aren't a Chauchat.
JTWilliams74 4 months ago
@JTWilliams74 Sorry but the Afghans were still using AK's and USA was still in Iraq after Saddam's regime and look AT THEM now, almost being toppled by rusty AK's from the untrained, in Hollywood you may crush them but in reality you can crawl back :)
BusinessKi11ER 4 months ago
@BusinessKi11ER haha I think you need a history lesson bud. Both Saddam and Osama's regimes have been collapsed, both men have been found and killed by the US. All that is left to fight the US is small pockets of insurgence hiding wherever they can. And whenever they show themselves they get crushed by the superior training, accuracy, precision and skill of the US military and they're weapons. Plus the Air Force overhead has air supremacy and the Taliban can't do anything to stop them.
JTWilliams74 4 months ago
@JTWilliams74 The war in Iraq and in Afghanistan isn't over yet...
BusinessKi11ER 4 months ago
@BusinessKi11ER Correct but it has been undeniably going heavily in the favor of the US. Both of the leaders have been found and killed and their regimes are destroyed.
JTWilliams74 4 months ago
Its not the weapon..its all about the operator. AK is accurate in a hands of a shooter that knows how to properly shoot an AK. And M16 runs reliably in hands of operator that knows how to maintain the M16.
breakurselff 4 months ago 2
Everyone is comparing the AK to the M16. They are nothing alike. It's like comparing a Honda to a Jeep.
mout12 4 months ago
@mout12
Make that comparing a HMMWV to a Ferrari :)
yoda1616 4 months ago
All depends on situation. Jungle=AK Mountains=M-16 Body Armor involved=AK Sniping=M-16.
I do think the AK is better though. Excluding Reliability and cost for the moment, it actually goes full auto, uses more penetrating bullet, and when are you going to actually need to hit something 500 yards away? Thats why we dropped the full-sized cartridge in the first place.
BTW, AK stemmed from SMGs, M-16 from rifles.
HerrJohann72 4 months ago
"god help the terrorist if they ever invade the usa."
Typical stupid thinking of an American !
Youre the ones who invade other countrys and provoking wars, nobody would be stupid enough to invade the most battle experienced, most weaponized country in the world, only stupid americans think that way. Period
I would prefer the M14 Rifle or the Ak47
TheSensismoker 4 months ago
@TheSensismoker Of course the German says "you're the ones who invades other countrys and provoking wars" oh well Germans are awsome, I feel bad that World War 2 has scared German history so much. Now what associate Germany with the Nazi's and the shamwow guy.
yoyoguy1st 4 months ago
Look at the U.S. Mexico border its a joke millions of illegal aliens have already crossed into America. America has already been invaded by illegals.
buckwheat40 4 months ago
@buckwheat40 Same here in Europe, but its the politicians WHO WANT IT LIKE THAT ! And its a huge difference if the Germanz come with their u-boats and Sturmgewehrz to attack you, or if Immigrants ( which, by the way, made your country what it is today!) come to your country ! Huge f***ing difference...
TheSensismoker 4 months ago
@TheSensismoker Hey pal. While we do have the battle experience, it is not by choice. You can thank the rogue government for what happens these days and has happened in the past. The population of a country does not take countries to wars. The "leaders" of said country take it to war. And the only ones that make good of war are the banksters whom finance the wars. I can't ever recall hearing an American face to face saying we should invade this or that country.
chop98 4 months ago
agreed
DarthWafflez 4 months ago
It's also the coolest looking gun ever made.
augustc4 4 months ago
M1 Garand, the most effective battle implement ever devised. Period.
13collec 4 months ago
i keep my m14, id rather have real steel and wood than plastic and aluminum
himmler251 5 months ago
there are other more accurate,powerful,longer range, and more reliable fire arms like this, such as , FN scar,ak 101,steyr AUG
airsoft78910 5 months ago
From a soldier,
Having 12 years of service and vast experience with the AR15/M16 platform, I agree that this platform, if maintained properly, is a great firearm in ideal conditions. By ideal, I mean garrison and urban environments. Great for homeland security and police special weapons forces.
That being said, in a combat environment (desert, jungle or woodland), this weapon system is prone to jamming. Dump a handful of sand in the chamber and try to fire. It will malfunction everytime.
zabrak69 5 months ago
@zabrak69 I'll wager that bet. /watch?v=xRjy5S1-yMg
I know the guy shooting that Rifle and he is also a combat vet. We shoot in competitions year round and have never had any real malfunctions with our firearms. granted we aren't putting it through the abuse combat would, a lot of guys intentionally neglect and abuse their rifles to see it's fail points and so far we are all very impressed.
AtavistArise 4 months ago
colt is no better than a cheap dmps period! just cause you have one dont mean shit!
rednecklowlife 5 months ago
i love the m16 a1 but i own a FUCKING ak47 so
MrFeatherDer 5 months ago
ar 15 vs m4a1 lol
andygarcia702 5 months ago
And then this dumb ass woke up
IXXVIXXXIIIXIV 5 months ago
where the fuck is the ak?
badcoairsoft11 5 months ago
Best weapon ever made? Wow. mmkay. All I hear is horror stories from the soldiers that carried these. But hey what do they know.
killersushi99 5 months ago
Ar's are garbage and you know it
toawsome4u 5 months ago
It is a .22 caliber poodle shooter which never won a war
BernieEOD 5 months ago
i thought the song was dust in the wind at first
Gunluvin 5 months ago 2
that shit is ugly
xlilnetx 5 months ago
@LegendofHogger A lot of weapons work when they're not cleaned. The G3, AK-47, G36, L85, FAMAS, all these weapons work just fine when they're not properly cleaned. You have to neglect these rifles for VERY LONG TIME to make them not work anymore. The AR-15, on the other hand, can fail you after just one day of abuses.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@LegendofHogger Reliability means that the weapon should work PRECISELY WHEN IT'S NOT CLEANED AND TAKEN CARE OF. You can't say a weapon that is constantly cleaned and taken care of is reliable... Unless you don't understand what the word "reliable" means.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
The AR15 is like a high class women you must take care of her and show her love and affection and there is no better. The AK is like a tough fuck buddy that you don't talk to for months then you just pop up say high and get to it.
ChinaLakeNATIC 5 months ago
@ChinaLakeNATIC Very smart this analogy with a woman... It definitely makes people love the AR-15. But the reality is that a weapon that needs the same attention that you give to your sweetheart just to make it run, it's not a weapon designed for war.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Yeah AR15 is wonderful for the range but in a warzone I would choose and AK or something more durable just because I like it a little rough.;)
ChinaLakeNATIC 5 months ago
@ChinaLakeNATIC I don't know what you refer too when you say you like it a little rough... But in a war, I prefer a weapons that I can rely on in any combat conditions. G3 is my favorite combat rifle and it's the weapons that I would choose if I fought in a war.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 I a reffering to the fact that I am rough on my stuff so an M4 would break in record time with me. Also if i had to choose a gun it would be the M14e2.
ChinaLakeNATIC 5 months ago
@ChinaLakeNATIC Well, the AR-15 is a fragile weapon. That's why I'm saying is not suited for war.
As for the M14, I recently argued with some folks that that was the weapon that should've been kept in service. Make it in a straight line shape and chamber it for a lighter round. It would've been much better than the AR-15 and it would've also been cheaper. Of course, the possibility for an M14 replacement was very great and so was the US military industry capability to deliver a replacement.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@ChinaLakeNATIC Of course, the US military industry capability to develop and deliver weapons was never utilized at its full potential. Who knows what weapons would've been developed if all arms manufacturers would've received requests for an M14 replacement. The truth is the AR-15 had no competition and that's basically why it was selected.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Twas the damn Air Force needing a new damn light weapon. Jeez, was the Grease gun not good enough.
ChinaLakeNATIC 5 months ago
@ChinaLakeNATIC The fact that Curtis LeMay had on crush on the AR-15 did have a contribution for the AR-15's adoption, that's true. But the total lack of interest on the part of military and political officials was what allowed the AR-15 to be adopted. There should've been a competition between all American arms manufacturers and the best product should've been selected. But the process through which the AR-15 was selected was completely twisted and very suspicious.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
You are correct Sir.
cutmonn 5 months ago
@LegendofHogger The HK is pretty front heavy, plus it requires specific optic mounts. I'm also not too big on the lower receiver in general. It requires a tool for the push pins, the grip is awkward, and the stock is not too great either. Oh, and it doesn't work with PMAGs. I've just been looking for an upper for under $2.5k without luck. I have an LWRC M6A3, they're very well built rifles. I'd say the LWRC rifles have better barrels, the HK has a better bolt. They're both great, though.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@LegendofHogger You are correct, the Army had Remington package a lot of the early M193 and other 5.56mm rounds with really nasty powder that it had in stock instead of the IMR developed powder Stoner specified. It was dirty, it did cause some fouling, but that wasn't the big issue with it. The big problem with it was that it caused the weapon to cycle at over 1000 rounds per minute, much too fast for the magazine to properly feed.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@LegendofHogger yea true i mean it is all personal preference i mean i'm an AK guy but i'm flexible too, i like the AR too, most people are one sided a lot of times on the concept of AK vs. AR.
godzilla1463 5 months ago
wow he says an AK can't be accurate obviously he hasn't shot one
godzilla1463 5 months ago
5454354864544654124684186154264264682426% agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my ar15 is deff my fav over any of my other assault rifles
jamesjamesa 5 months ago
I disagree. The best weapon, and I do mean the very best, is the one you never have to fire at all.
somedirtyangel 5 months ago
AR's jam too much. They just require too much maintenance. Good rifle other than that though.
paul0421 5 months ago
A death-machine/minigun is the worlds most fastest gun, speed beats power,but powers win when you use a sniper rifle
soccerbullet18 5 months ago
Any machine that is capable of spitting out hot chunks of metal at over 1000fps is deadly.
TR5T 5 months ago
M14 > M16, AR15
BL80488 5 months ago
@BL80488 True, But it's also that way in price :(
Kingofprinces85 5 months ago
huh, all the mg42s in this video were invisible and replaced by an m4.
billyboyg001 5 months ago
Great Video! It never fails to amaze me how many different company's make AR and M style guns! And the after market parts available is just incredible! It is no wonder to me why the AR and M Rifles are the patriots weapon of choice!
TheOgle420 5 months ago
every one knows the AK-47 is the best gun ever made.
sowrdoo1 5 months ago
@sowrdoo1 the M14 is better
BL80488 5 months ago
Not even close to the best.
GTRZE70 5 months ago
@navyteccs
That is definatly not a sound amplifier. That is a close quarters barrel surpressor. They are extremely useful when used with a 10 inch barrel because if you need a suppresor AND you need to go room to room then you don't want a 4 in long standard suppresor on the front.
JackAttack1760 5 months ago
just to add, by design i mean the way it feels to fire, not the fact it cant handle more then 3 rounds before it has a brain fart and jam's its self for shits and giggles
gunneruk1983 5 months ago
the 5.56 dont have enough punch, passes through and not always a clean kill, a good design but not the best, take the Barrett Rec7 in 6.8mm SPC, now thats a good weapons system
gunneruk1983 5 months ago
@scassidy0526 You're an idiot, plain and simple.
Marioag20 6 months ago
whats this sont call?
callmighty 6 months ago
Well, the problem with this "best weapon ever made" is that it jams to fucking much. If this weapon is not maintained like a princess, it will jam on you and it will get you killed. That's exactly what happened in Vietnam and Iraq. (many times). Firefights that lasted for hours didn't give soldiers the time to clean their rifles, the rifles were jamming and they got killed. This weapon is not suited for war. The M14 and the AR-18 were much better suited for this purpose.
StiviGun1 6 months ago
@StiviGun1 The problem was the ammo in the vietnam war (i dont know about iraq)
WalkinDeath1997 6 months ago
@WalkinDeath1997 The ammo just made matters worse, but it was not the root problem. The root problem of the AR-15's high jamming rate is the way it operates. The fact that it uses the burned propellant to cycle causes to jam much more often than any other assault rifle. This is a fact. If this weapon is not cleaned and taken care all the time, it will fail. That's not how a weapon designed for war should behave.
StiviGun1 6 months ago 3
@StiviGun1 the use it for rapid target accusation, easily controllable from the low recoil. Firing 5 rounds quickly into a target 100 yards away is much easier with a 5.56 than a 7.62. The thing is I don't see any decent suitable replacements. Is the M4 the best weapon ever made? Absolutely not. the HK416 seems to be a better replacement.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
MetalSights 5 months ago
@MetalSights Look, just go make some research on how much ammo the soldiers in Iraq were wasting. That quick target acquisition of yours doesn't actually work in real combat situations and that's not even the reason why they adopted the 5.56. They adopted it because it allowed fully auto fire at much higher rates of fire while it was very controllable. No one even thought about what you say. And the concept the 5.56 was adopted for is not being scrapped since the M16s and M4s the US army and
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@MetalSights marines are using don't even have the full auto capability anymore. Furthermore, go ask the soldiers what they want. Why do you think the SEALS ordered an AR-15 variant that fired the 7.62 NATO round and they use it both for sniper and CQC. Your acquisition theory actually works better with a higher caliber round that can knock down the target.
As for replacements for the AR-15 platform, there are many other options there not just the HK416.
As for what you said, that
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@MetalSights "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", well, the thing with the M16 was that it was never a weapons suited for war. This weapons only works if it's cleaned all the time and who the hell has the time or the mood to clean it 10x/day in real war conditions? Ask the soldiers in Iraq about this, who ate every end of the day, tired and hungry, they had to clean up their sweet 16... Go ask them how they really feel about the M16.Of course, there are also exceptions.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Wrong wrong wrong. The AR doesn't jam more than most assault rifles. The additional carbon build up or heat also doesn't cause any issues as far as operation is concerned. This crap gets parroted in every AR thread in the history of the internet. What causes problems is lack of lubrication. If the weapon is properly lubed, it will run, end of story.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Hmm... Everything you said here is bullshit, really. The build up of carbon and heat is exactly why the AR-15 jams so much. Because of DI operation system it needs much more maintenance than other assault rifles that use other operating mechanisms. And your lube makes matters even worse if fouling builds up inside the operating mechanism. An assault rifle made for war should work in any conditions, in specially when it's not properly maintained. Just ask the soldiers in Iraq.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 How many ARs do you own?
Nater245689 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 See, because I've owned several DGI ARs (for that matter, a piston gun as well) and know goddamn well that carbon fouling doesn't cause it to jam. I've seen the things run just fine with the barrel extension coated in carbon. Being dirty doesn't cause it to jam. Lack of lube, on the other hand, can cause problems.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 I wouldn't know if what you say you know about these weapons from 1st hand experience is true because you're definitely biased. But the excuse about the lack of lube is bullshit. Lack of lube doesn't make the AR-15, G3 and other battle rifles jam. A lot of assault work in conditions that are less than ideal but not the AR. The AR-15 needs to be taken care of ten times/day just to make sure it runs. That thing is not suited for war.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 No, it doesn't need to be taken care of ten times a day. It doesn't need even to be cleaned once a day. You lube the gun properly and you're good for at least a few thousand rounds. We'll be conservative and say two thousand, that's 10 combat loads of ammunition. Lack of lube certainly can cause the AR to malfunction, if you actually knew anything about the weapon, you'd know this. But you don't.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 OK, then let me ask you something. How do you know that the AR can fire 2000 rounds non-stop without jamming? Have you ever done this? The AR-15 needs to be cleaned after every firefight, just to be completely sure that it will not jam. No other assault rifle needs this kind of maintenance. Just ask the soldiers in Iraq who were too tired to clean their weapons after a day of fighting an the next day, their weapons were jamming.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Yes, I have. I fired 1,980 rounds over the course of three days, never did anything but lube the carbine daily, and only had 4 malfunctions. They were all double feeds. The AR does not need to be cleaned after every use. Bias isn't knowing what the facts are and stating them. It doesn't need more maintenance than most other assault rifles. I needs more than an AK, but so does every other rifle on the planet. T
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 "only had 4 malfunctions"... I really laughed at this 1... When I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army, I fired my AK daily & only cleaned it 3-4x in 1 year & never had any malfunctions. & you call 4 malfunctions in 3 days, reliable... What you don't seem to understand (because you're biased) is that in a real war situation any of those malfunctions would've endangered your life.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 I find that both highly unlikely (firing it 'daily') and that you never cleaned it. Furthermore, the number of malfunctions compared to the amount of time isn't important. It's the number of malfunctions compared to the number of rounds fired. Lastly, they were double feeds. You, being such a rifle expert, must know that double feeds are not a rifle induced malfunction. But you didn't, and you're not.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Yes, I fired that AKM every day and I only cleaned it 3-4 times in 1 year. It never jammed from any reasons.
As for the double feeds, this just shows how many problems the AR system has. Problems with the mags, with the extractors, problems with fouling and heating caused by the DI system. The weapons performances really don't mean shit if the weapon is not reliable. Sure, if you clean it every day after every gunfight, it'll work. But the idea of an assault rifle made for war is
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Yes, I fired that AKM every day and I only cleaned it 3-4 times in 1 year. It never jammed from any reasons.
As for the double feeds, this just shows how many problems the AR system has. Problems with the mags, with the extractors, problems with fouling and heating caused by the DI system. The weapons performances really don't mean shit if the weapon is not reliable. Sure, if you clean it every day after every gunfight, it'll work. But the idea of an assault rifle made for war is
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@Nater245689 that it should work in less than ideal conditions and when it's not properly taken care of because these are the situations you're most likely to encounter in a real war. And the M16 simply doesn't fit this essential criteria.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 The M16 has been performing well in adverse conditions for the last 40 odd years. Obviously it does meet those criteria.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Well, that's the thing. It only performed well in the official reports which are known to be forged. The soldiers though, come with completely different stories. Why don't you try to perform a reliability test on your AR-15 and post it on YT and show us all how reliable this weapon is. If you trust it that, this shouldn't be a problem for you.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Oh, and for the record, I own AKs and have owned AKs. They're dead reliable, but that's about all they can be commended for. In ever other aspect, the AR is vastly superior and it's also more than reliable enough. There is a reason why a lot of Western SOF units use the M16/M4 instead of their own country's service rifle. The British SAS/SBS, Australian SASR, New Zealand SAS, French Special Operations, ect all use the M16/M4.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 A weapon that's very accurate doesn't worth shit if it jams on you. I'm not saying that you should sacrifice accuracy for reliability, but reliability is the most important feature of an assault rifle.
As for why many SF units in many countries use the M16/M4, that's probably political. But from what I know, the British SF use their L85, they stopped using the M4 along time ago. I don't know about the others, but I find it hard to believe that they would choose the M4 over the AK-47
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 The SAS don't use the L85, talk about a piece of shit rifle. They all choose the M4 over the AK. The only reason an AK would be used would be to blend in with locals and/or leave little evidence of being in an area (ie leaving spend 7.62x39 cases instead of 5.56x45). It's not a political choice to use the M4, they use it because it's the best. The French use it instead of the FAMAS, the Aussies instead of the F88, the Brits instead of the SA80.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 The SAS use the L85. If you want to make your point, at least stop coming with such misinformation. They stopped using the M4 a long time ago. The French also use the FAMAS in every units. The French are well known 4 their patriotism & claiming that they would use an American weapon over a French weapons is just lame... As for the Australians, I really don't see why they would choose the M4 over the Steyr AUG, which is better in every way. U're starting to be not worth paying
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 No, they don't use the L85 and don't use it for a very good reason. Try shooting an L85 around a barricade with your weak/support/reaction shoulder. It's not happening. I'm sure the rifle is available to the SAS, they might even use it on occasion, but rarely. You look at any pictures of British SOF in Iraq or Afghanistan, they're packing M4s.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Well, I don't know what you mean by firing a weapon with the "weak/support/reaction shoulder", but I didn't see any SAS soldier carrying the M4 in Afghanistan. Andy Mcnab also talked about the L85 and how good the weapon is. The British use the SA80. They used the M4/M16 when they didn't have their own rifle. But since they've adopted the SA80, they use it for all their units, including the SAS.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Well that's interesting that you don't know what that means, it should be self explanatory. It means firing the rifle both left and right handed, on the fly. That's something you can't do with most bullpups unless you want brass in the face. The SAS use the M4 in Afghanistan, the SAS use the M4 in Iraq. Look at any pictures of British SOF operators and you'll see them carrying a SOPMOD M4.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Yeah, that's what I said when I talked about the bullpups only problem. However, this can be fixed relatively easy and it's well worth all other advantages, like lighter weight, more compact. And this design also makes a more ergonomic design (despite of what you said). The only "disadvantage" is that you have to modify it to eject the shells from the other side if you fire it left handed. But this issue can be fixed so easily that it's actually a non issue.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Bullpups are ergonomically inferior to traditional rifles. They're harder to get prone with, slower to reload, and you can't rapidly switch from right to left handed shooting with them. The British, Australian, NZ, French SOF units use the M4 because it isn't a bullpup and is at least, if not more reliable than their standard service weapons.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Hard to get prone with, harder to reload? Where do you get this. The bullpups are more compact, thus they're much easier to handle and operate. They're also lighter than conventional rifles. The bullpups have a lot of advantages, the only disadvantage being that it can't be fired by left handed people without some simple modifications.
And again, the Australian, and the French don't use the M4. The M4 is far less reliable than the Steyr AUG and FAMAS so stop this bullshitting.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 I get this from actually shooting one. You obviously have not. A bullpup is an ergonomic mess. Ideally you want most of a rifle's weight between the operator's two hands, slightly biased towards the front. Most of a bullpup's weight is in the stock. A bullpup has one advantage over a conventional rifle, it's more compact. In every other measure of a rifle, it's inferior.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Again, I don't know if what you say it's true. Your opinions on the L85 may be the result of the fact that you're biased. I, for one, don't see how it can bee so heavy in the stock that will affect its performances or the way it can be handled. Frankly, this seems to be a biased opinion. And of course, let's not forget that the L85 is much more reliable than the M4. So I really don't see why the SAS would use the M4 over the L85.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 The FAMAS has very stringent ammunition requirements due to it's blowback operation and it's generally very finicky. The French call it a 'range rifle'. Figure that one out. The AUG is reliable, for a bullpup. The Australian and NZ SAS use the M4 in it's place and for good reason.
Nater245689 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nater245689 What are those "very stringent requirements" for its ammunition? The blowback operating system can work with any type of ammo. And the French always said about it that it's a very reliable rifle. They wouldn't use it for such a long time if it wasn't good.
"The Australian and NZ SAS use the M4 in it's place and for good reason". Maybe you'd like to explain what is that "good reason".
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@Nater245689 attention too...
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 The ONLY 5.56mm rifles that I have shot that I can definitely say are better than the AR-15 are...gas piston AR-15s (HK and LWRC's rifles). I'd also say that the SCAR-L is at least as good as the AR-15, better in some aspects and weaker in others. Everything else (AR-18, AKs in 5.56, G36, AUG, ACR, ect) is not as good.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 Well, what you say here only reflects that you're biased and it doesn't prove anything. I don't know what "good" means for you, but to me, a weapon that you'll never be sure if it works or not, it's not a weapon suited for war. Piston operated variants are better, but in my opinion, the blowback operated systems are the best.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 How thick are you? You have zero experience with an AR and really little knowledge of it, or of the AK for that matter. There is a good reason why the M16 has been in service for over 40 years, it works and it works well. How many weapons that were supposed to have replaced it have come and gone? SALVO/SPIW, the ACR, the OICW, the XM8, the SCAR-L.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 I have a pretty vast experience with the AKM. I fired it a lot when I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army. I never fired an M16, but that weapon is famous for its unreliability.
As for why the M16/M4 were never replaced by any of the weapons you mentioned, even though they were much better than the AR, again, that is purely political, it has nothing to do with the weapons' performances. It also has to do with business.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 No, the AR wasn't replaced because the new "improved" weapons were equal at best. Some (XM8) were a step backwards.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 And how was the XM8 a "step backwards". Every single weapon tested to replace the AR-15 was superior from reliability point of view. The reason why the AR-15 was not replaced was because it always had political backup. That's the real reason, not because the AR-15 was better.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 Well, lets see. It melts under sustained fire. If it got hot enough it would also cause the trunion position to shift, giving up a wandering zero (the G36 has the same problem). It has no rail space. It has a reciprocating charging handle. It has proprietary magazines. It has a non-removable carry handle. Any optics mounted to it have a higher height over bore than optics mounted on an M4. A 12.5" barrel is too short for a general purpose carbine.
Nater245689 5 months ago
@Nater245689 The XM8 proved to be the most reliable weapon in the reliability tests they performed to determine which weapon would replace the M4. The M4 got the most jams by the way. Melting is a problem with a weapon that uses composite materials in every sensitive area. Heat is also a problem for the bolt carrier parts in the AR. The XM8 did have a reciprocating charging handle and it had problems with sights mounting. The AR-15 should employ either a piston operated system or a blowback
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@Nater245689 operated system. I would opt for the second. It's a much simpler design that keeps the weapon light in front and it also keeps it very reliable while very accurate.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 To that I would say try one of the new Nickel Born plated receivers and carrier groups, makes them run 1000s of rounds without having to clean and no jams. I have seen it in person myself. Also allot of the early AR jamming crap isn't valid. I mean they used to say it never needed cleaning and it ran dry without oil lol. For every one person I hear saying they are Jam-o-Matics I hear two say they never have problems. Its like Bigfoot, people just jump on the train I think to bash ARs.
pac6010 5 months ago
@pac6010 1000 rounds. OK, but after that, you have to clean it to be sure the next time it won't jam. Ask the soldiers in Iraq who had to clean their weapons after a day of gunfights what they thing of that. There's some1 above who said the M16 needs constant attention and carrying in order to work. That's the thing. A weapon that's made for war shouldn't need this kind of attention. It should work no matter what, regardless of how abused an neglected it is.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 There's no machine mankind makes that doesn't need to be maintained or cleaned and Guns are just one of those. Even the AK needs to be cleaned after a hard day in the field, sure maybe you don't have to and it will run, but would you really bet your life on that ? With the proper tools and experience it takes about 25 mins to really clean an AR pretty good. You're not gonna shoot 1000s of rounds on a day in a war zone unless its an actual war, I don't know of any of those going on.
pac6010 5 months ago
I didn't say a weapon can be 100% reliable when it's never cleaned, I just said the AR-15 needs too much maintenance just to make run. This is a problem that most assault rifles don't have. And yes, I'd bet my life on an AK. When I did my 1 year term in the Romanian army, I only cleaned my AK 3-4x in 1 year & it never suffered any malfunction. That's reliability.
& in a war, you could fire even more than 1000 rounds/day. Ask the soldiers in Iraq what they think abt those 25 min of yours after a
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@pac6010 long day of heavy fighting. Why do you think many of them choose the AK-47 over the AR-15?
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun1 In fact they only carry at most like 20 mags on their vest with 30 rounds each, you do the math. I don't even think a solder has fired that many rounds in a day that's not a machine gun operator. Its just not feasible. I have torture tested ARs and you can see videos on here with it being done, you really have to work to make them fail. Also if a guy payed less that $1000 for an AR and hes having problems he just has to stop taking because the gun is crap and it should fail lol.
pac6010 5 months ago
@pac6010 In In a war, you can fire much more than just 600 rds/day. I don't know about numbers, but you can talk with a soldier that fought in the early years of the Iraq war. He will tell you that 600 rds r not enough & wven after 600 rds, the guns sometimes were jamming.
As 4 the price, well, I can find an AK or a G3 for 300-400$ and thy're solid as a rock. So from what you say, the AR-15 is just not worth it.
StiviGun1 5 months ago
@StiviGun He musta been shooting at air then, or operating for a very long period with lots of battles, Its believable, but like I said its very unlikely. Certainly not happening that much right now that we are in police mode over there. As far as a good $400 AK, its not mil spec, or its fake mil spec. They might start out just fine, but put em to the test and fire hundreds of rounds every day and they stat to fall apart on ya. I know I owned a $450 one before I bought my arsenal M-7.
pac6010 5 months ago