ak47 vs m16 - Page 4

Praxus · 06-03-2004, 19:49 PM

LOL, 5.56 x 45mm is not an original AK round and is not in widespread service in the Russian military and it is a NATO round and the SVD is not an AK.

lurker · 06-03-2004, 20:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxus

LOL, 5.56 x 45mm is not an original AK round and is not in widespread service in the Russian military and it is a NATO round and the SVD is not an AK.

I was just too lazy to look for picrues

5.46x45 is "export" round so there is a LOT of images about it.

"Standard" AKM 5,45x39 round is 7N6 (steel kernel) - penetrates only 5mm from 350m.
7N10 PP round (hardened steel kernel) - penetrates 16mm steel plate from 100m

Sinfulcurves_AK · 06-03-2004, 21:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

"

In afghanistan US troops routinely drop 'Mujahamorons' at ranges of 500 meters with the M-16A2, and 400 meters with the M-4. The enemies only means of effective counter-fire is mortars. This has caused the interesting situation on a few occasions of US rifleman getting into firefights with enemy mortar teams. Afghanistans mountainous terrain is ideally suited to weapons with excellent LR capability.
In Iraq both during ODS, the initial invasion of OIF, and now during the insurgency, US troops have used the superior(OK, vastly superior) range of the M-16A2 and M-4A1 to great effect on many occasions.

Really? I had read someone that their weapon of choice were RPG-7's -- at least 50% of US soldiers have died from RPG attacks.

Anon · 06-03-2004, 22:58 PM

The RPG is a short ranged point defense anti-tank and anti-personnel weapon.

Ideal for ambushes(when it doesn't blow up in your hands, which the RPG-7 rocket has a tendency to do, they are quite old)

Since Luna has been tutoring you then i'm sure you're aware that almost all ambushes are short range affairs. They typicly happen at near point blank range.

An M-16A2 has about 2 to 2.5x the maximum effective range of the RPG-7(in the hands of the typical insurgent).

Anon · 06-03-2004, 23:03 PM

Lurker, the thinnest armor on an M-113(because it's typical of APCs so is a good example), is about 1" of hardened aluminum alloy. That's approx 23mm.

The tests all use NATO mild steel plate, which is not as resistant to gunfire as hardened aluminum alloy is.

There are a FEW spots on a -113 you can penetrate with 7.62x51mm SLAP ammunition, there are none you can penetrate with either US M855(green tip AP) 5.56x45, US 7.62 M118 Special match, US M80 7.62 ball, or any variety of 7.62x39 or 5.45x39..

An M-113's armor is designed to give protection all around from .30-06(which is far more powerful than 7.62x51 NATO) and frontal protection vs. .51(14.5mm) caliber HMGs.

A bradley or stryker are much more heavily armored than a M-113, btw.

Sinfulcurves_AK · 06-04-2004, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

The RPG is a short ranged point defense anti-tank and anti-personnel weapon.

Ideal for ambushes(when it doesn't blow up in your hands, which the RPG-7 rocket has a tendency to do, they are quite old)

Since Luna has been tutoring you then i'm sure you're aware that almost all ambushes are short range affairs. They typicly happen at near point blank range.

An M-16A2 has about 2 to 2.5x the maximum effective range of the RPG-7(in the hands of the typical insurgent).

Hehe, spanx for educating me on RPG's, sweetie: buuuut I actually know a li'l bit on 'em already

(~AK+RPG~, whoohoo!) I know the RPG-7 is quite old (60's), but not the RPG-7V1 (90's) and the other variants: RPG-29, etc. I'm not really sure what kinda RPG's their using, could be the 'ol 7, but could also be the latest versions -- Also keep in mind the newest RPG-7V1 has deadlier rounds (like the ~TBG-7V thermobaric round~) ,

RUSKIE · 06-22-2004, 05:36 AM

All im gunna say all i need to day is

AK-47 Extremly better durability.
M-16 A-2, I assume, better accuracy.

Garry · 06-22-2004, 10:13 AM

well lets count on facts..... in the competition between the armore and the shelll the last wins... little evidence is bellow

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1115413/posts

ps. just a short response to comment about brave american guys with M-16 in and stupid Russians with AK-47 in Grozniy....

RUSKIE · 06-22-2004, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garry

well lets count on facts..... in the competition between the armore and the shelll the last wins... little evidence is bellow

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1115413/posts

ps. just a short response to comment about brave american guys with M-16 in and stupid Russians with AK-47 in Grozniy....

Aboot that last comment in, the M-16 blah blah blah, And the Stupid Russians, with AK-47, 1, Russia doesnt use the AK-47 any its all AK-74 and up,(but there still exists remanents of the 47 in some units) 2 of all, it takes alot more guts for Russian Soldiers into Chechnya than into Iraq ( if i had to say anything aboot them, the Russians would consider Iraq wayyy over Chechnya...

**Lunatock** · 06-22-2004, 16:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garry

well lets count on facts..... in the competition between the armore and the shelll the last wins... little evidence is bellow

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1115413/posts

ps. just a short response to comment about brave american guys with M-16 in and stupid Russians with AK-47 in Grozniy....

Where at in the thread?

Hmm...would things have been much different if America invaded Chechnya and Russia slugged it out with the Republican Guard & Fedayeen? Not to mention Russia being in a worse location for Jihadi's to start coming out of the woodwork.

CenterFire · 06-23-2004, 00:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by berkut

A pretty cocky comment, eh? AKs have seen a LOT more action then any other firearm in the world history, and they never betrayed their owners, unlike most others. And "commies" have never stood down from a fight. And a real fight at that, not that picture perfect scenareos with weekend-camping type of accomodations, and endless "order-by-phone" ressuplies.
Like I said before, AK is almost a 60 (!!!) year old veteran that is still very very competent compared to the newbies and keeps proving itself in every single conflict every day. Starting with WW2 it has allready been proven that in modern warfare accuracy beyond 150-200 meters falls behind importance in behind reliability, and in a large scale war behind its cost and time to produce. If you need accurate automatic fire at distances of several hundred meters you use your squad machine gun, if you need even more accuracy beyond that you have your squad snipers. Spend a few weeks in the rubble of cities, sand, and dirt. with no reinforcements, and no time to dust off your weapon after every magazine and you will see AK's advantage. One clear dissadvantage of M-16 series is that the gases from the barrel directly enter the locking mechanism of the chamber, so residue must always be kept at a minimum. Drag your M-16 in sand or mud and you better find time to clean it out in the middle of a fight.

Current Russian weapon is AN-94, however due to horrible financial situation in Russian military it cannot fully replace the AKs in service. But if you want to compare current weapons use it, and we'll see how all other weapons measure up to the AN.

P.S I dont see how some other members on this board can trash countries that produced such fine weapons while their own country of origin has not invented as much as its own muzzle loader.

Golly whiz-- The folks in Ogden, Utah seem to think Browning was a US citizen. ;-)

Anon · 06-24-2004, 12:51 PM

I visited the Browning museum in Ogden, very nice displays.

John Moses Browning's father was also a world class gunsmith, and designed such weapons as the henry and sharps rifles of US Old west fame.

Both men were Americans.

**Lunatock** · 06-24-2004, 13:01 PM

The Brownings, The Winchesters. Any other American family that is responsible for inventing famous firearms, all have thier rightfull place under the feet of the Kalishnkov family.

Praxus · 06-24-2004, 13:58 PM

For western armies the M16A2 is a better choice. You just have to clean it daily which is no problem.

Sniper · 07-07-2004, 09:50 AM

The M16 is way more accurate than the AK-47. If you can not hit the target than you ****ed. Who cares if you can dip the AK-47 in mud. The AK-47 was made cheap and you get what you pay for. It is a very inaccurate peice of ****. The M16 is an accurate rifle. I do not know about anyone else but if I were going to war with a M16 I would feel save know that i could hit the target. If I had the AK-47 I would only hope that as the barrel is bouncing all over the place that it happens to end up in front of the target. It does not really matter if it can shoot it matters if you can hit the target. Oh yah and another thing just because it was used more does not mean ****. It only means that it was made to the old standards and with old technology. You only have to clean the M16 daily which I do not see a problem with. Another thing is since the the M16 is so light the soldiers do not have leave food behind just to have the same amount of ammo as a AK-47 user but Ak-47 users had to do that to keep up with M16 users.

Therefore M16's rule!!!!!

07-07-2004, 09:50 AM	#60 (permalink)
Sniper New Member Join Date: 07-07-04 Posts: 1	AK-47's Suck!!! The M16 is way more accurate than the AK-47. If you can not hit the target than you **ed. Who cares if you can dip the AK-47 in mud. The AK-47 was made cheap and you get what you pay for. It is a very inaccurate peice of . The M16 is an accurate rifle. I do not know about anyone else but if I were going to war with a M16 I would feel save know that i could hit the target. If I had the AK-47 I would only hope that as the barrel is bouncing all over the place that it happens to end up in front of the target. It does not really matter if it can shoot it matters if you can hit the target. Oh yah and another thing just because it was used more does not mean *. It only means that it was made to the old standards and with old technology. You only have to clean the M16 daily which I do not see a problem with. Another thing is since the the M16 is so light the soldiers do not have leave food behind just to have the same amount of ammo as a AK-47 user but Ak-47 users had to do that to keep up with M16 users. Therefore M16's rule!!!!! Last edited by Sniper : 07-07-2004 at 09:59 AM.*

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
INSAS vs AK47 vs M16?	scoop	Small Arms and Personal Weapons	157	Today 19:33 PM
M16 vs G36	Mt1	Small Arms and Personal Weapons	114	10-26-2007 15:09 PM
AUG vs. M-4 Carbine	troung	Small Arms and Personal Weapons	61	09-16-2005 00:23 AM
Xm8 Prototypes Surpass M16 ?	CenterFire	Small Arms and Personal Weapons	57	03-21-2005 18:05 PM

06-03-2004, 19:49 PM	#46 (permalink)
Praxus *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-26-03 Posts: 3,237	LOL, 5.56 x 45mm is not an original AK round and is not in widespread service in the Russian military and it is a NATO round and the SVD is not an AK.

06-03-2004, 22:58 PM	#49 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	The RPG is a short ranged point defense anti-tank and anti-personnel weapon. Ideal for ambushes(when it doesn't blow up in your hands, which the RPG-7 rocket has a tendency to do, they are quite old) Since Luna has been tutoring you then i'm sure you're aware that almost all ambushes are short range affairs. They typicly happen at near point blank range. An M-16A2 has about 2 to 2.5x the maximum effective range of the RPG-7(in the hands of the typical insurgent).

06-03-2004, 23:03 PM	#50 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	Lurker, the thinnest armor on an M-113(because it's typical of APCs so is a good example), is about 1" of hardened aluminum alloy. That's approx 23mm. The tests all use NATO mild steel plate, which is not as resistant to gunfire as hardened aluminum alloy is. There are a FEW spots on a -113 you can penetrate with 7.62x51mm SLAP ammunition, there are none you can penetrate with either US M855(green tip AP) 5.56x45, US 7.62 M118 Special match, US M80 7.62 ball, or any variety of 7.62x39 or 5.45x39.. An M-113's armor is designed to give protection all around from .30-06(which is far more powerful than 7.62x51 NATO) and frontal protection vs. .51(14.5mm) caliber HMGs. A bradley or stryker are much more heavily armored than a M-113, btw.

06-22-2004, 05:36 AM	#52 (permalink)
RUSKIE Regular Join Date: 06-21-04 Location: Russia Posts: 94	All im gunna say all i need to day is AK-47 Extremly better durability. M-16 A-2, I assume, better accuracy.

06-22-2004, 10:13 AM	#53 (permalink)
Garry *Defense Professional* Join Date: 06-18-04 Posts: 1,643	well lets count on facts..... in the competition between the armore and the shelll the last wins... little evidence is bellow http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1115413/posts ps. just a short response to comment about brave american guys with M-16 in and stupid Russians with AK-47 in Grozniy....

06-24-2004, 12:51 PM	#57 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	I visited the Browning museum in Ogden, very nice displays. John Moses Browning's father was also a world class gunsmith, and designed such weapons as the henry and sharps rifles of US Old west fame. Both men were Americans.

06-24-2004, 13:01 PM	#58 (permalink)
Lunatock Staff Emeritus Join Date: 08-03-03 Location: Southeast Pennsylvania Posts: 3,505 Country:	The Brownings, The Winchesters. Any other American family that is responsible for inventing famous firearms, all have thier rightfull place under the feet of the Kalishnkov family.

06-24-2004, 13:58 PM	#59 (permalink)
Praxus *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-26-03 Posts: 3,237	For western armies the M16A2 is a better choice. You just have to clean it daily which is no problem.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)