Alex

Hey, M249 and M60 aren't assault rifles. Don't like AK? Take PK. Not enough? Take Kord. Not enough? There're AGS

Anon

For the maximum in portable firepower, i reccomend this...

Attached Images

SINCGARS.gif (27.7 KB, 979 views)

Fury

I guess that's something you use to call for airstrikes and artillery support
PK has enough firepower for my needs and for supporting squad advance, one time I tried the 12.7mm NSV on vechile mount but that wasn't so practical since the Sisu armored personnel carrier doesn't come up with a turret so I felt a little naked been partially outside the vechile. Those NSV gunners are snipers favorite targets

s_qwert63

The first 1 -2 rounds are accurate, the rest might spray, but will you exactly fire at full auto at long ranges?

Another advantage that no one mentioned about the AK is that it can go full auto, while the most common M16's (A2/A3's) only have a 3 round burst option. So at CQB, the AK will have a huge advantage over the M16, esp. because it is also smaller.

The AK's can have a folding stock, while the M16 series family cannot, only a somewhat collapsable stock on the M4 perhaps, however it is NOT a folding stock. Therefore this gives the AK another advantage, in CQB.

Any AK rifle can be transformed into an RPK LMG, just by changing the barrel and possibly the stock.

The AK can be fed by any 7.62x39mm/5.45x39mm ammunition.
WHile the M16 operates at different efficiencies with different types of ammunition, such as the SS109/NATO/M193, if I am not mistaken, a certain type of ammunition causes more jams than the others.

The Kalashnikov is cheaper and easier to mass produce.

s_qwert63

However the M14 is almost uncontrollable at full auto, and it's accuracy at full auto is also about as bad as the AK's in the hands of a normal soldier. It is also heavier than the AK.

Fury

Then what about AR-10, its like M16 with .308win, I suppose its not much better in full auto than M14.

s_qwert63

I think the reason why the AR-10 wasn't adopted was because it was too light for it's caliber.

eMGee

Hey, don't forget about .223 Remington (5.56x45mm NATO)!

• AK-47, AKS-47, AKM, AK-103 and AK-104 - 7.62x39mm
• AK-74, AKS-74, AK-74M, AKS-74M, AKS-74U, AK-105, AK-107, AEK-971* and AN-94* - 5.45x39mm
• AK-101, AK-102 and AK-108 - 5.56x45mm

(* No Kalashnikov derrivative)


I don't think the AR-10 was ever going to be succesful as a battle rifle. Only as a semi-automatic sniper rifle, in later Stoner & Knight Armament incarnations.

Which speaking of, I think the only nation in the world that was ever interested in adopting the AR-10 was the Netherlands

s_qwert63

Exactly, put ANY 5.56x45mm into an AK101/102/108 and it will still fire without jamming.


It was produced for 3 years by Artellerie Inrichtingen and was meant as a LMG/SAW if I am not mistaken.

Fury

Finnish defense forces tested the AR-10 in 7.62x39 caliber to be as a new standard infantry rifle. I think this was in the early 60's and the AR-10 was a candidate along with AK-47 to replace the aging Mosin-Nagant bolt action rifle which was used to end of 60's and well into the 70's. The AK was chosen as the base for the Rk62 and Rk95.
If AR-10 would have been chosen we would be shooting with M16s now

Officer of Engineers

And you will get 5 inch groups instead of the mandatory 3 inch groups.

__________________
Chimo

eMGee

The recoil handling/supression is pretty adequate on the AK-100 series. Which is very apparant in this particular, AK-USA, demonstration video (select-fire AK-102, in 5.56x45mm NATO).

Here's another nice AK-USA video, featuring several AK-100 serie select-fire rifles.

Fury

What does that mean? I hate to repeat myself but a weapon is as accurate as the person firing it.

Officer of Engineers

It means that after a 500 rounds per recruit, he should be able to shoot gold eight times out of ten.

Fury

Allright then Perhaps I misunderstood the message.