Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Jalisco Lancer
Sultan
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2112
|
Quote Reply
Topic: AK-47 or M-16? NATO or Warsaw? Posted: 08-Dec-2005 at 19:43 |
Yes, the G3 is a real Assault rifle, more powerfull ammo than the 5.56 mm and of course, more accurate than the 7.62 soviet.
However, the limited 20 rounds magazine and the the recoil on full auto mode makes it not really good option for closer combat.
Edited by Jalisco Lancer
|
 |
arch.buff
Colonel
Joined: 18-Oct-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 606
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Dec-2005 at 21:44 |
Originally posted by Arkhanson
Gunpowder which used in AK-47 is better than M16'S Gunpowder we saw the defeat of M16 at Viet-Nam war
|
The US used the M-14 in early vietnam and used the M-16 in later years. And believe me the M-16 itself killed far more people holding the AK, than the other way around, eventhough it wasnt even used for the whole span of the war.
Edited by arch.buff
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 05:22 |
I voted for the AK-47 and its countless variants and spinoffs. It is the most successful AR design in the world. The same design has been used as a basis for light machine guns, submachine guns, bullpup ARs, and sniper rifles.
http://kalashnikov.guns.ru/models/list
|
 |
Turkic10
Knight
Joined: 01-Jul-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 65
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 14:06 |
There's some speculation that the AK-47 owes some of it's design to this German late war design.

|
Admonish your friends privately, praise them publicly.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 14:42 |
That's a Stummgewher model 1944. It's 7.92x33mm Kurtz. The design of
the AK was roughly based on this, but not entirely. Note the AK's
buttstock is closer to the pistol grip and covered pistons.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 14:49 |
In other words....
Gewher Model 3...
Great long range
Heavy recoil
Large caliber
Very accurate
Very reliable
VERY large and some-what heavy
AK-47...
Very common
Extremely reliable
Some-what accurate
Cheap and common ammuntion
Exellent close battle rifle.
7.62 x 39 M1943, basically a shortend .30 round.
Lacks long range abilities.
M-16...
EXTREMELY accurate
Pretty reliable (not older versions though...)
High-velocity long range 5.56 x 45 caliber.
Expensive
Exellent infantry med-long range sniper rifle as well as the G3.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 14:54 |
There should be a caliber that gives the knock-down power of the 7.62 x
39 M43 with the high velocity of 5.56 x 45 NATO, like a 7.62 x 42 or
8mm x 43.
Even though these calibers do not exist, I believe they would perform very well.
|
 |
Turkic10
Knight
Joined: 01-Jul-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 65
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 15:23 |
When it comes to sniping at long distances this is the one:
'Big Mac McMillans Tac-50 Neither the Canadian government nor DND are willing to comment on CF sniping in Afghanistan but unconfirmed reports put kills by 3PPCLI snipers at more than 20. A particularly successful CF rifle is the new 12.7mm McMillan Tac-50. One shot, in the Shah-i-kot, set a gruesome new distance record for sniping 2,430m. The combat effectiveness of the Tac-50 and CF snipers (nominated for five US Bronze Stars) has now been proven.
Our Canadian snipers have been used by the US forces
in Afghanistan on occasion.
|
Admonish your friends privately, praise them publicly.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 15:37 |
Well I have to agree with you, nothing can compare to the 12.7mm
(except .50 BMG, otherwise known as just 12.5mm) at extreme distance
shooting. I also agree with you, you Canadians are very fine marksmen.
All I am saying though is there needs to be an assault rifle that can
be flexibile in its design so it can be used not only as an infantry
weapon but as a support weapon and perhaps a sniper weapon. The only
firearm that I believe could do this would be the G3A4 using a 90 round
drum magazine, collapsable stock, and a medium range scope.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 15:41 |
The best short-range assault weapons availibile in my opinion are from
the Stoner arms production company. They produce a basic recreation of
the M4A2 Carbine that uses the AK-47's hard-hitting M43 rounds and uses
the same magazines.
|
 |
Turkic10
Knight
Joined: 01-Jul-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 65
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 18:59 |
Here's some pictures, one showing the present Canadian army med. range sniper rifle and one similar to the new one which will replace it.


8.6mm / .338 cal.
|
Admonish your friends privately, praise them publicly.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 19:04 |
Ah... the C3A1 looks remarkably similar to the M40A1 used in Vietnam.
Edited by AFV Master
|
 |
Laelius
Consul
Joined: 22-Oct-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 354
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 20:30 |
What many of you haven't realised is that the M-16s reliability issue has been overstated. When the Army first purchased the M-16 Colt maintained that the firearm, due to its space age design, never needed to be clean. This might have been true with the stick propellant the gun was designed with Secretary of Defense Mcnamara had decided for the gun to use a finer grain ball propellant which although increased the firing rate it also substantially increased barrel fouling. Anyways the first M-16s were sent to Vietnam without cleaning kits and it wasn't too long before the guns started jamming to the point of being unusable. Many of these problems were corrected with the design of the M16A1 which arrived with cleaning kits and a push bolt for use in a jam.
Also I believe many of you are entirely wrong when making the claim that the AK-47 possesses greater stopping power, actually the reverse is true.
The 5.56 NATO cartridge with the standard military ball bullet (NATO SS109; (US: M855) will penetrate approximately 15 to 20 inches (380 to 500 mm) into soft tissue in ideal circumstances. As with all spitzer shaped projectiles it is prone to yaw in soft tissue. However, at impact velocities above roughly 2,700 ft/s (820 m/s), it will yaw and then fragment at the cannelure. The fragments disperse through the flesh causing much more internal injury. The effectiveness of fragmentation seems to impart much greater damage to tissue than bullet dimensions and velocities would suggest. It should be noted that this fragmentation effect is highly dependent on velocity, and therefore barrel length: short-barreled rifles generate less muzzle velocity and therefore rounds lose effectiveness at much shorter ranges than longer-barreled rifles. |
|
 |
Laelius
Consul
Joined: 22-Oct-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 354
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 20:36 |
The AK-74 makes a decend comparison to the M16 but the AK-47 is completely outmatched. The M16 is lighter, has nearly 200 meters in extra range, is demonstrably more accurate, and significantly more lethal, see above post. There's a reason the USSR quickly designed the AK-74 in response to the M-16. Yet even in comparison to the AK-74 the M-16 possesses a more modular design which allows the incorporation of many different accessories thus enhancing the M-16s effectiveness.
|
 |
Turkic10
Knight
Joined: 01-Jul-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 65
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Dec-2005 at 21:51 |
I watched a test of the AK-47 vs M-16 on tv and the AK out classed the M-16 in just about every category except accuracy and controlability. You could see the AK's barrel flex with each shot. One of the tests involved a concrete block wall and 10" of wood. An enemy behind either would survive the M-16 shots but not the AK-47. It would seem that multiple calibers of bullets are required to cover all situations.
|
Admonish your friends privately, praise them publicly.
|
 |
Laelius
Consul
Joined: 22-Oct-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 354
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Dec-2005 at 00:05 |
and I'm sure the tests didn't play to the strengths of the AK-47... did they compare the ease of fitting different components to each weapon? Did they compare the effects of the rounds on a soft target where the NATO 5.56 and Warsaw 5.45 are significantly more lethal than the 7.62? In comparisons involving these factors the M16 stands head and shoulders above. Oh and did the test also consider logistics, number of rounds carried in the field?
|
 |
LEGATVS LEGIONIS
Knight
Joined: 10-Dec-2005
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 55
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Dec-2005 at 03:05 |
nah the best one is : AR 70/90 made by Beretta and used by the italian Armed Forces  to be honest i dunno if it's really the best, but i could use that one only and it was absolutely great
P.S. the caliber is NATO 5.56 mm x 45
Click Here
Edited by LEGATVS LEGIONIS
|
Hosti non solum dandam esse viam ad fugiendum, sed etiam muniendam!
(Publius Cornelius Scipio 'Africanus')
Si vis pacem para bellum!
|
 |
Turkic10
Knight
Joined: 01-Jul-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 65
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Dec-2005 at 14:22 |
Originally posted by Laelius
and I'm sure the tests didn't play to the strengths of the AK-47... did they compare the ease of fitting different components to each weapon? Did they compare the effects of the rounds on a soft target where the NATO 5.56 and Warsaw 5.45 are significantly more lethal than the 7.62? In comparisons involving these factors the M16 stands head and shoulders above. Oh and did the test also consider logistics, number of rounds carried in the field?
|
The test was based on what was effective for soldiers with a small amount of training vs a well trained group. For an insurgent group the AK-47 was best since it could handle more neglect due to it's loose fitting parts. It was mentioned that smaller, lighter bullets permit carrying more of them into battle. The M-16 wins that one. They did do ballistic gell tests which showed the tumbling and fragmenting effect of the M-16 round whereas the AK round just tore thru it. By the way, the M-16 round also fragments when it hits water at an angle. In the jungle I'd want the AK and in open areas the M-16. I would not want to be hit by either. As for the absolute best... it hasn't been invented yet.
Edited by Turkic10
|
Admonish your friends privately, praise them publicly.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Dec-2005 at 14:52 |
I don't know... the G36 is pretty good.
The AK's and M16's are all great designs on paper, but you must include
all factors. A well-produced AK-47 model compared to an M16A1 Vietnam
surplus, of course the AK will win. Ultimately though, all the new M16
needs is just a larger caliber. High-velocity does NOT count for
knock-down power unless you have a large caliber, like the AK. The AK
triumphs in this area because its round is basically a shortend .30
while the M16 is just .223. Big differance, but due to this, the higher
velocity round can achieve more distance than the AK not to mention
tighten accuracy
Edited by AFV Master
|
 |
xristar
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Nov-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1028
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Dec-2005 at 13:22 |
I wonder how a wound by a 20mm minigun would be.
That's stopping power!
|
 |