SpikeTV AK47 vs. AR15 Vanity

April 18, 2010 | Me

[goodwithagun]

Informal poll: SpikeTV is showing a Deadliest Warrior rerun. It has the Taliban vs. IRA. The IRA is testing the AR15 against the Taliban with the AK47. I vote for the AK47. I would like to know what you think.

[Knitebane]

Nice FAL. DSA?

Actually, that's not MY FAL. But I came across the picture and it's a dead ringer for mine.

Right down to the aftermarket dust cover with the picatinny rail for mounting optics.

And I swapped out the safety with a DSA extended safety so it's more like an L1A1.

[ExSoldier]

I'll say FAL or AR-10.

Between those two I'll take the FAL for battle proven performance. As to the OP question: I like the M4 but I'd rather have an H&K 416 in 6.8

[Travis McGee]

The dust cover/bridge on a FAL has to be really screwed down to give a good scope mount. That’s another “plus” for Stoner’s original AR concept. The flat top doesn’t need an aftermarket bridge added and bolted on.

Don’t get me wrong, I think FALs are fantastic.

[Travis McGee]

I wonder what it would be worth at auction today?

[yarddog]

I have no idea what an FN model 49 goes for today. I remember back when I was 16 which was around 1963, I tried to order one from JC Penney. I can’t recall the price but they were cheap.

I filled out an application for credit but they refused me. Since I had no source of income except my allowance, I can’t blame them. Oddly enough, it would have been a good move for them as I would have paid for it.

[Travis McGee]

Plus it’s about the coolest looking rifle EVER.

;^)

[Knitebane]

The flat top doesn’t need an aftermarket bridge added and bolted on.

The flat top is a new design. The original AR design had an integral carry handle. Early optics like the AN/PVS-2 had custom mounts that mounted beside the handle because they were so huge, but for practical purposes the only way to put modern optics on an early AR is to replace the upper.

A quality FN dust cover makes the rifle stronger. A touch of Loc-Tite in on the screw threads and it might as well be part of the rifle.

I have a simple dust cover that only accommodates optics but some of the more advanced ones will allow loading of ammo from stripper clips and the attachment of a brass catcher. Very versatile.

[Travis McGee]

THe flat top is a new design? REALLY?

Shoot, I saw them made in the early 1980s just by grinding off the handle and milling in 4 slots.

The point is, the ARs can inherently take a scope. AKs and FALs need a clunky bridge bolted on.

[mamelukesabre]

I really don’t see what difference it makes if the handle was original or not. The point is, the AR upper receiver is a superior design. Dust covers are crap.

[Blackhawk]

World of difference between 100yds and 600yds. The 7.62x39 max powder load MV isn't enough to get a 125gr. bullet out to 600yds with any degree of accuracy. At 100yds fine, a lot of lead on target with a medium amount of ft/lbs of energy. To get that same bullet down range to 600yds and hit what you want to you really need to go up to the 7.62x51 NATO (.308) which will hold almost twice the powder load and an extra 1000 fps MV which will keep the bullet in the air with enough energy to keep it true to target. That is where the 5.56 NATO has the advantage. For the size and weight of the bullet (62gr. for the SS109) it has a huge powder load and MV which keeps it almost flat out to 400yds. That makes BD calcs pretty easy at 600yds.

[Blackhawk]

I really want a Barrett but with today's economy.....Have to settle for my FS110 Tactical with the heavy bull barrel. I load my own and I'm good out to 1000yds.

Or at least I was, before I sold it, years ago, at a gun show, to a guy named Bob, he had on a red plaid shirt and a blaze orange ball cap, never saw him again.

[hiredhand]

Er... I dunno (insert dumb look here :-). I had a dust cover on the FAL that I had before my fishing accident just about the time that Obama took office and it was NICE. It had the cut-out for strippers if you wanted to use them. The only thing I didn't like was that it interfered with thorough cleaning because it was screwed ON. But it was VERY stable and never moved when the rifle was scoped.

I think I favored the short AR-15 that I had before my fishing accident over the FAL though. I know all about the exterior ballistics differences, but point blank range on SS-109 5.56 ammo is 250 yards...300 if it's "hot". Point blank range for the 7.62 is "about" 180 yards. In all reality, it's not a big deal until you try to "point and shoot" at 400 yards. If you zero SS-109 5.56 ammo in at 100, you'll have to hold over 24" at 300...whereas you'll have to hold over "about" 32" with the 7.62. ...and yes, the 7.62 round at 400 yards will impart "about" 1280 ft-lbs of kinetic energy, whereas the 5.56 imparts "about" 594 ft-lbs of kinetic energy. The 5.56 only produces 1173 ft-lbs of kinetic energy at muzzle. :-)

I liked being able to hump the weapon WITH 300 rds of 5.56 ammo on my person as opposed to 150 of the 7.62.

Gosh I hate fishing now. :-)

[PugetSoundSoldier]

The Kel Tec RFB is 7.62x51mm. It’ll get to 600m with enough energy to still get the job done!

[Still Thinking]

Between those two I'll take the FAL for battle proven performance.

Me too (in fact I did), but I'd still take an AR-10 over a 15.

[MadJack]

A3 is good stuff, but if I’m alone in open country, and getting my pick of systems, I’ll take an M14 on an ALCS stock.

[redgolum]

Good points.

A few buddies of mine keep telling me “accuracy doesn’t matter in a fight”. Being one who only will shoot a tight grouping rifle, I never wanted to believe them.

In fact, my AR A2 upper is right about an inch at 100 yards. Iron sights right now, and from a bench. Want to get a small optic for the carry handle mount.

[Blackhawk]

Sorry, that was part of a different conversation. Yes the Kel Tec has the power but with only the 18” barrel you won't get the accuracy. As an example I offer my 2 AR15’s. Both Colt HBAR, identical in every way except barrel length. One is 18.5 and the other is 24. At 50yds. no difference. At 100 yds. the 18.5 can put 30rnds in a 1.25”group. The 24” will do the same 30rds in a .75” group. At 500yds. (The longest measured range I have access to) the 18.5” will shoot a 9 inch group.(a 10x scope) With the 24” @500yds, same scope, 3” group. Point is you need the length to get the twists to make it accurate for the long shots.

[Travis McGee]

"Get off my lawn!"

Me, guarding the picnic. Borrowed rifle.

[Travis McGee]

I have an EOTech on my flattop, because the rifle is intended for short and fast suburban scenarios.

But if I had my druthers, I’d put an ACOG on it for longer range work.

[Knitebane]

You know my major complaint isn't with the 5.56 though I still maintain that if everything else is equal, bigger holes are still better.

No, my main beef is with the Stoner Stick. If someone gave me an AR-10 I'd sell it, but I'd hang onto a SCAR 16S.

Direct impingement sucks. After the Wanat debacle even the Army finally figured it out. The new plan is that regular soldiers get the SCAR-16, SOCOM get's the SCAR-17 and REMFs get the new M-4s with a gas piston. Heck, even the Marines figured it out. Even the FRENCH are buying SCARs!

So there. Neener, neener neener!