"Most" users of the AK are dirt ignorant peasants who haven't had a single day of formal instruction in their lives, let alone formal marksmanship instruction.
If one takes the time to properly sight in an AK you'll be surprised as hell at how far out you can reach with one. "Most" of the rest of those shooting AK's have heard all about it's legendary inaccuracy and therefore don't put enough effort in to learning the proper way to make hits at distance with one.
Who knows. Maybe your guys had some crappy shot out ones. But in my experience the 'off the shelf' stuff available to civilians here in the States is capable of much greater accuracy than people give it credit for.
It's a poor workman who blames his tools.
Are you really trying to make the case that given equally capable shooters that the AK-47 and the M-16 would be equally effective at ranges beyond 200 meters?
Or put it this way, face to face at 300 yards would you prefer your AK over someone with an M-16 and is that a match up that you would advocate for others?
‘Cuz it seems to me that you’re trying to turn an exceptional situation into the rule.
“properly sight in an AK you’ll be surprised as hell at how far out you can reach with one. “
A major issue with the AK isn’t always the AK rifle itself but the crummy ammunition many of the shooters worldwide use. Russia no doubt has fresh ammo and can sight in an AK to 300 yards, but if you look at Iraq you’ll find they shoot crusted over stuff and mix-n-match of all kinds of ammo.