GRM fire arms now?

rebelgtp wrote: In reply to Strizzo: Actually now that I think of it I think the Hilux fits the AK best. Damn near impossible to kill.

and often seen together:

Have you guys actually priced AK's and AR15's lately? The prices are within $100 for equal quality weapons.

In reply to rotard:

So the proper answer is to own both.

I have yet to see an AR15 that was the equal to an AK for other than playing at the range.

Flight Service wrote: I have yet to see an AR15 that was the equal to an AK for other than playing at the range.

care to elaborate? i have an AR15 so naturally i personally prefer it but i'm not in combat either.

Strizzo wrote:

Flight Service wrote: I have yet to see an AR15 that was the equal to an AK for other than playing at the range.

care to elaborate? i have an AR15 so naturally i personally prefer it but i'm not in combat either.

And that is the is big difference. The AR is a more accurate rifle in controlled conditions and the AK will trump it everywhere else. AK round is a heavier hitter (great for shoot through brush) the weapon itself isn't prone to jamming (what they are known for) and the design leads to cheap manufacturing processes.

You can tell the experience of the engineers and the thought process in the designs of the weapons.

The AR is a great gun for the right application, the AK is a more versatile gun for more applications.

So yes, buy both!

You know, I'm not exactly a grunt or a snakeeater, but the guys I know that are tend to have nothing bad to say about the modern iterations of the M16/M4. I wonder if some of their rep is still a holdover from the M16A1.

I'd go for an AR myself, the aftermarket has made it a much more versatile gun.

Talked to too many returning vets, all hold the same opinion.

Now don't think I am saying the AR is the jam-tastic Mattel stocked M16 from the Vietnam era, it's not. It has evolved greatly, but it still isn't the AK in the level of durability or combat readiness.

That being said there are a ton of accessories for the AR now. Every Tom, Dick and Harry is building them. My next door neighbor contracted a local builder shop to build the lowers for $80, Cheap Shot Arms.

Good luck whatever you decided, if you have the funds buy both.

I've shot both AK and AR. I like the way the AK shoots. I don't like hte AR. It's an ergonomics thing for me. I learned with the AK, so anything not an AK style layout feels.... weird. Plus I like the simplicity, the harder hitting 7.62x39 bullet and the dead nuts reliabilty of the AK. Every AR I've shot has jammed. Sure, they have made it really easy to fix a quick jam and get it back up again, but in the 3-4k rounds down range in the cheapest AK ever built it's had a total of 3 misfeeds. All of them were from our 75rd drum that I did not wind properly.

Now... I am not sayin the AR isn't a great rifle. I'm sure they are. But I just want a simple, no frills, no tacticool rifle that will put bullets down range and be fun to shoot. Plus 7.62x39 is still about 40% cheaper than .223/5.56

From an engineering standpoint, the AR makes no sense, it cycles by blowing dirty gas directly into the bolt assembly. Maybe the name Stoner was a clue.

I owned a WASR years ago, then an FAL, then traded the FAL for a Rock River AR.......I sold the AR because the hatred for the caliber, plus its not as good of a rifle as the FAL is.

The FAL is better than both the AK and AR platforms. Oddly enough, in the world view......the Europeans always have the best battle rifle, we always have the best target rifle, and the ruskies always have the most durable rifle.......its been this way for over a century now.

Edit: I will add that my WASR, FAL, and AR never jammed a single round when shooting them. I probably put 1500rds through the wasr, nearly 1000 through the AR, and nearly 800 through the FAL....

Kenny_McCormic wrote: From an engineering standpoint, the AR makes no sense, it cycles by blowing dirty gas directly into the bolt assembly. Maybe the name Stoner was a clue.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the original stoner design a gas piston setup? My m1 carbine is gas piston, the fal and AK are gas piston, and some AR's are gas piston(most are still gas system).....

As long as we're talking about guns, here's what Santa brought a little early this year for me:

Custom built USPSA Open Class gun chambered for .38 Super. STI frame, lightened Caspian slide, Schuemann hybrid barrel, six-port compensator, C-More, blah, blah, blah. Makes lots of noise and shoots as flat as a board as fast as you can pull the trigger.

jg

In reply to JG Pasterjak:

I hate you btw........I want one of those badly. If I may ask, how much did that set you back? I'm guessing between $2-3k range.

yamaha wrote: In reply to JG Pasterjak: I hate you btw........I want one of those badly. If I may ask, how much did that set you back? I'm guessing between $2-3k range.

That particular gun it's hard to say because I've sort of been building it for nearly a year. Some of the parts I won at matches, and some I bought from guys who abandoned other builds. If you wanted to duplicate it and just buy everything and have it built and be done with it, though, you're probably looking just a little north of $4k.

Open guns are a lot like racecars, though. They depreciate a bit, but if you're buying used it's better to spend extra money up front on a good competitive one than a project. That said, you can be real competitive in Open for around $2500 if you shop smart.

jg

yamaha wrote: the Europeans always have the best battle rifle, we always have the best target rifle, and the ruskies always have the most durable rifle.......its been this way for over a century now. /

I'm guessing most of the GI's who carried M1's into Europe might disagree with that assessment.

In reply to JG Pasterjak:

That there should be labeled porn

It was said that in WWI, the Germans had the best Hunting Rifle, the Americans the best Target Rifle and the British the best Battle Rifle.

I think we had the best battle rifle in WWII, once production ramped up. I don't think there's too much debate on that point.

I had the opportunity to live with an M4 as my constant companion in a rather sandy environment for a year. I have one here at home that I'm much harder on. As long as you run them wet, they'll be fine.

For sustained automatic fire, the DI system isn't ideal, IMO, because it can overheat the bolt carrier group. It does save weight and improves accuracy slightly.

I like both, but I'm biased toward the AR15 for obvious reasons.

It's very tempting to purchase a CMP M1 Garand...

kazoospec wrote: I'm guessing most of the GI's who carried M1's into Europe might disagree with that assessment.

Back then they all thought they had the best rifle......In WW1, we had the 1903 Springfield, the Germans had the mauser k98, and the russians had the 91-30 mosin. The springfield was essentially the most accurate rifle of those three, the mosin was hands down the most durable, and the mauser was the best battle rifle of the three(best on average across all things) Edit: I forgot the Enfield in WW1 reference.....the k98 was slightly slower firing than the Enfield, which is why most give it the nod to the best battle rifle.

WWII, the Mosin was still the most durable rifle, the Garand and 1903(sniper duty) were still the most accurate, and the germans were still using predominately k98 rifles(some were using gwer43's, stg/mp44's, etc) The STG44 would have made invading Germany in the first place much much harder if it had been standard issue vs. the normal MP40 smg. Somehow, the best "battle rifle" from the WW2 era seemed to have been the British Enfield.....I still don't know how that happened.

FWIW, the first Squad Automatic Weapon was the BAR, the M1 carbine was the first "Military Carbine" in modern speaking, and the stg/mp44 was the first true "assault rifle." The STG would have won the european theatre for the Germans before we got there if it had been used properly and embraced early enough.

Hmmm me thinks there is going to be a new forum in the works

Back to the cars = guns bit:

Miata has to be the 10/22: small, cheap, fun, and incredibly upgradeable.

I don't think there's a perfect analog for the AR-15, because it's reasonably high tech, yet easy to work on. You can make it into whatever you need it to be, because it's probably the most versatile rifle ever produced. Closest car I can come up with is a Z06, maybe.

Mustang is an M1 Garand, or maybe an M14. Big on power, a bit behind the times, maybe, but still deadly in the right hands.

BMW M cars = HK. Amazing quality, but you'll definitely pay for it. Crazed fan base that will defend the product no matter how expensive it is relative to the competition. Oh, and expect at least a couple features that make no sense because Germany is right and you're wrong, so get used to it.

Kenny_McCormic wrote: From an engineering standpoint, the AR makes no sense, it cycles by blowing dirty gas directly into the bolt assembly. Maybe the name Stoner was a clue.

I understand your point, but do you really think that when the bolt is getting blown back on an AK via the piston that the receiver is staying clean?

Have you ever had to clean out an AK piston tube vs. an AR bolt carrier? I'd take cleaning out the bolt carrier any day.

Bobzilla wrote: I've shot both AK and AR. I like the way the AK shoots. I don't like hte AR. It's an ergonomics thing for me. I learned with the AK, so anything not an AK style layout feels.... weird. Plus I like the simplicity, the harder hitting 7.62x39 bullet and the dead nuts reliabilty of the AK. Every AR I've shot has jammed. Sure, they have made it really easy to fix a quick jam and get it back up again, but in the 3-4k rounds down range in the cheapest AK ever built it's had a total of 3 misfeeds. All of them were from our 75rd drum that I did not wind properly. Now... I am not sayin the AR isn't a great rifle. I'm sure they are. But I just want a simple, no frills, no tacticool rifle that will put bullets down range and be fun to shoot. Plus 7.62x39 is still about 40% cheaper than .223/5.56

I have owned and built both and also shot my fair share of clapped out M16A2s when I was in the Marine Corps. The only AR rifle I ever had an issue with was my M16A1 Colt kit that I assembled because the gas tube was tweeked a slight bit where it goes into the bolt carrier. This just caused the bolt to not cycle fully to snatch the next round in the magazine. It was an easy fix.

.22 rifles/pistols and 1911s are the only weapons I have found to be finicky with jamming but were usually due to ammo or magazines.

I am thinking about doing an SKS with a bullpup conversion just for giggles

In reply to Flight Service:

There have been some nice Yugo models that were not issued that just came up as available. Also some very worn Norincos.