Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old October 10th, 2010 #21
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
I totally forgot about the AK-100 family. I thought we were discussing AK-47's. And yeah, I looked into it and indeed you're right, Saiga now has AK's chambered in 223; and in 30-06 (kinda useless if you ask me)...and in 308...

I never heard of them up until now that you mentioned it, though.

Oh well, as long as it's not a Krinkov, any AK will do its job, I guess.

 
Old October 10th, 2010 #22
Derrick MacThomas
Senior Member
 
Derrick MacThomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In your nightmares
Posts: 2,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Fitzwell View Post
The classic debate.

Im suprised it hasnt been discussed yet!(if it has i appoligize)

Which gun do you feel is superior?

I will chime in later.
Speaking as a former soldier, I would pick the AK every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
If you can get a Czech one made in the old Mauser works the quality of materials, manufacture and finish is on a par with the US offering.
What matters to me, though, is the ability of the weapon to kill the enemy. To a soldier, that is all that matters.
The AR is toy. A piece of crap that will not kill a man on a reliable basis. The description of it as a mouse gun is deserved.
Thank Wodan I served when our army had the FN FAL (7.62x51).
The current rifle, the Styer, uses the same useless calibre as the AR. More than one friend of mine has told me of shooting someone with a Styer and watching as the target did NOT die.
The fact is that the AK fires a 150 grain projectile at 715 metres per second, which is 105 metres per second slower than the NATO 7.62x51mm round of the same weight.
The AR fires a variety of weights, but most commonly a 55 grain projectile that leaves the muzzle at 1,000 metres per second.
The AK round has more than twice the killing power when it hits a target. It will also go through wooden house walls, doors, brickwork, etc. The 5.56x45mm round launched by the AR will not.
Bottom line, the AK is a man killer. The AR is a freaking toy that is a liability to everyone who carries one in the fanciful belief that it will actually kill a man when you shoot him.
 
Old October 10th, 2010 #23
ray bateson
baппed
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A:\
Posts: 3,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick MacThomas View Post
The AR is toy. A piece of crap that will not kill a man on a reliable basis. The description of it as a mouse gun is deserved.
We call them "poodle shooters."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick MacThomas View Post
The AK round has more than twice the killing power when it hits a target.
Re: "Stopping power."

Everyone serious about the subject of offensive rounds (all rounds) needs to ingest this.

http://firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
 
Old October 10th, 2010 #24
Simo Häyhä
Senior Member
 
Simo Häyhä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick MacThomas View Post
The fact is that the AK fires a 150 grain projectile...
The AR fires a variety of weights, but most commonly a 55 grain projectile...
Err....wut???



You do realise that there's no set grain quantity to a specific round, right? You can get 7.62x39 in 150 grains, 168 grains and so on. The same with the 223, and all other calibers as well.

As for the rest of your post, I don't disagree that the AR has a much weaker round than the AK, but calling it a "toy" is simply preposterous. I'll tell you what I tell people that tell me the 22. is a weak round: if you think it's so weak, then go stand in front of it.

End of discussion.
 
Old October 10th, 2010 #25
Derrick MacThomas
Senior Member
 
Derrick MacThomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In your nightmares
Posts: 2,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
Err....wut???



You do realise that there's no set grain quantity to a specific round, right? You can get 7.62x39 in 150 grains, 168 grains and so on. The same with the 223, and all other calibers as well.

As for the rest of your post, I don't disagree that the AR has a much weaker round than the AK, but calling it a "toy" is simply preposterous. I'll tell you what I tell people that tell me the 22. is a weak round: if you think it's so weak, then go stand in front of it.

End of discussion.
I was referring to standard military projectile weights.
Your closing proposition is imbecilic.
Ask anyone who has been at the pointy end of a war which rifle they would rather have.
Perhaps you did not get the memo, but US forces in Afghanistan screamed and bitched until some old M14s were taken out of mothballs . . . because their M16s would not kill the enemy.
Watch the news footage and look closely at the rifles they are using for long-range work. They are either M14s or Russian Druganovs.
My most of my former comrades who are in Afghanistan use Russian weapons and leave their 5.56mm mouse guns in their lockers.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #26
Simo Häyhä
Senior Member
 
Simo Häyhä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick MacThomas View Post
I was referring to standard military projectile weights.
What are you talking about? Grains don't measure weight, as far as I know, they're the measure of how many grains of powder a cartridge contains.

Quote:
Ask anyone who has been at the pointy end of a war which rifle they would rather have.
Perhaps you did not get the memo, but US forces in Afghanistan screamed and bitched until some old M14s were taken out of mothballs . . . because their M16s would not kill the enemy.
Watch the news footage and look closely at the rifles they are using for long-range work. They are either M14s or Russian Druganovs.
My most of my former comrades who are in Afghanistan use Russian weapons and leave their 5.56mm mouse guns in their lockers.
Are you seriously comparing DMR's to standard assault rifles?

And my imbecilic proposition still stands: go stand in front of a 223 if you think it's a "mouse round", as you put it. If you got shot by an AR in your center mass at 200yds and could still stand up and keep on fighting or search for help, then congratulations, you have 3 testicles. But normally that's not what happens. The AR will still kill at 200-300yds center mass. It may take longer than the AK, but in the long term, you can't possibly survive more than an hour if you got shot on your belly by a battle caliber, or pretty much any other caliber for that matter.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #27
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chopper stopper View Post
well boys this my first post my name Col pale horse and I was trained by a Aussy. Going into battle you carry around twice issue 320 rounds 223 the ar is a good rifle if kept clean and very good if use in semi one shot one kill. the Ak is on the other hand a very robust rifle I have a russ smerch vest and it holds 12 30 shot mags binos & a small ruck with 3 days of rats. Both guns where made for very diff battle roles the ak will run where the ar will not and parts supply roles are 2 parts ar to 1 part or nerver to the ak it will take so much abuse I have both 9 ar & 22 ak,s and then some heavy com bloc stuff so there you go. I hope this help I feel the same as you guys do about being white and its half the white you have to watch out for too I hate all equal and trush no one and nothing of what I even see my job is to keep a Alaskan A team alive in times of need we deploy ar rifles as it what nato has for parts. But I have many ak,s to run op,s with as they will run so much better and longer ammo is not as good but if you match reload for the ak in brass is a tack driver in the right mans hands. I know and I hope you dont think Im bullshiting you all if and we you really have to fight you will find out what works and what will not pure and simple good luck if the shit hits the fan as I plan to put a hurting on all bad folk in my AO .WE also deploy a 50 bmg sniper rifle for hard targets and such and demo would have to be made at home or taken in a fight this is really how it will pan out in small groups of fighters Pale horse out
Your syntax is terrible but your instincts are superb!
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #28
ray bateson
baппed
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A:\
Posts: 3,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
What are you talking about? Grains don't measure weight, as far as I know, they're the measure of how many grains of powder a cartridge contains.
Projectile-weight is measured in grains, powder-weight in grains. The term applies to both, with the exceptions of powder-weight in shotshells which we measure in drams and, in places in europe, projectile-weight in grams. Your misapprehension belongs to the fact that our table of measurement for small arms ammunition is a strange mixture of the apothecary, avoirdupois and metric systems. I'd guess you'd never studied guns?
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #29
Simo Häyhä
Senior Member
 
Simo Häyhä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ray bateson View Post
I'd guess you'd never studied guns?
Where have I claimed I'm an absolute expert?
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #30
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
Where have I claimed I'm an absolute expert?
You write 'born to kill' on your helmet and you wear a peace button.
What is that supposed to be? Some kind of sick joke!
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #31
Simo Häyhä
Senior Member
 
Simo Häyhä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 860
Default

Well pilgrim...

Only after ya...EAT THE PEANUTS OUTTA MY SHIIIEEET!
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #32
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

Adam Baldwin.



End of discussion.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #33
Chris Clafton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
.

Oh well, as long as it's not a Krinkov, any AK will do its job, I guess.
What's wrong with the Krinkov? I don't know anything about firearms, but I assumed a Krinkov had the accuracy of a regular AK and the maneuverability of an MP5.

Tell me how wrong I am.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #34
Simo Häyhä
Senior Member
 
Simo Häyhä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 860
Default

Actually, Chris, I expressed myself in a faulty manner. I didn't mean to say that the Krinkov was unreliable, it's just that I, personally, really dislike it. It's obnoxiously loud, the flash on that thing is HUGE, and you can't attach a flash hider on it thanks to that weird muzzle brake. How it has been adopted by certain Special Forces around the world is beyond me.

I believe the AK-100 family suffers from the same problems. At least they have the same weird muzzle brake.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #35
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

There are certain silencers that are developed for it. The AK-74U suffers from some over-heating issues, though.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #36
Derrick MacThomas
Senior Member
 
Derrick MacThomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In your nightmares
Posts: 2,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
And my imbecilic proposition still stands: go stand in front of a 223 if you think it's a "mouse round", as you put it. If you got shot by an AR in your center mass at 200yds and could still stand up and keep on fighting or search for help, then congratulations, you have 3 testicles. But normally that's not what happens. The AR will still kill at 200-300yds center mass. It may take longer than the AK, but in the long term, you can't possibly survive more than an hour if you got shot on your belly by a battle caliber, or pretty much any other caliber for that matter.
I have used 7.62 x 51mm and it does the job wonderfully. I have not shot anyone with 5.56mm.
People I know who have shot men with 5.56mm tell me that it simply does not do the job.
One, in particular, put three taps into a man who was running at him (after the promised 72 virgins, I suppose). He saw the blood spurts when the rounds hit. The target barely slowed down. The only reason that he was around to tell me the story was that his platoon sergeant used an AK-47 to cut the bastard in half.
All of the above renders the AR-15/M-16 a poor choice of weapon if the intended role is to be a man killer.
For hunting foxes or large rodents perhaps, but not large game such as a man.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #37
ray bateson
baппed
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A:\
Posts: 3,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simo Häyhä View Post
Actually, Chris, I expressed myself in a faulty manner. I didn't mean to say that the Krinkov was unreliable, it's just that I, personally, really dislike it. It's obnoxiously loud, the flash on that thing is HUGE, and you can't attach a flash hider on it thanks to that weird muzzle brake. How it has been adopted by certain Special Forces around the world is beyond me.

I believe the AK-100 family suffers from the same problems. At least they have the same weird muzzle brake.
Muzzle-brakes amplify the perceived decibels by redirecting more of the blast around the muzzle, than away from the shooter. Good for snipers, competition. A liability for soldiers and self defense.

Oh. And there's no such thing as a silencer, people. Yeah. I'm gonna nitpick about that one.
 
Old October 11th, 2010 #38
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

Did I say silencer? I meant suppressor.
 
Old October 12th, 2010 #39
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ray bateson View Post
Muzzle-brakes amplify the perceived decibels by redirecting more of the blast around the muzzle, than away from the shooter. Good for snipers, competition. A liability for soldiers and self defense.
Never used a muzzle brake. Can its use damage hearing? Vision?
 
Old October 12th, 2010 #40
ray bateson
baппed
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: A:\
Posts: 3,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonard Rouse View Post
Never used a muzzle brake. Can its use damage hearing? Vision?
Muzzle flash has never blinded anyone that I've heard about. Brakes or not. In low-light and near-dark conditions, depends, but the worst effect is a momentary retinal retention. Like getting a flashlight in the face. And all gunshots damage unprotected ears. But yeah, they're definitely boomers. The loudest thing I've ever heard was a .50 bmg at the range, with muzzle brake, twenty feet to the right.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:46 AM.
Page generated in 0.13472 seconds.