LDS Freedom Forum

Ok this subject has been beaten to death on other forums but still has never been solved. When SHTF, what rifle would you prefer. For me, it's the AK. I have seen AKs so worn out that the rifling was gone from the barrel and they still ran like clockwork. Sure, ammo isn't as plentiful but if your preparation policy involves picking up ammo and spare parts off of the ground then you have already failed.

AK hands down. Let me list the reasons.

1. Field tested since ... well sometime after 1947.
2. More reliable to keep firing through dirt, mud, crud, hairballs and stuff
3. Easier to maintain
4. Cheaper to buy / maintain
5. Fewer parts / less complicated parts / system

As if those weren't enough reasons, consider the .223 / 5.56 mm round was designed to wound enemies which is great if you're waging a long campaign and treating the wounded serves your purposes better to demoralize / starve / bankrupt your enemy.

However, in a S(tuff)HTF scenario, I don't think I will be shooting to wound. 7.62x39 FTW.

AR is more accurate at a distance, and I think has more range. No small consideration there, but I'll take all the reasons above.

I have an AR and an AK. I'll be handing my more expensive AR to someone else and be bearing an AK during our hike to ZION.

Good AK47 points.... but....

I feel more comfortable with my AR. I can hit anything with it from whatever range. In life or death....AR15. If it breaks i have a Glock17 and my knife strapped to hip.

I been having feelings that the Lord might ask us to surrender our weapons. I believe He will allow us to come under bondage.

I'll take an AR15. I have an AR10 too, but I prefer my AR 15.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:51 am As if those weren't enough reasons, consider the .223 / 5.56 mm round was designed to wound enemies which is great if you're waging a long campaign and treating the wounded serves your purposes better to demoralize / starve / bankrupt your enemy.

Most people shoot 55 grain bullets. Bump up to 66 or 77 grain and the "wounding" issue goes away.

Of course shot placement matters too.

mirkwood wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 1:54 pm I'll take an AR15. I have an AR10 too, but I prefer my AR 15.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:51 am As if those weren't enough reasons, consider the .223 / 5.56 mm round was designed to wound enemies which is great if you're waging a long campaign and treating the wounded serves your purposes better to demoralize / starve / bankrupt your enemy.

Most people shoot 55 grain bullets. Bump up to 66 or 77 grain and the "wounding" issue goes away.

Of course shot placement matters too.

I better double check my stash. If the wounding issue goes away..... Hrnmmmm

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 1:56 pm I better double check my stash. If the wounding issue goes away..... Hrnmmmm

Hollow point .223 could be added to the mix. I have 55, 66 and 77 grain. I have green tip and tracer too. Not much hollow point as the price jumped dramatically, though that was back in the ammo inflation days. I haven't looked recently. I'll be buying 223/556 again this summer.

mirkwood wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 1:58 pm

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 1:56 pm I better double check my stash. If the wounding issue goes away..... Hrnmmmm

Hollow point .223 could be added to the mix. I have 55, 66 and 77 grain. I have green tip and tracer too. Not much hollow point as the price jumped dramatically, though that was back in the ammo inflation days. I haven't looked recently. I'll be buying 223/556 again this summer.

Dang. Tracer rounds..... That's got to have an added fear element

Bigger issue is being a great shot. Practicing marksmanship is way more important. (Check out Project Appleseed and get your young ones to these training sessions).

"Suppressing" fire or "Covering" fire are used in much of today's military scenarios. Used to keep heads down among the enemy when maneuvering to gain advantage. However they expend hundreds of rounds with zero casualties. (Thousands of rounds are expended for single digit casualties).

SHTF scenarios against looters/gangs would need accurate sniper fire to ward them off. Single shots hitting what they aim at.

Spraying bullets down the block is a terrible waste of ammo and most people would soon expend their stored amounts in this manner.

Fighting against invading "peacekeepers" of whatever flag, trying to enforce marshal law and confiscate civilian owned weapons require other tactics. However, sniping is much more likely to slow the advance, (when the priority is leaders) and allow time for escape.

Yes an AK will still function in terrible conditions. But can you be sure your scope stays zeroed when you need to take a head shot because one of your family members is held as a shield with a knife to their throat? (and if you lack confidence, what do you do...? surrender? shoot you family member so they don't suffer? what?).

Close quarter battle scenarios are for Patriotic guerrilla militia who are actually on patrol and may come into contact with opposing forces.

A proper deer rifle with a decent scope, and more than average practice would be a larger deterrent than the current SOP of spraying fire over the wall in the general direction of the threat.

Having stored away a couple bundles of sandbags, and having a sandbox out in the back yard would go a long way for preparing a shooters nest up in the attic or top story window. You need to be able to weather some return fire as you pick them off. Better yet, have a partner sniper across the street behind sandbags, and have them open up when you come under fire. (A walkie-talkie is helpful in these situations).

Of even more worth is a suppressor/"silencer". Absolutely essential to be able to pick off a bunch of low level troops before being detected.

Next time at the range.... don't just sit at a shooting bench and squeeze off shots at paper targets 100 yards away.... add helium balloons on long strings with a cross breeze, stand up and jog in place for 2 minutes, then drop to your belly, or crouch to the side of the shooting table and squeeze off a couple of shots at the waving balloons. When you get good enough to hit them 75% of the time, then you are a very formidable shot.

JK4Woods wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 2:59 pm Bigger issue is being a great shot. Practicing marksmanship is way more important. (Check out Project Appleseed and get your young ones to these training sessions).

"Suppressing" fire or "Covering" fire are used in much of today's military scenarios. Used to keep heads down among the enemy when maneuvering to gain advantage. However they expend hundreds of rounds with zero casualties. (Thousands of rounds are expended for single digit casualties).

SHTF scenarios against looters/gangs would need accurate sniper fire to ward them off. Single shots hitting what they aim at.

Spraying bullets down the block is a terrible waste of ammo and most people would soon expend their stored amounts in this manner.

Fighting against invading "peacekeepers" of whatever flag, trying to enforce marshal law and confiscate civilian owned weapons require other tactics. However, sniping is much more likely to slow the advance, (when the priority is leaders) and allow time for escape.

Yes an AK will still function in terrible conditions. But can you be sure your scope stays zeroed when you need to take a head shot because one of your family members is held as a shield with a knife to their throat? (and if you lack confidence, what do you do...? surrender? shoot you family member so they don't suffer? what?).

Close quarter battle scenarios are for Patriotic guerrilla militia who are actually on patrol and may come into contact with opposing forces.

A proper deer rifle with a decent scope, and more than average practice would be a larger deterrent than the current SOP of spraying fire over the wall in the general direction of the threat.

Having stored away a couple bundles of sandbags, and having a sandbox out in the back yard would go a long way for preparing a shooters nest up in the attic or top story window. You need to be able to weather some return fire as you pick them off. Better yet, have a partner sniper across the street behind sandbags, and have them open up when you come under fire. (A walkie-talkie is helpful in these situations).

Of even more worth is a suppressor/"silencer". Absolutely essential to be able to pick off a bunch of low level troops before being detected.

Next time at the range.... don't just sit at a shooting bench and squeeze off shots at paper targets 100 yards away.... add helium balloons on long strings with a cross breeze, stand up and jog in place for 2 minutes, then drop to your belly, or crouch to the side of the shooting table and squeeze off a couple of shots at the waving balloons. When you get good enough to hit them 75% of the time, then you are a very formidable shot.

Jk4woods just went up several notches in my book.

I almost posted earlier that an AK in the hands of a trained marksman is more accurate than an AR enthusiast who never goes to the range

In fact, if China ever invades this aiming differential may make all the difference.

TNT gun range (right of i15 5600 s) has Indoor Clay Pigeon shooting, a simulator, 100 yard rifle ranges, and 25 yard ranges.

It's the biggest and best gun range in North America . Great if you don't have time to get out of the city to shoot.

Has anyone seen the Keanu Reeves John Wick training videos? I'd like a shooting range like those.

Puts on Mod Hat

Added a poll to the OP.

Takes off mod hat

JK4Woods wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 2:59 pm Bigger issue is being a great shot. Practicing marksmanship is way more important. (Check out Project Appleseed and get your young ones to these training sessions).

"Suppressing" fire or "Covering" fire are used in much of today's military scenarios. Used to keep heads down among the enemy when maneuvering to gain advantage. However they expend hundreds of rounds with zero casualties. (Thousands of rounds are expended for single digit casualties).

SHTF scenarios against looters/gangs would need accurate sniper fire to ward them off. Single shots hitting what they aim at.

Spraying bullets down the block is a terrible waste of ammo and most people would soon expend their stored amounts in this manner.

Fighting against invading "peacekeepers" of whatever flag, trying to enforce marshal law and confiscate civilian owned weapons require other tactics. However, sniping is much more likely to slow the advance, (when the priority is leaders) and allow time for escape.

Yes an AK will still function in terrible conditions. But can you be sure your scope stays zeroed when you need to take a head shot because one of your family members is held as a shield with a knife to their throat? (and if you lack confidence, what do you do...? surrender? shoot you family member so they don't suffer? what?).

Close quarter battle scenarios are for Patriotic guerrilla militia who are actually on patrol and may come into contact with opposing forces.

A proper deer rifle with a decent scope, and more than average practice would be a larger deterrent than the current SOP of spraying fire over the wall in the general direction of the threat.

Having stored away a couple bundles of sandbags, and having a sandbox out in the back yard would go a long way for preparing a shooters nest up in the attic or top story window. You need to be able to weather some return fire as you pick them off. Better yet, have a partner sniper across the street behind sandbags, and have them open up when you come under fire. (A walkie-talkie is helpful in these situations).

Of even more worth is a suppressor/"silencer". Absolutely essential to be able to pick off a bunch of low level troops before being detected.

Next time at the range.... don't just sit at a shooting bench and squeeze off shots at paper targets 100 yards away.... add helium balloons on long strings with a cross breeze, stand up and jog in place for 2 minutes, then drop to your belly, or crouch to the side of the shooting table and squeeze off a couple of shots at the waving balloons. When you get good enough to hit them 75% of the time, then you are a very formidable shot.

Exactly. And in such a scenario, an AR-15 is the right tool for the job. An AK is useful, but an AR-15 is even more useful if it doesn't break and you use it like you note it would need to be used in a SHTF scenario.

I give a more thorough examination in my next post.

Aprhys wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:37 am Ok this subject has been beaten to death on other forums but still has never been solved. When SHTF, what rifle would you prefer. For me, it's the AK. I have seen AKs so worn out that the rifling was gone from the barrel and they still ran like clockwork. Sure, ammo isn't as plentiful but if your preparation policy involves picking up ammo and spare parts off of the ground then you have already failed.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:51 am AK hands down. Let me list the reasons.

1. Field tested since ... well sometime after 1947.
2. More reliable to keep firing through dirt, mud, crud, hairballs and stuff
3. Easier to maintain
4. Cheaper to buy / maintain
5. Fewer parts / less complicated parts / system

As if those weren't enough reasons, consider the .223 / 5.56 mm round was designed to wound enemies which is great if you're waging a long campaign and treating the wounded serves your purposes better to demoralize / starve / bankrupt your enemy.

However, in a S(tuff)HTF scenario, I don't think I will be shooting to wound. 7.62x39 FTW.

AR is more accurate at a distance, and I think has more range. No small consideration there, but I'll take all the reasons above.

I have an AR and an AK. I'll be handing my more expensive AR to someone else and be bearing an AK during our hike to ZION.

Okay, its actually kinda hard to make a decent decision without choices, so lets actually look at some more recent comparisons here. Also, lets be a bit more scientific while doing so, to try and limit the amount of bias we have.

Here's one recent source (dating in at March 2018) that I found to serve as a baseline/overview for this comparison. He's slightly biased, but I can tell he tried to make as fair a comparison as possible. Just to be sure, however, I will be conducting my own research to double check what he says (at least on the areas that I can easily do so) and to go into further detail. Key info will be bolded or highlighted.

For simplicity's sake, I will be assuming that the person reading these posts lives in the US.

The AK-47

1. Cost: Just by looking at the first page listing on gunbroker.com (filtering out bids and only looking at semi-auto rifles to try and stick only to actual AK-47s), a factory new AK-47 costs anywhere between $600 and $800 on the cheaper end, with a couple outliers that cost between ~$400 and ~$550. Arranging the prices from low to high, it becomes clear that the majority of listed AK-47's are far more expensive than that, with only the first page covering AK-47's that are less than $1k in cost. Going by the pictures, the closest item I could find to a standard AK-47 cost around $720. Taking all this into account, its probably safe to say that an average AK-47 is probably around $700 at its average cheapest.
2. Weight: A base AK-47 weighs about 8.5 pounds when it has an empty magazine loaded. Cross referencing with Wikipedia, I can see that this estimate is fairly accurate (7.7 lbs for the gun + .73 lbs for a steel cartridge, comes out to ~8.43 pounds). Of course, if the magazine is made out of lighter materials, then the AK-47 will weigh slightly less than this.
3. Power: The AK-47 uses a 7.62×39 round that hits pretty hard.
4. Ammo Cost & Availability: The 7.62x39 bullet is available at several different prices and at several different qualities and designs. The cheapest listed bullet pricing I could find on linked sources was ~$11 for a pack of 20 bullets. Obviously it is cheaper to buy in bulk, and higher quality ammo will cost more.
5. Cartridge: The standard AK-47 cartridge holds 30 rounds. There are magazines/drums that can hold more or less (as little as 5 rounds, and up to 100 at the most), but they are probably more expensive.
6. Rate of Fire: 600 rnds/min when on Full-Auto/Cyclical; 40 rnds/min on Semi-Auto; 100 rnds/min on Burst.
7. Effective Range/Bullet Speed: Effective range of 380 yds; Bullets are fired at a speed of 2.35k ft/s.
8. Reliability: The AK-47 has a reputation for being extremely tough and durable, and requires less matinence. In practice, however, this reputation is probably highly exaggerated, though it is likely based on truth to some extent. An AK-47 can get jammed, but from what I've read, its more likely to be ammo jamming or a similarly common issue. Experiences vary widely, so some people may have more trouble with an AK-47 than others. In short, AK-47's are seemingly less likely to jam than other equivalent rifles.
9. Ergonomics: Comfortable to use. Controls are on the right-hand side. "Taking the weapon off [safety] requires the swing of a lever-like control downward on the side and physically racking the bolt back and letting it slam forward" and changing magazines "require you to first take hold of the magazine, work a lever with your thumb, then rock the magazine out of place. You then have to rock a new magazine into place" which increases both the reload time and the time it takes to prep the weapon for hunting or combat.
10. Accessories: There are accessories for the AK-47, and plenty of options.
11. Other Considerations: An AK-47 probably has a slight intimidation factor over other common rifles in the US, due to its association with terrorism and Jihadists.

Now, the AR-15 is actually used as a catch-all term for an entire style of lightweight semi-auto rifles. To make things easier, when it comes to weapon specs (not cost or anything like that), I will be using the Colt AR-15 Civilian Models as references unless otherwise stated, as it is the current basis for all modern variants of the AR-15 design.

The AR-15:

1. Cost: On gunbroker.com, the cheapest AR-15 is currently around $550 (filtering out bids and attachments, and limiting to semi-auto rifles) and the price only rises from there, which supports the reference's assertion that AR-15's have a wide range in price. Budget AR-15s are estimated to be around $600 and they are plentifully available (though I cannot currently verify this on gunbroker, as only 3 rifles have a price tag of less than $700; all the rest are $800+), while also noting that you can spend thousands of dollars on more expensive (and probably higher quality) AR-15s. Considering the fact that AR-15s are very popular in America, I am inclined to believe this assertion (to some extent anyway). Thus, I will peg the average lower cost at ~$600.
2. Weight: Varies depending on the model, addons, and customization; apparently the stock AR-15 weighs 6.5 lbs when it has an emptied magazine loaded.
3. Power: Standard AR-15 ammo are the 5.56x45 NATO and the .223 Remington, both of which are fast but probably not as penetrating as some other rifles that can carry larger rounds.
4. Ammo Cost & Availability: Ammo for the AR-15 is cheap and readily available with the cheapest bullets listed in the comparison costing $8 per pack of 20 bullets. With a wide variety of options regarding quality and variety of bullets, and considering the popularity of the AR-15, it is arguably one of the easiest types of ammo you could find in the US.
5. Cartridge: The magazines of an AR-15 and its many variants can hold up to 30 rounds. Smaller magazines are also available.
6. Rate of Fire: 23 rnds/min, presumably on semi-auto.
7. Effective Range/Bullet Speed: Effective range of 600 yards; Bullets fired from an AR-15 travel at a rate of 3,251 feet per second.
8. Reliability: AR-15s are known for being extremely customizable and therefore more complicated to maintain. They do have slightly more problems than other rifles, but its rare.
9. Ergonomics: Comfortable to use. Modular/customizable in nature. Mechanisms to allow for fast magazine reload and turning the safety off make it a practical choice for combat. Can chamber the bolt while aiming the weapon.
10. Accessories: AR-15s are extremely customizable and they are widely available.
11. Other Considerations: AR-15s and all rifles based on them are modular in design, making them extremely versatile in nature. In fact, they might be the most versitile rifle that the average citizen can acquire in the US.

Comparison/Analysis:

The costs for both the AK and the AR are currently about the same, although the cheaper AR-15's are probably cheaper than the average cost for an AK, at least in the US.

The AK-47 and its derivatives are beasts, able to hold and rapidly fire a ridiculous amount of bullets (if using extended magazines) that have greater penetrating power, and being extremely durable in nature. However, the gun weighs an average of 2 pounds more than the AR-15 its bullets are heavier, more expensive, and somewhat less available than the AR-15 in the US. It has a slower reload mechanism, and turning the safety off is awkward and takes longer. In effect, an AK sacrifices range, versatility, and ergonomics in exchange for additional firepower/damage and slightly more durability. An AK is built primarily for specializing in shorter range combat and not much else.

The AR-15 on the other-hand has greater versatility, due to increased options with customization in the US, as well as its longer range and reduced base weight. Its increased range makes it better as a hunting rifle or marksman's rifle than the AK, and with the reduced cost of its ammunition makes it easier to prepare for disasters. Ultimately it is more cost efficient to use.

In a SHTF scenario, I would go with the AR-15, as it is arguably more cost-effective and efficient in the long run than the AK. The reduced weight and greater versatility of the rifle allows me to more readily adapt to a given situation; the reduced cost and weight of the ammo allows me to purchase, store, and carry more of it beforehand and during the apocalypse without taking up as much space; the extra range and bullet speed gives me more time to down enemies and hunt prey before they escape, reach me, or react; and the greater accuracy helps me to conserve my ammunition more efficiently. I would last far longer with an AR-15 than with an AK-47, provided it doesn't permanently break.

Also, the commonality of AR-15s makes it much easier to scavenge additional parts and ammo from buildings and bunkers if necessary.

The clear winner, for me at least, is the AR-15!

Now, thats not to say the AK-47 doesn't have its uses... I just think that an AR-15 would be more useful and effective in the long run.

Durzan wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 4:30 pm

Aprhys wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:37 am Ok this subject has been beaten to death on other forums but still has never been solved. When SHTF, what rifle would you prefer. For me, it's the AK. I have seen AKs so worn out that the rifling was gone from the barrel and they still ran like clockwork. Sure, ammo isn't as plentiful but if your preparation policy involves picking up ammo and spare parts off of the ground then you have already failed.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 11:51 am AK hands down. Let me list the reasons.

1. Field tested since ... well sometime after 1947.
2. More reliable to keep firing through dirt, mud, crud, hairballs and stuff
3. Easier to maintain
4. Cheaper to buy / maintain
5. Fewer parts / less complicated parts / system

As if those weren't enough reasons, consider the .223 / 5.56 mm round was designed to wound enemies which is great if you're waging a long campaign and treating the wounded serves your purposes better to demoralize / starve / bankrupt your enemy.

However, in a S(tuff)HTF scenario, I don't think I will be shooting to wound. 7.62x39 FTW.

AR is more accurate at a distance, and I think has more range. No small consideration there, but I'll take all the reasons above.

I have an AR and an AK. I'll be handing my more expensive AR to someone else and be bearing an AK during our hike to ZION.

Okay, its actually kinda hard to make a decent decision without choices, so lets actually look at some more recent comparisons here. Also, lets be a bit more scientific while doing so, to try and limit the amount of bias we have.

Here's one recent source (dating in at March 2018) that I found to serve as a baseline/overview for this comparison. He's slightly biased...

Let me stop you right there. That's an extremely biased take on the AK47 if I've ever seen one--it reads like someone who set out to defame the, well, famous AK47!

Before I refame, kudos to you Durzan for this excellent post in format if nothing else.

The AK-47

1. Cost: Just by looking at the first page listing on gunbroker.com (filtering out bids and only looking at semi-auto rifles to try and stick only to actual AK-47s), a factory new AK-47 costs anywhere between $600 and $800 on the cheaper end, with a couple outliers that cost between ~$400 and ~$550. Arranging the prices from low to high, it becomes clear that the majority of listed AK-47's are far more expensive than that, with only the first page covering AK-47's that are less than $1k in cost. Going by the pictures, the closest item I could find to a standard AK-47 cost around $720. Taking all this into account, its probably safe to say that an average AK-47 is probably around $700 at its average cheapest.
   
   PFFFFFFTTTTT - My AK cost me less than $ 300. The finish was pretty bad, so I refinished the wood, and sanded to 600 grit until it became smoother than a baby's rear. A little dark stain, and a light finish and voila. No AR feels as good I promise you that. And what? $ 20 later (plus hours of work, tbh)
2. Weight: A base AK-47 weighs about 8.5 pounds when it has an empty magazine loaded. Cross referencing with Wikipedia, I can see that this estimate is fairly accurate (7.7 lbs for the gun + .73 lbs for a steel cartridge, comes out to ~8.43 pounds). Of course, if the magazine is made out of lighter materials, then the AK-47 will weigh slightly less than this.
3. Power: The AK-47 uses a 7.62×39 round that hits pretty hard.
   
   
   Pretty hard?
   
   vs
   
   [/color]
4. Ammo Cost & Availability: The 7.62x39 bullet is available at several different prices and at several different qualities and designs. The cheapest listed bullet pricing I could find on linked sources was ~$11 for a pack of 20 bullets. Obviously it is cheaper to buy in bulk, and higher quality ammo will cost more.
   
   Apparently, this guy's never been to a gun show in Arizona
5. Cartridge: The standard AK-47 cartridge holds 30 rounds. There are magazines/drums that can hold more or less (as little as 5 rounds, and up to 100 at the most), but they are probably more expensive.
6. Rate of Fire: 600 rnds/min when on Full-Auto/Cyclical; 40 rnds/min on Semi-Auto; 100 rnds/min on Burst.
7. Effective Range/Bullet Speed: Effective range of 380 yds; Bullets are fired at a speed of 2.35k ft/s.
8. Reliability: The AK-47 has a reputation for being extremely tough and durable, and requires less matinence. In practice, however, this reputation is probably highly exaggerated, though it is likely based on truth to some extent. An AK-47 can get jammed, but from what I've read, its more likely to be ammo jamming or a similarly common issue. Experiences vary widely, so some people may have more trouble with an AK-47 than others. In short, AK-47's are seemingly less likely to jam than other equivalent rifles.
   
   It's probably exaggerated? That's sounds highly scientific. Clean an AK47 and clean an AR15 - it's not difficult to see why the AK47 is more reliable just from the mechanics.
9. Ergonomics: Comfortable to use. Controls are on the right-hand side. "Taking the weapon off [safety] requires the swing of a lever-like control downward on the side and physically racking the bolt back and letting it slam forward" and changing magazines "require you to first take hold of the magazine, work a lever with your thumb, then rock the magazine out of place. You then have to rock a new magazine into place" which increases both the reload time and the time it takes to prep the weapon for hunting or combat.
10. Accessories: There are accessories for the AK-47, and plenty of options.
11. Other Considerations: An AK-47 probably has a slight intimidation factor over other common rifles in the US, due to its association with terrorism and Jihadists.

Eh .... well in any case. I've done enough refaming of the defaming. AR15 wins hands down when it comes to accessories. Adding picatinny rails on an AK47 is a bit awkward, but I always think of the actual best sniper in WWII Russia (not the sniper "Enemy at the Gates" is based off - the one who had many, many more kills) - this guy didn't use a scope on his mosin nagant. He said other snipers had to expose more of their head to use a scope, so he just got real good (bad english sounds better when talking firearms) at aiming down those iron sights. So you can take those accessories and ...

I really don't hate on AR - in fact, Mirkwood's little post already has me rethinking which gun is going to be my personal carry. However, I can't just halfway dissassemble:

The AR-15:

1. Cost: On gunbroker.com, the cheapest AR-15 is currently around $550 (filtering out bids and attachments, and limiting to semi-auto rifles) and the price only rises from there, which supports the reference's assertion that AR-15's have a wide range in price. Budget AR-15s are estimated to be around $600 and they are plentifully available (though I cannot currently verify this on gunbroker, as only 3 rifles have a price tag of less than $700; all the rest are $800+), while also noting that you can spend thousands of dollars on more expensive (and probably higher quality) AR-15s. Considering the fact that AR-15s are very popular in America, I am inclined to believe this assertion (to some extent anyway). Thus, I will peg the average lower cost at ~$600.
   
   The average cost of an AR-15 is $ 600 and lower than an AK-47???? Yeah right! My bro-in-law and I finished machining an 80 percent AR frame (and by we I mean 99 percent bro-in-law and dad-in-law's CNC machine) with an upper kit from cheaperthandirt.com. I'd say the final cost (without accessories) was right around $ 600, but this is like seriously low for an AR15. I wouldn't scoff at an $ 800 - $ 900 average claim, but even that seems low. Of course it has been a couple of years, but I doubt inflation is the answer here. Happy to hear other comments on this.
2. Weight: Varies depending on the model, addons, and customization; apparently the stock AR-15 weighs 6.5 lbs when it has an emptied magazine loaded.
3. Power: Standard AR-15 ammo are the 5.56x45 NATO and the .223 Remington, both of which are fast but probably not as penetrating as some other rifles that can carry larger rounds.
4. Ammo Cost & Availability: Ammo for the AR-15 is cheap and readily available with the cheapest bullets listed in the comparison costing $8 per pack of 20 bullets. With a wide variety of options regarding quality and variety of bullets, and considering the popularity of the AR-15, it is arguably one of the easiest types of ammo you could find in the US.
5. Cartridge: The magazines of an AR-15 and its many variants can hold up to 30 rounds. Smaller magazines are also available.
6. Rate of Fire: 23 rnds/min, presumably on semi-auto.
7. Effective Range/Bullet Speed: Effective range of 600 yards; Bullets fired from an AR-15 travel at a rate of 3,251 feet per second.
8. Reliability: AR-15s are known for being extremely customizable and therefore more complicated to maintain. They do have slightly more problems than other rifles, but its rare.
   
   Rare?
9. Ergonomics: Comfortable to use. Modular/customizable in nature. Mechanisms to allow for fast magazine reload and turning the safety off make it a practical choice for combat. Can chamber the bolt while aiming the weapon.
10. Accessories: AR-15s are extremely customizable and they are widely available.
11. Other Considerations: AR-15s and all rifles based on them are modular in design, making them extremely versatile in nature. In fact, they might be the most versitile rifle that the average citizen can acquire in the US.

Comparison/Analysis:

I think it's hard not to put on love goggles when it comes to ARs because they are so customizable, fun to shoot, and they just look awesome. I think that guy's ^ lenses are pretty thick though.

Edit: Here's the wiki article on the best WWII "russian" sniper. You can see the bit about the fact he didn't use a scope, and apparently his rifle was a mosin nagant variant. If you don't have a Mosin, I highly recommend as they are fun and cheap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4

AR's are the Batman Utility Belts of the semi-auto rifles. They are just a good all-round purpose rifles, even without the customization. Its a jack-of-all-trades, master of none. The customization just makes that versatility even more pronounced.

Now, can an AK be used for sniping? Absolutely, as you pointed out. But generally speaking that's not its intended niche, unless using a specific variant designed to compensate or have the skills to snipe like that sniper you linked to. I'm speaking generalities here. Its ridiculously effective at closer ranges, but it becomes far less effective at further ranges.

With the AR, you have more accuracy for further distance, which means you can make more lethal shots in the same amount of time than an AK can. More lethal shots = less ammo wasted, meaning it is more efficient at conserving ammo. Conserving Ammo is one major factor that needs to be considered when looking at an SHTF scenario. Also, smaller bullets means less weight, which means you can carry more ammo and food on your person. And since AR bullets (and their useful variants, such as hollow-point rounds) cost less than AK bullets, that means you can hoard a lot of ammo, which means you have a better chance of surviving longer as you'd have more bullets to hunt and defend yourself with. Also, being further away from the enemy allows you to be in less danger than if you were closer.

Durzan wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 5:25 pm AR's are the Batman Utility Belts of the semi-auto rifles. They are just a good all-round purpose rifle. Its a jack-of-all-trades, master of none.

Now, can an AK be used for sniping? Absolutely, as you pointed out. But generally speaking that's not its intended niche, unless using a specific variant designed to compensate. Its more effective at closer ranges,

Range is definitely a consideration. If you're traversing wide open spaces between you and ZION, and if you live in an area with little cover and wide open spaces, well then you shouldn't even be thinking of AR vs AK but which large caliber rifle you should be carrying.



If there are wooded areas and cover, then the range between an AK and AR becomes negligible at some point. Also ...

Farbeit from me to make baseless claims. I did look up (by round) rifles on cheapterthandirt.com sorted by price:

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/categor ... sortType=1

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/categor ... sortType=1

Apparently reality has flipped on me here - I don't recall ever seeing AR15s that cheap, but then again those $ 300 - $ 400 ones look a little sketchty. I wouldn't buy anything without doing more research on the brand / model / reviews etc.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 5:36 pm

Durzan wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 5:25 pm AR's are the Batman Utility Belts of the semi-auto rifles. They are just a good all-round purpose rifle. Its a jack-of-all-trades, master of none.

Now, can an AK be used for sniping? Absolutely, as you pointed out. But generally speaking that's not its intended niche, unless using a specific variant designed to compensate. Its more effective at closer ranges,

Range is definitely a consideration. If you're traversing wide open spaces between you and ZION. If you live in an area with little cover and wide open spaces, well then you shouldn't even be thinking of AR vs AK but which large caliber rifle you should be carrying.

Yep. Most of that area is Great Plains. Range is very important, but not the only thing to consider. Accessibility is another important factor. AR-15's are far more accessible to the average US citizen than an AK-47... cause ya know, automatic weapons are heavily restricted. Sure, you can get semi-auto only variants, but still. Think about it, what kind of rifle are they more likely to have?

If you are planning for an end of the world scenario, you gotta think strategically. Every choice you make has its opportunity costs. Higher caliber rifles are generally going to be far more heavy and expensive, same with the ammunition. The heavier the ammunition, the less of it you can take with you, which means you are going to run out of ammo faster, and therefore become vulnerable far sooner. Heavier equipment slows you down more too, so its best to go with a serviceable all-purpose weapon that is relatively light, will last a lot longer, and be useful in far more environments and situations than a .50 cal sniper rifle (Okay, I'm exaggerating here, but you get the point).

An AR-15 is fairly light for a rifle, and like I said is versatile in nature. It will cover your arse adequately in most situations where you'd need a weapon... and the situations where you would be better off with an AK-47 or a heavier rifle with much longer range are ones that aren't as likely to crop up in a doomsday scenario. Its super easy to get and you can alter it to suit your fighting style (and those alterations aren't always just cosmetic either) or the needs of any given encounter.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 5:36 pm If there are wooded areas and cover, then the range between an AK and AR becomes negligible at some point.

True. But then again, you can say the same thing about a sniper rifle and a bowie knife.

Despite the fact that an AR has almost double the effective range of an AK, that advantage is negated in areas with thick cover such as a forest. Like I said, the AK-47 is best used at close range... cause that's where it shines the most. An AR is okay to good at close range, but its not optimal. Its a mid-range all-purpose rifle. Its what you use when generalization is preferable over specialization, which is exactly why it is more optimal to use in this scenario over the AK-47.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 5:36 pmAlso ...

Farbeit from me to make baseless claims. I did look up (by round) rifles on cheapterthandirt.com sorted by price:

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/categor ... sortType=1

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/categor ... sortType=1

Apparently reality has flipped on me here - I don't recall ever seeing AR15s that cheap, but then again those $ 300 - $ 400 ones look a little sketchty. I wouldn't buy anything without doing more research on the brand / model / reviews etc.

Hahahahaha! XD Knew it! Why do you think I said the price range for the majority of the cheap rifles (of each kind) was around $600 to $800?

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-16- ... e-kit.html

$279.99 for the upper

https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-dep ... eiver.html

$49.99 for the lower.

Build it yourself for $330 plus tax.

You can get AR 15's pretty cheap if you are willing to put it together. Several different websites have videos showing step by step instructions for the build. A buddy of mine does this all the time and says he can put them together in an evening.

He has been shooting Palmetto Armory AR 15's for a long time now and never had any trouble with them.

Well, whoopsies Durzan. I thought those bullet points were from that "recent article" and not written by you. Now I feel like a jerk!

Just remember, while those in my caravan are trying to fiddle with their jammed ARs, I'll be holding down the fort. hahaha :->

My Remington 700 isn't all that heavy by the way - and there's quite a distance to close before those ARs become effective. The heavier bullets would be worth their weight in gold in such a scenario.

A nice trade-off may be the .308 - there are some sweet ARs chambered to .308. Ammo is a trade-off since .308 is not as common. However, the .308 round is very comparable to the larger 7.62x51 round (versus the AK47's shorter 7.62x39) which is the round those Russian Snipers were mostly using with their Mosin Nagants.

I found this effective range online.

"The .223 is effective from 400-600 meters. An AR-15 chambered in .308 has an effective range to about 800 meters;"

Once again imagine trying to close those 200 m with your .223. That's a loooonnng distance when someone's shooting at you.

Supposedly the maximum range of the AK-47 is 400m, so there again you could have a long distance to close under the wrong circumstances if you're wielding an AK-47 versus a .223 AR. In that situation, just wait until your adversary jams.

Isn't this fun to talk about?

Keanu Reeves is an avid 3 gun competition shooter.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 6:41 pm


"The .223 is effective from 400-600 meters. An AR-15 chambered in .308 has an effective range to about 800 meters;"

Once again imagine trying to close those 200 m with your .223. That's a loooonnng distance when someone's shooting at you.

Supposedly the maximum range of the AK-47 is 400m, so there again you could have a long distance to close under the wrong circumstances if you're wielding an AK-47 versus a .223 AR. In that situation, just wait until your adversary jams.

Isn't this fun to talk about?

I'll bring my scoped .308 too.

mirkwood wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 6:46 pm

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 6:41 pm


"The .223 is effective from 400-600 meters. An AR-15 chambered in .308 has an effective range to about 800 meters;"

Once again imagine trying to close those 200 m with your .223. That's a loooonnng distance when someone's shooting at you.

Supposedly the maximum range of the AK-47 is 400m, so there again you could have a long distance to close under the wrong circumstances if you're wielding an AK-47 versus a .223 AR. In that situation, just wait until your adversary jams.

Isn't this fun to talk about?

I'll bring my scoped .308 too.

As I recall, a gun chambered to 5.56 can shoot .223 just fine but not the other way around. Do you know if the same can be said of .308 and 7.62x51 NATO? I looked up the .308 rifle on cheaperthandirt and both rounds are lumped together.

https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/categor ... sortType=1

Make sure to bring a bowie knife or two... eventually, everyone is gonna run out of ammo.

Alaris wrote: ↑June 13th, 2019, 6:41 pm Well, whoopsies Durzan. I thought those bullet points were from that "recent article" and not written by you. Now I feel like a jerk!

Just remember, while those in my caravan are trying to fiddle with their jammed ARs, I'll be holding down the fort. hahaha :->

My Remington 700 isn't all that heavy by the way - and there's quite a distance to close before those ARs become effective. The heavier bullets would be worth their weight in gold in such a scenario.

A nice trade-off may be the .308 - there are some sweet ARs chambered to .308. Ammo is a trade-off since .308 is not as common. However, the .308 round is very comparable to the larger 7.62x51 round (versus the AK47's shorter 7.62x39) which is the round those Russian Snipers were mostly using with their Mosin Nagants.

I found this effective range online.

"The .223 is effective from 400-600 meters. An AR-15 chambered in .308 has an effective range to about 800 meters;"

Once again imagine trying to close those 200 m with your .223. That's a loooonnng distance when someone's shooting at you.

Supposedly the maximum range of the AK-47 is 400m, so there again you could have a long distance to close under the wrong circumstances if you're wielding an AK-47 versus a .223 AR. In that situation, just wait until your adversary jams.

Isn't this fun to talk about?

Yes it is.

Can't you swap out the chambers on a AR? Or can .223's be used in an AR .308 chamber effectively? If so, a .308 AR could be used fairly well, just swap out to the shorter ranged bullets to conserve the more heavy and expensive ammo for when it counts.

Remember, I'm approaching this scenario from a strategical/tactical mindset. If you can get those heavier duty bullets in an AR-15, that mitigates the power aspect of the AK-47 and adds additional range to your modular rifle, giving yet another reason to go with it in most circumstances over the AK. But still best to conserve bullets that give more umph for the situations where you really need them.

AK's do experience bullet jam too. Its jamming from other problems that is rare across most guns. So long as you take care of your weapon, its not likely to occur no matter which weapon you have.

If your receiver is stamped 5.56 you can also safely shoot .223. If your receiver is stamped .223 you can PROBABLY safely shoot .223. I only buy AR15"s stamped 5.56 so I can shoot both. I have both in my ammo stock.

I believe you can shoot .308 and 7.62x51 interchangeably, but you would want to confirm that first. I only buy .308 so I can't say for sure and have never researched it.