what is the best assault rifle?

Recommended Videos

matrix3509

New member
Sep 24, 2008
1,372
0
0
Stalk3rchief said:
matrix3509 said:
Seriously people? AK-47? In this case, cheap does not equal good. Has anyone here ever even fired a 47? The accuracy is absolutely atrocious. Definitely not something I would want my life to depend on. Yeah, it never jams, but thats because the tolerances between the piston and the barrel are so ridiculously big that you'd have to stick a cow in the damn thing before it jams. Sorry, but I'd like to be able to actually hit what I aim at, rather than just spray and pray.
That's why you fire in bursts you damn civvy. Everyone knows the AK is innacurate, that's why you never go full auto. Ever.
I have fired a 47, and I did pretty fucking good.
Maybe you have girl arms?
You don't have to fire on full auto to be inaccurate. Instead of arguing with you, I'll point you to a video earlier in the thread. Its more or less completely true. I did the same experiment that they did before I ever even saw that video. AK-47 at 200 yds on semi-auto: can't hit shit. AR-15 at 200 yds on semi-auto: hit the target every time. When I did the experiment, there was a full 80% difference in accuracy between the two. I has nothing to do with my shooting ability, and I would appreciate it if you refrained from making lame-ass insults at me.
 

Joos

Golden pantaloon.
Dec 19, 2007
662
0
0
TornadoADV said:
...definetly better than the 7.62 AK 47 and 5.56 M16 we tried in the service...
Oh, so your opinion is considered fact now? I must of missed the televised conference.

Also, FYI, it's spelt "definitely". LRN2SPL
No, my opinion is merely that, an opinion, not a fact. No need to be a fucking **** about it. However, it is a somewhat qualified opinion since I tried both rifles. However, I must confess that it was most probably not the most recent M16 available at the time (1995) and not the current one which is most certainly an improvement.

Also, thank you very much for the spell-check. We second language immigrants certainly appreciate your humble help. My workstation at work (Unix) comes with some archaic version of Netscape since the IT department is too incompetent/lazy to install Mozilla, thus, no spell-checker available in the browser. I am sure you understand.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
Best is hard to qualify. Some rifles excell in accuracy or lethality or reliability. A rare few excell at all the qualities one looks for in a weapon of warfare (reliability, durability, lethality, accuracy - in order of greatest importance). Others excell on more dubious rounds (The look like they shoot lasers is a favorite quality of mine).

But, were I forced to choose, I would select the one that has had the greatest impact on the world, and in such a case one can halt their search at the venerable AK-47. Used by more nations than any other weapon ever built, this rifle has been used in virtually every conflict in the world since it's introduction on the world market. While upstaged in terms of lethality or accuracy by any number of weapons, it is the reliability of the weapon and it's capacity to absorb mistreatment that makes it such a favored weapon around the world. There isn't anything sexy or high-tech to be found - just pure, simple mechanical perfection. The fact that the weapon is produced by so many different arms manufacturers and incredible ease of construction means the weapon can be had for a relative pittance, often a tiny fraction of the price of a more advanced or capable rifle.

Of course, were I to choose the weapon that best exlempifies the idea of an assault rifle, I would undoubtedly choose the FN-SCAR. The rifle is prohibitively expensive thus ensuring it will never reach widespread proliferation, but it represents one of the handful of modular weapons on the market. Able to fire either the 5.56x45mm NATO (one of the most common modern assault rifle rounds) or the significantly more powerful 7.62x51mm NATO (similar to a .308 winchester - a common hunting rifle round. Also, a common round in sniper rifles and medium machine guns) the rifle can be equipped for a variety of roles. Tactical flexibility is only part of the package, it is also supremely reliable, showing fewer stoppages in extreme use or hostile environments than most other rifles. Accuracy and range are no slouch either, with effective ranges from as short as ~300m (carbine varient, 5.56mmx45 NATO) to greater than 700m (sharpshooter varient). With less than 1/2 MOA mechanical variation in accuracy (translating to a mechanical accuracy of about 1/2 inch deviation at 100m. The M-16, only reknowned for it's accuracy only manages 1 MOA). In a single package you have no compromises in performance, so long as you're willing to pay the hefty price for the rifle.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
matrix3509 said:
Stalk3rchief said:
matrix3509 said:
Seriously people? AK-47? In this case, cheap does not equal good. Has anyone here ever even fired a 47? The accuracy is absolutely atrocious. Definitely not something I would want my life to depend on. Yeah, it never jams, but thats because the tolerances between the piston and the barrel are so ridiculously big that you'd have to stick a cow in the damn thing before it jams. Sorry, but I'd like to be able to actually hit what I aim at, rather than just spray and pray.
That's why you fire in bursts you damn civvy. Everyone knows the AK is innacurate, that's why you never go full auto. Ever.
I have fired a 47, and I did pretty fucking good.
Maybe you have girl arms?
You don't have to fire on full auto to be inaccurate. Instead of arguing with you, I'll point you to a video earlier in the thread. Its more or less completely true. I did the same experiment that they did before I ever even saw that video. AK-47 at 200 yds on semi-auto: can't hit shit. AR-15 at 200 yds on semi-auto: hit the target every time. When I did the experiment, there was a full 80% difference in accuracy between the two. I has nothing to do with my shooting ability, and I would appreciate it if you refrained from making lame-ass insults at me.
First, the facts.

The M-16 has both a longer effective range and greater mechanical accuracy than the AK-47. That point is hardly even up for a debate. The difference in accuracy, however, is not nearly as profound over the common ranges as some would suspect, as either weapon is capable of delivering well aimed lethal fire on a man sized target at 150m (and most modern combat takes place at ranges of shorter than 150m).

One of the primary reasons the AK-47 has such an appaling public opinin regarding it's accuracy is simply because it is rarely used by a well trained force. Often, such a weapon is fired by users who have little or no training in the principles of marksmanship and because the weapon is capable of operating even when seriously neglected they often are in poor working order (just because the weapon cycles properly doesn't mean it's going to work terribly well). Additionally, poor quality control in the ammunition is common as well, and the ammunition itself can often have a greater impact on accuracy than the weapon itself (If there is inconsistant bullet mass or powder load, or even poor quality powder the weapons performance shot to shot will change through no fault of the weapon). In most cases, a weapon is only as accurate as the shooter, and it takes an excellent shooter to honestly say that the weapon itself is holding them back, even for an AK-47.
 

frank220

New member
Dec 25, 2008
433
0
0
I can't stand all these commies and their fancy, efficient AK-47s! Hell, the good ole M16 will break down before you can unload a clip! ...wait that's a bad thing, isn't it...
 

TornadoADV

Cobra King
Apr 10, 2009
207
0
0
frank220 said:
I can't stand all these commies and their fancy, efficient AK-47s! Hell, the good ole M16 will break down before you can unload a clip! ...wait that's a bad thing, isn't it...
If your statement was true that is.