Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
AK47 vs AR15 | mud reliability test
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 янв 2022
- After Žiga saw the first InRangeTV mud test of an AK47 he was shocked. The result was opposite of what he expected and it just didn't make sense to him and his experience with both platforms.
Today we finally got the courage to do our own AK47 vs AR15 mud test.
So what we wanted to test here is how reliable are both of these rifles when dirt comes into the working of the gun.
It seems that our mud reliability test has given us a result that is closer to real life experience. Not that mud is a common reason for malfunctions but can be substituted by carbon fouling and lack of lubrication in an uncleaned or suppressed gun.
The AK doesn't really mind but some ARs quickly develop hiccups - from bolt not going into battery to short stroking and double feeds.
So does our AK47 vs AR15 mud reliability test contradict the tests done by InRangeTV?
I would say not at all. InRangeTV tests have shown that AR is a more enclosed and tight fitting platform than an AK and that it does an amazing job of keeping dirt and debris out of the workings of the rifle. And our test showed that if some mud manages to infiltrate in the operating system of the rifle, the AK platform is more reliable and can keep on firing with bigger amounts of crud.
You can support us at:
¤ Polenar Tactical Store: polenartactica...
¤ Join our community at: / polenartactical
¤ or slide in our DMs: / polenartactical
Ammo provided by Sellier & Bellot
FB: / sellierbellotammunition
IG: / sellier_bellot_official
The bunny ears really proved the legitimacy of this test. 10/10 would listen to Dr. Žiga again.
Cries in dinosaur roar.
Damn-- I thought that was some kind of non-US e-surveillance head set!
Disappointed now...
I can't believe how long it took to realize that something was different with his tactical gear
Legit
My faforite gunbunny
I was really surprised by how well both platforms did. The magazine is the most vulnerable point of any firearm design. So when I saw you dumping mags in mud I was like, “Well, both platforms are going to completely fail.” And they both did surprisingly well for using fucked up mags.
The belt fed side of The Pew is a pathway to many abilities some may consider to be unnatural 😏
Ain't that the truth. Crud and mags don't mix. So sayeth Mr.Murphy.
👀
Surprisingly most of my misfeeds were primarily from mags with weak springs or simply not seated properly. The offhand failure to eject but that could be the round didn't have enough powder or burn it all properly.
@@NarutoMagicCyclops Same here. I've had one malfunction ever with my AR and it was a combination of steel case and a weak magazine spring.
This is by far the most reality based test. Likely nobody is going to really let their rifle get submerged in mud, but it's not hard to believe that someone might drop a mag, or lay on their pouches and get mud/dirt into the magazine. People lose sight of the fact that both of these rifles are still in service for damned good reasons, and both have their strong points. I still think a major factor in the AK's tolerances is to run through frost build up in extreme cold, rather than run through mud and dirt. I think it would be cool to see you guys approach freezing conditions in the way you approached this test.
Falling and getting your rifle muddy is definitely possible. Discarding a dirty mag is definitely easier and more viable than discarding your dirty gun. Both tests are valid and hi light the strengths and weaknesses of the two platforms.
The point of submerging the rifles in mud is to take it to the extreme on what could happen when carrying around your rifle, so that everything short of that is already accounted for. Especially with the possibility of needing to hit the dirt and crawl around in it.
Dropping your magazines is very possible, but you should have decent magazine pouches, and normal people would go to the next magazine should you drop a magazine opening first into the mud, since either rifle, you are risking reliability by feeding it in, basically ruining your rifle for all the clean magazines to come. This one is the less realistic test.
Only problem is you store your mags in mag pounces upside down so nothing gets in them in the first place, so unless you have poorly stored your spare magazines you would likely have 0 errors unless the rifle itself got dirty and wasn’t cleaned
You're trained to inspect/clean your mags before inserting them into your rifles.
Maybe this happens in the heat of battle at night and you're on your last mag that got dropped in the trench. At that point, you're probably screwed anyway. Moral of the story is don't introduce FM into the weapon if at all possible. Either weapon is reliable if you keep the crud out of its mouth.
20:05 fantastic editing, non-intrusive but still adds to the content of the video. Y'all never disappoint
A lot of folks may piss on these tests... but for me they are GOLD. I give zero craps about the "Ar vs Ak" debate they are both great rifles. For me these tests are training examples. What to prevent in the field, what to look for, and how to remediate. Keep 'em clean. That rifle may be your only connection to staying with the mortal realm. If you must expose yourself to these conditons- swaddle that baby. And FFS keep lube on hand. It also helps to keep a couple of "clean" mags stashed away in a pack or otherwise sealed place.
Remember that headspace on MOST EVERY RIFLE is a clearance measured in thousandths of an inch (smol, in metric) so if you have nasty dirt encrusted rounds do NOT put them in your rifle unless it is your one and only option. Take cover, fix yo shjt. Its easier to prevent a stoppage than it is to clean your rifle.
I mean, Malaysia and the Philippines, both countries with lots of rainfall and thus mud, have run M16s for decades. And neither have qualms about continuing to use the platform for their militaries.
Hell yeah, they're taught to keep their shit clean for sure.
And I’d add, keep a little extra water on hand. I’m thinking a simple splash would have gotten both of these guns working immediately.
great way of looking at it
@deserada I'd have to ask a Malaysia Army veteran, then, since the documents for those are not exactly something I can find easily. One thing to note that is that Malaysia rushed to acquire M16A1s in 1976 to replace the HK33 that were still relatively brand new in service. The things I read about that cited that the HK33 was too heavy for the caliber and they found that the M16 has better reliability (which is interesting considering that it's a roller delayed rifle), but nothing much else.
@deserada Explains a lot why Malaysia went into the trouble of making a special procurement program to quickly get M16A1s, first from the US and then Singapore. And of course, this was during the Second Emergency period so they needed a supply of reliable rifles ASAP.
I suspected that Malaysia would surplus them out, and I never knew that any were domestically made considering how new the rifles were. But then quality control issues is not surprising since it was an issue that drove the adoption of the M4A1 instead of continuing to use the AUG which was licensed produced (here lies the issue with the fire control group I believe.) The M4A1 is also licensed produced but now with much better oversight from Colt.
And of course we's adopt the M4A1 because recruits are still trained with the M16A1 and it would make sense that way.
"The forward assist, it does nothing" was comedy gold.
Stoner was right.
and it just became emotional assist 😂
Except with you - ask Kyke Rittenhouse it has a purpose.
@@ratagris21 The plural of anecdote is is "anecdotes", not "data".
Forward assist only works when you're 17 years old and fighting against antifa
Your test verifies everything that I learned in basic training and in combat with an M-16A1 in Vietnam, keep the magazines clean first and foremost. In my outfit, squad leaders and plt sgts regularly inspected rifles at every opportunity and insisted on maintaining operational cleanliness. We regularly went through 3-400 rounds per firefight, and I never experienced any problems with it other than an occasional tap, rack and bang drill (and those were usually due to bad ammo). The M16 and it's variants were more than reliable enough, and given the far better ergonomic features of the M16 over the AK (yes, it too is an outstanding infantry weapon) I would prefer the M-16 in the aggregate if I had the choice.
Yeah all you guys got screwed before the improvements made to the M16 with the powder change cause big gov cheaped out. In the book "fortunate son" Chesty Puller son had a jam with two viet cong in front of him so he booked it then stepped on a massive landmine or unexploaded 155mm arty shell. Had his weapon not jam he could have made it thru vietnam and not be a amputee above both knees. He took his own life in the mid 90's.
the ar does not have superior ergonomics, and it also isnt better. Though if you prefer it that is a thing of its own.
@@parallax9084 Exactly, "superior ergonomics" is all about perspective. Sure the thumb fire selector and drop magazine release is coinvent, however try to see how those "superior ergonomics" are with heavy winter gloves. The AK was designed with simple to operate large surfaces because they can easily be manipulated in a large variety of use cases. I prefer the AK over the AR, and I'm American. However I'm not saying the AR is bad or anything, both are good platforms, but it's important to understand context. I think allot of the critisism of the AK comes from lack of understanding.
@@-Zevin- yes
@@-Zevin- agree, as it matters on perspective, because as I've got left eye more "accurate" I'm shooting from the left hand-side, so when I'm using an AK it fits me even better than AR15 which manipulators are on the left side of a rifle.
Another very important thing is that AR15 is very easy equippable with various sights, from red dot thru nv ending on thermal sights. In the AK though, it is not so easy (if you dont have a "swallow's tail" rail on the left side of a rifle, then you've got to modify a gun in a warehouse in order to mount any sight on it.
Important note about one of the MAJOR differences in both rifles. The lockup for the AK bolt is achieved via lugs that lock into place on the side of the bolt head. The AR locking lugs protrude from the front, have to fit through very smol cutouts in the breach, and then rotate to lock. Once you’ve introduced debris or contamination on the reverse side of either the bolt head or back side of the locking lugs, that’s it - until the debris is removed.
This inherent design difference is why the AR failed completely, while the AK could still function. The debris was able to “rattle” out of the way, whereas the debris in the AR was just bouncing around, but still trapped. AK is clear winner, imo.
This is also why mortaring was so much more effective with AK - because the impact was releasing the bolt, and also moving the debris out of the way.
Its not an ak its an yugoslavian m 70
Well yeah if you dump mud into a mag and do that I guess... most rifles would jam up and the AK definitely didn't operate in a legendary fashion as fudd lore likes to say it does. I also feel like it's not exactly the best test either because no one is gonna look at their magazine and say "wow lets let chunks of mud into my rifle" They'd at least shake it off or something lmao.
@@joakimmilosevic right it is vastly superior to Russian crap
Just because you invent something doesn't mean it's automatically the best of that thing. Rob Ski tests the m70 showed less wear and had less failure than all other import and domestic AK available right now
Including a fuller AK and a Saiga ak103. It had less wear than the real thing, no splash on the bolt face and the coating was all intact no shiny spots.
But yugoslavia had a lot less money and the ar15 is modern m 70 is older
The AR vs. AK debate at this point is definitely just, "Know and understand your weapon while respecting the other dude's weapon." They've all got their limitations somewhere.
@matthewcampos2564 it's only there because the army demanded it for the M16
well as i know m16 (or ar15) and ak can't be compared because they are created for different tasks and different conditions
@matthewcampos2564 ik
But you should admit, AK is way more better than AR
They are both good,they are tools . AK vs AR is getting redundant.What is the point,they have both proved effective killing machines?
Excellent test guys! :D
Thank you!
It was a nightmare to clean the guns afterwards...
@@PolenarTactical water hose with high pressure nozzle. Works great.
Excellent test for sure.
I guess the biggest lesson here is: Don't use a muddy mag. Sometimes it's better to lose(put away) 30rds than stop the rifle from functioning.
@@JohnZ556 unless it's ak and it's your last mag and you arent too picky about converting it to bolt action rifle
But that's not an AK, that's M70...greetings from Serbia
This taught me that having mag pouches that properly covered your mag is still important if you are expecting to get dirty.
I think this demonstration had an important lesson behind it. It is not about which gun performs better under harsh conditions, it was truly about the importance of maintaining your gun. Doesn't matter if you have either the high end AK or a cheap AR, neither gun can work without maintenance.
@matthewcampos2564and the AK is a piece of shit
Came to YT for garand thumbs mud test.. stayed for off-brand Ruskis' mudtest
So true. In that exact order too
Best mud test
@@danielpowers2413 I'm not even gonna give this comment a proper reply
@@operatorsanonymous1741 cool story bro
This is exactly what most of these tests miss. It doesn't matter how clean your rifle is if your magazine is dirty, you're fucked. This is why most companies & gunsmiths do not make their own mags, they make guns & use mags from 3rd party suppliers. Reliable magazines are a whole different animal.
Great test boys👍
Yeah, that's why in most RUclips tests AK is fucked, bc AR were designed to not let the mud go inside, while AK were designed to work somehow if mud is already got in
I wouldn't say work so much as scrape by. I'd switch to a sidearm before using either dirty rifle
This is by far one of the most fair and educational videos on weapons performance and failure when it comes to both the AR and AK platforms. Magazine cleanliness and quality make a huge difference too.
Two very different rifles.
Two very different design philosophies.
Same mud.
Same malfunctions.
What surprised me was how well both rifles self cleaned their way back to operational status.
Both designs are incredible, great job Ziga and crew!
@matthewcampos2564It does something, there is a reason it’s on the rifle.
@@Dr.KarlowTheOctolingthe AR is garbage 😂
@@chaosXP3RT Lmfao desperation
Are you joking? The AR utterly failed and the AK was still running in the end.
I mean, that AR was impressive, it did great. But the AK was the clear winner here
But WHO sticks a muddied up mag into the weapon without so much as a slap on their hip or something to at least attempt to knock out the stuff most likely to jam it??? That's the problem with this test. It's a test of "how much stupidity can this design survive" and more an example of what happens when you fail to do anything to prevent a malfunction.
This video along with the InRange tests jut confirms what everyone thinks at this point. ARs are great at keeping stuff out of its action but fails when stuff gets in. AKs are trash at keeping stuff out of its action but tends to be able to function with more stuff getting into it.
Yes. ARs keeps the mud out, and AK chews through frozen ice.
Exactly. I kind of always knew this but never tested it.
And i feel like a lot of people thought that AKs were less reliable than ARs because of their mud tests so i had to try it myself
The other problem with the InrangeTV tests is they have a lot of rocks and pebbles in their mud. Once one of those gets into the trigger group or jams the bolt, the rifle fails.
@@mechag9488 That's why we actually sifted through our test media to get more consistent grit
@@PolenarTactical Just today, Garand Thumb released his video where he did a similar test to InRange. Similar test with same results where the AR did not let mud in but did not test when muck goes directly into it.
I really appreciate that your approach was based on actual experience. I also think that your approach was unique in the way you focused on the magazines because someone is much more likely to drop a mag than their rifle. Keep up the good work!
Semper Fidelis.
After watching InRangeTV's AK vs AR mud tests, my literally first question was "OK, cool, but what if a dirty mag gets loaded in both of the rifles (a totally possible case senario in real combat)?" Well, now we all have the answer. Thank you, guys.
Ak 47 has been proven in all wars. Cold war, Middle East, Modern, Ukraine
Not like AR - 15
Loading dirty mags is allways bad idea, keep them in protective pouches and only use clean ones
@@petrsukenik9266 If you fought in Vietnam, I'm sure you wouldn't be able to keep it clean. Because this is the tropics. So AK was the best at that time
@@DungPhan-vf1fe AK will jam too if you stick dirty mag in
So in summary, ar platform prevents dirt from getting into the chamber a little bit better than the ak, but the ak on the other hand is a little bit easier to clear and get to functioning condition if that woulld happen.
Both excellent rifles, i'd be proud too!
More mud tests please:)
correct remark
Yes, the AR protects its internal organs better, but even so, the AK is more reliable.
@@hdelouestI mean if you treat your rifle like a rock you're throwing around its bound to break so to note for me I like the us ones better but you can have your own opinion
I think you should continue doing tests specifically on how much it takes to get different guns working again after they had problems, which in my opinion is just as relevant as how much it takes to cause the problems.
You raise a really good point, I'm on board with that 100%
I'd like to see that myself. How to rapidly resolve these various problems and get the weapon firing again with dependable frequency is a good idea.
Probably a dunk in some fairly clean water would have these back running in a few seconds.
I think this is the best one so far with fair representation on both sides. When you think of a solider with his weapon, he won't be pouring mud on it but rather crawling around or picking it up wherever its been left. Most likely having junk get in the magazines on his pouch if he is belly down.
That's exactly what happened to us during the extreme infantry shooting competition in Poland
The lesson I'm seeing here is buy good quality mag pouches more than anything else
This is probably one of the reasons mags are taught to be stowed “facing down” in pouches. That, and the mechanics of reloading, of course.
I'm from Russia and I've seen a lot of all sorts of tests, but in my opinion this one is more adequate in relation to real situations in the fields, thank you it was interesting
From what I've seen with most AR vs AK mudtests, the common finding is usually that:
ARs are better at keeping mud and dirt out of the system
AKs are better at running with mud and dirt in the system
And in a scenario where you can't keep mud and dirt out of the system over a long enough timeframe AK wins. If I was in the "Road" TWROL situation where I have long times before ability to perform maintanance or can't perform maintanance I would take an AK over an AR.
AR-15 or this video is communiss propaganda
P R O P A G A N D A
**soviet anthem plays in the background**
Fake News
James, Hop is shitposting again
Do you got sunday shorts?
A very thoughtful approach. Garand Thumb also put a a comparative mud test, which showed more of a 'field use' approach. Your method also showed how gunk could 'sneak in' during hard field use, and reinforced the importance of regular cleaning, even if it doesn't look too dirty.
This is a real test of the mechanisms rather than just glopping mud to test how sealed the system is. Thanks PT.
The AR was supposed to use disposable magazines. They also said it was a "self-cleaning rifle" (leading to the infamous problems in Vietnam). You proved both of these correct. Bravo!
Don't forget how botched the rifle was after they altered vital components like the chrome lined bore and chamber, then they used powder with unsuitable burn characteristics for the .223 cartridge.
It was like putting pot metal pistons in a race car and then filling it up with diesel fuel instead of high octane gasoline.
Both rifles have their pros and cons. I'm so tired of mud tests, all they prove is that rifles jam. There is no way to have a 100% fair test. The simple fact is that you should always make every attempt to keep your rifle clean, your life depends on it weather it's an AK or an AR. Love your videos.
I am kinda over the abuse testing. Obviously an abused gun will fail eventually.
Well said.
Your observations on the InRange TV mud test are great. I really appreciate that you ran a clean mag through the AR at the end. Great test!
Actually this is an excellent companion to the other malfunction videos. As you say, it points out a very common variety of failure; where the other "studies" are the "Oh no I dropped the rifle!" this is the "I don't know where all that dirt came from Drill Sergeant..."
^ This!
Also people always forget that soldiers are fallible. I mean there's a good repertoire of hilarious military fails that prove that.
Funny as it may be, I'd say it's uncommon for outright stupid things to happen, BUT if things like that may happen, then the small things just might creep up on you.
Finally, at least someone did a normal test of weapon platforms. Regarding the AK, only one thing was embarrassing that he got up on the slide delay with an empty magazine, the KK did not agree to the slide delay due to possible delays and problems in feeding the first cartridge. I suspect the way it is on your AK, it was the supply of the first cartridge that caused problems. But perhaps simply because of the greater amount of dirt on the first cartridge.
As for the AR, I consider it an indicative example of the fact that dirt still causes problems with the reliability of the system. Another issue with AP piston rifles is whether they will be reliable, or vice versa. Remembering the video where people like about HK416 were tested with mud there.
In general, the test is more realistic, not only from the point of view of the military, but also from the sports side. Because the last competition in Russia, most of the athletes who switched to the AR platform faced problems (last year in the summer) due to dirty stores and lost to an ordinary dude with an AK almost in the basic configuration.
P.S. I don’t know if you have competitions in bad weather, but in addition to bad weather, the shooting range itself interfered with the guys at the competition, since sand shooting ranges prevail in Russia and during rain it turned into a mess. By the way, it rained all day at the competition. And as our shooters like to say, "There are only three seasons when, the dirt, the dirt has dried up, the dirt has frozen"
I really like this method. We already know what happens when you glop tons of mud on the outside… plenty of people have done that now.
Let’s see more of these!!!
I was impressed that a 10.5” AR did as well as it did. I wouldn’t mind seeing a repeat of this test with a 16 or 20” AR since you were using a full sized AK rifle. Or do a test between full sized AR vs a Krink to see how much a shorter barrel adds/subtracts from reliability.
I don’t think that stuff matters as much as the drill bit size that drilled the gas hole!!!
I think this is a far more realistic test than I’ve seen in quite a while
Really liked this test. I think this was a better real world representation of the type of soil that would end up in your rifle in the field. Shoveling mud on them looks dramatic, but grit and sand is most of what I dealt with in my meager experience with the M16A2. Bonus points for the double feed. It's a PITA.
I think that this test method is very valid, I served in the US army for many years and if there is going to be any dirt or debris introduced in to the AR platform it is almost always introduced by the magazine. Aside from proper maintenance, dirt is the biggest downfall to the AR/M4/M16. The magazines in my my mag pouches and web-gear always got dirty in the field and often caused problems! Great Test!
Going to guess that AK will have trouble going into battery and AR will have trouble feeding. Still think AK is going to come out ahead and be easier to clear malfunctions.
I like ak because it’s more reliable to fix . Like the boot stomp and fast disassemble. Don’t drop those pins !
You should watch Garand Thumb’s mud test video. They do a more “field test” and the AK failed while the ARs soared. I’m not picking a favorite. I own both platforms and love them both equally
@@dragmorian6347 I think it depends on the quality of the AK as well.
@@curbyourenthusiasm9874 GT used a $3k+ AK and it jammed like crazy with mud. But a $1500 AR didn’t. Not trashing AKs, I have my own and love them. But they’re not invincible like the myths claim
AR is more likely to malfunction if debris gets into the action due to tight tolerances, however it is much better at keeping debris out. The AK is less likely to malfunction if debris gets into the action due to looser tolerances, however it does a worse job at keeping debris out of the action. The "best" gun is the one that suits your needs and will function in the terrain you plan on using it in.
Now this is how to do a proper test and not how the other guys did it. Your data showed numerous results both good and bad and it continued to remain unbiased instead of trying to seem like you were trying to shit on either weapon. Which other RUclipsrs have tried to do in the past. I am happy with this experiments conclusion.
Personally I think both did exceptionally well. These rifles are Gold Standards in their class and the fact that they can trade blows with each other in many areas including reliability always make me appreciate both. I lean towards the AK but only because I like it more, not because it's better. But still, I always point to the AR without a second thought should it be a readily available platform to procure for sporting or defensive purposes.
People ask us to pick a poison, but why not both?
See, I swing the other way. I prefer the AR platform, but I would not hesitate to use an AK of I had to.
@@jamesharding3459 Swingin' away, yo! That rifle life.
Look at these people speaking the truth
Disappointed that you didn't freeze them and then light them on fire
I can do that next time :D
@@PolenarTactical Dunk them in motor oil then light them on fire!
@@PolenarTactical Thank you, would be a better science.
I am glad I watched this video.
I've never thought that mud could cause a gun to malfunction this bad, but it's quite possible for infantry to get mud in while crawling or fighting in the rain, as in this experiment.
Regardless of weapon system, method of testing, or final results, there's always one takeaway from these tests: no system is infallible, and maintenance is a must.
So, what I learned is that if you drop your mag into the dirt/mud, put in away and grab a clean mag.
Or rinse it with water, if time isn't a factor. Pee is another option, if water or other appropriate liquids are unavailable🤔
*NO CHEATING!*
Write your prediction on which rifle will do better and why :)
PS: i misspoke, AR has an 11.5" barrel and carbine length gas system
I'm gonna say based on the fact that's dudes in flip flops have been fighting the US military for years with aks made in the 50s that haven't been cleaned since around that time, the ak is gonna probably win this.
I don’t know enough about the AR-15 to make a prediction.
I predict the AR-15 will do great overall, but the AK will regain some of its glory that it lost in InRange’s test.
I noticed you used a full sized AK versus a short barrel AR15 (10.5") which are already iffy in the reliability department. Perhaps a full-sized AR15, at least M4 length (14.5" barrel) would make a more equal test? I'd bet on the AK for this though.
AR, keeps out mud like a champ, and i know this because i have studied Karl'd and Ian's very scientific mud tests 🌚
One of the best parts of this video is to show what can jam these weapons and how to deal with those jams and get the weapon back in action. Nice work!!!❤
Finally, a fair and objective mud test between the Kalashnikov and Stoner platforms. If you're going into combat in a jungle, desert, or arctic environment, the AK series is more reliable than the M4/M16. AKs aren't perfect because they can still malfunction, but they malfunction less than most weapons, including the M4 or M16.
AK's do not malfunction, at least not beyond the point where it takes more than 3 seconds to fix it.
With all due respect, but all mechanically functioning objects malfunction or have the potential to malfunction.
@@zhaoyun3153
Sure. However, because AK is built out of nearly indestructible parts, if it jams you can just grab it by the barrel and kickstart it like an old motorcycle. It literally takes a heartbeat to clear a jam.
That's the first trick they teach you in a military, the day you're assigned the weapon and somehow none of the RUclips so called "operators" seem to know about it.
@@paulbenedict1289 Much more reliable than M4/M16 rifles and bullpups, but can still malfunction nontheless.
I would even argue that the most modern Kalashnikovs (AK-100 series, AK-200 series, AK-12, 15, 19) are even more reliable than the older AKMs and AK-74s.
It's interesting that the 1st AK failures were at the same level of dirt where the AR failed as well. And the AK failure to go into battery when dirty matches InRange's experience as well.
This combined with Garand Thumb's two vids, the mud test and the ice test, shows just how evenly matched the two platforms are.
Ice: AK wins
Mud on weapon: AR wins
Mud in mag: Nobody wins
Add sand ak wins
Its all about tolerances
@@frostydrifterAR’s work just as well as AK’s in sand.
@@frostydrifterHow does ak win in sand?
AK clearly won this test, it was far easier to get it running again.
Best test I have seen comparing these two rifles. AK for sure has an edge.
Thank you. You speak so slowly, and I, from Russia, can understand you without problems.
I keep a metal straw in my plate carrier, and I've even used it on a few occasions to blow dirt and debris out of the locking lugs. Just a trick a fellow showed me, and it worked surprisingly well. Do what you please, but I like knowing I at least have an option, especially considering I may not have water, or may not want to pour my only available water into my rifle. The straw i use is stainless steel, and has a bend in it that is good for getting into awkward places. Don't knock it till you try it.
Outstanding tip that I've never heard of before. TY
Pee is another potential option, if the situation allows.
@@Jeff.78 gotta do whatcha gotta do sometimes, and I'd definitely use that before pouring my last canteen of water out if possible.
Slav Science
Best.
I may be late to the game, but I will say they both worked pretty fine under the conditions that they were in. You and Ian’s mud tests may be different but gave us different results under different conditions, in all, this would be depending on your preference of rifle. If the AK was a more tightly sealed system like the AR, it could have done just as well as the AR for Ian’s mud test, maybe better given its more simple and rugged design. But in terms of ease of use and modularity with fair but not completely the best durability, the AR platform is a good platform to use as well, but given the modernization of the AK and the use of smaller cartridges such as the 5.45 calibre rounds which can provide a little bit lighter recoil, the AK is getting the same kind of modularity as the AR, however how well they both function is for environment. In all honesty, when it comes down to the physical weak points, I would choose and AK,given if you drop the AR wrong it damages the buffer spring in the back, your whole rifle is fucked, but if I wanted a system with additional features such as the forward assist to further improve trying to work around a malfunction, I would use an AR, I would also choose it for its ability to be more universal such as it being an ambidextrous weapon system to use. At the end of the day, I depends on your preference and the situation you are in. I would say for the US military, it would be useful for them to train in both the AR platform and the AK platform, given there were soldiers in the Middle East who had to resort to picking up an AK and using it when they ran out of ammunition in some dangerous firefights, given a decent part of the world use the AK platform it would do them good to get used to it, the same for bullpup style platforms, given there are also a decent part of the world that uses that style of weapon system as well. The military teaches you to be very versatile yet they don’t train you in other weapon systems, just what they give you since that is what you will primarily use. But when an emergency happens and you need to pick up an enemy weapon, it is better for more high speed and risky environments to be somewhat used to other weapon systems. Like if a soldier religiously trains with ARs and then picks up an AK, they may, by muscle memory may try to charge it like an AR unless they is actively remembering how to try and operate an AK platform as to not mess up while in a fight, but that may slow them down when time may be crucial, the same for Russia and other countries that use the AK platform, it is better for them to at least be somewhat familiar with other weapon systems and have some muscle memory for it than none at all…
A fair, correct, regional and realistic comparison, because this is what happens to the weapon naturally, and not immersing it in water and mud. The weapon is not exposed to such a thing. In fact, we in Iraq have many wars and conditions, with exciting atmospheres of sand, dust, water and mud, and very high temperature and freezing cold, but
Interesting take one a popular topic. What I took away was the AR and AK swapped strengths in this test. The AR being a more sealed design kept dirt in the action longer, while the AK seem like it worked through and cleared the debris easier. Nice job guys!
I like this test, it's more likely and practical. Dropping a mag in a thin layer of mud is far worse and more likely than dropping your rifle in knee deep mud. Beyond fueling the debate of AK vs AR this just shows no matter what your running you want to keep your mags clean or it will cost you precious time whether its on the clock or the battle field both rifles will put you in a bad situation.
I watched the mud test video you were explaining from another RUclipsr and they test they did was very flawed. They had the AR-15 closed up while the AK they had the safety down so mud could easily fill the inside. I’d like them to re do the test with the AR-15 with the ejection flap down instead of up. See if we get different results
that's what even GarandThumb said. AK was the one of those who still works with ice in it.
Thought this channel was just satire but you brought some interesting and new views to the torture test. Good work dudes!
This channel does a good mix of both
This is almost the difference between government testing and in use.
Karl's results are based on a "worst case" situation with "best possible" preparation for the tests.
These tests are much closer to field or combat conditions where you're doing silly things like crawling through mud, dropping magazines, and other crap that negatively affects the performance of a rifle.
Not really this is also worst case senario, nobody who understands weapon systems is going to jam a shit covered mag into a gun unless they absolutely had no other choice. No time to grab another mag, or wipe it off or strip the top rounds, any mag carrier will prevent this type of contamination unless your dumb and insert them rounds up and exposed, magpul also makes poly dust covers for mags. All these test are just over the top worst case senario with a dumb ass behind the gun. When really no riflemen would let it get to the point in which these test potray. Its cool to see how far you can push it and entertaining to watch but the horse is dead and yet people keep beating it.
I think this shows that no matter what design/operating system a rifle has, if you get any debris in the locking system or the fire control group you're pretty much hosed until you figure out a way to clear it out.
This also underlines the importance of your magazine pouches not allowing shit to get inside your magazine to begin with as that is the entry point of debris in this test.
Could you Test the PWS and the POF? I would be intrested in seeing piston AR's vs AK's since they are similar.
You guys did a great job with this! It was interesting to see a test that's basically completely opposite of the InRange mud tests. They put mud outside the gun, you put it inside. I think the results did a good job of demonstrating that neither gun is perfect nor terrible, but the AK does better in these conditions and clearing malfunctions is slightly easier.
Edit: I wouldn't mind seeing more of these, definitely need one for the G3.
I can only vouch for myself, but this mirrors my experience with both platforms. One of the things I noticed about the InRange tests was that Karl gingerly wiped the mud off of the bolt carrier for the AR while not doing the same for the AK. Also, the mud was more solid and clumpy for the AR whereas the mud was more runny for the AK. Just things I noticed about their tests.
@@elburropeligroso4689 ak47s do better with ice. Ar15s do better with mud.
Ak does better in these conditions.. so this concludes that ak is the better platform! Stay out of mud and keep your rifle clean
Finally an actual mud test and not just shoveling as much mud into the weapon as possible.
As much as I like both Ian and Karl, their tests doesn't say much about the actual reliability of the rifles.
The convoy dust tests they did briefly were far more relevant. Shame the mud test is what's 'famous'
@@Sypher474 Yes I agree, the convoy dust test was my favorite as it was actually realistic.
@@BloPsy__ totally agree with you, to be fair the inrangetv mud test video is quite interesting to watch but if someone uses that as an excuse to say that ar15 is more reliable than gail, ak, tavor then personally i think the that's stupid, i'm not an ak fan but i'm tired of seeing some ar15 fanboi (not all) bullshit about inrange tv's mud test video
I thought the AK was frikking loud when you fired from the encrusted magazine.
Then you fired the AR and even your own microphone did utterly shit the bed! xD
Love the failure counter when you were slamming the AR Magazine into the table lmao
i think youre more likely to drop a mag on the ground rather than a rifle especially if you use a sling
I'm an AR fanatic, but I've always known if you get junk in the mag or behind the bolt head, it's done. Interesting to see the AK can still fight through the gunk, even if it does become a single shot rifle. 👍
Even muzzleloader is more effective weapon than trying to throw rocks over 100 yards.
Wounded but not totally out of fight.
Which was something Karl actually demonstrated when he mud tested the AKM. In fact, the original AK shot more rounds than even the SLR104 (AK74 clone) and the Valmet (Finnish AK)
@@Kesssuli Or if you have a blunderbuss, using the rocks as ammunition
@@TheOz91 Yeah i have seen that video. Blunderbuss is kind of funny oldschool weapon. It will eat literally anything what you stuff down from barrel.
Test reality/relevance=50ish%
Video badassery=2050%
Loved it you guys rock!
I think this disproved the notion that DI systems are “self cleaning” or that they clear the action of crud or debris. Nothing inherently wrong about the DI system but those claims alway came across as salesmanship tactics to me.
The fact this and the garand thumb test dropped so close is a sunday miracle
You guys thought of a novel test here. No one has tested debris introduced to the gun by way if mag changes, an extremely relevant, but completely overlooked situation.
The reason AR-15's jam so frequently when compared to the AK47 is because it was designed to fire from the closed-bolt position in order to effectively vent the heat and gasses from the tube and keep the weapon from overheating.
As a result anything introduced to the weapon such as dirt, mud, etc would eventually clog the barrel and cause the weapon to jam.
The AK47 on the other hand can be disassembled easily in order to perform maintenance when needed. Because of this you can get the mud out of it by repeatedly smacking it around without damaging it.
But just like any other weapon, it's better to keep mud out of both of them. Having a corroded weapon is more likely to cause the weapon to jam, or worse yet misfire and possibly explode.
The AR vs. AK rivalry is one of the most important rivalries of all time. As much as I'm a freedom-loving defender of the AR, there's simply no denying the popularity of the AK.
All these mud tests conducted by Polenar, InRangeTv and Garand Thumb are extremely helpful for operators to know the limitations of their equipment! Please do this same test with the FN FAL and the HK G3.
I’d say most of your problems were the sand/mud in the chamber, not letting the round seat all the way forward. Just a little bit of grit on either the case wall or the chamber wall is all it takes to prevent locking into battery on almost any rifle. Awesome video!!
Loved it when you started to pound the OA mag on the table and the test numbers started to glitch , nice touch !! Haha
The AR-15 give me some sort of flash backs because this model or similar model / branch off of the model was used in multiple mass shootings in the U.S and hearing it reminded me of it that first clip of him shooting it.
This is probably one of the better mud tests I've seen, and the way the magazine gave out more than the gun was probably the most interesting part. Do these AR mags use the Magpul anti-tilt follower? I know that's what solved a lot of problems with the AR-15's magazine issues and why the US ultimately switched to them.
In the end I'm pretty impressed with how both rifles performed.
Yes they most likely do but that didn't have anything to do with dirt getting in the mag. It's most likely a case of AR mags like the AR just hold the rounds tighter where and AK mag can be on the loose side sometimes.
Check out Grand Thumbs channel. He has the best mud and frost testing on firearms I have seen.
Indeed, I thank you Žiga for putting your rifles through this torture. It wears them out and damages them a lot, so I value your sacrifice. This was one of the more relevant tests I saw.
The thing is, that AK people trying to prove AK superiority tend to pour rubbish in to action, which is in favour of AKs construction and obviously, that wont happen so often in a field.
Where as AR fanboys just tend to use the greatly enclosed frame of gun to its advantage, as Ian in Inrange did. And just pant some mud to the sides, claiming the AR is "extremely" reliable.
But the real issue is, dirt comming up through mud well fr dirty magazines, which will get dirty as you wear them and crawl arround. And dirt build up inside gun from all the shooting. The insides of AR are far less suited for dealing with it, due to bolt head type, locking and overall compression of quite tiny parts, that move a lot in them selfs. And its far easier to clean AK than AR on spot. For the record, it might have been enough for you to put your little finger in to the AKs window and swipe some dirt from behind locking lug and bolt head. Or just pour water tgrough it and out of mag well. It would be much harder fo AR though.
I would love to see the part which you had not made, but is not that relevant, as it came later, and that is putting a dirty mag in from the start and racking the action. It would cause AR to suck much sooner.
I can hear the AR Fanbase shriek in agony even all the way to my home in central Europe, Bohemia. Ian will be sad.
I dont know why people tend to compeete in this toppic. To me its settled. AK is more reliable, 7,62x39 is more versitile, stable, powerfull, dependable round. But AK has less dynamic features, and the round has greater trajectory curve and has bigger kick. If you are trained, non of it is an issue and if you are untrained, the AK will compensate for your mistakes.
ARs on the other hand are more pleasant to carry, to shoot and faster to handle. The 5,56x45 is in general, more easier to aim at the targets in different ranges. But AR sucks in long-term usage in environent or in prolonged shooting situations. The 5,56 is in general more treatcherous and has just as many negative effects in its ballistics, as positive ones. It is not versatile round and it tends to fail with longer distances or in harsh enviroment, like the rifle. Trained person will be ACE in close combat with it, but in time, will have issues non the less. The untrained person, will have issues with AR with reliability, as even small mistakes may punish you, but they will find shooting it, easier to them.
Thats the whole story there is.
I applaud your abillity to make fun out of your self ^_^ Mr. Kitty. Most wanna be "gunnery gurus" behave like "masters of the world", but not you guys.
Have fun!
Thanks for sharing guys. Watching you demo I've learned what to do and what not to do in the field.
I think this test and the others show what we already should know. One system was designed with being as reliable as possible while being as dirty or icy as possible. The other was designed to keep dirt out of the gun as much as possible so that you wouldn’t have to worry about reliability while dirty as much. The other tests show that the AR is extremely reliable under most circumstances. And this test along with the others show that the AK will perform relatively well no matter what. Don’t get dirt in your AR and you’ll be fine. And if you get dirt in your AK you are probably okay. But I would clean it anyway.
В кои-то веки дождались адекватного и непредвзятого теста. Команда Polenar Tactical как всегда на высоте. Уважение.
Awesome video in conjunction with everyone else who added to this genre. Everyone doing the same/similar tests with mildly different variables adds a lot to the community. Not that one test is better than the other, they're all realistic.
Bottom line, remember to keep your action as clean as possible and be conscious of where it goes. Sometimes you can't help what gets on or in your rifle and it's important to know how to remedy the issue. Don't just count on your firearm never having a malfunction.
I think Eugine Stoner was correct on that forward assist for the most part. Shit doesn't do anything but assist in gumming up the works more.
Очень хороший тест)) он на самом деле показывает почему калаш надёжен.
lever gun mud test, go.
I have a video out on cleaning and shooting a 114 year old Winchester 1894: check it out if you wanna see a lever gun mud test that wasn’t staged hahah
The more data we get the better the the results! I think everyone should do this and post it to youtube! XD
A man of true, empirical science. I appreciate your embracing of creating an abundance of data rather than simply believing popularly held beliefs.
You in last have to do Water rinse and fire . Cause in vietnam people used water if their AK jammed.and same Marines did but their ARs presist to Malfunction. For AK water is Lube . Mr Ziga
This is a testament to the forward assist on ARs and just how necessary they are. I’m talking to you, you goofy slick sided AR gang.
This has to be the best and fair mud test I’ve ever seen on RUclips. Great job Žiga, can’t wait for more of your reliability tests in the future.
As important as weapon reliability is, shooter habit is more important. What if the guy who dropped his magazine swirls it around in a watery part of the puddle to remove the heaviest crud before it gets into his rifle? What if he strips a few muddy rounds off the top of his magazine before he inserts it? What if he uses his camelbak nozzle to hose the rounds off a bit? What if the shooter hoses out the chamber with his camelbak while pointing the muzzle down? Either of these actions takes a few seconds to save you the misery of several back to back malfunctions because a few rounds at the top of the magazine were smeared in filth.
I would be interested in seeing parallel testing where the control test involves 0 hygiene habits while the other test involves a habit like rinsing the mag or stripping a few rounds off the top.
This was my thought as well, the crud ingress could be lessened a lot by a splash of water at the mag and a quick rinse of the chamber. It's also a question of environment: in a dusty, sandy place the wet parts would attract more dust but in the rain and mud you wouldn't have to worry about that. Would be interesting to see a follow-up test with "5 second cleaning before loading".
Or the best habit, dont stick the dirty mag into the gun, use a clean mag.
Very clear english brother....every single word you pronunce or utter is clear
Always love seeing the m70!
This is the kind of testing that needs to be done more. I am for testing the guns into their extremes so better guns can be made.
I’d love to see the same test done with the addition of suppressors, it would be interesting to see how much the additional back gas aids clearing the action…
A fascinating test, great work guys!
Thank you very much for all of your fantastically insightful but fun content and superb production quality!
Thank you!
That's definitely an interesting idea but i need to first forget the horror of cleaning the rifles after this test...
Это некорректно по 1 причине, у АК есть лишь 1 глушитель одобренный в армии это ПБС-1.
1. ПБС-1 не рассчитан для стрельбы обычными боеприпасами. Для этого нужны УС патроны.
2. При стрельбе обычным сверхзвуковым боеприпасом может привести к поломке из-за слишком большого давления газа в стволе, что негативно скажется на работе автоматики.
This is what i've been thinking ever since seeing the mud test. Excellent video!
I served in Afghanistan 08-09 with 1st ID and from my experience the AK is a better platform when fighting in a dirty environment especially if you have an optic for it. The M16/M4 platform is still good but better for fighting in environments like Europe.
Ice and snow says hello in northern europe.
The M16/AR platform also works really well in tropical climates, too, especially after post-Vietnam improvements. The Philippines and Malaysia as well as Thailand have been using M16s for decades and will continue to use the platform