Just to say, as a Brit having fired many weapon systems including the AK74 and the M16A4, the depressing fact is, you can drag an AK74 through the mud and water and it will still fire. It is such a simple design that there really is naff all to go wrong. If/when it does, however rare that is, it is normally catastrophic failure...
As a former 101st Airborne soldier let me tell you I hated the M4/M16 rifle. It jams like crazy under even light use and God help you if you have to put a serious amount of fire down range for any extended period of time.
Really?Ive never once had a problem with my ar,only times ar's mess up is when you treat them like shit.Must not care for it and let shit get all into the action.
daveyjones585 There are many factors that begin to impact a weapon during long term field use. Each of these places a stress on the function of the weapon system. The AK systems perform more reliably under these diverse pressures and they do it with far less maintenance.
I feel like this is bullshit, as much I would prefer and AK over an AR, the AR isn't that bad, or at least mine isn't, I put it through hell after I finished building it, and it never jammed once.
Amadeus belle So your home built AR tests are better then over a century of Soviet/Russian military testing standards? OK, then how many steps does the standard automatic rifle test has according to Soviet standards? Name them.
I don't know about Soviet "standards", both my AK and AR builds are semi auto only. And don't get me wrong, I am not saying the AR is better than the AK, as I said before, I would grab my AK before anything else. I built the AR using all Colt A1 surplus parts minus the lower receiver which is a Milspec Stag arms lower, and a 20 inch FN barrel. I've preformed an over the beach test, dragged it through the woods and back, and dropped it mag down on the concrete driveway. All with zero lube, and I didn't have a single issue other than cosmetic (I only use Magpul Pmags, USGI mags are shit) Obviously I have no way to preform a sub zero test. Also, I know for a fact the US fakes these "side by side" tests to show our troops to give them a false sense of superiority, so there is no reason why any other country wouldn't do the same.
Mad respect then. My experience with the AR series has been nothing but positive. Just use some PMAGS and you'll be alright. In cold terrain, use a corresponding cold resilient lubricant. Problems solved in the video.
I remember seeing a video where they have an AK run over by a tank, and it can still fire without problem. M16 will probably shred into pieces with its plastic like construction.
They tested Vietnam Era M16A1 in the 60's to AK-74 in the 70's? Lame! The Russian only tested old M16 and M4. I see Larry Vickers former Delta Force tested M4 in water, dirt, mud and drop test. The M4 still can fired.
greenmarine5 You could throw the M16A2 in mud and still put rounds down range. The only difference between the A2 and A3 is they added a removable carry handle and made it fully automatic. The only difference between the A2 and A4 is that the A4 has a removable carry handle.
jozo masic Sorry but I used both m16e1s and m16A1s and theynever failed to fire when needed and would shoot all the ammo I could carry without a problem. If someone is having problems with an AR its 1. Some cheap POS and there are many out there. 2. Has some problem that needs to be fixed. 3. They try to run it dry which has not been recommended since its adoption. 4. They have not been properly instructed. So far as the Russian tests. The M1 Garand will not run if oiled and greased to normal spec at -20f. In Korea in winter and I suspect in Europe too they washed the grease and oil out with gasoline and ran them dry. Believing ANYTHING that comes out of Russia is a mistake. If the AK had not outperformed the AR someone would likely have been sent to the Gulag. But then we only got to see the edited film after all. Either platform will run like its supposed to. Saying one is a POS compared to the other shows a marked lack of understanding or experience. Even the old pencil barreled m16/SP1 guns would shoot about MOA at 100 yards. The only AR I ever owned that would not run right out of the box was one that was improperly assembled at the factory. I have owned or used at least 8 of the AR platform rifles since 1970 when I was drafted, they all worked but the one. I never dumped one in water like the commies did here and they did not follow the, dumped in water procedure everyone in the US army was taught either. Thinking that the AK is flawless is a major mistake thinking the AR is perfect is too but they are both very reliable. Might be below zero here tonight maybe I will put my AR in the tool box on my pickup over night and see if it shoots OK in the AM. But wait the Army and NG in Alaska use the AR in winter and it seems to work. Fancy that.... The Marines and SEALS get them wet.
That wasn't a 74m, it was just the basic 74. I don't think using the a1 was by choice either. Remember this was done in the cold war, they'd of had to of used a captured M16. I'd be interested in seeing the 74m going up against the a2 or a3 though. M16a4 against the AK12 could also be interesting.
Translation to comment above: This test shows the vitality of the design. The result will be the same! Regardless of the model tested, whether A1 or A4. Unnecessarily, the bolt, trigger and BGS, remained the same Courtesy Google Translate
That isn't even an m16a1. Those where the earlier produced xm16e1, which where crap because they didn't have Cromelined barrels or chambers, they weren't issued with cleaning kits, and they used crappy ammo. This rifle used was issued from 1964 to 67, and then was replaced with the improved m16a1 in 68.
+megadeth22885 Once they chrome lined it, which is standard practice & used the proper powder it functioned fine. Later variants still function the same. They just changed barrel lengths, stock configuration & other updates unrelated to the basic functioning. They did add slightly extended feed ramps on the M4 but that was very minor.
well, there are many other aspects to the AR15 that make it a poor design, the magazine design is the worst of all, straight magazine well feeding not straight cartridges tend to cause problems.. the mag release is the dumbest idea ive ever seen.. having a lever on the right side of the rifle with a simple torsion spring would have still made them drop-free with the index finger but would have been a hell of a lot simpler... and a new issue people are noticing is if you get moisture inside the current AR mag release in cold weather itll freeze itself locked so you cant remove magazines other problems are related to the operation of it.. theres nothing specifically wrong with direct impingement but the way it was implemented was over complex and added zero benefits, and the multi-lug bolt design was a bad idea carried over from earlier rifles where it should have remained.. while the idea of 7-8 lugs seems valid, in actual machining practices its statistically and mechanically impossible to machine both the bolt and the extension in a way to ensure each lug shares an equal load of the bolt thrust.. because of this a bolt that SHOULD be able to handle .308 levels of bolt thrust can BARELY handle 5.56 levels of bolt thrust because in reality 2-3 of those lugs are taking the majority of the bolt thrust while tri-podding the rest so many failures went into the foundation of the rifle that will never be fixed
to be fair no standard ar15 will out-do an ak in reliability. The only thing that comes close to or equal to are ar15s that use a notable piston driven upper. also, what was up with the "accuracy test?" everyone and their mother knows that the ar15 is way more accurate than any ak platform rifle.
I never said you can't have an accurate rifle that is based on a robust and simple gas piston system, physics just tends to agree that a long stroke gas piston system isn't the best for precision shooting.
@EndyEndy2 Translation to EndyEndy2 comment above: M16A1 no longer used, instead of the Americans mainly M16A4, and he in turn suffered a significant change in design, including increase reliability. Therefore, this comparison is - nonsense. Courtesy Google Translate
@oneothree baxter M16 is way better in america? The m16 in the video is an m16a1, which is no longer used. Now, we use the m16a4, which is much more reliable. This video is just a little outdated. Not trying to be a smartass, just tryin to make sure you dont make a biased opinion :)
Thanks for your objective feedback. Its hard to find ppl who are unbiased & reasonable nowadays. However, I do think the AK is a much more reliable system. I have owned both. I sold my Romanian AK for $500 and bought a Windham SRC for $750 out the door at a gunshow. I do regret the purchase a little. I miss the confidence and worry-free mentality I had with the AK. It was accurate enough, and the most reliable semi-auto there is. The only problem I had with it was the ergonomics. Heavy & awkward
I have never seen dropping an M16 on its mag to cause it to jam like that. Although I have never seen an M16A1 go through that test (the rifle I saw was an M16A4)
Reliability test type 3 russian or chinese vs m16a4. That would be the one for the books. I know people would complain because how much older the type 3s are but it doesnt get much better than those milled guns from then.
I spent five years in the USMC running M16A2/A4s and I experienced zero malfunctions. I firmly believe most of the problems with military m16s are magazine related, usgi mags are crap. My person AR has also never given me a problem, I dont clean her much but I tend to keep her wet. There's no telling what they did to that M16A1 in the video, I would trust their propaganda about as much as I would trust ours. Best to get your own real world experience.
theres a reason the m16 is called the matel 16 its a plastic unreliable range toy made for controlled enviroments not combat why they ever replaced the M14 in .308 with a .22 is a mystery to me and before anybody makes the weight argument id rather lug a heavy gun that works than a light gun that is gonna take 5 or 6 shots to stop the enemy
I would just like to say that we were allowed to buy Pmags (with our own money) in the Marines, and I believe the Army started to issue them to soldiers.
Совершенно верно: мне нравится думать, АК, как мачете, где AR является электрической пилы. Одним из них является более "уточнить, чем другие", но один всегда будет работать независимо от погодных условий или opperators опыта.
You can't tell from this biased video, but new AR15s are nearly as reliable as the AK series of rifles. These tests were conducted with an early M16A1, which did not have many of the enhanced reliability features that have been added to the new M16A4s
Good for you. A real AK-47 huh? Are you left handed? Did you like the extra weight the milled receiver added to the already weighty system, and less rounds you could carry? I call bullshit.
@EndyEndy2 Я бы apreciate, если бы Вы прислать мне личное сообщение с некоторыми письменными заметками о том, что люди это испытание оружия говорят о системе АР. Я могу перевести и разместить его здесь на английском языке, чтобы мы знали. Мне любопытно посмотреть, какие вещи они говорят об оружии системы. спасибо
It isn't because the tests were done by the Russians that this info is incorrect. In fact, the AK series are always more reliable if mishandled than the american made rifles such as the M16 &M4. Like arctic fighting, water, dirt, sand, mud, swamp areas, even a slight dent, the AK prevails. If you need accuracy you go for an M-series. Stopping power is also in favor of the AK even with its smaller round in the AK-74 series. In a brutal postapocalyptic world, AK wins, in 'normal' war, M-series do.
M16A1... Vietnam Era weapon and you use this for test purposes??? Odd you did not use the M16A2, A3 or the M4 variants. For those weapons have been in the system as long the AK-74.... Rigged Test....
That and the Israelis did some testing as well. The gun would get so hot that it will discharge a round. The Israelis have long since abandoned the M4, and the M16A4 for their new Tavor. Almost every NATO country have abandoned the AR platform with the exception of a few reserves and the United States.
They didn't get mud IN the barrel of the AR and the also didn't do a drop test on concrete. But yes the AR won if no dirt got inside. They didn't show what would happen if even a small bit of mud got in the bolt area.
XaviarCraig WEll, that isn't the point.....the AR-15 works well for that...however, the AK's reliability is much greater...all in Range TV do was show the poor quality of American builds...the irony as they showed that Americans just have ruin nearly everything in the gun community
INrange test was biased, just as biased as this Russian propaganda video. Karl is an AR fan boy, has no idea how to operate an AK, how many times did he dry fire the AK in that video??? He looked just as uncomfortable in that video as the Russian in this video slamming the forward bolt assist in this video. MAC has a much more balanced and more realistic AR &AK reliability test, check that one out and make descisions off of that. The INrange guys are chumps and their tests are a crock.
I think the ar test would turn out better if something like a lwrc m6 was tested. Both are great guns and both have their places on the battle field. The ak is the work horse and the ar needs to be maintained and treated well. I have both and love both of them; they are different animals.
And one more thing - the metal mags the military issued were crap, maybe still are I don't know what they issue currently. Metal mags get knocked out of shape very easily and as with all semi-autos many of the problems are because of the magazine, not the gun. That's why many soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq replaced their military-issue magazines with plastic Pmags.
@EndyEndy2 You are right about the test being done in an older model of AR systems. I just think it show one thing very clear. The AR is a very fragile platform and that the AK-74 can take a beating and still go to work the next day. Вы правы по поводу тестов проводится в старшей модели АР систем. Я просто думаю, что это показывает одно очень ясно.АР является очень хрупким и платформы, что АК-74 может занять избиения и до сих пор ходят на работу на следующий день.
The 1st gen M16 was shit but those issues were fixed and it's at least as reliable as an AK these days if not more reliable. The piston on the AK can get clogged whereas the gas system on the M16/AR cleans itself out with every shot. And the 1st gen AKs were crap too, it took years to work out the bugs which is why it wasn't until the 1950s that the AK replaced the SKS in the Soviet military.
Yup. Ive seen the old 50's and 60's Cold War conscious videos. There was a significant amount of propaganda in there. I've owned both. With my AR, Im not as concerned with dust and mud as I am with humidity. My AR has gotten plenty dirty and worked just fine. As long as you're conscious about the dust cover being closed, you're good. Weather is more of a worry to me than the environment - dry or wet.
For the record, America took only 418,500 casualties in the whole world war 2. And before you go say that America was a more tactical country and crap, Russia had won the big battles like Kursk, Stalingrad and Berlin. Compared to Russia, America was just cracking coakroches, not making war.
So what branch of the military did you say you were in? Funny I have used M16A2s and M4s variants and so far haven't given me any ga dam problem Call of Duty wannabe.... Oh and I DO own both the M4 carbine and AK-74! Both are very good weapon system wannabe GI Jane!
AR15 fanboy, explain me why the effective range of M1 and M14 officially was max 550 yards with iron s., and roughly 800 with scope, and the M16A2 is just as good ? haha that must be the magic inside the "black rifle".
I find it hard to believe that a dumb ass would deny the fact that both Rifles are from the same era and were used by Armies in the Cold War. I guess the first M16 variant came out in 1939 and the AK-74 was from the 90's.
THE AK47 FIRES 7.62X39 THEAK74 FIRES A SMALLER ROUND 5.45X39 TO GO UP AGAINST THE 5.56X45 WHICH IS WHAT U SHOOT IN A AR15 SO YES ITS A SMALL BULLET U USE WHAT U NEED DEPENDING ON THE ROLE U NEED IT FOR
I never said that ak-47 is a weapon for real soldiers i told you to stop underestiamting army that use ak-47. Ak-47 barrel really does flex a bit but you can upgrade it. At least ak-47 does not jam
I love these kind of arguments ''this is better than that'' and no explanation at all. And especially when it is about firearms most of the time the arguer has no experience nor knowledge whatsoever.
I'm glad ar 15s have improved sooooooo much hahaha Vietnam era ar's weren't no where near reliable. I own both and done these tests with both zero issue with either... ar is more of a marksmen rifle I dont understand why people people argue which ones better they both are great guns. Comparing them is like comparing a car to a bicycle. Two very different plateform for different uses. I love both!
They lost because of US help,PAID for by US tax payers.However,I can tell you about a war where the AK did wonders, Vietnam.I saw Vietnamese soldiers pull mud dripping AK's from muddy rice fields,fire every rd,reload,and the AK's fuctioned flawless.AR's would explode if you tried to do this.AR's/M16's have been getting US soldiers killed,since 1965,and it STILL suffer with malfunctions issues.For those that say "keep an AR clean,and it will function well,good luck trying this on a battlefield
Im bout to sell my AR15. An over engineered American rifle and I had problems all day. Got out class by my dad origanl AK47. FML I had faith in American rifles.
I have used or owned at least 8 different AR platform rifles since 1970, M16E1 and 2 M16A1. Other than one of the non-colt commercial versions that was sloppily assembled they all ran when needed. I seriously abused the second A1 in VN once or twice and it would only fail (one time) due to a bad magazine. Other than that it never failed to feed and never failed extract and never failed to fire. In civilian use ammo can be an issue especially handloads. My current Armalite heavy barrel runs flawlessly and will do 600 yard head shots (on paper) with my match grade ammo. Not so good with issue ammo, but still far better than the AK platform is with anything. If the AR won't run its either magazine, ammo related. The user does not know how to keep it running or its either broken/damaged or some cheap spinoff version. Cheap ARs are failure prone because of poor assembly of second quality parts. Battlefield? If I had to run an AK because of damage or out of ammo for the AR platform I would use it and its not a bad rifle. But its a "give this to the lowest common demominator and he can spray the country side with it" weapon. Sure it works but would not use it longer than I needed and would drop/destroy the thing as soon as I could find another AR and ammo.
@TheGunsoutdoorsshoot WHY GET OFFENDED ?LISTEN IF U WANT TO BE ACCURATE W A PUNY ROUND THATS FINE IF U WANT KNOCK DOWN POWER AK IF U WANT RELIABILITY AK IF U WANT ACCURACY MOUNT A FKNG SCOPE ON AN AK 47 OR 74 IF U WANT A SURPRISE JAM KEEP YOUR AR NO NEED FOR OFFENDING
This may very well be the biggest piece of propaganda horse shit I've ever seen. I've shot my M16 in all kinds of conditions and it's never done me wrong.
Matthew Taylor You've never shot a factory M16A1 before, have you? That's what they're testing. I've seen all sorts of testing for the M16, underwater and in sand conditions. They're complex design and they jam a lot more often than they do on an AK, which are a much more simpler but low tech design. I've seen AKs fire UNDER WATER, in the MUD, and all sorts of other jam-like conditions. The M16 has been known to be twice as worse with reliability and endurance, and it's been proven MANY times over. You think because it's 'MADE IN URRRRMERICA' it's more superior? No wonder everything is outsourced to Asia now. Stop with your own bullshit.
Blas Molinari Hahahaha no this is just really biased propaganda. i have both an AR and an Ak and I can say from personal experience the AR is a damn reliable weapon. Not as reliable as the AK, but it definitely is not as unreliable as in this video. It's just Russian propaganda lol. They are also using those old gray USGI mags, PMAGs are indestructible yet they don't use them for that reason.
Immortalkalashnikov ... For your clarification, AR is nothing like the M16. Different manufacturing processes, different materials, heck even the receiver is not the same. M16's aren't for civilian sale, resale, and distribution. ARs are single-fire semi-automatic rifles made by a multitude of companies, the largest being Colt Manufacturing LLC. ALSO, just so you notice, they're testing AK-47s and M16 rifles. Not your modern day AKs and M16/M4s. And even then, I've SEEN M4s jam in the mud, while the AKs kept on firing, even with friggin' sand in their bolt and receiver. If anyone's throwing bias and propaganda, it's you, my wonderfully oblivious pride-gloating ignoramus. :)
Been in the US Army, M 16's fail and fail alot. I will not own one now if it were given to me. AK 47, Glock and Remington pump are all I will own. So in my experience its AK 47 for the win
Yeah, so the bent mag of the M16a1 after it fell down is photoshoped, the water filled M16a1 that can't cycle is PS, the freezed M16a1 that can't cycle is PS... haha
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Why the guy beats the rifle? it is working properly, he released his finger, and the bolt is in locked position ready to shoot.
Just to say, as a Brit having fired many weapon systems including the AK74 and the M16A4, the depressing fact is, you can drag an AK74 through the mud and water and it will still fire. It is such a simple design that there really is naff all to go wrong. If/when it does, however rare that is, it is normally catastrophic failure...
Afghans were not even aware that you had to clean a rifle because they used AK's...
As a former 101st Airborne soldier let me tell you I hated the M4/M16 rifle. It jams like crazy under even light use and God help you if you have to put a serious amount of fire down range for any extended period of time.
Youre full of it.
Fellow vet, have to agree had nothing but trouble with AR's in the field.
Really?Ive never once had a problem with my ar,only times ar's mess up is when you treat them like shit.Must not care for it and let shit get all into the action.
The thing is in the field shit gets in there whether you let it or not. DI systems get dirty fast.
daveyjones585 There are many factors that begin to impact a weapon during long term field use. Each of these places a stress on the function of the weapon system. The AK systems perform more reliably under these diverse pressures and they do it with far less maintenance.
Been in the US Army. The M 16 is a fail. I wouldnt own one now if it was given to me. AK 47 for the win
The M16 has come a long way since the M16A1.
Test a 40-50 year old gun vs. a brand new AK
I got some guns I'm in the process of reviewing. Videos will be uploaded sometime this January. Thanks.
I feel like this is bullshit, as much I would prefer and AK over an AR, the AR isn't that bad, or at least mine isn't, I put it through hell after I finished building it, and it never jammed once.
pics or gtfo
That's OK, women also feel all kinds of things all the time, that's why grownups do all kinds of test to keep feelings about such things to women.
lol, what are you talking about?
Obviously you didn't read my entire comment.
Amadeus belle
So your home built AR tests are better then over a century of Soviet/Russian military testing standards?
OK, then how many steps does the standard automatic rifle test has according to Soviet standards?
Name them.
I don't know about Soviet "standards", both my AK and AR builds are semi auto only. And don't get me wrong, I am not saying the AR is better than the AK, as I said before, I would grab my AK before anything else.
I built the AR using all Colt A1 surplus parts minus the lower receiver which is a Milspec Stag arms lower, and a 20 inch FN barrel.
I've preformed an over the beach test, dragged it through the woods and back, and dropped it mag down on the concrete driveway. All with zero lube, and I didn't have a single issue other than cosmetic
(I only use Magpul Pmags, USGI mags are shit)
Obviously I have no way to preform a sub zero test.
Also, I know for a fact the US fakes these "side by side" tests to show our troops to give them a false sense of superiority, so there is no reason why any other country wouldn't do the same.
That would be called the AKM... Which wasn't around until 59..
Mad respect then. My experience with the AR series has been nothing but positive. Just use some PMAGS and you'll be alright. In cold terrain, use a corresponding cold resilient lubricant. Problems solved in the video.
in comparison to the weapons the tap, rack and go is deadly fast in the M16 which a loose mag test didn't get tested.
I remember seeing a video where they have an AK run over by a tank, and it can still fire without problem. M16 will probably shred into pieces with its plastic like construction.
They tested Vietnam Era M16A1 in the 60's to AK-74 in the 70's? Lame! The Russian only tested old M16 and M4. I see Larry Vickers former Delta Force tested M4 in water, dirt, mud and drop test. The M4 still can fired.
That was what an AK-74 or 74M and they put it up against an M16A1, not very fair. Put it up against an M16A3/A4.
greenmarine5 You could throw the M16A2 in mud and still put rounds down range. The only difference between the A2 and A3 is they added a removable carry handle and made it fully automatic. The only difference between the A2 and A4 is that the A4 has a removable carry handle.
greenmarine5 Unite all Europeans with the Russians? but what the hell are you talking about?
That is a fair comparison. The AK -74 came out during the time when A1 was still being issued.
jozo masic Sorry but I used both m16e1s and m16A1s and theynever failed to fire when needed and would shoot all the ammo I could carry without a problem. If someone is having problems with an AR its 1. Some cheap POS and there are many out there. 2. Has some problem that needs to be fixed. 3. They try to run it dry which has not been recommended since its adoption. 4. They have not been properly instructed. So far as the Russian tests. The M1 Garand will not run if oiled and greased to normal spec at -20f. In Korea in winter and I suspect in Europe too they washed the grease and oil out with gasoline and ran them dry. Believing ANYTHING that comes out of Russia is a mistake. If the AK had not outperformed the AR someone would likely have been sent to the Gulag. But then we only got to see the edited film after all. Either platform will run like its supposed to. Saying one is a POS compared to the other shows a marked lack of understanding or experience. Even the old pencil barreled m16/SP1 guns would shoot about MOA at 100 yards. The only AR I ever owned that would not run right out of the box was one that was improperly assembled at the factory. I have owned or used at least 8 of the AR platform rifles since 1970 when I was drafted, they all worked but the one. I never dumped one in water like the commies did here and they did not follow the, dumped in water procedure everyone in the US army was taught either. Thinking that the AK is flawless is a major mistake thinking the AR is perfect is too but they are both very reliable. Might be below zero here tonight maybe I will put my AR in the tool box on my pickup over night and see if it shoots OK in the AM. But wait the Army and NG in Alaska use the AR in winter and it seems to work. Fancy that.... The Marines and SEALS get them wet.
That wasn't a 74m, it was just the basic 74. I don't think using the a1 was by choice either. Remember this was done in the cold war, they'd of had to of used a captured M16. I'd be interested in seeing the 74m going up against the a2 or a3 though. M16a4 against the AK12 could also be interesting.
Translation to comment above:
This test shows the vitality of the design. The result will be the same! Regardless of the model tested, whether A1 or A4. Unnecessarily, the bolt, trigger and BGS, remained the same
Courtesy Google Translate
Dude those coats look badass
That isn't even an m16a1. Those where the earlier produced xm16e1, which where crap because they didn't have Cromelined barrels or chambers, they weren't issued with cleaning kits, and they used crappy ammo. This rifle used was issued from 1964 to 67, and then was replaced with the improved m16a1 in 68.
+Nelson rodriguez so youre saying the M16 was a failure in design only made passable through decades of turd polishing?
+megadeth22885 Once they chrome lined it, which is standard practice & used the proper powder it functioned fine. Later variants still function the same. They just changed barrel lengths, stock configuration & other updates unrelated to the basic functioning. They did add slightly extended feed ramps on the M4 but that was very minor.
well, there are many other aspects to the AR15 that make it a poor design, the magazine design is the worst of all, straight magazine well feeding not straight cartridges tend to cause problems.. the mag release is the dumbest idea ive ever seen.. having a lever on the right side of the rifle with a simple torsion spring would have still made them drop-free with the index finger but would have been a hell of a lot simpler... and a new issue people are noticing is if you get moisture inside the current AR mag release in cold weather itll freeze itself locked so you cant remove magazines
other problems are related to the operation of it.. theres nothing specifically wrong with direct impingement but the way it was implemented was over complex and added zero benefits, and the multi-lug bolt design was a bad idea carried over from earlier rifles where it should have remained.. while the idea of 7-8 lugs seems valid, in actual machining practices its statistically and mechanically impossible to machine both the bolt and the extension in a way to ensure each lug shares an equal load of the bolt thrust.. because of this a bolt that SHOULD be able to handle .308 levels of bolt thrust can BARELY handle 5.56 levels of bolt thrust because in reality 2-3 of those lugs are taking the majority of the bolt thrust while tri-podding the rest
so many failures went into the foundation of the rifle that will never be fixed
to be fair no standard ar15 will out-do an ak in reliability. The only thing that comes close to or equal to are ar15s that use a notable piston driven upper. also, what was up with the "accuracy test?" everyone and their mother knows that the ar15 is way more accurate than any ak platform rifle.
I never said you can't have an accurate rifle that is based on a robust and simple gas piston system, physics just tends to agree that a long stroke gas piston system isn't the best for precision shooting.
ProRussianBear Your comment is stupid, and off point. The AR is more accurate. Stupid Russian.
+btmatto The AK-12 begs to differ.
@EndyEndy2
Translation to EndyEndy2 comment above:
M16A1 no longer used, instead of the Americans mainly M16A4, and he in turn suffered a significant change in design, including increase reliability. Therefore, this comparison is - nonsense.
Courtesy Google Translate
@oneothree baxter M16 is way better in america? The m16 in the video is an m16a1, which is no longer used. Now, we use the m16a4, which is much more reliable. This video is just a little outdated. Not trying to be a smartass, just tryin to make sure you dont make a biased opinion :)
Hey why haven't you made anymore videos?
Tests or not, personal use when it matters is what is important to me!
Damn dude been a while since you put out a video. Welcome back.
Please tell me more about this documentary. I'm intrigued.
Thanks for your objective feedback. Its hard to find ppl who are unbiased & reasonable nowadays. However, I do think the AK is a much more reliable system. I have owned both. I sold my Romanian AK for $500 and bought a Windham SRC for $750 out the door at a gunshow. I do regret the purchase a little. I miss the confidence and worry-free mentality I had with the AK. It was accurate enough, and the most reliable semi-auto there is. The only problem I had with it was the ergonomics. Heavy & awkward
AK is for russian mud and winter warfare. Why comparing?
TelPrank why not?
"and had multiple changes made to production" Name these changes.
I have never seen dropping an M16 on its mag to cause it to jam like that. Although I have never seen an M16A1 go through that test (the rifle I saw was an M16A4)
Whoa, buddy. Why are you on a crusade against the AR-15?
Reliability test type 3 russian or chinese vs m16a4. That would be the one for the books. I know people would complain because how much older the type 3s are but it doesnt get much better than those milled guns from then.
Is the music from video intro taken from a Metal Gear Solid game?
Biased test,thats an original m16 fielded in the vietnam war.It had problems and failed a lot.But today the m16a4 would be on par with the ak.
They carefully forgott about mud or sand test.
And are American tests fair? We don't even include contemporary AK designs in our comparisons.
@reneql8
I agree with you. I hope they see it for what it is some food for though and not a war of the machines.
RIP Kalashnikov.
I spent five years in the USMC running M16A2/A4s and I experienced zero malfunctions. I firmly believe most of the problems with military m16s are magazine related, usgi mags are crap. My person AR has also never given me a problem, I dont clean her much but I tend to keep her wet.
There's no telling what they did to that M16A1 in the video, I would trust their propaganda about as much as I would trust ours. Best to get your own real world experience.
FAIR? FAIR YOU SAY? how about the M16A3/A4. vs. the AK12? now we talking FAIR!
uh,yeah i agree,you may have misinterpreted my comment.
jozo masic
All poor country use ak47, and no one in american army use the fucking ak period.
arianis99 Really?Then why USA make them?
giedrius laimikis Make them? We Americans can make whatever weapon we want, that doesn't mean our military uses them. You are a dumbass. XD
josh cummings So you too :P
Because it is a m16 it is not the newer model
So true.
But guess what, guns are for battles, and on field you can't do a full maintenance :)
How do ARs suck?
theres a reason the m16 is called the matel 16 its a plastic unreliable range toy made for controlled enviroments not combat why they ever replaced the M14 in .308 with a .22 is a mystery to me and before anybody makes the weight argument id rather lug a heavy gun that works than a light gun that is gonna take 5 or 6 shots to stop the enemy
I would just like to say that we were allowed to buy Pmags (with our own money) in the Marines, and I believe the Army started to issue them to soldiers.
what is name of background music?
Совершенно верно: мне нравится думать, АК, как мачете, где AR является электрической пилы. Одним из них является более "уточнить, чем другие", но один всегда будет работать независимо от погодных условий или opperators опыта.
You said "before the M16 was even a concept". You didn't say "before the M16 was fielded" In other words; you were wrong.
You can't tell from this biased video, but new AR15s are nearly as reliable as the AK series of rifles. These tests were conducted with an early M16A1, which did not have many of the enhanced reliability features that have been added to the new M16A4s
Странный тест, ни какого года выпуска образцы, ни какие патроны были использованы, короче это нельзя назвать полноценным тестом.
soon as i opened the video heard mgs 4 opening theme. i was like what a fucking lad
You call a 9 year difference "WAY" before?
Good for you.
A real AK-47 huh? Are you left handed? Did you like the extra weight the milled receiver added to the already weighty system, and less rounds you could carry?
I call bullshit.
@EndyEndy2
Я бы apreciate, если бы Вы прислать мне личное сообщение с некоторыми письменными заметками о том, что люди это испытание оружия говорят о системе АР. Я могу перевести и разместить его здесь на английском языке, чтобы мы знали. Мне любопытно посмотреть, какие вещи они говорят об оружии системы. спасибо
why not m4a1?
It isn't because the tests were done by the Russians that this info is incorrect. In fact, the AK series are always more reliable if mishandled than the american made rifles such as the M16 &M4. Like arctic fighting, water, dirt, sand, mud, swamp areas, even a slight dent, the AK prevails. If you need accuracy you go for an M-series. Stopping power is also in favor of the AK even with its smaller round in the AK-74 series. In a brutal postapocalyptic world, AK wins, in 'normal' war, M-series do.
M16A1... Vietnam Era weapon and you use this for test purposes??? Odd you did not use the M16A2, A3 or the M4 variants. For those weapons have been in the system as long the AK-74.... Rigged Test....
They're from the same era, dumbass
That and the Israelis did some testing as well. The gun would get so hot that it will discharge a round. The Israelis have long since abandoned the M4, and the M16A4 for their new Tavor. Almost every NATO country have abandoned the AR platform with the exception of a few reserves and the United States.
INrange did this test. AR-15 won.
*Tested shitty American slop parts kit
They didn't get mud IN the barrel of the AR and the also didn't do a drop test on concrete.
But yes the AR won if no dirt got inside. They didn't show what would happen if even a small bit of mud got in the bolt area.
XaviarCraig WEll, that isn't the point.....the AR-15 works well for that...however, the AK's reliability is much greater...all in Range TV do was show the poor quality of American builds...the irony as they showed that Americans just have ruin nearly everything in the gun community
INrange test was biased, just as biased as this Russian propaganda video. Karl is an AR fan boy, has no idea how to operate an AK, how many times did he dry fire the AK in that video??? He looked just as uncomfortable in that video as the Russian in this video slamming the forward bolt assist in this video. MAC has a much more balanced and more realistic AR &AK reliability test, check that one out and make descisions off of that. The INrange guys are chumps and their tests are a crock.
Joshua B well, it does have upgraded components
I think the ar test would turn out better if something like a lwrc m6 was tested. Both are great guns and both have their places on the battle field. The ak is the work horse and the ar needs to be maintained and treated well. I have both and love both of them; they are different animals.
lend-lese, never heard right?
And one more thing - the metal mags the military issued were crap, maybe still are I don't know what they issue currently. Metal mags get knocked out of shape very easily and as with all semi-autos many of the problems are because of the magazine, not the gun. That's why many soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq replaced their military-issue magazines with plastic Pmags.
@EndyEndy2
You are right about the test being done in an older model of AR systems. I just think it show one thing very clear. The AR is a very fragile platform and that the AK-74 can take a beating and still go to work the next day.
Вы правы по поводу тестов проводится в старшей модели АР систем. Я просто думаю, что это показывает одно очень ясно.АР является очень хрупким и платформы, что АК-74 может занять избиения и до сих пор ходят на работу на следующий день.
M16 < AK47/74/M < AR-15
The 1st gen M16 was shit but those issues were fixed and it's at least as reliable as an AK these days if not more reliable. The piston on the AK can get clogged whereas the gas system on the M16/AR cleans itself out with every shot. And the 1st gen AKs were crap too, it took years to work out the bugs which is why it wasn't until the 1950s that the AK replaced the SKS in the Soviet military.
AK74 began to be used at roughly the same time. It's a fair trial.
Ah yes the usual propaganda.
I doubt that the newer models would do any better: The M16 is a temperamental prima donna; happy only on firing ranges...
As long as you don't own one, you shouldnt care...
they tested the ak-74 the round is smaller
a rifle is made for all conditions
That was an old M16
It's a fair test, the AK-47 comes in the 40s and the vintage AR-15 comes out in the 50s-60s
Yup. Ive seen the old 50's and 60's Cold War conscious videos. There was a significant amount of propaganda in there. I've owned both. With my AR, Im not as concerned with dust and mud as I am with humidity. My AR has gotten plenty dirty and worked just fine. As long as you're conscious about the dust cover being closed, you're good. Weather is more of a worry to me than the environment - dry or wet.
But the m16 ist what the military uses
For the record, America took only 418,500 casualties in the whole world war 2. And before you go say that America was a more tactical country and crap, Russia had won the big battles like Kursk, Stalingrad and Berlin. Compared to Russia, America was just cracking coakroches, not making war.
Thats fine and dandy but tests are accurate and experiance can be very subjective.
So what branch of the military did you say you were in? Funny I have used M16A2s and M4s variants and so far haven't given me any ga dam problem Call of Duty wannabe.... Oh and I DO own both the M4 carbine and AK-74! Both are very good weapon system wannabe GI Jane!
AR15 fanboy, explain me why the effective range of M1 and M14 officially was max 550 yards with iron s., and roughly 800 with scope, and the M16A2 is just as good ? haha that must be the magic inside the "black rifle".
That is a fair test. Both from the same era.
M16A1 and AK-74, nope.
RussianClasher
AK-12 my friend.
ProRussianBear You must be butthurt about something. XD
josh cummings Why?
I find it hard to believe that a dumb ass would deny the fact that both Rifles are from the same era and were used by Armies in the Cold War.
I guess the first M16 variant came out in 1939 and the AK-74 was from the 90's.
THE AK47 FIRES 7.62X39 THEAK74 FIRES A SMALLER ROUND 5.45X39 TO GO UP AGAINST THE 5.56X45 WHICH IS WHAT U SHOOT IN A AR15 SO YES ITS A SMALL BULLET U USE WHAT U NEED DEPENDING ON THE ROLE U NEED IT FOR
Perhaps - Mars knows, the M-16 had nowhere to go but up...
I never said that ak-47 is a weapon for real soldiers i told you to stop underestiamting army that use ak-47. Ak-47 barrel really does flex a bit but you can upgrade it. At least ak-47 does not jam
I love these kind of arguments ''this is better than that'' and no explanation at all. And especially when it is about firearms most of the time the arguer has no experience nor knowledge whatsoever.
Well, the Russians are trained with the AK. The americans are trained more with the AR.
I'm glad ar 15s have improved sooooooo much hahaha Vietnam era ar's weren't no where near reliable. I own both and done these tests with both zero issue with either... ar is more of a marksmen rifle I dont understand why people people argue which ones better they both are great guns. Comparing them is like comparing a car to a bicycle. Two very different plateform for different uses. I love both!
They lost because of US help,PAID for by US tax payers.However,I can tell you about a war where the AK did wonders, Vietnam.I saw Vietnamese soldiers pull mud dripping AK's from muddy rice fields,fire every rd,reload,and the AK's fuctioned flawless.AR's would explode if you tried to do this.AR's/M16's have been getting US soldiers killed,since 1965,and it STILL suffer with malfunctions issues.For those that say "keep an AR clean,and it will function well,good luck trying this on a battlefield
Im bout to sell my AR15. An over engineered American rifle and I had problems all day. Got out class by my dad origanl AK47. FML I had faith in American rifles.
u mad bro?
Tell me........real soldier! What fucking branch of the military did you serve? Call of Duty? Or Battlefield 3?
I have used or owned at least 8 different AR platform rifles since 1970, M16E1 and 2 M16A1. Other than one of the non-colt commercial versions that was sloppily assembled they all ran when needed. I seriously abused the second A1 in VN once or twice and it would only fail (one time) due to a bad magazine. Other than that it never failed to feed and never failed extract and never failed to fire. In civilian use ammo can be an issue especially handloads. My current Armalite heavy barrel runs flawlessly and will do 600 yard head shots (on paper) with my match grade ammo. Not so good with issue ammo, but still far better than the AK platform is with anything. If the AR won't run its either magazine, ammo related. The user does not know how to keep it running or its either broken/damaged or some cheap spinoff version. Cheap ARs are failure prone because of poor assembly of second quality parts. Battlefield? If I had to run an AK because of damage or out of ammo for the AR platform I would use it and its not a bad rifle. But its a "give this to the lowest common demominator and he can spray the country side with it" weapon. Sure it works but would not use it longer than I needed and would drop/destroy the thing as soon as I could find another AR and ammo.
Its reliability is over rated, look at the tests and its quite evident, but its accuracy is quite underrated as well.
@TheGunsoutdoorsshoot WHY GET OFFENDED ?LISTEN IF U WANT TO BE ACCURATE W A PUNY ROUND THATS FINE IF U WANT KNOCK DOWN POWER AK IF U WANT RELIABILITY AK IF U WANT ACCURACY MOUNT A FKNG SCOPE ON AN AK 47 OR 74 IF U WANT A SURPRISE JAM KEEP YOUR AR NO NEED FOR OFFENDING
My AK has 3 firemodes; Fire, Kill the bastard and Pwn. A safety is not one of them.
Did you expect anything differently out of a Russian test.... what riffle wins wars. If the ak was that superior the US would've adopted it.
jozo masic I SMELL A TROLL!!!!!!! LOL
jozo masic
Well 99% of you russians want to get out of Russia and live in US, ur just a hater poor russian.
this isnt an ar
Only in reliability and durability....
This may very well be the biggest piece of propaganda horse shit I've ever seen. I've shot my M16 in all kinds of conditions and it's never done me wrong.
Matthew Taylor You've never shot a factory M16A1 before, have you? That's what they're testing. I've seen all sorts of testing for the M16, underwater and in sand conditions. They're complex design and they jam a lot more often than they do on an AK, which are a much more simpler but low tech design. I've seen AKs fire UNDER WATER, in the MUD, and all sorts of other jam-like conditions. The M16 has been known to be twice as worse with reliability and endurance, and it's been proven MANY times over. You think because it's 'MADE IN URRRRMERICA' it's more superior? No wonder everything is outsourced to Asia now.
Stop with your own bullshit.
Blas Molinari Hahahaha no this is just really biased propaganda. i have both an AR and an Ak and I can say from personal experience the AR is a damn reliable weapon. Not as reliable as the AK, but it definitely is not as unreliable as in this video. It's just Russian propaganda lol. They are also using those old gray USGI mags, PMAGs are indestructible yet they don't use them for that reason.
Immortalkalashnikov ... For your clarification, AR is nothing like the M16. Different manufacturing processes, different materials, heck even the receiver is not the same. M16's aren't for civilian sale, resale, and distribution. ARs are single-fire semi-automatic rifles made by a multitude of companies, the largest being Colt Manufacturing LLC. ALSO, just so you notice, they're testing AK-47s and M16 rifles. Not your modern day AKs and M16/M4s. And even then, I've SEEN M4s jam in the mud, while the AKs kept on firing, even with friggin' sand in their bolt and receiver.
If anyone's throwing bias and propaganda, it's you, my wonderfully oblivious pride-gloating ignoramus. :)
Blas Molinari They tested AK-74M, not AK-47 and M16A1.
Matthew Taylor Nonsense.
Been in the US Army, M 16's fail and fail alot. I will not own one now if it were given to me. AK 47, Glock and Remington pump are all I will own. So in my experience its AK 47 for the win
@kaak95
Вы на самом деле Россия тролля. Ваш комментарий был очень incohearent.
Yes it has.... Far, far better than the crap that was used in Vietnam.
Yeah, so the bent mag of the M16a1 after it fell down is photoshoped, the water filled M16a1 that can't cycle is PS, the freezed M16a1 that can't cycle is PS... haha