3 ms·

i'm sure lack of reliability is part of their business plan. You make the perfect humvee, and suddenly the army stops buying as many. There is a reason the AK4

by vaksel 17y ago

i'm sure lack of reliability is part of their business plan. You make the perfect humvee, and suddenly the army stops buying as many. There is a reason the AK47 is so much more reliable than the M16. And it's been out for like 60 years now.

likpok 17y ago
The AK is more reliable because it is less accurate. The tolerances on the various mechanical parts are higher, but as a result they are looser.
- malkia 17y ago
  AK is the Perl of the weapons. I had to use AK-47 for year (serving in the Bulgarian army). It was easy to clean, assemble, disassemble, but every weapon was a bit-off due to the production (or heavy usage, don't know). So to get good results you have to learn where your weapon strays.
  - roundsquare 17y ago
    How much does that affect a user? I mean, if you take the time to learn how much it strays, are you at that point just as accurate as someone with a more accurate weapon? I've never used a gun so I'm curious.
    - gaius 17y ago
      All rifles do this a bit; snipers/designated marksmen get very accustomed to their personal weapons, and need to take time to re-acclimatize with any other rifle. For a regular line infantryman in a modern army who is mainly using his rifle for suppressive fire it doesn't significantly reduce his effectiveness.
      - apgwoz 17y ago
        I'm guessing this is why the Riflemen's Creed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Creed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Creed) is so important?
        eru 17y ago
        I'd say indoctrination plays a part as well.
    - TallGuyShort 17y ago
      In real close-to-mid-range combat, this matters even less (unless you're a marksman). It's rare that you'd have time to properly line up the sights and take one really good shot. What really matters in that situation is knock-down power, reliability, and the shooter's training.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    They are also stupid easy to manufacture. The design has been copied numerous times as well. Basically, they are the Honda Civics of military weapons. Cheap, easy to use, reliable, easy and cheap to fix when they do break, and lasts forever. I've seen AKs in 3rd world countries that were probably less than 20% original parts.
- rdtsc 17y ago
  That's part of the design. Judging by the use and adoption of AK-47 I'd say it is a better weapon in general than M16. Usually an inacurate weapon is better than a stuck weapon when the soldier is facing an enemy.
  - stcredzero 17y ago
    The M16 would've been fine, if the brass hadn't skimped on the propellant.
    - xsmasher 17y ago
      If the AK fires fine with cheap powder, then that's another advantage for tightwad armies.
bootload 17y ago
"... There is a reason the AK47 is so much more reliable than the M16 ..." There is nothing worse than "language" or "editor" wars, except maybe arguments over "weapon of choice" ~ http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/m16-vs-ak47-iraqi-viewpoints/ http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/m16-vs-ak47-iraqi-...
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- jimbokun 17y ago
  I could hardly find a single person in that discussion advocating for an M16 over an AK47.
  - bootload 17y ago
    "... I could hardly find a single person in that discussion advocating for an M16 over an AK47. ..." I wouldn't expect too many combat vets to be hanging around HN (or the NYT blog). "... Becca: early issued M16 had jamming problems...by the time I got to Nam thing were worked out and the 16 wasa great piece ..." It's not wise to take the advice of non-experts, "Doc" is so I listen to him ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/13184821@N07/4011451162/in/set-72157601943765946/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/13184821@N07/4011451162/in/set-... (read the comments)

by vaksel 17y ago

likpok 17y ago

The AK is more reliable because it is less accurate. The tolerances on the various mechanical parts are higher, but as a result they are looser.

malkia 17y ago
AK is the Perl of the weapons. I had to use AK-47 for year (serving in the Bulgarian army). It was easy to clean, assemble, disassemble, but every weapon was a bit-off due to the production (or heavy usage, don't know). So to get good results you have to learn where your weapon strays.
- roundsquare 17y ago
  How much does that affect a user? I mean, if you take the time to learn how much it strays, are you at that point just as accurate as someone with a more accurate weapon? I've never used a gun so I'm curious.
  - gaius 17y ago
    All rifles do this a bit; snipers/designated marksmen get very accustomed to their personal weapons, and need to take time to re-acclimatize with any other rifle. For a regular line infantryman in a modern army who is mainly using his rifle for suppressive fire it doesn't significantly reduce his effectiveness.
    - apgwoz 17y ago
      I'm guessing this is why the Riflemen's Creed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Creed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Creed) is so important?
      - eru 17y ago
        I'd say indoctrination plays a part as well.
  - TallGuyShort 17y ago
    In real close-to-mid-range combat, this matters even less (unless you're a marksman). It's rare that you'd have time to properly line up the sights and take one really good shot. What really matters in that situation is knock-down power, reliability, and the shooter's training.
- elblanco 17y ago
  They are also stupid easy to manufacture. The design has been copied numerous times as well. Basically, they are the Honda Civics of military weapons. Cheap, easy to use, reliable, easy and cheap to fix when they do break, and lasts forever. I've seen AKs in 3rd world countries that were probably less than 20% original parts.
rdtsc 17y ago
That's part of the design. Judging by the use and adoption of AK-47 I'd say it is a better weapon in general than M16. Usually an inacurate weapon is better than a stuck weapon when the soldier is facing an enemy.
- stcredzero 17y ago
  The M16 would've been fine, if the brass hadn't skimped on the propellant.
  - xsmasher 17y ago
    If the AK fires fine with cheap powder, then that's another advantage for tightwad armies.

bootload 17y ago

"... There is a reason the AK47 is so much more reliable than the M16 ..." There is nothing worse than "language" or "editor" wars, except maybe arguments over "weapon of choice" ~ http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/m16-vs-ak47-iraqi-viewpoints/ http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/m16-vs-ak47-iraqi-...

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
jimbokun 17y ago
I could hardly find a single person in that discussion advocating for an M16 over an AK47.
- bootload 17y ago
  "... I could hardly find a single person in that discussion advocating for an M16 over an AK47. ..." I wouldn't expect too many combat vets to be hanging around HN (or the NYT blog). "... Becca: early issued M16 had jamming problems...by the time I got to Nam thing were worked out and the 16 wasa great piece ..." It's not wise to take the advice of non-experts, "Doc" is so I listen to him ~ http://www.flickr.com/photos/13184821@N07/4011451162/in/set-72157601943765946/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/13184821@N07/4011451162/in/set-... (read the comments)