Why I abandoned the AR 15..............

Discussion of rifles, shotguns, and muzzleloaders

Re: Why I abandoned the AR 15..............

Postby Erud on Tue Jan 31, 2017 6:16 am

hard h2o wrote:
Erud wrote:Why are you measuring distance in meters, did you just move here from France or something? :cogitating:


That is the way my uncle measured his range.

I guess I could have said 1093.613 yards.


That would have been the correct measurement.
User avatar
Erud
 
Posts: 2503 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:31 am
Location: SE Metro

Re: Why I abandoned the AR 15..............

Postby goalie on Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:58 am

linksep wrote:
Shoot the 600 prone with a factory stock <$650 AR, irons, and Tula ammo and get back to me...

Gotta be apples-to-apples comparison, otherwise you're talking about different philosophy of use (there I go dropping a quote from that complete ass-hat Nutinfancy).


If someone compares a high-point 9mm to a Sig or Glock 9mm, and is asserting, after said comparison, that the High Point is "better," it isn't "unfair to make observations about said assertions and possibly refute them. And I say that as someone who hasn't seen a High-Point that didn't reliably go bang. ;)

My personal experience with the AK platform isn't one that instills tons of confidence in it. My friends who stayed in when I got out and spent time in Afghanistan damn sure didn't want to use one where target engagements often were 500+ yards. Even up close, well, I'm posing with the AK in the picture and the guy in the bunker that had the AK......

Anyhow, I didn't mean to get into a pissing contest, I just think that a lot of people have huge misconceptions about the AR platform from waaaay back when Vietnam era troops were told that they didn't have to clean the damn thing, and from more recently, where there were several instances of reliability issues related to moon dust all up in there when non-combat MOS soldiers were carrying them around without magazines in them in dusty environments etc....

I would also point out that the "reliability" of the AK was, in my experience, vastly overrated.

But, in the end, I am taking plug-and-play modular components, lighter ammo, better ergonomics, easier optic mounting options, better iron sights, and objectively better accuracy, and the resulting huge increase in effective range, every day of the week that ends in Y.

The fact that, unlike the 80's and 90's, you can buy or build a solid AR for less than an AK is just frosting and a cherry on top.
It turns out that what you have is less important than what you do with it.
User avatar
goalie
 
Posts: 3812 [View]
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 2:45 pm

Re: Why I abandoned the AR 15..............

Postby andrewP on Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:13 pm

goalie wrote:I say that as someone who hasn't seen a High-Point that didn't reliably go bang. ;)


The only Hi-Point I have any personal experience with would reliably stovepipe at least once/mag. Still can't figure out why the owner bought it - he has many guns that are actually nice...
andrewP
 
Posts: 608 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:50 am
Location: Twin Cities, MN

Re: Why I abandoned the AR 15..............

Postby yukonjasper on Mon Apr 17, 2017 9:31 am

I found this article that attempts to explain why the AK is so reliable................

http://weaponsman.com/?p=12534

The Avtomat Kalashnikova obrazets 1974g and its successors have an enviable reputation for reliability, especially under adverse conditions. There are a number of reasons for this, and we’ll go into them in some depth here. First, though, let’s say what is not a cause:
•It’s not because of blind luck.
•It’s not because the weapon is orders of magnitude better than its worldwide competitors. Indeed, by the end of WWII a very high standard of reliability had come to be expected, and weapons that did not meet this standard were mercilessly eliminated, like the Johnson M1941 and the Tokarev SVT.
•Mikhail KalashikovIt’s not because Kalashnikov the man had genius that was lacking in other men. His competitors in the field, from Browning, to the Mauser-werke engineers of the 1940s to Stoner, were certainly men of genius as well. (Heck, so were Tokarev and Johnson). He’d have been the first to tell you he was just a thinking engineer.
•It’s not because of breakthroughs. Almost every feature of the AK is recycled from somewhere else. What Kalashnikov did was synthesize them in a new way.




Deo Adjuvante Non Timendum - (with the help of God there is nothing to be afraid of)
Spectamur Agendo - (We are proven by our actions)
Non Ducor, Duco - (I am not led, I lead)
NRA Life Member
User avatar
yukonjasper
 
Posts: 5823 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: eagan

Postby goalie on Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:57 pm

My personal experience is that they are no more reliable than any other weapons platform that you put into the hands of poorly trained troops with an average IQ of 70-80 and an acute lack of toilet paper.

YMMV.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
It turns out that what you have is less important than what you do with it.
User avatar
goalie
 
Posts: 3812 [View]
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 2:45 pm

Previous

Return to Long Guns

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 8 guests

cron