For those with experience. What is the best assault rifle on the planet? or the top 2 or 3?

I think this is a fun comparison, I left fpe out as it's a dead give away.

One is 5.56 77gr tmk

Other is 7.62 M80 147gr ball ammo

T95rUag.jpg

S61ni8G.jpg
I would assume the first one is the 77 grain 5.56 because of the wind drift at 1000 yards

Pretty surprised at the similar performance otherwise. Which is which?
 
I would assume the first one is the 77 grain 5.56 because of the wind drift at 1000 yards

Pretty surprised at the similar performance otherwise. Which is which?

Bottom is black hills 5.56 77gr tmk out of a 20" barrel.
 
Bottom is black hills 5.56 77gr tmk out of a 20" barrel.
Now that is surprising. Of course there are better 30 cal projectiles, but for it to even be the clear winner in this contest as far as elevation/wind goes shows just how much performance you can squeeze out with the 77 grain projectile.

I'm definitely going to have to get some to experiment with handloading.
 
Last edited:
Now that is surprising. Of course there are better 30 cal projectiles, but for it to even be the clear winner in this contest as far as elevation/wind goes shows just how much you performance you can squeeze out with the 77 grain projectile.

I'm definitely going to have to get some to experiment with handloading.


Yeah the tmk is an awesome round.

69 tmk is excellent as well.

There are .30 cal projectiles that blow it out of the water for sure but even compared to a very popular .308 factory load 168gr smk federal gold medal match the 77gr tmk is impressive.

168 gr FGMM
V8b275o.jpg


77 tmk
S61ni8G.jpg
 
lets see here it shoots a round that is almost completely ineffective against anything thicker than plywood at medium range. is so bad at killing that .223/5.56 isn't even allowed for use in hunting medium or large game such as deer (white tailed deer average 100lbs or 150lbs for females and males respectively).

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/12/10/more-than-a-rifle-how-a-new-68mm-round-advanced-optics-will-make-soldiers-marines-a-lot-deadlier/
I've killed a few things with an m4, I'd say medium sized as well and it does work.

Given a combat situation I'd ask for an m4 any day. It's an all around good gun for fighting.
 
lets see here it shoots a round that is almost completely ineffective against anything thicker than plywood at medium range. is so bad at killing that .223/5.56 isn't even allowed for use in hunting medium or large game such as deer (white tailed deer average 100lbs or 150lbs for females and males respectively).

If what you are saying is true. all the people we dropped must have just been pretending to sleep or something right? Guess that red stuff was ketchup or something lol....
 
If what you are saying is true. all the people we dropped must have just been pretending to sleep or something right? Guess that red stuff was ketchup or something lol....
Must, not, post, helmet cam footage, of Rangers, sweeping, houses......

Guess I could just post this:
 
I'm still rather amazed that ak vs ar debates still happen. I guess I shouldn't be since there's a lot to argue about, 5.56 vs 7.62, long stroke piston vs DI.

AK is a better weapon for unintelligent masses that don't have significant training. Think peasants or child soldiers. Can't charge the gun on safe, take it off safe and now you can charge then fire. They are easy to take apart and clean. They also don't require the same level of cleaning. They are not as accurate as ars. They are probably more reliable than an ar when it comes to very high round counts. But, recoils harder because of the reciprocating mass being above the bore. Not conducive to rails. I would never trust a rail on an ak for holding zero. Harder to build, which is amazing to say.

The AR is a better weapon for specialized forces that have been trained up. More accurate and a closed system makes it harder to get dirty compared to the AK's. Weighs less. Keep the dust cover closed and you will be hard pressed to get dirt in it. You have the rail on flat top receivers that is basically the gold standard at this point. Infinite customization. Switch out the upper receiver to a 300 black out and you have an amazing suppressed rifle. Switch out the upper receiver to a 20 inch SPR and you can have a sub moa gun at distance. 5.56 is probably not as effective at killing at distance than 7.62x39, but it has a longer battlesight zero. Which probably matters a great deal more than wounding at 300 yards. This is of course ignoring the fact that swapping out a 5.56 upper to a 7.62 x 39 upper is trivial. The AR platform uses the 7.62x39 round better than an AK platform. It might need more care than an AK...but I am just going by the fact that other people say that. I've heard a lot of really quality ARs going thousands of rounds between cleanings and being just fine.

I think the difference maker between which is better is how smart/trained the person who will own it is.
 
I'm still rather amazed that ak vs ar debates still happen. I guess I shouldn't be since there's a lot to argue about, 5.56 vs 7.62, long stroke piston vs DI.

AK is a better weapon for unintelligent masses that don't have significant training. Think peasants or child soldiers. Can't charge the gun on safe, take it off safe and now you can charge then fire. They are easy to take apart and clean. They also don't require the same level of cleaning. They are not as accurate as ars. They are probably more reliable than an ar when it comes to very high round counts. But, recoils harder because of the reciprocating mass being above the bore. Not conducive to rails. I would never trust a rail on an ak for holding zero. Harder to build, which is amazing to say.

The AR is a better weapon for specialized forces that have been trained up. More accurate and a closed system makes it harder to get dirty compared to the AK's. Weighs less. Keep the dust cover closed and you will be hard pressed to get dirt in it. You have the rail on flat top receivers that is basically the gold standard at this point. Infinite customization. Switch out the upper receiver to a 300 black out and you have an amazing suppressed rifle. Switch out the upper receiver to a 20 inch SPR and you can have a sub moa gun at distance. 5.56 is probably not as effective at killing at distance than 7.62x39, but it has a longer battlesight zero. Which probably matters a great deal more than wounding at 300 yards. This is of course ignoring the fact that swapping out a 5.56 upper to a 7.62 x 39 upper is trivial. The AR platform uses the 7.62x39 round better than an AK platform. It might need more care than an AK...but I am just going by the fact that other people say that. I've heard a lot of really quality ARs going thousands of rounds between cleanings and being just fine.

I think the difference maker between which is better is how smart/trained the person who will own it is.
There's also this:


The gun has improved exponentially since it's early adaptation. My dad carried some of the first AR patterned rifles during his time in Vietnam before he opted to be the 12 gauge and BAR guy and he HATED the damn things cause they were so unreliable. He shot mine and had a shit eating grin the whole time till he shot my buddy's Daniel Defense one then talked shit about my built AR for being heavy as fuck.
 
There's also this:


The gun has improved exponentially since it's early adaptation. My dad carried some of the first AR patterned rifles during his time in Vietnam before he opted to be the 12 gauge and BAR guy and he HATED the damn things cause they were so unreliable. He shot mine and had a shit eating grin the whole time till he shot my buddy's Daniel Defense one then talked shit about my built AR for being heavy as fuck.

In my experience, even my first gen home made ARs have been reliable enough to trust with my life. I have shoot thousands of rounds without much issue in the way of FTF, FTE etc and I am the one that likes to run a gun without lube, see how dirty it needs to be, so I can see exactly how it will run in adverse conditions.

The platform is amazing in a lot of ways. It would not have stood the test of time if it was terrible.

Certainly the design has advanced considerably. But just look at how many things stay the same. The difference between an M16A1 and M4A1 is almost trivial. They are practically the same gun, with the M4A1 having an adjustable stock and a shorter barrel. Yes I realize it's more than that, but it's nothing crazy like the difference between an AKM and AN94.

Makes you wonder how different the reputation for reliability would be if the gun wasn't more or less sabotaged in the first place. So many issues in getting this gun into vietnam soldier's hands. No cleaning kits. They were told the gun was self cleaning. Using a powder for the ammunition that was not used in testing.

If the M1 garand was allowed to work with the BAR mags like it was originally intended for, I doubt the M14 ever comes to existence. Interesting timeline to say the least.
 
In my experience, even my first gen home made ARs have been reliable enough to trust with my life. I have shoot thousands of rounds without much issue in the way of FTF, FTE etc and I am the one that likes to run a gun without lube, see how dirty it needs to be, so I can see exactly how it will run in adverse conditions.

The platform is amazing in a lot of ways. It would not have stood the test of time if it was terrible.

Certainly the design has advanced considerably. But just look at how many things stay the same. The difference between an M16A1 and M4A1 is almost trivial. They are practically the same gun, with the M4A1 having an adjustable stock and a shorter barrel. Yes I realize it's more than that, but it's nothing crazy like the difference between an AKM and AN94.

Makes you wonder how different the reputation for reliability would be if the gun wasn't more or less sabotaged in the first place. So many issues in getting this gun into vietnam soldier's hands. No cleaning kits. They were told the gun was self cleaning. Using a powder for the ammunition that was not used in testing.

If the M1 garand was allowed to work with the BAR mags like it was originally intended for, I doubt the M14 ever comes to existence. Interesting timeline to say the least.
Any FTF instances I've had with home put together ARs is either user error in putting it together... (screw fell out of gas block and it moved it's self forward so it was ejecting but not pushing the bolt far enough back to feed) OR the magazine is shit (fuck hexmags, never had one feed properly in like 4 different ARs.)
 
AR
AK

I’m putting the BAR as my number 1 lol
 
In America it's the AR15. If you're a commie your tastes may vary.


lol


That aside.. I’ve seen enough stress tests at this point now to say that the answer here really depends. Both the AR and AK hold up well under extreme conditions and are proven designs.


If you’re looking for range and accuracy I’d say the AR.. if you’re looking for something you can bury in mud, unearth it after a week and light it but fire without it misfiring..? The AK 47, accept no substitute.


Also, if you’re one of those tac guys that likes to trick his gun out like it’s your mud truck.. it’s the AR
 
lol


That aside.. I’ve seen enough stress tests at this point now to say that the answer here really depends. Both the AR and AK hold up well under extreme conditions and are proven designs.


If you’re looking for range and accuracy I’d say the AR.. if you’re looking for something you can bury in mud, unearth it after a week and light it but fire without it misfiring..? The AK 47, accept no substitute.


Also, if you’re one of those tac guys that likes to trick his gun out like it’s your mud truck.. it’s the AR
oddly enough, considering how closed up the AR is, you'd probably find one of them in better operating condition after being buried for a week than an AK....
 
oddly enough, considering how closed up the AR is, you'd probably find one of them in better operating condition after being buried for a week than an AK....

Exactly, close the dust cover and essentially it's completely sealed less the muzzle...
 
Problem with the AK is if you have the safety disengaged and something gets behind the bolt carrier.
I used to have an Arsenal in 7.62x39. I'm surprised that it seems like it's easier to use for lefties (I don't have to reach over the receiver to disengage the safety).
 
Last edited:
oddly enough, considering how closed up the AR is, you'd probably find one of them in better operating condition after being buried for a week than an AK....





Both are good, reliable, and proven designs. I haven’t personally stress tested them myself so all I have to go off of is reading, talking to people who have been around them enough, and videos. I’m sure that’s what most of us are working with tbh
 
Last edited:
Both are good, reliable, and proven designs. I haven’t personally stress tested them myself so all I have to go off of is reading, talking to people who have been around them enough, and videos. I’m sure that’s what most of us are working with tbh

I see you edited this.

fpAZ4vR.jpg

sQ0xy4I.jpg


You close the dust cover it is basically a closed system if you were to bury it. The internals would be pretty much dirt free.
 
I see you edited this.

fpAZ4vR.jpg

sQ0xy4I.jpg


You close the dust cover it is basically a closed system if you were to bury it. The internals would be pretty much dirt free.



I’m not arguing that an AR isn’t a reliable rifle, I do believe an AK is more reliable and can take overall more punishment tho. Not sure why you’d argue different if that’s the point of this back and forth. The AK and AR are pretty much the two best rifles you can get with both having slight advantages in different areas while still being strong in most areas, if not all.
 
Back
Top