http://rawstory.com/news/2007/PBS_Guns_of_US_Soldiers_in_0924.html i have seen even ak47 jamming cant they just modify the m4 with HK also isnt the m16 more accurate.

I would take the AK over the M16/AR any day. The M16s are fussy and jam alot, as well as you have to keep them very clean..with the AK you can throw them around in the dirt and sand and keep blasting.

You may keep blasting with that Ak of yours, but I would shoot a round in your thigh from nine hundred meters with my M4 and it would come out your back after tumbling through your entestines.

Oh my, where to start?

I should leave this one alone................

..........but I just can't

Gungirl05....no. The m16 family is trucking along perfectly fine here in the sandbox. I have repaired more AK's from the Georgian Army than US Army M16's. Don't fall for the old hype.

blackbelt989...whilst I shall not question your marksmanship, I will question your grasp of velocity degredation and terminal ballistics. No, at 900m the 62gr bullet fired from an M4 into the human leg will have about as much effect as stabbing them with a pencil.

(and it's "intestines", as in "internal")

SnB,
I agree with you on the effectiveness of the M16/M4. What I have been questioning is the terminal ballistics of the SS109 "Green Tip" ammo that most use. With a steel penitrator, it was designed for Soviet body armor back in my day. (I retired in '86). Seems to me, it might be like a super clean ball wound from that stuff when not wearing armor. What are you seeing on the ground? I would like to hear your observations.

I figured that is why a lot of the SpecOps teams are using the Mk 262 77 gr. that Black Hills designed.

S/F
Finger

quote:

Originally posted by blackbelt989:
You may keep blasting with that Ak of yours, but I would shoot a round in your thigh from nine hundred meters with my M4 and it would come out your back after tumbling through your entestines.

The SF use the heavier bullet for longer range shooting in the ATO. One team here in southern Iraq had me modify the feed ramps on their M4's, as the longer bullet was having trouble making the abrupt jump from mag to chamber. I told them that they are getting no better performance from the short barrels and heavy bullets, then they would shooting standard ammo. Local team may even go back to the 55gr just to see "what if".

I love it when my plan comes together!

The 62gr here in Iraq does just fine. Bad guys drop when hit center mass, or head shot.

So what would be a good bullet weight for long range AR shooting?

I see a lot of people mention a 75 or 77 grain bullet. But I'm not sure if any are standard or which is more popular..

back in OIF 3, we had 62 grain and 55 grain, 55 seemed better for closer ranges but the 62 has better penatration

Hmm, where to start?

AK vs M16...I've only ever had to fire the M16 at the range (the new mags helped with that) and the only time I ever had it jam was when I wasnt shooting it. The bolt had become so packed with fine sand (more like powder) that I had to wrestle with it to clear the weapon. I have not fired more than a few rounds out of an AK, so I cant comment on its reliability.

As to 900m shooting with anything...the front sight post is about as wide as a man size silhouette at 300yds; at 900m, the front site would completely cover your target. At that distance it would probably be travelling at less than 1000fps and would have dropped about 30+ feet.

Not so sure that a bullet travelling at just slightly less than the speed of sound is as innocuous as a pencil though; its still travelling about as fast as a 22LR at the muzzle.

As to the SS109 being issued to penetrate soviet body armor...it's not an AP round,just a lead bullet with a steel tip.

Congrats to SnB on the promotion, unfortunately, it seems you are back "over there." Take advantage of the tax free reenlistment bonus if you can.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: PrinceofThieves,

quote:

Originally posted by PrinceofThieves:
Congrats to SnB on the promotion, unfortunately, it seems you are back "over there."

Hardly unfortunate. I worked nearly two years to get back here, wholly volunteer.

Thank you!

The AK is a "Turd" World rifle. It was designed so any moron can shoot it. To me it's worthless over 200 meters. Give me the M16 family over the AK any time.

Iraqi Army to Ditch AK-47s for M-16s

In a move that could be the most enduring imprint of U.S. influence in the Arab world, American military officials in Baghdad have begun a crash program to outfit the entire Iraqi army with M-16 rifles.

The initiative marks a sharp break for a culture steeped in the traditions of the Soviet-era AK-47 Kalashnikov assault rifle, a symbol of revolutionary zeal and third-world simplicity that is ubiquitous among the militaries of the Middle East.

"We in the U.S. know that the M-16 is superior to the AK ... it's more durable," said Army Col. Stephen Scott, who's in charge of helping the Iraqi army get all the equipment it needs to outfit its forces.

More at:

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,162878,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl

And they aren't the only ones:

President dumps Kalashnikov for US rifle

EX-SOVIET Georgia's army began to switch from the Russian-designed Kalashnikov to the modern US M4 rifle, pro-Western president-elect Mikheil Saakashvili announced.

"Today is a historic day for the Georgian armed forces: we start to switch to Western armament. From today, we will use the best weapon in the world - the M4 assault rifle," Mr Saakashvili told troops at a new military base at Gori, in the north of the strategic former Soviet republic.

More at:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23075712-23109,00.html

Stars is right. The SS109 has been shown to have the ability to go through both sides of a Kevlar helmet at 1000 meters when fired from a 249 (FN proved it in 87) saying that its like being shot with an ice pick.

- To me it's worthless over 200 meters.
Puffboy it time you read up on some ballistics and military doctrine past and present. First when the round fired from an AKM is ballistically identical to the Winchester .30-.30. Which coincidentally out to 100 meters is identical to the 7.62 NATO round! Lots of killing power.

Saying that look at military doctrine and how combat is conducted. You will never be engaging the enemy further than 150 meters on probably 99% of all engagements and then it would be with machinegun fire, Mortars etc. Since the M-16A2 has a max effective range of about 600 meters you won’t be in range anyway. Just wasting ammo. AND forget that stupid crap about the bullet tumbling. That started in Nam because the bullet travels and spins very fast and has on very rare occasions bounced around inside people when someone was hit at extremely close range. At 900 meters the 5.56 bullet has lost so much of its velocity that tumbling AFTER impact would not happen

The 5.56 (and Russian 5.54) theoretically work under the principle of Hydrostatic Shock.
The bullet is traveling at such a fast speed that when it impacts with soft tissue a shock wave will travel through the tissue rupturing cell walls and thus cause massive fatal injuries. News Flash – it doesn’t work most of the time and when it does it is the result of a very short (< 20 meter engagement range). In fact the 5.54 does inflict this type of injury more reliably but still not to the level of the theoretical probability. The 7.62 just does massive damage at normal engagement ranges. It also has the ability to kill effectively while employed in the plunging fire harassment mode. A yound girl was accidentally killed at Carolwinds waterpark at Charlette NC in 1985 or 86 by an AK round fire 1 ½ miles away.


BTW When I was on active duty I was the best shot I new of with the M-16A1 . I shot 40 out of 40 for qualification right handed and switched sides and usually shot 34 out of 40 shooting left handed with the same weapon without adjusting the sites. I also could knock down a man sized target at 500 meters while in a standing unsupported position. And in case you are wondering why I didn’t go sniper I was an officer and I’d be stuck behind a desk. Anyone who claims to be able to shoot someone at 900meters is maybe stretching their abilities just a tad.

The M16 / M4 is not as described in the article. I'd take an M16 over an AK anytime because it is a highly quality rifle, it doesn't jam as the article suggest, only jamb I encountered was when fire blanks stateside, never had a problem w/live rounds. The AK having full auto is not a benefit but a curse, its better to fire well aimed shots than spray and pray, 3-round burst works just fine.
my $.02

Boy, this is an old debate but it comes up regularly. I own an AK-103 clone and not a M4 or M16 clone. First reason is economics, much cheaper to buy the imported weapon even modified to conform with 18 USC 922. Second, nostalia for the Evil Empire's black gun. Third, it is reliable and accurate enough for my intended uses, which is urban combat. However I would never argue that it is more accurate than a M16 variant. More reliable possibly but not more accurate. The issue of reliability has to do more with maintenance and training than anything else. Since the US Armed Forces are properly trained this seldom becomes an issue. Only idiots who don't listen to what their instructors told them routinely have jamming problems with their M16/M4's. Overall most new modern military arms when regularly maintained are adequate for combat. There are few Reisings or other poorly designed weapons adopted by armies anymore. It becomes a matter of preference then which "black gun" anyone uses.

If I was to choice a rifle/caliber it would be the AR15 50.cal Beowulf as my choice but you guys have your own type of rifle and caliber but i love my option

quote:

Originally posted by Gungirl05:
I would take the AK over the M16/AR any day. The M16s are fussy and jam alot, as well as you have to keep them very clean..with the AK you can throw them around in the dirt and sand and keep blasting.

If I was in charge of putting use of weapons in USMC,US Army and US Navy I would have the 50.cal Beowulf, and the 450.caliber. Done both are better than a .223 or 308 round together

And what other weapon are you going to carry if you have to shoot someone more than 50 yards away? You'll need one.
Both those rounds have the ballistic coefficient of a 55 gallon barrel. Impressive at close range, but they shed velocity real quick. And, the trajectory looks like a rainbow.