Balance issues (AK, M16, M14)
- Thread starter Perun58
- Start date
It seems you're lumping both mechanical accuracy in with practical accuracy in the same boat. The ergonomics on the AK are better than most people seem to think it is, and the inline stock of the M16 does nothing for accuracy, that helps with follow up shots. The sights on the AK are the only only thing that has any real tangible effect on your practical accuracy as they're harder to use with precision than the M16's aperture sight.2dfrog;n2296056 said:
But in any case I think we all seem to agree that regardless of how less accurate the AK is to the M16 the AK's inaccuracy seems to be a little too exaggerated in the game.
It's very much on topic.IrishHitman79;n2295938 said:
1. I had to assume you were talking about barrel length because otherwise your comment would be even more dumb than before.
2. Again, you don't get to spoof the record with M21...etc. You're just regurgitating what you saw on wikipedia.
If you continue to harp on about M14 being in a warehouse somewhere or EBR/EMR then I can always say M1 Garand is in service longer due to ceremonial purposes.
You're wrong and your lack of knowledge is blatant. There is no room for your lies here.
2dfrog;n2296056 said:
Tighter tolerance by how much? (last I checked 4.5moa is still accepted for M16 in U.S. service)
Did you know that an AK won't function properly if piston/gasblock tolerance is off by a little? (why U.S. made "AK" wannabe tends to be ****, aside from ****ty cast trunnions and other smaller problems, like IO and Century ****)
What about milled receiver AK? Have you considered the thicker barrel and solid(less flex when firing) receiver of older AK?
AK stock angle changed by AKM but developers failed to put that onto the model.
Last edited:
What are you even trying to argue here? That the AK somehow has tighter tolerances than an AR? Yes, a poorly made gun will often perform poorly, to the surprise of absolutely no one here. That doesn't make the AK more accurate than an M16. "Loose tolerances" does not mean you can just blindly cobble together a bunch of parts and get a working gun.ComradeHX;n2296136 said:
You can make an accurate AK, but it is a lot easier to make an accurate AR. Disagreeing with that is simply being a damn contrarian.
And I own a milled AK(Bulgarian parts kit build), a milled receiver can lend itself to a slightly more accurate rifle but it absolutely does not guarantee it.
Last edited:
No one is taking into consideration that the user of a rifle is more accurate then the rifle. Americans have fought in gun battles since the dawn of time, their ancestors shot muskets accurately at 100 yards. Please do not make the A.K more accurate for one simple reason, the gooks cant aim as accurately as an American. Now before you jump on the sjw bandwagon and scream racist because your big brother lives in your basement and has antifa gear on its simply logistics. Americans can fire 12 million rounds in basic training each and not give one F%$# why? well because MURICA!!! Second reason, all guns are either hand me downs from ww2, knock offs or half broken for the gooks, the round eyes have the latest battle rifles with cleaning materials, do you think the gooks had oil and brushes for their Kalashnikovs lol. The game is good, you supposed to be laser accurate as a G.I as they only lost 80 000 men, the V.C lost upwards of 500 000 men. The game is realistic in this matter, honestly take a mosin if you want accuracy. Plus honestly the A.K is accurate enough what you have t do on full AUTO is hold the soot button and slide your mouse down to pull it back from autistic recoil, kind of like pulling the reigns on a horse,
Jagdwyre;n2296158 said:
That's your made up argument.
It's only "a lot easier" in U.S. where AR part is plentiful. The amount of tooling required makes AR a harder weapon to build elsewhere, even though you can assemble it easier by hand if you had the parts.
What I'm arguing against is simply the assumption that possibility of tighter tolerance means better accuracy.
Again, acceptable accuracy of AR even today iirc is 4.5moa; I would like to see solid data on how "bad" a Russian-made AK really is back in Vietnam war.
So what are you trying to say?
6MILLIONPIES;n2296201 said:
I'm going to stop your diatribe right there.
First of all, you got it backwards; user of a rifle is generally less accurate than the rifle.
And dawn of time? Earliest example of firearm is Chinese.
Americans shoot accurately -> iirc 20,000 bullets average per kill for Vietnam.
Clearly, in general, Americans do not shoot accurately. (assuming some of them, drafted early ancestors of SJWs, even shoot to kill instead of fire in a random direction) Just like everyone else.
Nobody asked to make AK more accurate...
Fyi, there's a lot more that kills people than simply performance of rifles or shooters.
(such as vast differences in number, Northern side overall was outnumbered around 1 to 4; talk about human-wave attack, eh?)
Also, simply pulling down on AK doesn't really work because it jumps sideways(which is wrong, it should have a right-side bias); this is not about fullauto accuracy, this is about semi-auto accuracy.
M14 is far from latest(being a dressed up Garand) and gooks have AKM(a very modern rifle for that time).
Gooks would have brushes because those(entire cleaning kit) are held in the stock of rifle, and cleaning rod is right under the barrel.
As for condition of AK handed down to gooks; Guess what Type 56 stands for. They're pretty new. These are sent to NVA by Russia and China to tell America a giant "FU," not just profitting off some peasants' money(which they don't have).
You need to eat more rice; all that bacon is fattening your brain.
Last edited:
If you've ever seen an AK vs M16 fired in slow motion, or better yet actually taken them apart, OR better still fired plenty of examples of both, well then you'll learn why on average the AR-15 is quite noticably more accurate.
What made/makes std. service AK's, Chinese or Russian made, less accurate than std. service M16's (or other AR-15 platforms) comes down mostly to tolerances and weight of moving parts, whilst ammunition quality obviously also plays a part. In all cases the AK is at a disadvantage when it comes to accuracy as:
1. Its looser tolerances creates play
2. The heavier weight of it's bolt carrier and gas piston creates stronger vibrations & recoil
3. The lower quality ammunition exacerbates vertical stringing
Oh and finally one big crucial mechanical reason that makes AK overall less accurate even if all of the above was solved (it never will be, because it's part of the design), is the trigger pull - std. service AK's feature quite a heavy & creepy trigger pull.
What made/makes std. service AK's, Chinese or Russian made, less accurate than std. service M16's (or other AR-15 platforms) comes down mostly to tolerances and weight of moving parts, whilst ammunition quality obviously also plays a part. In all cases the AK is at a disadvantage when it comes to accuracy as:
1. Its looser tolerances creates play
2. The heavier weight of it's bolt carrier and gas piston creates stronger vibrations & recoil
3. The lower quality ammunition exacerbates vertical stringing
Oh and finally one big crucial mechanical reason that makes AK overall less accurate even if all of the above was solved (it never will be, because it's part of the design), is the trigger pull - std. service AK's feature quite a heavy & creepy trigger pull.
Last edited:
Just a little video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YNOt-UHIyY
Also watch how easy it is to transition from target to target with the peep sight in real life. Why is that? Because in real life the damn aperture opens up almost completely so that there's only a small part of the edge still visible, providing you with excellent FOV. So come on AMG, let's have this fixed!
PS: I noticed ingame that the MAT 49's front post becomes 50% see through once DOF kicks in, go try it out for yourself gents, so there's definitely a way to create the same effect for the rear aperture as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YNOt-UHIyY
Also watch how easy it is to transition from target to target with the peep sight in real life. Why is that? Because in real life the damn aperture opens up almost completely so that there's only a small part of the edge still visible, providing you with excellent FOV. So come on AMG, let's have this fixed!
PS: I noticed ingame that the MAT 49's front post becomes 50% see through once DOF kicks in, go try it out for yourself gents, so there's definitely a way to create the same effect for the rear aperture as well.
Last edited:
Unus Offa said:
Cheap, non-premium, U.S. made AK clone shooting ****ty wolf ammo... Sub-2 MOA:
https://youtu.be/ULWb-83QW_c?t=2m58s
Yes, barrels flex...etc.; that's why I mentioned thicker barrel and milled receiver(which can be implemented if developers cared about details).
Again, standard service M16's acceptable accuracy is up to 4.5moa, do send hard data proving Vietnam M16 has sub-2moa if you want to actually make a case for M16 accuracy.
Next.
Last edited:
Gladius;n2296385 said:
Exactly, I'm thinking it's a mistake, however if it can be done with the front then it can be done with the rear as well.
ComradeHX;n2296420 said:
Commercial wolf ammo is still better than Russian or Chinese surplus. Also what exactly do you know in regards to how "cheap" and "non premium" said AK is compared to the mass produced eastern block examples? The answer is YOU DON'T. Heck have you ever even once operated said firearms or are you just another one of those keyboard warriors who pretends to know everything??
Infact just by looking at that AK I an spot a multitude of upgrades, incl. a new barrel and a custom muzzle brake, and for all I know said US made clone might have a custom trigger as well. Furthermore I'm pretty damn sure it was made to tighter tolerances than the std. service AK as well. Manufacturing tech has moved on quite abit since the 1950's & 60's afterall.
Show me a 1950's or 1960's AK accuracy test and then we can talk.
Please do provide actual barrel circumference measurements, then I can quite quickly tell you wether or not it matters.
All this proves is that you don't understand/know that a 4.5 MOA acceptance std. is quite normal for service rifles, similar standards were used for bolt action rifles in WW2. All it's there for is to ensure that no rifle leaves the factory without atleast placing all shots within said size circle. IIRC there was no such quality control from the AK factories, now what does that tell you?
So yeah, neeeext.
Last edited:
Unus Offa said:
There is nothing about wolf ammo that suggests it's better than milsurp(unless you don't clean your guns when you shoot corrosive ammo). Except for maybe producing slightly less recoil due to some being underloaded.
I know plenty because I know people who build AK with import parts straight from Russia(not simply because it's Russian, but because it's good) and that even WASR10 quality is a lot better than you expect.
Chinese AK variant being one of highest quality AK clone you can buy on the market also helps.
These civilian versions aren't even using the best parts they have.
Yes I have operated said firearms if you consider any 7.62x39 AK variant/clone to be similar enough.
Your bias is blantant; you probably think AK are built to standards of wartime T-34 or something.
922r compliance.Unus Offa said:
Also, Tapco G2(which I assume is the "custom" one you are referring to) is heavily based off a Bulgarian trigger group.
Regardless, you most likely only get worse groupings on original trigger groups because you aren't used to it.
And no, you don't know; there's a reason why Saiga is still one of most sought-after AK variant even before import restriction.
You provide your data first.Unus Offa said:
Unus Offa said:
You didn't remember anything.
Just because you don't know it exists that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
From what I have seen both from youtube and elsewhere of decent-quality AK variants/clones they mostly do about 2-4moa (pretty common for Yugo ones to be 3moa, WASR somewhere between 2-4).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2-7wvIQHFY&feature=youtu.be
If you get bigger groupings, chances are it's the shooter.
So yeah, neeeeeeeeeeext.
Last edited:
*sigh* It's like argueing with a child..
Wolf ammo is definitely better than the Tula stuff, so let's just get that out of the way. Next the AK in said video is NOT a mass produced std. service 1950's or 1960's AK, it's a modern reproduction AK built to much tighter tolerances and higher quality control, it's a huge difference.
As for why Russian made AK's are more sought after, that's simple, it's because they're seen as more genuine AK's, i.e. a true collector's piece. If I had free pickings amongst all AK's it would always be a Russian made one for the very same reason, genuineness & value. It really is a no brainer.
Finally I've said from the beginning that the average AK does around 3.5 to 4 MOA with surplus ammo, where'as the average M16 does around 1.5 to 2.0 MOA with surplus ammo. That's my experience and it mirrors that of 99.9% of other shooters who have experience shooting multiple genuine service examples of both and not a myriad of modern reproductions with god knows how many custom parts & accessories.
As for the barrel dimensions I'll save you the work:
Wolf ammo is definitely better than the Tula stuff, so let's just get that out of the way. Next the AK in said video is NOT a mass produced std. service 1950's or 1960's AK, it's a modern reproduction AK built to much tighter tolerances and higher quality control, it's a huge difference.
As for why Russian made AK's are more sought after, that's simple, it's because they're seen as more genuine AK's, i.e. a true collector's piece. If I had free pickings amongst all AK's it would always be a Russian made one for the very same reason, genuineness & value. It really is a no brainer.
Finally I've said from the beginning that the average AK does around 3.5 to 4 MOA with surplus ammo, where'as the average M16 does around 1.5 to 2.0 MOA with surplus ammo. That's my experience and it mirrors that of 99.9% of other shooters who have experience shooting multiple genuine service examples of both and not a myriad of modern reproductions with god knows how many custom parts & accessories.
As for the barrel dimensions I'll save you the work:
Having a ton of parts and tooling does not make a weapon more accurate, that just makes it cheaper. AR's are accurate because of their design, not because we're building a ton of them.ComradeHX;n2296324 said:
Tight tolerances on the locking surfaces will give you more consistent accuracy, and it will allow a weapon that is mass produced to have more consistent accuracy(and function) throughout every weapon. AK accuracy can vary more significantly than it typically ever does with ARs. AK's have 4 less locking lugs and lock into the receiver instead of the barrel which can cause head spacing issues overtime. The AK's 2 lug bolt isn't a bad design, but that doesn't mean it's just as accurate as the M16's.
And the "4.5 MOA" you keep spouting is about military acceptable accuracy. That isn't something unique to the M16, no matter what weapon was adopted would likely have the same standard. The M14, which you've already derided in this thread earlier for having mediocre accuracy, likely passed the exact same standard. The military having a minimum accuracy requirement on their rifles does not automatically mean the rifle in question is sitting at the minimum accuracy required. What do you think the Russian's standard for AK accuracy was? Do you think it was 4.5 MOA? Higher? Lower? Based on their military doctrine at the time I'm inclined to believe they weren't that picky about it.
And the difference between AK and AR accuracy is not that significant, we're talking about a couple MOA, sometimes less. But the AR design is still a little more inherently accurate whether you like to believe it or not.
Last edited:
So it's like you're arguing with yourself?Unus Offa said:
Nope, the only somewhat significant difference is corrosive vs. not.Unus Offa said:
Next, mass produced doesn't mean it's automatically bad, especially the earlier AKs where production hasn't ramped up (before AKM).
Also, you could have looked on the same channel and see Yugo and Romanian **** get ~2-3moa.
You just went full retard.Unus Offa said:
There is no "genuine AK" after 922r compliance unless you're admitting to breaking the law.
Again, sub 2moa on average AK.Unus Offa said:
You're just pulling 99.9% out of your ***. If you even tried to google instead of making numbers up, you would see that M14 owners don't talk about moa much unless they have them upgraded.
You spent all that time googling yet can't find a single shred of evidence to back up your claim.Unus Offa said:As for the barrel dimensions I'll save you the work:
What ultimiately destroys your narrative is below.
Jagdwyre;n2296479 said:
It doesn't, that was about being easy to make one that is.
AR's are potentially accurate because of design. That doesn't mean much.
PSA's AR actually shoots worse than their AK. (same channel/shooter as link I uploaded)
Keep in mind that twist rate of Vietnam M16 were 1:12 iirc.
From what I've seen with civi AK stuff the military allowable accuracy out of factory should be about 4.5moa too.
Not-handpicked WASR: https://youtu.be/S2-7wvIQHFY?t=5m4s
M14 was proven to have mediocre accuracy in U.S. Army research; that's despite political pressure to keep the bigger round because "stopping power."
Here we can see M14's inferior accuracy compared to M16, at least until long range.
Compared to AK(by someone untrained in its use, for example the amount of curve of trajectory, with very limited ammunition available as noted in the report):
That particular AK, on average, has negligible accuracy difference in all combat ranges(300m and below).
("Report on Tests for Ad Hoc Committee on Accuracy and Testing of 7.62mm Ammunition and M14 Rifles.", as of December 1962, well into Vietnam war)
Also, interestingly from the same report:
I'm guessing USArmy must either have RUSSIAN-BIAS(tm) or maybe AK are not as inaccurate and M16/M14 are not as accurate as rumored.
The whole point is that the difference is negligible IRL but greatly exaggerated in-game with AR doing 1/3 the grouping or less.
Last edited:
Of course it's negligible at those ranges. A couple MOA doesn't make or break a rifle at 300 meters and in. I'd also like to point out that Ad Hoc Committee thinking a rifles has a 300 meter effective range in automatic fire is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen in a military report. Don't really know why the hell they would think that, unless "effective" just mean suppressing a group of people down range.
ComradeHX;n2296480 said:
*slow clap* what a great schoolyard comeback that was...
You've never fired a firearm in your life, I know that now.
Yugo and Romanian "****"?... ah yes... I wonder who provided them the tooling? *facepalm*
Do you actually comprehend english? I don't think you do, because then you wouldn't be writing that. Do yourself a favor, go back and read what was written.
It's still not a std. service 1950's-1960's production AK ffs!
No that's exactly what you're doing, and your constant mention of googling only underlines that.
Last edited:
Perfect fit for your level.Unus Offa said:
Actually, judging by what you post; whether you have ever been to schoolyard is in doubt.
I actually have, you haven't; you have made up bull**** all along.Unus Offa said:
I can give you all the proper tools and you'll still make monkey versions.Unus Offa said:
Regardless, if you knew English as of 2017; **** doesn't mean it's automatically bad. Ever heard of "good ****?"
I do; you clearly don't.Unus Offa said:
You clearly don't get the point that it's either genuine or...not; you're trying to say it's "more genuine" just because it has a few Russian parts.
You still have no relevant data on how 1950-1960s production AK performs ffs!Unus Offa said:
I mentioned you googling, and that's exactly what you're doing.Unus Offa said:
As proven by how you were incapable of producing anything to support your narrative because there simply isn't much on google.
In the minuscule chance you were not using google; that just means you're no better than someone who relies on google, and definitely much below my level.
I know you're trying to ignore it by working your mental gymnastics at 120%, but here it is again:
I look forward to seeing your further successful attempt at embarrassing yourself.
---
Between M16 and M14, it didn't; I just posted it to show how mediocre M14's performance actually is IRL to destroy the fanboy.Jagdwyre;n2296547 said:
In game for AK, it did.
I heard soviets tested lethality of 7.62 vs 5.45 AK against prisoners with 2-round bursts, that counts as automatic, I think.
Last edited: