Gun Forums banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
FAL and CETME/HK G3 are better than both


But if I had to go to war I would want an AK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
I actually prefer the lighter more modular M-16, but I know that's an unpopular stance with some on these boards.

-Chris
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
d prefer it to if it didnt eat where it shits(bad gas system) and as a result fouls and jams too easily.

Great gun if it werent so picky on ammo, mags, intolerant of dirt.

Thats why I like teh FAl and HK..modular dont mean a thing if the gun wont go bang everytime. Its a fundamental flaw.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
I like the M4/M16, but I've never had a bad experience with one. Through the 6 months of training where I carried them they always worked good(well, with decent mags, 1 out of my 4 mags would cause jams, no problems ever on the other 3). I'd field clean them after a few hundred rounds though. The thing that impressed me the most was the accuracy. Who knows how much my standard issue M16A2 had been beat on before I got my hands on it, and I know I wasn't gentle with it. Never let me down at the range, I'd always get every shot on target at the 500 meter prone line with the iron sights.

There's other guns I think I'd rather carry, but the AK isn't one of them.

I actually did get a little turned off to the SAW simply because the one assigned to my fireteam would always jam no matter how clean it was.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
i look at it thes way in todays wars the range that thar shooting at is 100yds or less most of the time

ak-47
300yds range but has a biger bullet than the m 16

m-16
500-600yds range

y do u need a long range gun if u can just use a smg or some thing?

i say the ak-47 is a better pick

but if u r looking for a long range gun i wood go with the an-94 or g-36
or the l-85-a1 and a2[/img]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
If AR are long distance than why are ar15 being used as entry weapons?

the pro of the ar15 is not only the modular design, but also the ability to have a rock solid mounting of optic, NV and launchers.

The pro of the AK is that it will run just about 100%

For battle, I'll take a m1a scout, rock solid design, shoots ofter than FAL or G3, better platform for optics

AN-94 - to complicated for the field
G-36 melts under rapid fire, but has a nice piston design,poor platform for optics and accessories
Enfield I85a1 .. why would you want that?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
FAL is more solid than either...all steel and not alloy

HK G3....no gas system to ever worry about.

Both have stood up to extreme conditions and kept going. The FAL served in 90 countries and the HK in over 50. Thre 7.62 NATo round is better than the AK all around and the 5.56 at distance yet is just as accurate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
Neither, I'll pick my Red Rider BB gun.

Actually, I'm kind of fond of the AR. I like the way they handle, the way they feel, and the way they shoot (when they're CLEAN). I also like the accuracy and the option of rails on AR frames. I suppose this stance comes from years of working with one, kind of got attached to them.
 

·
Fanatical Feline
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
Dont even get me started on this again... I fight about this all the damn time with people. Bacicly comes down to your supply chain for parts and ammo, what your enemy is using, what ranges your using them at and where you are.

Il take my M4 in 95% of places as long as I have backup parts and good ammo. JUST KEEP IT CLEAN!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
but the thing is with an FAL or G3 you dont need spare parts, or to keep it immaculately clean for it to be as reliable as an M16 type gun.

They just arent as picky and yet are jusgt as accurate with superior punch at longer ranges.

IF your clearing a house then use a shotgun and not an M4
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
OK!!!! I will play by teh rules.

Id want an M76 Yugo. Its in 8mm mauser, has an RPK type reciever, and a long precision type barrel. That way it has more firepower than an AR at all ranges, is more reliable, and is more than accurate for military purposes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
HAHA yeah good luck getting the M76...the parts kits are 1000 and no recivers to be found as well as mags...cause I am looking too...I have heard people using the Romak recivers...I know just not the same thing
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
Yeah for a little more I could by a Tiger/Dragunov
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
I have seen the "Tiger" sporting version for around 1200
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
GUN GIRL said:
eh...not sure I would pay the three grand for a Dragunov...

In some very hot 3rd world countries you can pick up a tiger, svd or psl kits for 50$ US and ups them to your ffl
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,393 Posts
yeah but there would be no barrel or reciever
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
No, your thinking the parts "kits" in american terms. The svd psl and tigers also come in ready for use kits. Gun, bipod (barrel or receiver mounted), scope, mounts, extra mags, mag pouch sling and cleaning kit; some in basic cardboard boxes some in hard cases. Just like the US made sniper systems. The prices range because of the optics on them. The psl's usually come with IOR glass the svd tiger and chinese models can have anything from a basic 4x to the new digital zoomers. You can litteraly buy a dozen goats and a few chickens and trade for 4 or 5 of them, cash doesn't mean much.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top