Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
M4's Vs AK's The Real Debate
-
18-10-2009 2:29pm#1A little miffed at the stiffling of open discussion in the previous thread i decided to start this one so that we could hear from both sides in the great debate.
To counter the Fagpul Fanboy Fallacies spouted n in the previous thread, my justification as to why AKs pi$$ all over Jam4s is as follows:
Simplicity of design both in mechanical operation and and the interface for its human controller, which guarantees that when you chamber a round and squeeze the trigger you will 999 times out of a thousand hear a bang.
Wood and Steel, the materials that guns have been made out of for over 800 years, if it continues to work why sacrifice strenght for the sake of weight, that youre only going to add regradless with a plethora of ****e like PEQ, torches, grips, mounts, magnifiers ad nauseum.
Id take wood and steel over plastic and aluminium anyday.
Id much rather my gun be able to stand up to the daily hardships of combat, for my mag catch to be able to support the weight of a man, for my gun to continue fire regardless of whats thrown at it.
Not to have a dust cover for fear of some small contaminates to enter the action.
Not to have a forward assist, a button to press for when the gun jams.
If its inginuity youre after then why not look at the AL7 designed by Uri Alesandrov of Izhmash. This rifle had what was referred to as automatic balancing. This was basically a counter weight which travelled in the oppositie direction to that of the gun when it was recoiling which resulted in an almost recoillless rifle.
The year in which it was designed, 1969.
I wonder where Costa & Co. were then, eagerly awaiting the day they could take a bodge job fix used by soliders to make gear more practical, replicate it with plastic and rubber and form a whole company around this ideaology, that is take a flawed design and try improve on it.
Another AK deisgn of note is that of the AKB & AKB-1, which along with incorporating the Automatic Balancing feature also incorporated a function that for the first two shots had a cyclical ROF of 2000rpm, with the remainder of the shots slowing down to a more practical 1000 rpm in FA.
Burst fire before there even was such a thing.
The Dragunov SVD, designed between 1958 & 1963 was the worlds firs semi-auti DMR, capable of mass production and the uptmost reliablility, again due to its simplicity of design.
The RPK, adopetd in 1961, was the worlds first SAW.
The VSS Vintorez, AK9, Bizon, the list goes on and on of these innovative and unprecidented gun designs. You only have to look at the use of Bakelite for magazines & bayonets, long before Gaston Glock lodged any patents, to see how much more advanced the designs of the East were, albeit a little less refined than those of the West.
AKs might be a little rough around the edges but they will keep going with little to no maintaince and the most rudimentary of repairs.
i think the following sums it up nicely:
Whats tour preference 19 votes
M4 Whore0% 0 votesAK all the way100% 19 votes4
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
its funny cause the debatting points has nothing to do with airsoft
I said my piece before...so I win
:P
all i read was AK mong mong mong ....magpul is rapid.:pac:StevieGriff wrote: »How has the performance of RS got anything to do with airsoft?
Plus you argument might have been worth it if the AK could hit the broad side of a barn. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0
Nothing but what has a lot of the stuff discussed here got to do with airsoft.
im just continuing the other therad started by The Master as i didnt feel AK affectionados were given a right of reply.
AK74?0 -
i liked this thread before it got all messy, fair play to ya.
As far as AKs are concerned, are we debating the real steel against eachother or the airsofts?
If its real steel, I must be one of the unluckiest people alive since out of those 999 times you mentioned, I had plenty of failures on them, and that was between a couple of rifles.
You also mention wood and steel as being the materials guns are made from for 800 years, and then mention how AKs started using bakalite, which is a plastic.
In the 1980's when the Glock pistol came about lots of people said it was dangerous and untrustworthy. Today, over 20 years on it remains one of the most reliable pistols in the world and is mostly built using composite plastics.
AK's in reality are inaccurate, front heavy, not as reliable as they are made out to be, and worst of all. Russian...
So since this is an airsoft forum I'll give my reasons for prefering an M4 airsoft gun over an AK airsoft gun.
The M4 is lighter and less of a burden to carry over time, its better balanced, its comfortable to shoulder, its sights are light years ahead of that you'll find on an AK (wayyy too close together and not instinctual to aim), Its magazines are easier to carry and easier to insert. It can be ambidextrous, it has low recoil (real one of course), Its capable of taking attachments, (regardless of what the fanboi's think, they are useful depending on the situation, and you cant attach them as easily).
Bad points of the M4 design:
Uses a V2 gearbox so some can be prone to breakage at the front of the gearbox, hte hopup wheel design isnt the best ive seen.
AK good points: (lol)
Well some of them are steel, so i'll give ya that, They use a V3 gearbox which is a stronger design, however they have to use an abnormally huge grip to accommodate this.
Bad points:
Their fire selectors use too many parts.
the rifles sights are horrible to use pig ugly things.
mags are a pain to insert in a hurry, they also have some wobble in some of them.
opening the bolt cover can often send a spring and guide rod on a tour of your living room.
practically the entire gun needs to be striped to get the barrel and hopup out.
the swingy aroundy stock ones are very fragile at the hinge.
The fire selector was designed with Neanderthal hands in mind. you cannot reach it with the right hand while firing the rifle.
Thats pretty much it for now.
(note, I'm more of a H&K fan, and don't like the look of armalites, but they are a better design)0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
StevieGriff wrote: »Agree with Masada, they both have major pro's and cons in both RS and airsoft. End of the day its just down to personal preferences.
AK-A1?
I see your AK-A1 and i raise you my MP74...
0 -
-
-
-
I see your AK-A1 and i raise you my MP74...
Touché:p Link to Pimp My Gun for anyone who doesn't know where I done the ak-a1. http://pimpmygun.doctornoob.com0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement