>>65217119
my dick

FAMAS

>>65217119
AK of course, not even close.

>>65217126
pick any other gun

>>65217119
AR won because of ammo prices

>>65217119
Depends on whether your just shooting on the KD range a few days a year or actually dragging the rifle through snow, sand, and mud in the trenches.

I have both and I like both but the AR wins because of ammo prices
Funny enough the AK was probably the better option because of ammo prices but nowadays the cheapest good AKs are $1000+ meanwhile a PSA can run you less than $600 and you can save for a decent optic or go full retard and get an ACOG
And it would probably cost less than say an Arsenal

AUG

>>65217527
>nowadays the cheapest good AKs are $1000+ meanwhile a PSA can run you less than $600
yeah but what's the cheapest good AR?

>>65217552
PSA unironically
It works
I guess for "good ARs" I would say FN is a good choice and can be bought for less than $900 in some LGSes

>>65217552
Most of them these days. Just buy a better upper once you start shooting more

>>65217119
the AR and it's not even close

>>65217119
AK.
>reeeee
The Garand/Kalashnikov hybrid design is the most produced, copied, and utilized firearm in history, the AR15 was so "superior" that it was copied and used by nearly no-one, and the nations that did (Taiwan/South Korea) dropped them as quickly as possible. A AK can be refined to beautiful degree (Sig 550/Rk series/XCR) while the AR needs to be redesigned from the ground up to be minimally functional.

>>65217119
AR is better for regulars, ak is better for conscripts.

Yes

>>65217838
Colt wouldn't give the South Koreans a license to produce M16s domestically.
The others I don't know enough to speak on

>>65217890
South Korea literally produced M16s domestically.

File: 95fa17.jpg (105.8 KB)

>>65217119

>>65217905
And then Colt sued Daewoo over it

File: koream16.jpg (314.8 KB)

>>65217916
>Deliveries of XM16E1s began in October 1966 and M16A1s in March 1967 by the United States for the South Korea during the Vietnam War.[289][290]
>Also, 1,039,599 M16A1s (Colt Model 603K) were locally produced by Ministry of Defense Arsenal (later privatized to Daewoo Precision Industries and Poongsan Cooperation) at $7 royalty paid per rifle to Colt between 1971 to 1982.[note 16][292] KATUSA (Korean Augmentation to the U.S. Army) soldiers who serve in the U.S. Army use the M16A2.[249] Retirement from active service began in 2005, and the Reserve Forces alone has 850,000 M16s in possession by the end of 2016.[293][294]

File: IMG_3094.jpg (71.8 KB)

>>65217119
Shotgun

>>65217890
South Korea MADE M16's in house. Taiwan chose to manufacture M14's in house rather than manufacture M16's and both ran into the same problem; that being M16's failed even on the firing range. Taiwan and Colt ironically came to the same conclusion, that a short stroke upper receiver was the most expedient solution, while Stoner himself moved to the AR17-18. If the Stoner DI system was so great then everyone would copy and use a version in their own service rifles.

The AIM-9 Sidewinder was so effective and groundbreaking that the Soviets copied it down to the point where K-13 components could be interchangeable with the Sidewinder. Military technology and general concepts boil weapons down to very similar weapons with few outliers that can be explained by two simple reasons.
>doctrine speciality
>outright corruption
The M14 is a example of doctrine, and while the weapon itself wasn't copied but the concept itself was.
The M16 was due to outright corruption, with Colt salesman outright having "private demonstrations" to Generals which leads to adoption without any sort of trials or development.

>>65217119
The AK is better for what it was intended to be, which was an evolution of the submachinegun. The M16 is overly long, and shoots a tiny 22-caliber squirrel bullet that was an overcorrection from the 7.62 NATO cartridge. The US military has been trying to replace 5.56 NATO almost as soon as it was adopted. The reason it’s stuck around for so long is ultimately a matter of cost/logistics which makes the bean counters happy. That being said, I think the AR is typically a more well-made firearm than the basic commie AK due to the difference in Western vs Eastern manufacturing. Something like the IWI ACE is like the ultimate evolution of the AK if it was redesigned and manufactured by a first-world country. The biggest advantage of the AR will always be its weight. This makes the AR easier to live with for the average person. If you compared short (10-13” barreled) versions of both, then I think the AK starts gaining more of an edge. Think Mk 18 vs Zastava M92.

>>65218013
>IWI ACE
No, though it is a very good AK the "best" version of the AK is hands down the XCR.

File: M193 Ball Exit Wound.jpg (71.8 KB)

>>65218013
>The M16 is overly long,
You can literally just make a shorter AR15, like the M4A1 with a 14.5" barrel and collapsing stock, or go even shorter like the Mk.18 with its 10.5" barrel, though that's less practical.

>and shoots a tiny 22-caliber squirrel bullet that was an overcorrection from the 7.62 NATO cartridge.
5.56x45mm NATO M193 Ball violently mogs the M59 Ball load of 7.62x51mm NATO, and the M43 load of 7.62x39mm. M193 Ball isn't even cutting edge either, we have M855A1 Ball and Mk.262 Mod 1, both which are even better.

>The US military has been trying to replace 5.56 NATO almost as soon as it was adopted.
Because there's many retards in the military. Look at it now, the .277 Fury is an excellent example of retardation.

>The reason it’s stuck around for so long is ultimately a matter of cost/logistics which makes the bean counters happy.
It stuck around because it let you carry more than twice the ammo, makes rapid fire and full auto trivially easy, has a flat trajectory, and makes wounds like pic related.
5.56x45mm was so fucking good that the Soviets had no choice but to copy it for their 5.45x39mm, and the Chinese 5.8x42mm isn't far away from it either.

>That being said, I think the AR is typically a more well-made firearm than the basic commie AK due to the difference in Western vs Eastern manufacturing.
It's also a fundamentally more practical and modern weapon.

>>65218047
Trufax.

>>65218707
>You can literally just make a shorter AR15, like the M4A1 with a 14.5" barrel and collapsing stock
I mean yes, but historically the M16 was already outclassed by the AK as soon as it was adopted. 30 round magazine vs 20 round, collapsible stock vs fixed stock, 16" barrel vs retardedly long 20" barrel, etc.
>It stuck around because it let you carry more than twice the ammo, makes rapid fire and full auto trivially easy, has a flat trajectory, and makes wounds like pic related.
>5.56x45mm was so fucking good that the Soviets had no choice but to copy it for their 5.45x39mm, and the Chinese 5.8x42mm isn't far away from it either.
The major advantage of the M16 and 5.56 cartridge was always just weight reduction. 5.56 was adopted because the Pentagon thought it would be easier for Vietnam draftees who grew up shooting 22s on the farm to control with spray-and-pray tactics in the jungle. Turns out 7.62x39 still performed better in dense vegetation, and American troops spamming full auto fire burned up ammo too quickly, which negated the whole advantage of 5.56 being lighter than 7.62 cartridges. Because of this, the Pentagon limited the newer M16s to three-round burst in the 80's. Fast forward to early GWOT, and troops are on record complaining about the ineffectiveness of the M855 cartridge and the "knockdown power" of 5.56 at range (same complaint made against the .30-40 Krag-Jørgensen rifle during the Moro Wars 100 years earlier).
>It's also a fundamentally more practical and modern weapon.
Because of weight. Steel AK vs aluminum AR means the AR is lighter and ultimately more practical. If the AK weighed the same as the AR, then I would consider it superior. Even though it sounded like I was shitting on the AR earlier in this post, I do think weight is the most important attribute for the practical use of a firearm. Really the thing I actually hate about the AR is the fact that it's married to the 5.56 cartridge due to the design of the magwell.

>>65217119
What blew up today, chud?

Iran with AKs is being the USA (fascist version) with ARs and DSAs with old sniper rifles beat chuds with necks so do the math. :3

>>65218774
whatcha doin' rabbi

>>65218707
>M4
>make the perfect light weight rifle into an overweight unbalanced shitbrick

>>65218772
>5.56 was adopted because the Pentagon thought it would be easier for Vietnam draftees who grew up shooting 22s on the farm to control with spray-and-pray tactics in the jungle.
utterly retarded drivel
>Turns out 7.62x39 still performed better in dense vegetation
it didn't
>and American troops spamming full auto fire burned up ammo too quickly, which negated the whole advantage of 5.56 being lighter than 7.62 cartridges
this makes zero sense either
> If the AK weighed the same as the AR, then I would consider it superior.
lol, lmao even

File: ar22_td.jpg (19.5 KB)

>>65217119
Wrong choice of guns. Here is the actual correct choice:

>>65218918
gay

>>65218931
yes
>>>/cm/
you're on a website created by a homosexual crossdresser to discuss pedophilic cartoons