AK47 vs. M14
- Thread starter SR420
- Start date
- Status
Jermtheory
New member
i dont have any experience with the M14,but my impression of the AK was...junk.:barf:
reliable?...sure,although not like they're made out to be(nothing is).
other positives?...cheap(imo the biggest reason for their popularity)...*crickets*
i'll take the M14 "sight unseen".
yeah,everyone should have an AK,because they're cheap and reliable....still god awfull though.
*runs for the fire suit*
reliable?...sure,although not like they're made out to be(nothing is).
other positives?...cheap(imo the biggest reason for their popularity)...*crickets*
i'll take the M14 "sight unseen".
yeah,everyone should have an AK,because they're cheap and reliable....still god awfull though.
*runs for the fire suit*
Well I got my distinguished on a M1a, and am on my third barrel with one of them. Now a M1a is not a M14, but it is pretty close.
My M1a's are dead nuts reliable. The sights are the best irons ever put on a battle rifle. I like the open top design, all you have to do is look down and you can see, and can clear, any jam.
The action was used in Vietnam, and everyone, and I mean everyone whom I asked who carried one, found it to be a reliable weapon.
Time and tactics have decided that the round is too powerful for the untrained concripts and females of the future, but I like it.
It is a bit long, so maybe it is not the best choice for fighting out of wheeled vehicles, or inside buildings, but given the choice of carrying a AK or a M14.
Gimme the M14.
My M1a's are dead nuts reliable. The sights are the best irons ever put on a battle rifle. I like the open top design, all you have to do is look down and you can see, and can clear, any jam.
The action was used in Vietnam, and everyone, and I mean everyone whom I asked who carried one, found it to be a reliable weapon.
Time and tactics have decided that the round is too powerful for the untrained concripts and females of the future, but I like it.
It is a bit long, so maybe it is not the best choice for fighting out of wheeled vehicles, or inside buildings, but given the choice of carrying a AK or a M14.
Gimme the M14.
overkill556x45
New member
This is really comparing apples and hand grenades. I can see comparing the M16 and AK, but the M14 isn't an assault rifle- it's a battle rifle. The M14 was meant to put bad guys down at 0-800 meters, and do so reliably. The 7.62x51 and 7.62x39 don't even compare. (I wouldn't want to be hit by either though.)
The AK was made to be simple to use and make hits from 0-300(optimistically) with full auto fire laid down by disposable conscripts. It is light, short, and ideal for guerilla fighting in close quarters. Though I ran across some vintage milled receiver Russian '47s in Afghanistan that could hit a man-sized rock from 500 yards(regularly), that is not the norm for AKs.
All that said, I voted M14. Sure, it's not ideal for clearing rooms, but you can load up with AP rounds and just shoot through the wall from a few hundred yards out. All your entry team would need is a bucket and a mop.
The AK was made to be simple to use and make hits from 0-300(optimistically) with full auto fire laid down by disposable conscripts. It is light, short, and ideal for guerilla fighting in close quarters. Though I ran across some vintage milled receiver Russian '47s in Afghanistan that could hit a man-sized rock from 500 yards(regularly), that is not the norm for AKs.
All that said, I voted M14. Sure, it's not ideal for clearing rooms, but you can load up with AP rounds and just shoot through the wall from a few hundred yards out. All your entry team would need is a bucket and a mop.
MTMilitiaman
New member
I voted for the M14, but it is an apples to oranges comparison that really isn't fair to either of them.
The M14 is a full power battle rifle from a legacy of American rifles designed to reach out past 800 yards with accuracy and authority. It is a finely crafted work of art, designed by and for riflemen. The M14 costs a lot more because of this, but it is more powerful, ergonomic, and accurate. It is also typically heavier than an AK, as well as longer and more ungainly, though the 16 and 18 inch barreled carbines are less so than the full rifle version.
The AK is an intermediate powered assault rifle--some would say the intermediate powered assault rifle--designed to put massed fire on an objective with acceptable power and accuracy out to 300 yards. It's reliability and durability are legendary, it is more compact, and there is perhaps no better weapon to have when you're room clearing. I have a Romanian AK with a reflex sight on it and would gladly take it over any poodle shooter on the market.
But if the SHTF today, and I could only grab one rifle to do everything, it would be my M1A.
The M14 is a full power battle rifle from a legacy of American rifles designed to reach out past 800 yards with accuracy and authority. It is a finely crafted work of art, designed by and for riflemen. The M14 costs a lot more because of this, but it is more powerful, ergonomic, and accurate. It is also typically heavier than an AK, as well as longer and more ungainly, though the 16 and 18 inch barreled carbines are less so than the full rifle version.
The AK is an intermediate powered assault rifle--some would say the intermediate powered assault rifle--designed to put massed fire on an objective with acceptable power and accuracy out to 300 yards. It's reliability and durability are legendary, it is more compact, and there is perhaps no better weapon to have when you're room clearing. I have a Romanian AK with a reflex sight on it and would gladly take it over any poodle shooter on the market.
But if the SHTF today, and I could only grab one rifle to do everything, it would be my M1A.
Last edited:
RockyMtnTactical
New member
I'm not terribly fond of either in particular. However, I like the M1A SOCOM in this case.
benign.neglect
Moderator
For situations inside 100 yards, or indoors, I would prefer an AK. For everything else, I would prefer the M1A.
I trained with the M-14 when I was in the Army, so many years ago. We fired semi and full auto versions. Full auto was sure a hoot, but you really couldn't hit much past the first or second shot. They just were not controlable in auto mode. As noted, the M-14 was a "Battle Rifle" a lot different than an assault rifle. Still, in 90% of the cases I would opt for the M-14 and the accuracy, range and power.
HorseSoldier
New member
AK's a superior fighting weapon. M14 is a superior target rifle.
The fact that the M14 got fast tracked for retirement as a service rifle as soon as it went head to head with the AK-47 probably answers the poll definitively.
The fact that the M14 got fast tracked for retirement as a service rifle as soon as it went head to head with the AK-47 probably answers the poll definitively.
This is indeed apples and oranges...kind of. They were both, after all, designed with the intent that they be the primary infantry arm of the originating nation's armed forces. Same end use; different doctrine. The AK seems to have won out doctrinally, as the M14 gave way very quickly to the M16.
Having said all that, allow me, now, to let loose my inner jingoist: Yeah, it's apples and oranges...and you can't make apple pie without apples! M14!
Having said all that, allow me, now, to let loose my inner jingoist: Yeah, it's apples and oranges...and you can't make apple pie without apples! M14!
73-Captain
Moderator
HorseSoldier, hate to tell you this but... the M-14 STILL has NOT been retired.
C.
C.
benign.neglect
Moderator
He means, of course, that it is no longer the primary rifle issued.
HorseSoldier
New member
It's tenure as the standard issue service rifle for the US military was . . . what? . . . the shortest in the history of this country?
Impressive.
It found a niche as a DMR and sniper rifle primarily because we already had a ton of them sitting around and paid for, so when a need for a 7.62 rifle for some specialist application popped up, we used it. Even then, its track record has been hit and miss and mostly about it serving as a stop gap until a better weapon can be procured.
The M14 has NEVER been out of service, in fact - it's numbers in active battle field duty continue to grow.
Efforts have been made to replace the M14 in it's current role, but they continue to fail.
The modernized M14 has proven itself and continues to prove it's worth in battle - there is less of a movement to replace it ...
Efforts have been made to replace the M14 in it's current role, but they continue to fail.
The modernized M14 has proven itself and continues to prove it's worth in battle - there is less of a movement to replace it ...
73-Captain
Moderator
"HorseSoldier, hate to tell you this but... the M-14 STILL has NOT been retired."
"He means, of course, that it is no longer the primary rifle issued."
benign.neglect, of course, I'm glad YOU know what he "meant", wonder if he really does?
People should, SAY WHAT YOU MEAN... and... MEAN WHAT YOU SAY!!!
C.
"He means, of course, that it is no longer the primary rifle issued."
benign.neglect, of course, I'm glad YOU know what he "meant", wonder if he really does?
People should, SAY WHAT YOU MEAN... and... MEAN WHAT YOU SAY!!!
C.
RockyMtnTactical
New member
I thought his post was clear. I didn't need an explanation for it.
The M14 was outdated the day it was created. It was the rifle the M1 Garand should have been, but the improvements were too small when it was finally put into service.
It is used right now because that is what we have. It's a stop gap like was stated. Not a horrible rifle, just outdated.
The M14 was outdated the day it was created. It was the rifle the M1 Garand should have been, but the improvements were too small when it was finally put into service.
It is used right now because that is what we have. It's a stop gap like was stated. Not a horrible rifle, just outdated.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Better battle rifle? AK-47.
Better sniper/special purpose rifle? M-14.
Better sniper/special purpose rifle? M-14.
- Status