Humor, satire, parody
Entertainment & Press
Home for all kinds of humor, satires, parodies, sarcasms and more.
JUST WHAT!
(view original)
Post a comment
Description
Not even going to speak about the others....
It's Wikipedia, need I say more?
ok lets set things straight
m14:calibre 7.62 (inferior to 7.62X39mm ak bullet)
mag capacity 20 way inferior to 30 of the ak
the m14 is used as a marksman designated weapon.adopted in 1957.it has the main body of m1 garand rifle wich was quite durable...
ak47:7.62X39mm superior to m14
mag cap is superior
production started in 1949 and it has the base idea of the sturmgewehr 44,designated as an assault rifle with medium to long range,durability...well the gun can be dropped in the mud and it can be ran over by a tank and still work contrary to the m14...so as a conclusion the ak 47 is an expert assault rifle while the m14 is a pansy wansy sniper for medium range...ak wins
oh...and ar 15....well its light ******** designed for pilots between 1964 and 1966...calibre 5.56X45cm (inferior to ak47 and m14)
capacity is 20 and to be honest...it sucks...
all of these were written from personal xp and info...
if there are further questions please pm me...
is it me or is unknown a good description for the ak's durability.
True. There isn't much you can do to make it stop firing.
Apart from pretty much disassembling the thing and scattering the pieces or blowing it apart, not much. This is, after all, the gun that can still fire after being buried in mud or sand for weeks or months at a time.
Must have used a Chinese Knock off. Those things were made in China.
Fan fact: The Chinese Type 56 variant is actually superior to the Ak-47.
So the AR is a better choice? I think the rebels here know what they're doing...
> AK-47 reliability is just "acceptable".
This seems to contradict everything I've ever heard about the AK-47.
Damn patriotic mudafuckas.
Dudes, it's from 1962, of course the study will lie about the soviet rifle.
I kind of always wondered why the army replaced the M14 with the M16 in Vietnam. The M16 was definitely not fit for combat for it could get jammed from just one crumb of dirt or drop of water getting inside.
War needed to be prolonged as much as possible. That's why they will never use reliable gear to the front. That's why AR10 never saw service. American economy relies on war for gains and profit, while the Soviet war doctrine and economy were different. Still.. a thing in the past though, all present day's economies are all marketing and media bullshitting, swag and yolo movements and internet memes.
What it boils down to is politicking between different departments in the Army. It's worth looking into beyond this post (ignore CadianConscripts. Guy doesn't know what he's talking about), but in the tests of both the M14 and AR15 were rigged.
The M14 had to go because it was unsuited for jungle combat (And really, was based on an obsolete combat model). But the Army Ordnance Office just had to have a select-fire rifle with a 7.62mm round... no matter how hard it was to control in fully automatic fire.
The AR 15 had it's problems with reliability issues, but those were fixed in the first few years, when the right propellant was issued and troops were trained in the appropriate care of the new rifle.