who makes ak47 the look like m4

[gunwolf72]

i saw 1 one time at a show but cant rember the look like an m16 but take ak47 mags and 7.62x39 ammo

[RMTactical]

It's probably an AR15 chambered in 7.62x39, not an AK that looks like an AR.

[TED]

+1

TED

[chevrofreak]

http://www.ar47.com/

In the end its still just a POS AR-15

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by chevrofreak
http://www.ar47.com/

In the end its still just a POS AR-15

Come on now. I didn't get the full idea of how you feel towards the AR-15 there. :rollsmiley:

[chevrofreak]

Last time I said how I truly felt about Eugene Stoner and his design I got in trouble.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by chevrofreak
Last time I said how I truly felt about Eugene Stoner and his design I got in trouble.

Well, I knew you didn't like his rifle, but why don't you like Stoner?

[chevrofreak]

Because he believed that direct gas impingement was the best gas system to use on a weapon. That alone says to me that he had no common sense.

[thetoastmaster]

I always imagined that ol' Gene Stoner was trying to design the slimmest rifle possible. I think he was just exercising his geekiness. He did. It's just not the most robust design.

GL would say it was a compromise. He compromised ruggedness for a slim design.

[RMTactical]

In truth, I don't see a huge compromise. My AR's must be broke 'cuz they run just fine. I must not have any common sense either... but hey, if you had an AR that worked you'd probably be in the same boat as me.

[chevrofreak]

Hey if you want a rifle that fouls the hell out of itself because of its poor design thats fine, but I dont want any of that garbage in my rifles thanks.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by chevrofreak
Hey if you want a rifle that fouls the hell out of itself because of its poor design thats fine, but I dont want any of that garbage in my rifles thanks.

I honestly can't believe people feel that is the weakest spot in the AR design. If there is a weak spot in the AR design, that's not it.

I've never even heard of an AR failure due to "fouling" in the past 40 years. Most AR's that do experience failures see them for a myriad of other reasons (and really the weak point on the AR for reliability is the bolt, I'd say). The fouling was an issue in Vietnam because of the specific powder, but for those of us living in the present time, fouling is not an issue.

I'd like to hear any stories you have regarding AR's malfunctioning because of fouling in the past 40 years.

[Ron3]

Man, listen to you!

Are you saying AR's don't have stops when they get dirty?


I doubt it. I think your making some kind of distinction between being "dirty" and being "fouled".

Never underestimate an AR owners ability to make excuses for his rifle. Hmm, that would make a nice sig line.

Just hope the bad guy understands the distinction so he'll pause while the operator clears his AR.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by Ron3
Man, listen to you!

Are you saying AR's don't have stops when they get dirty?


I doubt it. I think your making some kind of distinction between being "dirty" and being "fouled".

Never underestimate an AR owners ability to make excuses for his rifle. Hmm, that would make a nice sig line.

Just hope the bad guy understands the distinction so he'll pause while the operator clears his AR.

No, I've never needed an excuse for my rifles (yet) because they've all worked fine.

I hope the BG understands when I keep shooting in his direction...

Better tell these guys their rifles don't work. :upeyes:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/mwirig79/DIRTYM16.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/mwirig79/blackrifleinIraq.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y18/mwirig79/BalckrifleinIraq.jpg

[Ron3]

:laughabove: Those guys already know!

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by Ron3
:laughabove: Those guys already know!

They know something, which is more than can be said for some... ;)

[Ron3]

Originally posted by gunwolf72
i saw 1 one time at a show but cant rember the look like an m16 but take ak47 mags and 7.62x39 ammo

Why would you want such a thing?

I know why.

You desparately want a cool-looking all-American Ar-15 that is rugged and reliable. Since there is no such thing though you want to put an AR cosmetic package on an AK-47, which is a rugged reliable rifle.

Maybe you could just tape a full-size Airsoft AR onto the side of an AK? Would that do it for ya?
:clown:

[SilverState]

I had an AR47. Special Weapons made the receiver and I don't know who made the upper (bought it used). Anyway, the reciever was real nice, but the upper was all hacked up and as a result, I had lots of mag/feeding issues. I sent it back. The guy says it works good with the Hungarian mags, but not the Romanian or Bulgarian. I said screw that and bought an Aresenal Inc. SAM7S and could not be happier.

As to ARs, I have a RRA M4gery. I would feel comfortable with either in a SHTF situation. No worries about my AR "fouling up" on me. But then, I know how to clean a gun.

[kalashnikovluvr]

Originally posted by gunwolf72
who makes the ak47 look like the m4


*** Edited by Moderator for posting violation ***

I love the AK, my favorite assualt rifle. I have no problem, or experience with the AR, it's good enough for my military, so it must be good enough(Though the AK is superior). But each rifle is different and I think people shouldn't try to make one the other. An AK-47 is an AK-47, an AR-15 is an AR-15. I hate seeing these AK-15's and AR-47's on the market, people putting M4 collapsing butt stocks on AK's, it looks like ****. If you want and AK, buy and AK, if you want an AR, buy an AR, but please people don't mix the two.

[NeroGatto]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
It's probably an AR15 chambered in 7.62x39, not an AK that looks like an AR.

They have AR15s chambered in 7.62x39? ...I though that was an AR10?

[SilverState]

The one I was talking about, the AR47, takes AK mags. That's the beauty of it (when you have an upper that is not all hacked up).

They did make an AR15 (Colt made it) chambered for 7.62X39. The problem is that the mags don't work too well and it is hard to get good ones.

BTW, I agree that putting AR parts on an AK looks cheesey and vice versa.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by NeroGatto
They have AR15s chambered in 7.62x39? ...I though that was an AR10?

No, an AR chambered in 7.62x51 is an AR10.

[chevrofreak]

Originally posted by kalashnikovluvr

I love the AK, my favorite assualt rifle. I have no problem, or experience with the AR, it's good enough for my military, so it must be good enough(Though the AK is superior). But each rifle is different and I think people shouldn't try to make one the other. An AK-47 is an AK-47, an AR-15 is an AR-15. I hate seeing these AK-15's and AR-47's on the market, people putting M4 collapsing butt stocks on AK's, it looks like ****. If you want and AK, buy and AK, if you want an AR, buy an AR, but please people don't mix the two.

Hey if you care more about how your gun LOOKS than how it FUNCTIONS, thats fine I suppose, but I prefer function over looks. Personally I love having a 6 position stock on my AK for the same reason some* people love having them on their AR-15's, they add functionality.


I get freaking tired of you *** Edited by Moderator for posting violation *** that think an AK needs to be left stock.


*most AR15 owners care more about looks and being cool than actually having a rifle that is combat worthy

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by chevrofreak
I get freaking tired of you * Edit by Moderator * that think an AK needs to be left stock.

That's your opinion, and it varies from person to person. I don't think anyone should be labelled a * Edit by Moderator * based on if they like AK's in "stock" form.

Originally posted by chevrofreak
*most AR15 owners care more about looks and being cool than actually having a rifle that is combat worthy

That's debatable.

I'm sure there are some folks out there that are like that... but I know a lot of guys who like AR's, and I would say that they all put reliability and functionality of their rifle pretty damn high on the priority list. In fact, I don't think it ends with AR's. Most people who own ANY assault rifle seem rather concerned about how reliable their weapon is.

[kalashnikovluvr]

Originally posted by chevrofreak
Hey if you care more about how your gun LOOKS than how it FUNCTIONS, thats fine I suppose, but I prefer function over looks. Personally I love having a 6 position stock on my AK for the same reason some* people love having them on their AR-15's, they add functionality.


I get freaking tired of you * Edit by Moderator * that think an AK needs to be left stock.


*most AR15 owners care more about looks and being cool than actually having a rifle that is combat worthy


Why does a AK need to have a M4 stock on it to be more functional? It seems to do fine with a STOCK fixed stock, and a STOCK underfolding stock, you know, the stocks that were designed to be on the rifle. I do understand that the 6 position stock could make it easier to adjust for arm length, but I, personally, don't think it should be on a AK. The stock on my AK is just fine. In the 3rd world countries that use them everyone from a 5 year old kid, to a 50 year old man uses them fine with a standard AK stock, reguardless of arm length. Also just because someone wants their AK to be the way Mr.Kalashnikov designed it doesn't make them a * Edit by Moderator *.

[chevrofreak]

There is room for improvement in every firearm, otherwise the AK47 wouldnt have evolved into the Galil, FN FNC or SIG 550 series.

It is a damned fine weapon out of the box, but there is room for improvement.

[DJ Niner]

Folks, if you can't post within the GlockTalk rules, then don't post; just move on to the next thread. You can express any opinion you want, just do it in a manner consistent with the rules.

I've yet to see a case where name-calling gained a person converts to his point of view.

[johncx0]

It looks like no one agreed to agree to anything on this thread, but we finally got a great sig line for Ron 3. Congrats to a real AK Runner!

[MARTIN FISHER]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
No, I've never needed an excuse for my rifles (yet) because they've all worked fine.

I hope the BG understands when I keep shooting in his direction...

Better tell these guys their rifles don't work. :upeyes:



I will tell them they won't work in the condition they are in.

Come on GL, none of those guys in those pics are battle ready, I promise you all the guys in those pics cleaned the HE&& out of those A2s BEFORE they went into a fire fight. Do you really think any of the A2's in those pics would work? I doubt it. And, if they were in any danger of being in a firefight when those pics where taken, the guns would not be slung on the back, or laying in the sand.

And, those guys have air support, tanks, 50 cal. Brownings, plenty of other shooters and many other goodies not many of us have access to. And, they have no choice in what they carry, they take what is given to them. ;)

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
I will tell them they won't work in the condition they are in.

Come on GL, none of those guys in those pics are battle ready, I promise you all the guys in those pics cleaned the HE&& out of those A2s BEFORE they went into a fire fight. Do you really think any of the A2's in those pics would work? I doubt it. And, if they were in any danger of being in a firefight when those pics where taken, the guns would not be slung on the back, or laying in the sand.

And, those guys have air support, tanks, 50 cal. Brownings, plenty of other shooters and many other goodies not many of us have access to. And, they have no choice in what they carry, they take what is given to them. ;)

You should realize that I know at least the bottom pic is SAS. I think they have more than one choice as to what they could carry.

A good question you guys might all ask yourselves is, "have you ever had an AR that dirty and tried to see how it functions?"

Most of you guys who trash the AR have very little experience with them. I am not calling anyone out specifically, you should note.

I haven't had mine all that dirty... not quite, but very dirty nonetheless, and very functional. The issue with the AR's is WAY overblown by the AK guys, just like the AR guys blow the AK's accuracy way out of proportion. That's the way sides argue.

One of these days, when I have 10K rounds to blow thru (I need to get set up for reloading soon), and a "spare" AR to beat up on, I will do some torture testing and document it all for you naysayers. You guys will have to wait another year or so...

But, this is probably not an argument I can win in this forum. :supergrin:

[MTMilitiaman]

Hey if you care more about how your gun LOOKS than how it FUNCTIONS, thats fine I suppose, but I prefer function over looks. Personally I love having a 6 position stock on my AK for the same reason some* people love having them on their AR-15's, they add functionality.


I get freaking tired of you *** Edited by Moderator for posting violation *** that think an AK needs to be left stock.

+1

Why does a AK need to have a M4 stock on it to be more functional? It seems to do fine with a STOCK fixed stock, and a STOCK underfolding stock, you know, the stocks that were designed to be on the rifle. I do understand that the 6 position stock could make it easier to adjust for arm length, but I, personally, don't think it should be on a AK. The stock on my AK is just fine. In the 3rd world countries that use them everyone from a 5 year old kid, to a 50 year old man uses them fine with a standard AK stock, reguardless of arm length. Also just because someone wants their AK to be the way Mr.Kalashnikov designed it doesn't make them a * Edit by Moderator *.

Because 50 year old Vietnamese men and 12 year old Palestinian boys may get along just fine with the standard stock, but I am a 6'6" American male and my face doesn't agree with getting thumped by the receiver every time I pull the trigger. The LOP of the standard stock sucks. If you think arm length doesn't matter, you've obviously never been this tall or dealt with this amount of reach or simply prefer not to lean into you rifles like I do. Just because you can get by with it doesn't mean you shouldn't try to improve it.
I've personally seen Mr. Kalashnikov standing in front of a collection of AKs with a variety of modifications done to them. I saw a video where he fired one that looked very different than his rifle looked in the 50s but the grin on his face was still pretty big. He obviously approved.
Here is a fresh concept--why don't we admit that form follows function? Why don't we then admit that the AK has a lot of function but not a lot of form, at least in the sense of ergonomics? We can then admit that the AR has the form so if we put the ergonomics of the AR with the function of an AK, you should have something pretty sweet. HEY! What do you know, it works. I have a folding 6 position stock on my WASR. I can change the LOP to accomidate a shooter of just about any size wearing a variety of gear or body armor. It is simply more comfortable and convenient for just about everyone.
I also put synthetic handguards with a VFG on my rifle and I don't get burned anymore so I don't care what you think about how it looks. It works better and that is what matters to me. I put a new pistol grip on it so that it doesn't feel like I am holding a kitchen appliance. I put Mojo ghost ring sights on it because my eyes agree with them more. But in the end, I am only improving the ergonomics. The heart of the rifle is still pure AK and that is what matters. But if I can make my AK feel better and more comfortable, not burn me when I shoot it, and get on target faster, then that improves functionality.
Wow...you don't think Mr. Kalashnikov is proud that his rifle can evolve along with its competitors to be a major contendor 60 years after he designed it? I bet he is.

[MARTIN FISHER]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
You should realize that I know at least the bottom pic is SAS. I think they have more than one choice as to what they could carry.

A good question you guys might all ask yourselves is, "have you ever had an AR that dirty and tried to see how it functions?"

Most of you guys who trash the AR have very little experience with them. I am not calling anyone out specifically, you should note.

I haven't had mine all that dirty... not quite, but very dirty nonetheless, and very functional. The issue with the AR's is WAY overblown by the AK guys, just like the AR guys blow the AK's accuracy way out of proportion. That's the way sides argue.

One of these days, when I have 10K rounds to blow thru (I need to get set up for reloading soon), and a "spare" AR to beat up on, I will do some torture testing and document it all for you naysayers. You guys will have to wait another year or so...

But, this is probably not an argument I can win in this forum. :supergrin:

I promise you I have more experiance with the AR platform then you do, and I am not talking about just shooting coyotes or paper at the range. I carried an AR starting in 1996 and my patrol car has not been without one since.

I know exactly what the limitations of every rifle I have ever carried are, and I believe none of the guns you have posted pictures of whould have fired more then two shots before a major and most likely, unclearable malfunction would have happend.

I have done extensive T&E on the AR made by many different firms, as well as the H&K G36K, the M4 suppressed, MP5, Glock, H&K USP and on and on. What I know is this, the Stoner rifle is a fine rifle and with proper care it will work, but it does require more cleaning and will take less abuse then the AK/Galil/G36 and many other rifles out there.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
I promise you I have more experiance with the AR platform then you do, and I am not talking about just shooting coyotes or paper at the range. I carried an AR starting in 1996 and my patrol car has not been without one since.

You don't "know" that. It would be a useless to try and argue about it.

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
I know exactly what the limitations of every rifle I have ever carried are, and I believe none of the guns you have posted pictures of whould have fired more then two shots before a major and most likely, unclearable malfunction would have happend.

You don't "know" that either. I can't prove it and neither can you, so that's another useless point to argue.

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
I have done extensive T&E on the AR made by many different firms, as well as the H&K G36K, the M4 suppressed, MP5, Glock, H&K USP and on and on. What I know is this, the Stoner rifle is a fine rifle and with proper care it will work, but it does require more cleaning and will take less abuse then the AK/Galil/G36 and many other rifles out there.

I never said that the AR was more robust/reliable than the AK. I just know that most folks exaggerate their point with little real world experience. The AR has a stigma that it earned early in it's life and even though it's not an issue now, it has still lingered, just like Glocks and kB!'s. Old myths die hard.

[MARTIN FISHER]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
You don't "know" that. It would be a useless to try and argue about it.



Really? Go ahead and post how much experiance you have with an AR platform in the real world and then I will post my professional resume as well as contact information to those who I worked with in the Arizona Department of Public Safety CIB Unit, The Apache County Tactical Response Team, the Maricopa County SO and others.

You see, I can "know" that and I can prove it. So list away, GL.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
Really? Go ahead and post how much experiance you have with an AR platform in the real world and then I will post my professional resume as well as contact information to those who I worked with in the Arizona Department of Public Safety CIB Unit, The Apache County Tactical Response Team, the Maricopa County SO and others.

You see, I can "know" that and I can prove it. So list away, GL.

I don't see your proof. So you worked in some LE jobs. How does that prove you have more experience with the AR15 than me?

How about this, how many AR15's have you built? I don't recall how many I have built. Probably 30-something... No, it's not a ton, and no I am not an AR15 armorer, but I'd bet it's more than you... but I don't "know" that do I?

How often do you actually use your AR15? Come on now, how often do you shoot it?

How many different AR's have you shot? I'd say I have shot close to 100.

Do you really want to get into this? Seriously, do you?

[MARTIN FISHER]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
I don't see your proof. So you worked in some LE jobs. How does that prove you have more experience with the AR15 than me?

How about this, how many AR15's have you built? I don't recall how many I have built. Probably 30-something... No, it's not a ton, and no I am not an AR15 armorer, but I'd bet it's more than you... but I don't "know" that do I?

How often do you actually use your AR15? Come on now, how often do you shoot it?

How many different AR's have you shot? I'd say I have shot close to 100.

Do you really want to get into this? Seriously, do you?

Yeah, I do. Building an AR is easy, and yes I have done it. I shoot at least three times a week, ARs, AKs anything I can find ammo for. I am a AZPOST certified firearms instructor. I more hours of training and conducted more hours of training with the AR then the number of AR's you have built or fired, all of which I can back with AZPOST training documents.

I have personally USED the AR15 in over 50 felony warrant services for the DEA, AZDPS, Holbrook Police Department, St. Johns Police Department and various county SWAT teams.

I know more about the AR platform and what it can do then you, because I have trained with it, and used it in the real world more than you. Unless you have done more then pulled the trigger on some ARs on the range and thrown some parts kits together in your bedroom, I know more about the AR and what it can and cannot do then you do. So, yeah, lets go there.

[MTMilitiaman]

That seems like an incredibly arrogant thing to say to someone you barely know and have never actually met.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by MTMilitiaman
That seems like an incredibly arrogant thing to say to someone you barely know and have never actually met.

Exactly.

I never said I had more experience with AR's than him (I did say that I had more experience with them than most folks). He seems to be intent on trying to prove he has more experience than me but he can only assume.

[MARTIN FISHER]

Originally posted by GoreLicks
Exactly.

I never said I had more experience with AR's than him (I did say that I had more experience with them than most folks). He seems to be intent on trying to prove he has more experience than me but he can only assume.

So we are not going to "go there" then, GL? I am not arrogant, I just know what I know. I have been on this board enough to know what kind of experiance that you have, because you have never been shy about it. I also know what kind of experiance I have and what I can do. If you call that arrogance, so be it. I can back up everything I have said, any time, any place.

[RMTactical]

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
So we are not going to "go there" then, GL? I am not arrogant, I just know what I know. I have been on this board enough to know what kind of experiance that you have, because you have never been shy about it. I also know what kind of experiance I have and what I can do. If you call that arrogance, so be it. I can back up everything I have said, any time, any place.

(sigh)

So you KNOW all about my experience(s) huh? Please, lets' hear them too! After you find the time to list your extensive experience with AR's as well, of course. ;)

[MARTIN FISHER]

Still not going there huh?

I have already provided a limited list of my AR experiances and it is not putting parts kits together and shooting on a range, then killing some varmints and claiming real world knowlege I don't have, that is clearly your area of expertise.

Feel free to post YOUR professional qualifications at any time.

[MARTIN FISHER]

Yeah, I do. Building an AR is easy, and yes I have done it. I shoot at least three times a week, ARs, AKs anything I can find ammo for. I am a AZPOST certified firearms instructor. I more hours of training and conducted more hours of training with the AR then the number of AR's you have built or fired, all of which I can back with AZPOST training documents.

I have personally USED the AR15 in over 50 felony warrant services for the DEA, AZDPS, Holbrook Police Department, St. Johns Police Department and various county SWAT teams.

I know more about the AR platform and what it can do then you, because I have trained with it, and used it in the real world more than you. Unless you have done more then pulled the trigger on some ARs on the range and thrown some parts kits together in your bedroom, I know more about the AR and what it can and cannot do then you do. So, yeah, lets go there.

I reposted this because your ability to see is not as refined as your ability to make 800 yard shots with your AR. :freak:

[RMTactical]

You're sitting here talking about all your special knowledge, yet you have only asked to see mine. Why the double standard? Why can't you answer your own questions. Are you afraid that some civilian real estate investor might have more experience than you?

You posted a couple agencies you worked with. Is that you "credentials" Does that prove you have more experience with the AR than I do? Seriously now...

It's not like the difference between us a regular driver vs. a stock car racer. You shoot the same guns as me. The only difference is you might have more experience with full-auto weapons.

Trust me, I have shot many many more times than the number of AR's I have built and/or worked on and/or shot.

So, how many people have you killed (or shot) with your AR15's, just so I know how much more "real world experience" you have with them compared to me. You seem to be hinting that you have used them on people as opposed to the other live animals I have used mine on. Please, enlighten me as to what aspect of the AR I am not familiar with.

You have more ego than me, I will give you that much.

FWIW, what does it matter if one of us has shot 40K round thru AR's vs. 50K rounds thru an AR. If you've shot 50K rounds in AR's and I have shot 40K rounds, does that mean you have a vastly superior idea of what the AR can do vs. what I know? I don't think so.

I don't even know why this is the argument. I know many folks who would without a doubt put your supposed knowledge of the AR to shame 100x over (in EVERY category), and they like it. I'd rather hear the real world experiences of good friends who've used it in extensive combat vs the 50 times an internet commando pointed one at a perp while two other guys threw cuffs on them.

ETA: I'd also like to hear how many times your AR jammed up while you were pointing it those 50 perps. Let's hear about THAT REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE!!

[SilverState]

Originally posted by gunwolf72
i saw 1 one time at a show but cant rember the look like an m16 but take ak47 mags and 7.62x39 ammo

Both of you guys should stop your pissing contest. The truth of the matter is that this is the internet and we really don't know which one of you has more AR experience than the other. But that is not the question, is it?

To answer the question, once again, Special Weapons in Arizona makes a lower AR reciever that takes AK mags and fires 7.62X39 ammo.

And for the AR haters, get an AK. :upeyes:

[BigRed2k]

Originally posted by MARTIN FISHER
I reposted this because your ability to see is not as refined as your ability to make 800 yard shots with your AR. :freak:

What a @#$!ing douchebag