Comparison of AK 74 and M16 table. American M16 rifle versus Kalashnikov assault rifle: which is better

Once upon a time, the weapons of a potential enemy were not available to the vast majority of our compatriots even in the form of high-quality images. Now it is quite possible to purchase “civilian” versions of assault rifles from countries in Europe and the United States, although this is associated with various kinds of difficulties, ranging from the high cost of weapons to purely bureaucratic obstacles during import. And after all, there is little of this shooting exoticism in Russia. But, as usual, there are more than enough of all kinds of fables and myths.

Therefore, it was impossible to ignore the opportunity to compare in practice the legendary “Black Rifle” with our AK-74. And at the same time, optionally, with the lesser-known, but no less interesting German G-3.

There is no point in describing the design of all three shooting participants - it is known to almost all readers and is available in numerous sources. It was much more interesting to compare weapons according to the main operational criteria - ease of use and efficiency in shooting, and at the same time to analyze the reviews of professionals: army special forces officers and GRU special forces. An important point was the opportunity to “torture” in practice the features of caring for the weapon described in the article.

Request to readers: do not consider the conclusions in this article to be the ultimate truth. We all have our own understanding of the design and operational priorities that determine the subjective assessment of any weapon, so let this article remain only a personal opinion.

AK-74, M-16 and G-3

On “our” side, a modified AK-74M, chambered for the standard 5.45x39 mm cartridge, took part in the test. It was the cartridge, as a direct competitor to the 5.56 mm NATO one, that determined the choice of this particular AK model for testing.

“Civilian” version of the M-16A3 (we had in our hands the “omnivorous” XR-15, which is superior in barrel quality to the original “Kolt” M-16, designed for firing both “civilian” cartridges. 223 Rem and military 5.56 NATO) does not have the ability to fire in bursts, but this was not critical (given some experience with automatic shooting from the army M-4).

All three copies were modified to one degree or another. The AK-74M was equipped with: an Israeli stock “a la M-4”, a forend with a folding front handle, an ergonomic fire control handle and an American-made “EOTech” holographic sight. Previously, only the domestic “Cobra” collimator was installed on the machine, but now there are many opportunities for “tuning” AK-shaped ones, so we attached everything possible to our copy. However, as the shooting showed, it was not entirely in vain.

The XR-15, also produced by the American-British company SDI, had only a more comfortable fire control handle and a LEAPERS SCP-420M-B optical sight, which was developed specifically for weapons of caliber .223Rem (5.56 NATO). The sight is equipped with a bracket for a Weaver rail and can be easily mounted on any weapon equipped with this rail.

In addition, the sight is equipped with a quick-release Quick Lock Handle mount (on the rail) for installation on self-loading rifles such as M16 (AR-15) and analogues.

The XR-41 was also equipped with standard optical sight, attached to the weapon using the original bracket.

On the firing line

XR-15 (M-16)

Many of those who pick up the M-16 or its analogues for the first time note that the “black rifle,” contrary to all expectations, is not so light and comfortable. It’s certainly not lighter than the AK-74M. Regarding convenience, everything is also relative: the most important positive thing(especially tall people) usually have a long rifle fore-end, convenient for any grip and any palm. Everything is done very high quality and carefully (although the seams from casting on some parts are very visible). The rifle is good, beautiful and aggressive, you can’t take that away from it.

Our XR-15 had an improved fire control stick, but it didn't feel particularly comfortable. The connection of the standard 20-seater magazine did not cause any difficulties, but it had to be pushed into the shaft with the palm of your hand, otherwise it would simply fall out. The 30-round magazine had to be put aside altogether - it refused to be fixed in the rifle. Then I had to saw it with a file, but, oddly enough, this didn’t help either. But here the fault most likely lies with the store manufacturer.

Gate. Probably, almost every Russian teenager will be able to twist the bolt frame of the M-16 - now everyone plays American computer “shooters”, and there the loading algorithm for any known “shooter” is displayed very well. But the game is a game, and pulling the frame with a two-finger grip from behind and strictly along the axis of the barrel is not as convenient, unlike a weapon with a reloading handle, usually located on the right side - no one has yet canceled biomechanics.

I didn’t like the descent of the XR-15 – it was hard and not as clear as I would like. Of course, the trigger on a military weapon cannot be “sporty”, but in order to at least partially realize the potential of the “rifle-cartridge” complex, in this case at least minimal skill is required.

After shooting several magazines, we get a lack of firing (the forced shutter locking button justified its presence), and then a sticking. All this can be attributed to domestically produced cartridges (during famous war 08.08.08, M-4 failures were also attributed to the “wrong” manufacturer and either Turkish or Greek cartridges). A similar situation was observed on M-1, which we talked about a year ago. But somehow it has long been ingrained in the subconscious that a weapon should fire any more or less high-quality cartridges, of which Russian .223 Rem ammunition is completely included.

When you first pick up a weapon about which you have read so many enthusiastic and negative reviews, you expect something special. Interestingly, the author knows of only one positive opinion about the M-16, privately expressed by one domestic designer. Moreover, the positive concerns only the operational properties of the rifle, when firing in bursts, and in shooting range conditions. Of the military acquaintances who are well acquainted with the M-16 and its clones, for some reason no one has the desire to take it “to war.” Of course, the habit of using AKs also plays a role here, and psychological aspect also not in last place. But... these people cannot be called pragmatic enough, so it’s not that simple.

The disadvantages of the M-16 are known to everyone and there is no point in repeating this for the hundredth time. There are also plenty of advantages, but there is no 100% confidence in this weapon. And this factor is one of the most important.

XR-41 (Heckler-Koch G-3)

This rifle, with its “oakiness,” is reminiscent of German weapons from the period of the end of World War II: just as heavy, clumsy, with the widespread use of non-standard technical solutions. Our sample differed from the combat G-3 only in the trigger and minor changes in the bolt frame. There are currently two in Germany model range of these weapons: Saber Defense XR-15 from Waffen Schumacher and the OA-15 ​​family from Oberland Arms from Upper Bavaria. Schumacher imports its XR-15 from England, from Saber Defense.

The magazine lock is akin to Kalashnikov's. The reloading handle is foldable, motionless when firing, located on the left and moved forward. There can be a lot of debate about the benefits of this technical solution, but such a scheme is justified only when shooting from any position, but not lying down or in cramped conditions. And all the now fashionable “gadgets” in shooting techniques that came from practical shooting, to put it mildly, are not always adequate for combat use. Sport is a sport, it should not be confused with war or even hunting. So we will consider the “left-handed” weapon reloading scheme only a feature of the G-3, nothing more.

The G-3 diopter sight requires a specific attachment, and the ease of its use, especially for close and moving targets, is also a very controversial point. But the standard optical Hensoldt FERO-Z-24 turned out to be quite good. We must admit that the accuracy of our sample was excellent, and there were no problems with operational reliability (given the shooting conditions, this was not surprising, although the XR-15 “pleased” us here too). Cartridge.308 Win. has noticeable recoil, which is partly mitigated by the 4.5 kg weight of the rifle.

The descent is disgusting. Here we can draw a direct parallel with the myths about the “bad” trigger of our three-ruler and the “good” trigger of the Mauser rifle mod. 1898. In practice, the Mauser trigger usually works at least no better than the release of our three-ruble gun. So here too - the “oaky” and unpredictable descent of the G-3 forced us to focus more on fighting it than on aiming. But here “the West will help us” - “sports” triggers have already been ordered for both “foreigners”, which, if it does not improve shooting performance, will at least save the shooters’ nerve cells in the future.

Just in case, I’ll mention the “Revelli grooves” in the XR-41 chamber, for which our SVT-40 is so vehemently criticized, considering their presence as a sign of design imperfection. Apparently, the presence of Revelli grooves in German weapons is not so critical...

AK-74M

The AK is familiar to many readers thoroughly, so I’ll immediately give a few facts and figures: from a machine gun with an installed holographic sight, from a “standing” position (using a belt), standard army chest and height targets were confidently hit at distances up to 600 m inclusive. To hit small targets it was enough to take a more stable position. With open sights, of course, more effort and ammunition were required to hit distant targets, but this was true for all rifles tested.

Optionally, the AK-74M was fired in automatic mode, as well as with rapid fire, transferring fire along the front and in depth. As expected, when shooting at single targets at distances greater than 100 m, burst fire loses its meaning, but you also shouldn’t expect miracles from the M-16 and its clones when conducting automatic fire.

Thanks to its traditional layout, the AK-74M is easy to control and reload. Compact, well weighted, with good ergonomics (this also applies to the standard configuration) and absolutely normal weight. Nothing superfluous, no small buttons or knobs, everything is logical and intuitive. Minimal recoil and minimal barrel bounce. At distances up to 500-600 m, it is not inferior to the M-16 in practical accuracy. What else is needed?

Summary

It was difficult to draw conclusions here. If only because it was clear that they would not be objective, although they are a kind of generalization of many opinions about the tested weapons. But there was also no reason to repeat the hackneyed “perestroika” cliches about the “American miracle rifle”.

Everything is clear about the AK-74M - simple, reliable, familiar and accurate. No less accurate than an American rifle. Once again there is no point in talking about ease of maintenance. The AK-74 is much more convenient and lighter than the G-3, although the latter has some advantages, but this is only due to the .308 Win cartridge. It is the German rifle, equipped with optics, that can be seriously considered as a kind of analogue of our SVD: in this incarnation, the G-3 is, first of all, interesting due to its compactness and cartridge. Firing in bursts from the G-3 can only be interesting from an educational perspective.

It is unlikely that anyone will deny that victory is often achieved not by the design of the weapon, but by the level of training of the fighter and his competent control on the battlefield (it is also obvious that the level of training of the shooter is one of the most important in hunting).

At distances further than 100 m, usually few people shoot in bursts even from the M-16, so it is worth objectively evaluating the tested rifles based on the results of firing with single fire. And here, even when shooting in “greenhouse” conditions, some of the advantages of the M-16 design are reduced, if not to zero, then greatly minimized.

In practice, the “obsolescence” of the AK scheme acquires advantages that cannot be overestimated. Here, the words of one of my acquaintances are very appropriate, who briefly and succinctly described the emotions of a fighter who, located in an open area, is being “pounded by an inaccurate Kalash.” Let me mention once again that those of our specialists who have the opportunity to choose weapons when going to “combat” stubbornly prefer AKs.

Of the three rifles we talked about today, the M-16 inspires the least confidence among those who constantly use weapons to carry out their tasks: reliability in weapons and in people has been and remains the most important criterion.

Yuri Maksimov
Master gun 03 - 2012

• Articles» Assault rifles / Assault rifles
• Mercenary 3882 0

The theme of the confrontation between Kalashnikov and the American assault aristocrat is as old as time. The two legends of small arms clashed in confrontation on real battlefields and were repeatedly tested by military experts, but a definite answer has still not been found. The fact is that the original function of the M-16 and the products of the Kalashnikov concern are different: the American rifle is designed for a professional contract soldier, while our machine gun was intended for mass production - that is, for soldiers who may not have time to master a complex design. Let's try to figure it out.

The most important property of a mass-produced assault rifle should be resistance to contamination. Here, without any doubt, our native Kalashnikov assault rifle wins. American rifle refuses to behave “good” without regular cleaning and lubrication, and falls from a small height also negatively affect it. In 74% of cases, water turns an assault rifle into an assault baton - a good thing, of course, but not very effective against a machine gun.

Failsafe: AK-74M

The AK-74M, as well as the more advanced AK-12, is a weapon with high reliability. Experts note the ability of the domestic concern’s development to perform its functions even with extreme levels of pollution. AK is an undemanding, but very functional weapon, which is ideally suited for the army: easy to assemble, highly reliable in difficult conditions.

Dimensions: M-16

During World War II, the Americans decided to rely on accuracy and accuracy of fire. The M-16 has an elongated barrel, because of which it was even necessary to increase the height of American armored personnel carriers. Indeed, the rifle has increased accuracy at long distances, but how much is this in demand? Real combat rarely occurs at a distance of more than three hundred meters, which negates all the advantages of a long barrel.

Dimensions: AK-74M

Here our machine also has a number of advantages. Firstly, there is the AKS74U model, designed to arm the crews of combat vehicles and is actively used by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Secondly, even a standard Kalashnikov has very moderate dimensions and gives the fighter much more freedom than the same M-16.

Accuracy

The machine gun, developed by Eugene Stoner, boasts greater accuracy than the domestic AK-74M - by about 25%. The general layout of our machine gun is not very conducive to close-up shooting, because its butt is shifted down relative to the shooting axis. Roughly speaking, it is easier for a soldier to aim, but it is more difficult to send a second bullet at the same target, since the barrel will rise.

Accuracy

The M-16 also wins in terms of shooting accuracy. The fact is that American rifles are equipped with a diopter sight, which, together with a longer sighting line, allows for more accurate fire at long distances. While the AK-74M has a simple, open sight. On the other hand, this solution makes it easier to fire at moving targets.

Ammunition

The Americans chose to create weapons for a smaller caliber, knowing full well that this would have a positive effect on shooting accuracy. The light M-16 bullet has a higher initial speed than a heavy AK projectile. Experts recognized that poor ballistics leads to the fact that the AK bullet loses most of its kinetic energy at a distance: it is almost pointless to shoot from a machine gun at long distances.

After the end of World War II, two fundamentally different approaches to the question of how to arm infantry arose.

The first of them involved arming troops with a machine gun and a self-loading sniper rifle chambered for a rifle cartridge, an assault rifle chambered for a special intermediate cartridge, and a pistol chambered for a weakened cartridge. This concept, adopted in the Soviet Army, was based on the need to arm the bulk of the soldiers for combat at a distance of up to 600 m (the infantry dismounting line) with a universal assault rifle. The focus was on not very targeted fire from 200-400 m. All targets at a greater distance were hit by armored vehicle fire.

This approach was designed for a mass army in a global war, where conscripts do not know how to handle too much complexity. The leaders of third world countries also liked it: partisans (and government troops, who were not much different from partisans) could take full advantage of the AK at optimal distances for this weapon, where the shorter aimed firing range than rifles and accuracy were compensated by the density of fire.

The second approach involved arming the troops with a machine gun and an automatic rifle chambered for a single rifle cartridge, as well as a submachine gun and a pistol.

The concept relied on a well-trained soldier who, with accurate, rapid single fire, hits the enemy at long distances. In the event of a close approach, the rifle switched to automatic fire. The crews of combat vehicles and soldiers of supporting units were armed with submachine guns that were convenient for self-defense at short distances. This idea was implemented in NATO countries and a number of third world countries.

Rifles: M14, FN FAL, G3, SETME, designed mainly for single fire, were inferior to the Soviet SVD only in quality of execution. Well, their cartridge is a little weaker.

This concept underwent major changes in the 60s and 70s when these rifles were replaced by new 5.56x45mm weapons. The reason was that the wars of the 50-60s were of a somewhat unexpected nature for Western strategists. In particular, African and Asian partisans did not conduct long-range fire combat in open areas, but immediately approached at short distances, convenient for fire from submachine guns, in large quantities left over from the last war and generously supplied from the USSR. An automatic rifle, forced to fire in bursts in this situation, produced too low accuracy.

Thus, according to official American statistics of the Vietnam War, in the vast majority of cases, fire contact occurred at a distance of up to 25 meters. At the same time, for one killed Viet Cong, 50,000 rounds of ammunition were spent! It is no coincidence that the symbol of the European mercenary in Africa became not a rifle, but an effective Uzi submachine gun in close combat. However, when it spread across the continent, the partisans replaced the PPSh, Stan and Vigneron with the AK-47. In guerrilla warfare he was unrivaled. In the same Vietnam, American soldiers willingly armed themselves with captured Kalash rifles instead of the “native” M14 and M1 carbine.

From Uncle Sam's stash

Vietnam became the “moment of truth” for the American military, revealing all the problems war machine, including those related to small arms. The question of adopting an assault rifle, similar in its characteristics to the AK-47, has become acute.

Meanwhile, Uncle Sam had exactly what was needed in his stash. Back in the late 50s, American designer Eugene Stoner developed a light assault rifle. But the AR-15, as the M16 was originally called, was not in demand. Due to the then prevailing approach to small arms and existing design flaws, its recognition was delayed for long years. But there would have been no luck, but misfortune helped: the 7.62-mm M14 rifle, adopted in 1957, showed too low fire efficiency, especially in close combat. Within ten years it was necessary to rearm the army.

Stoner made a truly revolutionary decision - the assault rifle should be small-caliber. Thanks to this, the new weapon should provide greater accuracy when firing in bursts, and the amount of ammunition carried (a small-caliber cartridge weighs almost half as much). Thus, it was with the brainchild of Eugene Stoner that the global trend of caliber reduction began, as a result of which the domestic AK-74 was born. Although to this day there is a debate between supporters and opponents of small caliber, the stability of the trend undoubtedly confirms the justification of the decision of the American designer.

In 1959, Colt purchased the rights to manufacture the AR-15 from Armalite and began production of a commercial version of the rifle. At the same time, it was submitted for competitive testing to select a promising army weapons.

The task of the competition was as follows: the weight of a rifle - no more than 2.7 kg with a magazine for 20 rounds and with the possibility of automatic fire, capable of hitting the head target at a distance of 450-500 m with at least one bullet from the first round and piercing both walls of a steel army helmet.

The test results were very successful. The AR-15 was 1.2 times more accurate than the M14, and consumed one and a half times less ammunition to solve the same problems. With a total weight of 7.5 kg (determined for weapons and ammunition), a soldier could carry an M14 with 100 rounds or an AR-15 (M16) with 250. The advantages were obvious.

In the fall of 1961, the AR-15 was sent for field testing in South Vietnam. All requirements were met, and on May 15, 1962, the rifle was adopted by the US Air Force.

In 1963, a contract was signed with Colt for the supply of 85,000 rifles for testing in various branches of the military, in all climatic zones. Some shortcomings were identified that reduce the reliability of the weapon, and measures were taken to eliminate them. So, in particular, a pusher appeared on the receiver to manually return the bolt to the forward position if it does not close due to contamination. Taking these changes into account, the rifle, named M16A1, was adopted by the entire American Army and Navy. The company received an order for 700,000 rifles for the needs ground forces And Marine Corps in Vietnam.

Lesser of evils

But even after modernization, the M16 was still far from perfect. She was still sensitive to operating conditions. It turned out that the M16 barrel has capillary properties, accumulating and retaining moisture (to avoid this, it was recommended to use special protective caps). In addition, due to the replacement of gunpowder in the cartridges, the rate of fire increased sharply - up to 1000 rounds per minute, which led to various delays in firing.

To this day, many Vietnam veterans are convinced that the rifle, which failed at the most inopportune moment, was to blame for the death of their comrades. Despite this, the introduction of the M16A1 proceeded at an accelerated pace. Because there wasn’t much to choose from: the Garand rifle, which served the Americans in World War II and the Korean Wars, was already completely obsolete, and production of the M14 was discontinued.

Already in 1978, the M16A1 modernization program began and was developed new model M16A2, adopted for service in 1982. The main differences were: a heavier and longer barrel, replacement of automatic fire with a fixed burst mode (three shots), new design muzzle brake- compensator, new sight and modified configuration of the pistol grip and forend.

“When the M16A2 began to appear in the troops, everyone was extremely pleased: the improvements that were implemented on it were proposed by us ourselves, this was what caught our eye even when we first met Stoner’s weapon. Finally, a weapon worthy of a man has appeared, the seasoned Airbonne sergeants said, literally driving one bullet into another at 300 yards. The weapon could really be called “good”: thanks to the heavy barrel, it was finally possible to shoot in bursts for quite a long time, which was previously unrealistic, the recoil was perceived to be almost half weaker than the old version - due to just a slightly wider butt plate and greater mass.

The sight acquired normal adjustment screws, now any recruit could shoot the weapon. Accuracy was usually about 2-3.5 inches at 100 yards, but individual barrels would knock out 1 1/2 inches at the same distance. Shooting at 300-400 yards could now cause delusions of grandeur in an experienced shooter - it became so easy to blow targets to shreds. This was facilitated by a more durable and capacious nylon magazine with 30 rounds of ammunition. The bayonet included in the A2 kit looked cool, but it was already noticeably less useful than the long one of the previous modification.

A sight with two holes was probably also useless: even with a large one, shooting at dusk seemed like a bad joke, as did marking 800 yards. A trigger with a three-shot cut-off cannot be called correct either: at Fort Bragg, every recruit was able to cut off three shots on the second day of shooting.

But single shooting became much less convenient due to the cut-off detail; the descent became uneven, more difficult and with a failure at the end. Therefore, now many rifles in the Army and Navy do not have such a device. At 800 yards, you can only hit a target the size of an elephant, although the energy of the bullet is still quite sufficient. But the bullet’s anti-barrier effect, previously equal to approximately zero, has noticeably improved,” he assessed new rifle US Airborne officer, shooting instructor Dan Shani.

But also new modification wasn't ideal. The disadvantages of the rifle are still considered to be the low reliability of the return spring, excessive miniaturization of parts, and sensitivity to contamination.

Despite significant modernization, today the M16A2 and A3 are, according to American experts, an unpromising model, inferior to the Russian AK74M in terms of safety, burst accuracy, penetration and compactness.

The first captured M16s reached Soviet testing laboratories at the end of 1967. The studies carried out revealed a number of positive qualities: high lethal effect of the bullet, good ergonomics, high fire efficiency. But along with this, extremely low service life and failure-free operation of the automation were noted, especially in difficult conditions. The experts' conclusion emphasized: the rifle is not suitable for hand-to-hand combat, and an accidental fall on a hard base may make it impossible to use in combat.

Always Competitors

As a rule, any conversation about rifles of the M16 family inevitably ends with their comparison with their closest competitors - Kalashnikov assault rifles. Since politics and the arms market are almost inseparable things, these discussions often take on a corresponding coloring. To avoid accusations of partiality and national bias, we will provide the opportunity to compare the M16 and AK to an American specialist - the already mentioned Dan Shani: “From time immemorial, the alternative to the M16 was the AK. The AK cannot be called an ordinary weapon; it is probably the most reliable example mass weapons infantry since the Mauser-98. The AK was actively tested in the US Army, and was even used by certain special forces of the Navy during some local conflicts.

When we got the opportunity to shoot from AKs for a change, mainly the Soviet-made AK-47, this weapon seemed to everyone to be something like the sling and bow of primitive savages, it was so simply designed and finished, but at 300 yards the bullets were 7.62 they pierced the brickwork, and could easily kill the soldier hiding behind it. This could not fail to impress.

A modern AK costs almost a 10th of the cost of an M16A3. But, despite a lot of positive qualities that are not worth listing, the AK has a number of features that limit the versatility of its use. Yes, completely steel structure improves the strength of the weapon, increases service life and maintainability, but deprives the weapon of the necessary mass reserve to increase firepower. If the M16, after modernization, that is, lengthening the butt and making the barrel heavier, began to weigh only 300 grams more, then similar improvements on the AK increase its weight to unacceptable for military weapons- more than 4 kg, as can be seen in the example of Saiga M3 carbines and RPK machine guns.

I am sure that the Soviet Union created Kalashnikov assault rifles with a light-alloy receiver, but they, of course, could not pass the rigorous tests that the Russians like to put on their weapons...

The accuracy of the AK is not at all as bad as the inflated turkeys like to talk about it, who believe that east of Germany in Europe there is nothing but savagery and squalor. The AK-47 was not just quite accurate, but a high-precision weapon.

At 100 yards, most of the AKs I came across with a milled receiver confidently knocked out 2-2.5-3.5 inches, which is quite enough for a military weapon of such power. The results could have been better if the AK sight had been more convenient, and even better, if it had had a 1.5x collimator in addition to it. Quite accurate fire from the AK 7.62 can be fired up to 400 yards, at this distance the holes from bullets from the AK-47 are scattered over a 7-inch circle. In my opinion, this is not bad at all. More better weapons caliber 5.45. With it, I can easily hit targets up to 600 yards, and accurate shooting with optics is possible at 400 yards, while dispersion does not exceed 4-5 inches. We must assume that shooting from an AK-74M with a reinforced receiver will give more top scores, this is not to mention the modifications of caliber .223 Rem (caliber 5.56 x 45 NATO - approx. S.S.).

Other “disadvantages” attributed to the AK: the difficulty of attaching the magazine, the lack of a slide stop, the supposedly inconvenient sight, safety, short butt – these are not disadvantages, but rather, features. The magazine may not fit as naturally as the M-16A2 or HK G33 magazine, but it ALWAYS fits, even when a soldier with a weapon in his hands crawled through the mud for 500 meters, and then lay down in a ditch in a rice field, filled, like these fields, water...

This real example. skills. It's no more difficult than inserting film into a point-and-shoot camera, and there's nothing to invent here.

There is no need to turn on the AK safety at all if there is even the slightest possibility of instantly opening fire. The weapon does not fire, even if it is placed on a concrete floor; the trigger is quite reliable and will not break off unnecessarily. This is a well-known difficulty for accurate fire - but can also be corrected with a simple skill. You can shoot accurately from an AK even with such a trigger, and the sight, which is less convenient than a diopter for long-range accurate shots, allows you to instantly transfer fire to short and medium distances. The diopter in such situations blocks out all the white light, and it can hardly be called comfortable.

The shutter lag is generally not an acquired taste. On the M16 it quickly fails from a simple shot. In my opinion, no delay is better than one that could warp the first cartridge so much that it has to be knocked out. The AK stock is really short, but when you have to shoot in a thick jacket and equipment, it feels noticeably less, as does the “slenderness” of the fore-end and grip.

As for the M16A3, it has many shortcomings that immediately begin to irritate. One of them is the dimensions that made the ceilings of the M113 and M2A2 (American armored vehicles - S.S.’s note) so high, and the M4 carbines for a long time not enough.

Meanwhile, the experience of the very first clashes in the Gulf showed that the real firing range during fire contacts does not exceed 300 yards. This circumstance negated the concept of the “long infantry rifle,” which had occupied the minds of our commanders since World War II, and was partly supported by the experience of fighting in the mountainous regions of Vietnam.

Personally, I think that a “long” rifle with a 20-inch barrel should have become a “special” weapon for mountain rifle units, and for everyone else with a 14.5-inch barrel and a folding stock, like on the M4 modification.

Another very significant drawback is the overall fragility of the structure. Not only from hitting the ground when falling (which is also not uncommon), but also from accidental impacts on the body of armored vehicles, on the handrails of ladders, on the rifles of other soldiers, cracks appeared on the receiver. Most often this was treated only by changing the receiver. This meant not only the loss of the faithful $200 to the state, but also a week in the workshop and a new shooting. And this happens often, much more often than it should happen with normal military weapons.

A lot has been said about the reliability of the AR-15 in general and military rifles in particular. All I can say is that my M16 has never let me down difficult situation. But! In general, the reliability of weapons is relatively low. In experienced hands, the M16 will never plunge into mud, even if the shooter is in it to the very top of his head, will never drink water, and will always be cleaned and lubricated. But an inexperienced fighter will always find a way to render a weapon completely unusable. There were a lot of examples in the Persian Gulf... When sand got into the M16 mechanism, it did not always stop firing, but very soon it could be completely out of action due to breakdown. There is a great way to avoid this - do not disassemble the rifle except in a closed room. But since this often had to be done directly in the HAMVEE (Army Hummer vehicle - approx. S.S.) or in a tent, dust got in in the required amount.

Hence the conclusion - the rifle is of little use for a long autonomous campaign. One more “trifle”: when water gets into the M16 barrel, it is not always shaken out in one motion due to its small diameter, long length and peculiar type of rifling. As a result, the barrel fails after several (two or three) shots and requires replacement. It is curious that the AK-74, with almost the same caliber, is completely devoid of this drawback...

You often hear that the M16A2 is the weapon of professionals for whom accuracy is more important than the ability to withstand contamination.

This is, to put it mildly, not true. The war consists entirely of episodes that fall very little under the regulations, which civilians call extreme. During a fight, a professional must become one with the weapon; it must be 100% reliable, and you cannot convince more than one professional that the main thing in war is to keep an eye on the condition of the rifle. Rather, the M16 can be called a good sporting rifle, which can be used to a limited extent as an army rifle.”

Prospects

Not only by practitioners such as Deng Sheny, but also by gunsmiths in many countries, including the USA, the M16, even after the latest modernization, is considered obsolete.

However, numerous attempts to create a new assault rifle did not lead to the desired result. And therefore, as expected, the M16A3 will be in service with the US Army for quite some time. So far, despite all their patriotism, US special forces soldiers are increasingly using foreign-made weapons: the German MP-5 submachine gun, Uzi, G3, Israeli Galil or even AK, as, for example, today in Afghanistan and Iraq .

At the same time, the M16, M16A1, A2, A3 rifles are in service with the armies of 27 countries, including Honduras, Guatemala, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mexico, New Zealand, Iran, Oman, Panama, and Taiwan. It is produced with some changes in South Korea, Canada and China. In addition, the M16A3 is in service elite unit UK SAS. The fact is that the English Enfield L85A1 assault rifle is even worse: the reliability of the weapon turned out to be below any acceptable standards. For example, during Desert Storm it showed high sensitivity to clogging of mechanisms, and when firing prone, gas flows from the flame arrester raised a dust cloud. During the operation in Kosovo, the massive malfunction of British soldiers' weapons forced them to hastily rearm part of the contingent with American rifles.

Be that as it may, the M16 and its subsequent modifications occupy the second place, after the AK, in popularity in the world. Here, it really should be clarified that when purchasing this or that weapon, the state is forced to be guided not only by military criteria, but to a much greater extent by political considerations. After all, what weapons the soldiers are armed with indicates the general orientation of the country.

It should be noted that small arms were by no means the main direction of development of US military-technical thought. In recent decades, priority has been given to military space weapons, aviation and missile technology, and a number of other areas - in which the Americans’ successes are much more impressive.

However, recent events in Afghanistan and Iraq have convincingly shown that there are situations in which geophysical weapons, satellite fighters or stealth bombers cannot replace a reliable assault rifle, or, as we say, a machine gun.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed osh Y bku Select text and click Ctrl+Enter

The Kalashnikov assault rifle (AK74) was developed as a reliable weapon for a not very trained soldier, while the combat mission of the weapon was primarily reliability on the battlefield and long-term operation without additional maintenance in special workshops.

The accuracy of the battle was not initially strong point AK. Already during military tests of its prototypes, it was noted that with the greatest reliability of the systems submitted to the competition, the Kalashnikov design did not provide the required accuracy conditions (like all the presented designs to one degree or another). Thus, by this parameter, even by the standards of the mid-1940s, the AK was clearly not an outstanding model. However, reliability (in general, reliability here is a complex performance characteristics: reliability, firing until failures occur, guaranteed service life, actual service life, service life of individual parts and assemblies, storability, mechanical strength, etc., for which the machine gun, by the way, is the best even now) was recognized at that time as paramount, and fine-tuning accuracy until the required parameters, it was decided to postpone it for the future.

The range of a direct shot at the chest figure is 350 m.

The AK allows you to hit the following targets with one bullet (for the best shooters, prone, with single fire):

head figure - 100 m;

waist figure and running figure - 300 m;

To hit a “running figure” type target at a distance of 800 m under the same conditions, 4 rounds are required when firing with single fire, and 9 rounds when firing in short bursts.

It must be said that the M16 and M4 are not machine guns, they are assault rifles that can fire in bursts.

The M16 and M4 were not originally intended for intense shooting. It is generally not recommended to release more than four to five magazines at a time.

It is based on the principle of high-precision weapons with a small amount of firing before cleaning. Sighting range is 450 meters for M16A1 and 800 meters for M16A2. The M4 has an effective firing range of 500 meters against single targets and 600 meters against group targets.

The M4 is essentially an M16A2 with a shortened barrel and a shortened telescopic stock.

Powder gases are vented directly into the receiver, so the M4 and M16 are very demanding on the quality of the cartridges and only fire cartridges from certain manufacturers.

After each shooting, the mechanism must be cleaned, and complete disassembly is only possible in a specially equipped workshop.

The use of the M16 and M4 characterizes the general concept of the use of weapons in the American army.

If an American soldier needed to shoot a lot from a rifle, this means the entire military operation was planned incorrectly. To solve different problems there are different weapons and there are many of them, from pistols to strategic bombers and aircraft carriers. With normal planning and organization of a battle, one fighter should not spend more than a couple of magazines at all; if prolonged fire contact occurs, he must immediately retreat or call for reinforcements with another weapon. Using this concept, the M16 truly makes the ideal weapon for the American infantry fighter.

The command knows perfectly well what weapons their soldiers have and how to plan operations using them. And this command, in theory, should not even have the thought of sending soldiers into a meat grinder, where they may not have enough standard ammunition and where they may encounter problems with their weapons.

American soldiers They also know very well the shortcomings of their weapons and, therefore, when faced with a situation that could lead to intense firefight, they do not act as heroes, but call for reinforcements, tanks and aircraft.

This approach always minimizes the loss of manpower, which qualitatively affects the morale of the army.

Thus - for regular army For those fighting on foreign territory with good logistics and air support, weapons developed according to the concept of American assault rifles are better suited.

When conducting defensive combat or partisan actions, preference should be given to the more “hardy” Kalashnikov assault rifle.

Watch the video comparing AK74 and M16.

Fans of small arms have compiled a unique rating of AK and M16.

Power. An AK bullet will penetrate 30 centimeters into an oak trunk. The M16 can score 300 points with 30 shots at a paper target.

Service. The AK will work even if it was cleaned with a shoe brush last year. M16 requires manufacturer recommended synthetic oil with Teflon at $9/oz.

Repair. To repair an AK you will need a hammer and pliers. Repairs to the M16 can only be performed at a certified weapons workshop.

Shop. An inexpensive 30-round magazine for an AK is easy to buy. The M16 manufacturer does not recommend using cheap magazines - they can lead to jamming of cartridges.

Bayonet. By attaching a bayonet to an AK, you will scare your enemies. The bayonet on the M16 will make your enemies laugh.

In the 1960s, the AR-15 Armalite rifle chambered for 5.56 x 45 mm came into service in the United States. by Remington. After testing in Vietnam, Eugene Sooner refined it and in 1967 it was put into service under the designation M 16 A1. By using a small-caliber cartridge, we reduce recoil, weight, and dimensions of the weapon. The accuracy and accuracy of combat increases. The wearable ammunition load is increasing. The USSR responded to the M16 10 years later by creating the AK-74 chambered for 5.45 x 39 mm.

Let's compare these models more closely.

The AK-74 and M16 automatics work due to the removal of powder gases through a hole in the barrel. On an AK, the gases press on the gas piston of the bolt frame, with the bolt. Simplicity, large gaps between parts and a large mass of the bolt frame ensure shooting in mud and with lubricant thickened in the cold. Moving the heavy frame leads to the sight being knocked down when firing in bursts.

In the M16, gases press directly onto the bolt through a narrow tube. Light weight of the bolt assembly - less weight of the weapon, less recoil, better stability; small stroke of the bolt of low mass allows you to accurately place 2-3 bullets, because the weapon does not have time to change its position. Small clearances of parts - extremely unfavorable effects of dirt when shooting in real, field conditions, delays in shooting. Compare the energy of 5.45 x 39 mm AK cartridges. And 7.62 x 39 mm. With M16 5.56 x45 mm cartridges. (see reference book) The excellent muzzle energy of the American cartridge is created not only by excellent gunpowder, but also by the small removal of powder gases for automation.

Classic AK layout:
The buttstock is offset for ease of aiming. Therefore, a moment of force arises between the shooter’s shoulder and the axis of the barrel during the shot. The lower the fulcrum is from the shooting line, the greater the upward movement of the barrel.
When firing bursts from an AKM at a tall figure at 300 m, the first bullet hits the “stomach”, the second - “the shoulder”, the third - the “milk”.
The M 16 (same as the Mpi 43) has a “progressive layout” with a “straight” butt. Therefore, there is no “bulging” of the barrel. Dispersion when firing at 300 m for the M16 is 15 cm horizontally and 22 cm vertically.
Sights with this arrangement must be raised high above the barrel, which is inconvenient when shooting sideways; it unmasks the shooter in the prone position and increases his silhouette.

The penetration and lethal properties of the bullet in the AK-74 and M16 are implemented in different ways.
In the M16 barrel bore, the rifling pitch is 305 mm, the bullet has a small “twist” in flight, flight is on the verge of stability - all this causes the bullet to somersault when it hits the target, causing wounds “incompatible with life.” But this same “under-twisting” leads to ricochets even when hitting reeds or tree branches, and sharply reduces the penetrating effect.
The AK-74 has a rifling pitch in the barrel of 200 mm, but the bullet had a shifted center of mass. When it hit the target, the cavity between the bullet casing and the lead was crushed, allowing the bullet to penetrate the target, while the bullet changed direction already inside the target. Although this scheme also causes a lot of ricochets, but less than the M16.

With the advent of bulletproof vests for soldiers, the penetrating effect of the bullet came to the fore. The new cartridge SS 109 (Belgium) was adopted, the M16 A3 barrel rifling pitch became 178 mm, the penetrating force increased by 2 times (!) A burst of 3 shots pierces a 20 cm standard reinforced concrete target.
The AK-74 adopted a similar 7H10 bullet.

The AK has an open sector-type sight. Good visibility day and night, convenient to shoot at moving targets. Disadvantage - small sighting line, low shooting accuracy over long distances.

The M16 has a diopter sight. Easy to aim, large aiming line - high shooting accuracy. But the limited field of view does not make it possible to confidently hit moving targets or fire to kill at dusk, especially at night.
The AK-74 muzzle compensator reduces recoil and increases combat accuracy. The M16 compensator is also an effective flash suppressor (as is important when shooting with an infrared sight at night). The compensator body has side slots and allows a shot to break the barbed wire on the barriers. In addition, the compensator is a “guide” for throwing rifle grenades using live and blank cartridges.
M16 A2, M16 A3 has a limiter for firing in fixed bursts of 3 rounds, which increases the accuracy of the hit.
Convenient safety design allows you to “cock” the M16 thumb right hand when holding the pistol grip.

Anyone who has ever removed the safety of an AK in the cold with bare hands (after all, it is difficult to do this with gloves) will immediately feel the difference. Not to mention the telltale click of the safety catch on an AK at 100 m. Imagine that you are in an ambush in front of an approaching enemy, trying to remove the safety from the AK.
New AK series 100 have been developed. They can also “work” with NATO 5.56 mm cartridges. The reliability of firing has been increased, 15 thousand shots - the barrel is completely worn out and the mechanism is fully operational. Structurally, no changes have been made to the mechanism.

What are the results of this competition?
Victory in battle is determined not by the type of weapon, but by the soldier’s training and the coordination of actions in the unit.
The serious advantages of the M16 when firing at a distance of 300 m can be negated by climate, time of day, and dirt on the battlefield. And vice versa: the unpretentiousness and reliability of the AK in battle do not provide real advantages to an incompetent soldier.
The cost/efficiency ratio of both models is approximately the same. That is why these models are so popular (and this state of affairs will remain for a long time).

And these are the practical results:

News 2003

During the Iraq War, American and British commanders attributed many losses to the failure of the M16 at the most inopportune moment. In response, rifle manufacturers advise taking more careful care of their “barrels”, protecting them from dust, moisture, dirt, and not dropping them...
The advice is, of course, sound. Nevertheless tank battalion, located near the city of Bakuba, were armed with captured AK-47s. They were issued to soldiers upon signature and only after passing the test for assembling and disassembling the Kalash.
Half of the Iraqi assault rifles (8 million in total) are Chinese or Arab-made, and the other half were produced in the USSR in the 60s. What attracted the fighters of the superpower to the old (1947 model) machine gun? Of course, its legendary reliability.
Americans have loved the AK-47 since vietnam war. Then they threw away their service rifles and acquired a “Viet Cong carbine.”

How is our Kalash better than the US "vintorez"

“Kalash” can be buried in the sand, drowned in a swamp, and then just slightly shaken off - and good luck. Such tricks do not work with the M16 - the shutter quickly jams and the return spring freezes. Secondly, the caliber of 7.62 mm is steeper than that of the “American” - 5.56 mm. It will not be possible to hide behind a dune from a heavy Kalashov bullet. Thirdly, the Kalash is more ergonomic. It is no coincidence that it was the tankers who began to take it: it is much more convenient to juggle the AKS bolt in the cramped conditions of the tank.

News from 04/15/2008

NATO forces the Afghan army to change AK-47 to M-16: soldiers laugh at the “plastic” rifle

The rearmament of military personnel has begun in Afghanistan: Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifles are being confiscated from personnel, and they are replacing them with American ones. automatic rifle M-16. The London Times newspaper reports this.

The publication writes that the Afghan military is reluctant to part with Kalashnikovs and looks at rifles with suspicion. The fact is that the M-16 did not perform well in Afghanistan: due to the ingress of sand, its bolt often jams. Moreover, the rifle cannot, unlike the AK-47, fire in long bursts - its burst consists of only three shots. This is done in order to save ammunition.

The M-16, however, weighs less than the AK-47. But, according to the publication, Afghan soldiers “laugh” at the M-16, calling it “plastic.” The NATO command, for its part, insists on rearming the Afghan army.

Despite this process, even NATO officers serving in Afghanistan recognize the extraordinary smooth operation of the Kalashnikovs. An AK-47 can be buried in the sand, retrieved 100 years later, and the machine gun will work from the first shot, said Major Robert Armstrong of the British Royal Irish Regiment.