AK vs AR

[LifeInPa]

To be truthful, in my opinion (YMMV) full auto is a waste of ammo for most soldiers (or civilians) because they lack the training, practice and skill to properly control a weapon in full auto mode. I agree with Carlos N. Hathcock II, who once stated, "The single most dangerous thing on the modern battlefield is one well aimed shot."

The M-16A4 is three round burst, as is the M-16A2. I personally was never a fan of three round burst either, unless the range is extremely short. To me any good semi auto AR of A2 or newer flavor is every bit as effective as a full auto M-16 in the hands of the overwhelming majority of people. For a high speed low drag commando with extensive CQB training, full auto is fine. For most of the rest of us, it's just a waste of ammo in most platforms.

Actually I appreciate the POV since you actually had hands on time in the service with these weapons, plus your view on semi-auto fire seems to be shared with the US military as I have yet to see a video of a solider firing their weapons (Beyond SAW's, M240's, light/heavy machine guns, etc) outside of semi-auto. However it seems like 3 shot burst from what I have read is a total waste, at least with full auto you can make the burst as large or small as you like.

Now if I remember correctly the Russians are coming out with "fancy" AK's that can fire in 2-Round burst, that might be interesting for close to mid-range combat.

[Carnes]

When all factors are accounted for, the AK and the AR are in close competition. As such, if you have a hard-on for either platform, go with the one you perfer because the psychological difference will close the gap for you either way.

If you are not dead set on one platform or the other, the AR is likely a better place to start. The ergonomics make a big difference in the learning curve.