Dear Jim,
I have multiple ARs and AKs, and enjoy both. I would definitely recommend the AK for a truck gun, or for less experienced shooters. I’d like to debunk the “clean an AR several times a day” myth.
I have 24 years of service, USAF and US Army, active and Guard, two combat deployments, have served as armorer, weapons courier, PMI instructor and range safety NCO, and have 24 years of unbroken Expert ratings with the M16, M16A1, M16A2, M4 and GUU5P (an M4A1 with a USAF accent), including 15 perfect scores (three of them while wearing a gas mask). I have competed for the Guard in National Match. I test and review firearms for this site and others, and several manufacturers trust me to offer feedback.
A big part of the problem with AR type weapons is the fault of the US Army. I became very aware of this when my wife went through Basic Combat Training at age 36 in 2005–I already had 19 years of service. I taught her what she needed to know before she departed.
To say the current state of Army Basic Marksmanship Instruction is disgraceful is complimentary. She was handed a weapon without being instructed on how to clear and check the chamber first (luckily, she knew this. She was the only person in her platoon to check the chamber upon issue). Then, she was handed a “cleaning kit” that contained only a toothbrush, no rod or jag sections.
When I mentioned this on my forum, I had an infantry officer (Major, Ranger and Airborne qualified, masters degree) argue with me that this was unavoidable, parts unobtainable, etc. It was hard to gently inform a friend that he was making excuses for an unacceptable state of affairs.
Cleaning solvent is now considered HAZMAT, so cleaning is performed only with [Break Free] CLP. They were not issued CLP. Her Drill Sergeant was thrilled when I mailed a package containing a complete cleaning kit and two bottles of CLP. He’d been demonstrating the last ditch method of using shaving cream as a cleaner.
So, this starts with troops who are not taught how to operate or maintain the weapon properly, using weapons that have been beat to death for decades without proper maintenance. Take a look at this photo. (Ionic action between barrel nut and receiver caused failure of joint. Photo by Ranger Instructor, summer 2009).
After demob, I fired an M4 for annual qualification that had not been cleaned its entire time in Afghanistan (it was not my weapon). I shot 39/39 and tied the state champion, who was using his civilian Bushmaster match carbine. Lack of cleaning is not the entirety of the problem.
The biggest mistake I saw in the Sandbox was troops drenching their weapons with oil. Especially in the 2 billion year old Arabian desert, where the “sand” is fine as clay and dusty, this is an invitation for mud. A mostly dry weapon (dry teflon is preferred) will function very well, and will blow itself clean of sand with each shot–one time the direct gas impingement is very useful. Oil should be used as a repair step after extensive firing if malfunctions occur. Oily weapons will clog up, and repeated cleaning will not solve the problem, and, as many Vietnam vets will attest, can make things worse, as well as wearing out the weapon. Once you start oiling it, you will have to keep oiling it to sluice the crud out. The hot gas will also bake the oil into gum.
In temperate environments, either dry teflon or the prescribed lubrication from the manual should be adhered to, and, if possible, I highly recommend a swap to a hard chrome bolt carrier group, as was originally designed for the weapon. It’s more consistent in lockup, more reliable, has much higher lubricity and is easier to clean. Using original USAF issue M16s (not M16A1s) with the hard chrome bolt carrier group (BCG) and no forward assist, my experience as Opposing Forces (OPFOR) Aggressor was that I could easily run 1,000 rounds of blanks through in a couple of hours with no problems, and we cleaned the weapons by dumping components into a solvent tank, and pulling out parts until we had a complete rifle, without nitpicking about who had which upper or bolt–which every expert will insist is impossible. I and my teammates were buried in piles of fill sand as blinds and crawled through muck, and our weapons did not have any significant issues (we kept the ejection port covers closed). Bad magazines are an issue from time to time, so be sure to check them.
Since then, I’ve done the same 1,000 rounds of live ammo on a dusty range using cheap Wolf ammo, and had zero malfunctions while deployed (In fairness, most were on a training range, but it was shortly after a 35 day sandstorm). There is nothing wrong with the M16 family if it is cleaned right the first time, and treated properly.
Given the above, I do reiterate that as a weapon to be left in a vehicle for an extended period (“trunk gun”) or for less experienced shooters, the AK is a better choice. Its accuracy is “good enough” for 90% of shooters. Its stopping power is adequate. Ammunition, parts and upgrades are readily available. The side- and underfolder variants are very compact and convenient for carry and storage. It’s easy to maintain and field stripping involves no small parts. It is very cost effective.
However, a look at which armies carry AKs and which armies carry AR variants (including the G36 and L85 based on the AR18), it’s clear that modern, well trained forces do much better with a Stoner design over a Kalashnikov.
Ideally, of course, one should own several of both. – Michael Z. Williamson, SurvivalBlog’s Editor at Large