Defensive Carry banner

AR-10 vs M1A & AK-47

16K views 29 replies 22 participants last post by  douggr 
#1 ·
For those who have purchased or are still considering the purchase of one an AR-10 how much did / does the M1A or an AK-47 come up as the possible better option?

Beyond one's familiary with the AR platform, is it about the weight of the firearm?

I'm guessing the thought in these comparisons of the AK-47 (talking semi-auto versions) is that while the 7.62x39mm is not a .308, it is a similar cartridge and has the advantage of higher capacity magazine options, and theoretically easier to maintain then the AR platform. I don't see much for the AR-10 & M1A beyond 20 rounds. While I would think the AR-10 and M1A would have greater accuracy then the AK, I'm assuming the M1A be considered easier to maintain than an AR platform.

Some might point out FAL also, however I'm thinking the FAL is almost always chambered 7.62x51mm (I have not seen one marked .308). Also, I'm thinking there is a length issue that would put the FAL in different consideration.

So a lot of guesses on my end, looking for other's thoughts and experience.
 
#2 ·
Some might point out FAL also, however I'm thinking the FAL is almost always chambered 7.62x51mm (I have not seen one marked .308). Also, I'm thinking there is a length issue that would put the FAL in different consideration.
There are FALs out there chambered in .308 (all of DSA's FALs are, for example). I don't really know what you're talking about as far as length. With the same barrel length, the FAL is a bit longer than the AR-10, but a bit shorter than the M1A.
 
#3 ·
For those who have purchased or are still considering the purchase of one an AR-10 how much did / does the M1A or an AK-47 come up as the possible better option?
Never.
The AK is not even in the same league as far as accuracy or power. The AR-10 is superior in all ways.

The M1A is not as easy to maintain as the AR-10. The AR 10 also shares many of its parts with the AR-15, making those parts much easier to replace should the need arise.

The M1A is also longer. The AR-10 has a choice of barrels that run from 16" to 24". The AR-10 is the handier weapon. Twenty Five round mags can be had for the AR-10.

FWIW, I have lots of long range trigger time with the AR-10,M1A,FAL and even the SR-25.When it hits the fan I'd go with the AR-10 or the SR-25 every time.

Most M1A's need to be tinkered with to make them excellent shooters. I have shot several high dollar match guns that very accurate, but they had premium barrels and action jobs.

I have yet to pickup an AR-10,SR-25 or even a DPMS.308 that was not fairly accurate when mated with a good scope.
 
#4 ·
Out of curiosity, Thanis, what would prompt you to include the AK-47 in the same category as these other two rifles? The effective range alone would put the AR-10 and M1A in their own categories, in my opinion, and without a doubt the .308 and 7.62 NATO rounds both handle light materials better than the 7.62x39. Regarding the AR-10 and M1A, like HotGuns says, I can't think of anything in particular that it does better, or even comparably, than the AR-10. For the amount of money that you'd sink into an M1A-type weapon to make it as accurate as an AR-10 type weapon, you'd already have a nice AR and glass to go with it, and probably some goodies besides (mags, ammo, the usual).

That being said, my AR-10 project isn't even going to be in .308 or 7.62 NATO. :hand5:


-B
 
#5 ·
As a platform, I tend to go with the AR platform.

As a Marine, the M1A makes an excellent club in dire circumstances. You can butt stroke and beat a person(s) to death, repeatedly without the weapon breaking in two. Put a bayonet on it and you're good to go for a bayonet charge into hell!

But all things considered I think the AR-10, SR-25 are the way to go.

Still, I have my heart set on a Socom 16 or a Scout Squad.

Not sure if the AR or the M1A platform will win out in the end for my personal (next) battle rifle.

I do have an FAL so I'm not totally naked in the .308 (7.62) semi-auto slot and a Colt AR-15 in the .223 (5.56) slot.
 
#8 ·
Well, my FAL is a Century parts gun with the thumb hole stock, thanks to Bill Clinton so there's really no comparison to the Springfield rifle.

However, it has been pretty damn accurate. I was all over a 12 inch steel plate pushing 300 meters with iron sights without a miss. It raised a few eyebrows to say the least. (The thumb hole stock is very comfortable and helps with long distance shooting accuracy, I think, but I don't like the looks of it and would eventually like to put some original stock furniture on it. I just haven't gotten around to it as of yet)

It has also been very reliable. I like the gas adjustment on the FAL too. Pretty simple to regulate the gas for various ammo which I've had to do once for shooting a bulk order of some surplus ammo that failed to cycle. One minor gas adjustment and it cycled perfect for the entire lot.

There's a reason it has been the main battle rifle for so many NATO countries for so many years. It's one I don't think I'll ever sell or trade away.
 
#10 ·
First of all, the AK, and its 7.62x39 cartridge, are nowhere near the same category of the other two. Between the other two, if I was looking to buy one I'd probably buy the M1A, just because I've wanted one since I was about 12 for some reason.

Weight wouldn't be my primary concern these days, especially since its for a civilian application.

I am intimately familiar with the AR platform, and know them better than anything, and wouldn't discount an AR-10, but for some reason the M1A seems more pure in the .308 round than an AR-10, if that makes sense. The AR-10 definately has a bigger base of supplies readily available for it though.

Basically I don't think you could go wrong with either, and either one would serve you well.
 
#11 ·
FYI...in regards to my OP, just trying to learn a bit. I don't have many friends who own these types of firearms (hunters and handgunners, but even those in the military / LEO that I know don't talk much about these types of firearms). I don't have the funds to get a hands on feel, etc. Sorry if my OP comes off as a statement, I'm just trying to have th replies hit various topics I don't know enough about or just don't understand.

For example, I had no idea the AR-10 would be considered easier to maintain and more accurate than the M1A.

I thought AR-10 was, in general, a 7.62x51mm / .308 chambered firearm (the 7.62x51mm / .308 version of a AR-15). Is this correct?

Why I included the AK, is because when you read various threads, these firearms are compared.

Thank you for the replies.
 
#14 ·
For example, I had no idea the AR-10 would be considered easier to maintain and more accurate than the M1A.



.
It's not.If the AR or M1A are built right they run great, you get what you pay for.The FAL's are great battle rifles but some companies are not doing their job when building them.Do your home work.:tumbleweed:
 
#13 ·
It depends on what you want and what you want to do. Frankly, I wouldn't buy an M14 pattern- overpriced and hellishly expensive repair/replacement (in comparison).

Unless you're talking match chambers, 7.62x51 and .308 are (generally) interchangable.

For the money, the FAL or a PTR G3 clone are as good as, and again depending on your wants/needs, possibly better than the AR10. Parts are far cheaper, repair is easier, mags are less expensive. Don't worry about 30 round mags in 30 caliber- 99% of us can't afford that much ammo, and the range and accuracy should be allowing you to engage farther and deeper than the "assault rifle" calibers.

The 7.62x39 equates to the 5.56 (but in no way to the 7.62x51) in overall performance- they were designed with the same envelope in mind.
 
#15 ·
I'd pick the M1A from the three listed if I needed a foxhole companion. I know little about an AR 10 but am not enamored with the AR design overall. The 7.62X39 makes more sense as an intermediate cartridge than the .223 in my view but the rifles for which it is chambered don't have the accuracy reputation and it doesn't offer the long range punch of the bigger .30.

My plain-jain, unfooled-with M1A offers really wonderful accuracy from the bench rest or the firing line of a high power shoot. It has always given dependable service over extended shooting sessions. It also has proved to be surprisingly reliable with efforts to develop minimal "powder-puff" loads that are crazy light, giving reliable function even while sounding like a pump shotgun being cycled. It is a good dependable rifle.


 
#17 ·
FNAR getting great reviews, haven't shot one. M1A is the .308 benchmark by which all are measured, there's a reason for that. FNFAL is my personal favorite for purely subjective reasons. PTR G3 (aka; Cetme, HK91) is as good as either but doesn't handle as well for me. AR10 loses most of the best AR15 advantages as it grows bigger/heavier so I don't see the up-side. AKs are what they are, but they ARE NOT .308 Battle Rifles.
 
#18 ·
I have an Eagle Arms (Armalite) AR10,I shoot it occassionally and have about 1200 rounds of surplus 7.62x51 ammo,The gun is great for longer ranges and the gas system helps tame the recoil,M1A's are just plain sexy and were used predominantly in long range matches for decades.I think it boils down to what makes your heart twitter,some guys like skinny girls and some guys like girls you can grip
 
#20 ·
I've got an AK (Norinco 56s), a AR-10 (DPMS), and have had lots of trigger time with M1A's...and of the three, I'd take the AR-10 if I could only choose 1.

First, the AK falls away for the cartridge; I'd much prefer .308 over 7.62x39.

The M1A falls away for ergonomics; magazine release, safety, everything just is (to me) more intuitive. Then again, I've also got lots of trigger time with AR-15's, as well.

Add on the Ar-10 is easier and much less expensive to customize, and it takes the easy lead.

Although, if I had my druthers over which .308 battle rifle, I'd prefer the HK91/PTR series any day.
 
#22 ·
Mainly because of intangibles...for some reason, HK91's just plain work for me; they shoulder great, I love the sights, I've never met one that I can't hit what I want to with, and...I think--though I have no concrete evidence--that they have a edge in reliability.

And, to be dead truthfull...I just have a thing for HK's, in the same way some people have a thing for M1A's, AK's, whatever.

Like I said, intangibles. A good M1A, AR-10, FAL, or HK91 are all, really, going to be pretty darn equal on the field...it just comes down to what one prefers.
 
#26 ·
Mainly because of intangibles...for some reason, HK91's just plain work for me; they shoulder great, I love the sights, I've never met one that I can't hit what I want to with, and...I think--though I have no concrete evidence--that they have a edge in reliability.
I don't know about "no concrete evidence." When it comes to geting dunked, in pretty much anything, and still running, the 91 (and the FAL) have far and away better service reps than the AR system the world over. When you see turd world goobers waving their phallic symbols in the air, they are AKs, FALs or 91s. Not that the AR doesn't work, its just more maintenance sensitive.

Back to the 91 specifically: yes, the sights are superlative, close or long range. No gas system=maximum power to the projectile. Trigger pack is easy to work, and comparatively cheap.
 
#24 ·
I have to agree with HotGuns on this one;

In a fight, I would rather have the AR-10 due not oly to the superiority of the .308 round ballistically, but the pure simple fact that any AR platform is faster in a fight to reload and get back on target than any AK, a fact I have proven myself on occasion....
 
#29 ·
I have the M1A, CETME pre ban, SAIGA .308, and H&K91(not clone). If I needed this type of rifle for trudging thru the woods for great distances, my choice would be hands down the Saiga. It has the 16" carbine barrel and has been tarted up with the TAPCO furniture. If I was shooting at targets from great distances, my M1A with leatherwood Camputer scope is just the ticket. If I want the best of both, the CETME and H&K91 cannot be beat. My M1A has a Douglas heavy barrel and McMillan stock. For a build job that is around $3500, this is not bad. The H&K 91 has good sights, and the surplus german scopes are a great buy these days... even though the prices are spiking.

I have heard nothing good about the AR-10 rifles, as they are not durable enough. I have not had any experiance with them, but from the reputation they have in my neck of the woods, I would pass.

I love the H&K91, and would strongly recommend this. It will perform well and the parts and mags are still cheap. I have a coomplete parts set for both the CETME and 91, but have not had to replace a thing as these seem pretty damn near indestructible.

As for the AK, I would skip on these and go with the SKS. They are a bit more accurate and are nearly as easy to maintain as an AK. They also make great rifles for younger shooters.
 
#30 ·
Just an FYI...

Saiga, which is made by the same company that makes the AK, makes a semi-auto AK in .308/7.62x51 . Both marking are stamped on the side. I bought mine for $400 new. It's no MOA gun, but $400 for AK reliability and a .308 cartridge I couldn't pass it up.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top