I am assuming you mean AR’s built for 5.56 and AK’s built for 7.62x39. Of course, we all know there are other calibers available for both AR’s and AK’s, but this is my assumption.
For me, if my target is man sized, I don’t want to be stuck with a varmint rifle caliber (which 5.56 and .223 are). Instead, give me a deer rifle caliber (which 7.62x39 is).
I know, I know, the 5.56/.223 can do nasty things (tumble upon impact), but that is only for up to about 250 yards. After that, it slows down too much and doesn’t do the meat grinder action it is so famous for. And, yes, it is lighter, more accurate, and on and on. But, my original point (for me), stands: if my target is the size of a deer (weight wise), I want a deer rifle (caliber). In some states, .223 is not legal for hunting deer - that ought to be a good clue!
I had the opposite experience, my Arsenal 106 (5.56 model) was a piece of shit with a finish worse than a wasr but my Saiga was a gem, i had a better trigger, fit and finish. Thats only one rifle though, I dont hold it against them.
Try going to your local gun store (that stocks AK’s) and seeing for yourself how the Arsenals (and Saigas), compare to other brands. Of course, Saigas have been imported or made by different companies, so you may get a variety of results with them. The one I had (years ago), was one of the better importers (don’t recall which it was now). Still, the metal work looked good, but the overall finish was sloppy, to say the least.
Thanks for the info. The Saiga I had looked very much like the one below. I still like Saiga because it is purposely made to be “sporterized” (ie - for non-military use).
I own both, used one professionally. My vote is for the AR. Hit for hit, more bad guys have met their demise at the hands of an AR platform than the other way around. It’s interchangeability has no equal, and properly maintained the AR is more reliable.
Proper maintenance meaning lube and good mags. People act like “proper maintenance” means something serious. Im at 7kish through my Colt with no issues, just lube the shit out of it most of the time.
Ive posted this before but heres an article by Pat Rogers (RIP) on a BCM AR15 he named “Filthy 14”. This rifle hit over 40k only being cleaned once and had very minimal maintenance. Pat Rogers believed the military over cleans their guns and it wears them out alot faster.
I’ve had a number of AR’s and many bought as the owners thought they were broke, of course missing parts and incorrectly assembled bolt carrier groups could make you think that
I’ve never had an issue that wasn’t easily corrected, and even though DI is often cited as a weakness for potential fowling, never had any issues, and a piston does add weight, often a factor.
The military does overlube their weapons. By properly maintained I mean when not using close your dust cover, clean when needed- it does affect accuracy, and inspect parts for wear. It will last you a long time.
Yea I used to think AR15s were unreliable and ate through parts every 100 rounds lol. In that article I posted above the guy goes over his maintenance schedule. The article posted below shows how much abuse certain parts can take before breaking on an AR15 and the one below that is the samething but on AKs.