# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Security & Defense >  7.62x39 vs 6.8SPC vs 5.56x45

## noxagol

So I am possibly going to buy a lower receiver for an M4/M16 and then going to save for the upper receiver and can't decide which size to get it for. I am leaning towards 7.62x39 because it has superior stopping power, but the 6.8SPC is inviting and the 5.56 NATO round is cheap and plentiful, but so is the 7.62x39. What do you guys think?

----------


## voytechs

> So I am possibly going to buy a lower receiver for an M4/M16 and then going to save for the upper receiver and can't decide which size to get it for. I am leaning towards 7.62x39 because it has superior stopping power, but the 6.8SPC is inviting and the 5.56 NATO round is cheap and plentiful, but so is the 7.62x39. What do you guys think?


Hugh?

----------


## pickdog

I prefer .308 though I have never tried the 6.8.

----------


## noxagol

.308 is nice, but has a little more kick than would be tolerable for a close range fight which is what I am wanting for this gun. I am heavily leaning towards the 7.62x39.

----------


## Fig

I would say try the 6.8 only if you can possibly return the thing. Because... its rare. I imagine the individual bullets are rare as well and fairly expenseive. 

But what are you using the gun for? If you want more energy impacting the target, use the 7.62, if you want less recoil, use the 5.56.

CQC? Mid Range? Long distance?

----------


## noxagol

CQC to mid range.

----------


## Shellshock1918

To consider costs...Id go with 762x39.

556 is expensive because of the war and hardly anyone makes 6.8SPC.

----------


## terryp

A friend is thinking of getting an AR. I like the AR-10 in 300 (rsaum ?), the 6.8 spc and the .450 bushmaster. 
But my honey is an aks74, and I would love to get an aksu74 in SBR but the county leo refuses to sign the AFT form.

----------


## 1000-points-of-fright

There's also the weight issue.  5.56 is lighter.   But that's not a real issue for the hobbyist who doesn't have to hump all his ammo around on his back.

----------


## mordechai

For a lower, 5.56 NATO. But, _if you must have 7.62 Combloc_, it _must_ be an AK design. All there is to it.

Personally, I like AKs more. More durable, and reliable. And less expensive.

----------


## lucius

..

----------


## noxagol

AK-47 has $#@! for accuracy.

----------


## Matt

> AK-47 has $#@! for accuracy.


Not Saigas or VEPRs.

----------


## SWATH

7.62x39 does not have more stopping power than 5.56x45.  In fact the 5.56x45 is the most lethal round that you mentioned, all else being equal, due to it's extreme velocity and fragmentation, however it is the most expensive right now.

7.62x39 is the cheapest

7.62x51 is in a different class of calibers, but when used with light weight high velocity fragmenting bullets like HP's or ballistic tips/A-max/V-max it is truly in a damage class of it's own.  These are expensive though.

The most lethal (again all else being equal like shot placement and bullet type) is 5.56x45 M193 (55gr. FMJBT)

The most lethal AND the cheapest would be 7.62x39 HP's.

7.62x51 has over three times the power of these, but unless you are planning on using some high performance and expensive bullets, all the extra energy will be largely wasted (unless used against armored targets).

Oops, I talked about 7.62x51 instead of 6.8.  The 6.8 has promise but is too rare right now and will be the most expensive by a good margin, however it will likely be better terminally than even the 5.56x45 Mk262 77gr. HPBT although not by a lot and definitely not enough to warrant a caliber change.

As for the SBR, forget the LEO and go the trust route (you don't need the LEO to sign off):
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=17&t=199942

----------


## terryp

It looks like the link is dead. Do you just go the route of a trust instead on inc?
If so do you know what the cost is. I think to inc. is pretty cheap but then after your death it must be sold, or at least whomever you wish to get it would have to go the same route - Form 1/4 or inc./ trust.   Much appreciated.    TP

----------


## mordechai

SWATH, while you are technically correct, um... well how to put this.

Okay I'll just throw it out. All soldiers of NATO and a significant # of former Warsaw Pact troops have body armour as standard equipment. Because of that, I like 7.62 NATO.

However, given the calibers argued between, I'd choose 7.62 Combloc because it simply is the cheapest, and with SP rounds at close range, the deadliest. While 5.56 causes alot of damage, all centerfire rifle bullets do at close range. At long range, 5.56 against armour isn't very impressive.

7.62 Combloc has a limited range of effectiveness, but in that "home" it's highly effective, and 7.62 NATO is the king.

Don't even think about the new rounds available. Just too rare, too expensive, and too hard to get resupplied.

----------


## noxagol

I might go with a 7.62 NATO rifle. Can't decide, too many choices!

----------


## SWATH

Mordechai:
I hear ya. 7.62x51 NATO is king. 5.56x45 pretty much sucks against armor at long range, but remember when talking about hard armor penetration, velocity is king. When a relatively soft bullet confronts a much harder target (like armor plate), bullet weight is a distant second to bullet velocity, but really neither caliber will fare well against AR500 armor plate. For this you will need a hard bullet like a tungston AP round. For soft armor or mild steel, either caliber will penetrate easily, but between 5.56x45 and 7.62x39, I might give an edge to the .30 at longer range, however it rides the ballistic short bus. Remember one of the requirements for adoption of the 5.45x45 by the military was that is penetrate clean through (both sides) of a steel/kevlar helmet at 600m, that's no slouch.

I must disagree about 7.62x39 SP's being more lethal than 5.56x45. It has been demostrated that the primary damage mechanism in this class of calibers is fragmentation. 7.62x39 does not fragment very well even with SP's or HP's, although HP's fragment the best. Spend a few hours here reading and it will blow your mind because much of the findings are counter-intuitive: 
www.*ammo*-*oracle*.com
and here:
www.the*box**o**truth*.c*o*m

TerryP:
Yes the trust route behaves just like a corp. but there are certain advantages. The cost is minimal (like $30 for Quicken willmaker, $100 if you choose to have it reviewed by an atty.) You will use a form 4 for purchases (for transferring a pre-existing title 2 serial number) and a form 1 for new builds (like when making your own SBR or silencer and registering a new serial number). The link works for me, but here is another way to get to it: ->ar15.com->armory->general class 3->Setting up Trust for NFA items(tacked near the top).

Noxagel:
When in doubt go with .308. It is relatively inexpensive, very accurate, very powerful, will handle any game animal in N.America, will make short work of all but threat level IV ceramic armor, has a wide variety of bullet types and weights, is a standard NATO round, has a wide variety of rifles chambered for it, is the standard sniper rifle caliber, and is in my opinion the most adaptable and versatile round in the world. Check out the M1A. You cannot go wrong.

----------


## jdmac44

.308 

Save your pennies and get a DSA SA58 (not the STG) it's the last rifle you'll ever need to buy.  Go to their site and read the article about the 10,000 round (in 9 hours) torture test.  Has the best ergonomics as well.  The only hassle is the gas system, but once you get it set up so long as you use the same ammo you'll be fine.  I have a PTR91 and I'm switching.

----------


## RedLightning

Since its for an AR, go with 5.56x45. 6.8 is cool, but the 5.56 is more available.

----------


## Malum Prohibitum

I honestly cant begin to think of a better all purpose long gun than a Springfield M1 socom carbine in .308/7.62NATO.  Its relatively short with a 16" barrell, not too heavy, comes with a rail, capable of reaching out to spread love from a distance, and also capable of dropping medium to large game.

----------


## mordechai

SWATH, 7.62 Combloc SP rounds are what I suggest (for short range social situations), because in short distances, the rounds will tear through a vest just fine, but it'll be more effective than just fmj, and at the same time, not break apart.

As I said though, at any range (for me atleast), over 200 yards, if I have the choice 7.62 NATO is whats getting used.

----------


## Dequeant

7.62 x 39 has severe problems with jamming and "failure to feed" problems in the AR platform.  This is because of the bevel of the case itself being so extreme, combined with the relatively slight curve of the AR magazine.  Look at an AK magazine, see the extreme curve?.... It has to be like that to feed properly.  No matter how you try and work it, the AR mags are relatively straight, which is what causes the feed issues.  

But don't take my word on it, look it up.

In the choices of calibers you give, and the necessity of an AR platform........for me that limits it to the 5.56 and 6.8 SPC.  Of those 2 calibers, the 6.8 is superior in every single way that matters in close quarters, medium, and long ranges.  Also, you'd be suprised at how far manufacturers of 6.8 have come.  Wolf even makes ammo for them, and it's cheap as hell.  

Granted, they won't be as available as 5.56 for many years, but with 5.56 you have nearly zero choices when it comes to buying ammo.  Basically all you can get is military surplus rounds.....no hollowpoints, no ballistic tips, nothing but standard issue full metal jacket rounds for 5.56.  Unless you finagle your way into some frangible rounds, which are respectable, but still inadequate.

EDIT: Just for the record i do believe the 7.62 x 39 is the better round......  It's the AR platform that is to blame for its problems in this case.

----------


## noxagol

> 7.62 x 39 has severe problems with jamming and "failure to feed" problems in the AR platform.  This is because of the bevel of the case itself being so extreme, combined with the relatively slight curve of the AR magazine.  Look at an AK magazine, see the extreme curve?.... It has to be like that to feed properly.  No matter how you try and work it, the AR mags are relatively straight, which is what causes the feed issues.  
> 
> But don't take my word on it, look it up.
> 
> In the choices of calibers you give, and the necessity of an AR platform........for me that limits it to the 5.56 and 6.8 SPC.  Of those 2 calibers, the 6.8 is superior in every single way that matters in close quarters, medium, and long ranges.  Also, you'd be suprised at how far manufacturers of 6.8 have come.  Wolf even makes ammo for them, and it's cheap as hell.  
> 
> Granted, they won't be as available as 5.56 for many years, but with 5.56 you have nearly zero choices when it comes to buying ammo.  Basically all you can get is military surplus rounds.....no hollowpoints, no ballistic tips, nothing but standard issue full metal jacket rounds for 5.56.  Unless you finagle your way into some frangible rounds, which are respectable, but still inadequate.
> 
> EDIT: Just for the record i do believe the 7.62 x 39 is the better round......  It's the AR platform that is to blame for its problems in this case.


I didn't realize about the ammo feed problem.

----------


## erblo

Keep in mind that most AR lowers will not accomodate .308, you would have to get a lower designed specifically for this caliber. Check it out at Cold War Shooters.

I'd go with 7.62x39 myself, 6.8 is too rare and expensive.

----------


## Malum Prohibitum

Im curious as to why we Americans are so in love with the AR series when even the guy who designed them doesnt really think they are that great... 

They look cool, Ill give them that.

----------


## Dequeant

Black rifles are th3 sexy

----------


## john_anderson_ii

> CQC?


If I didn't have a shotgun handy, I would want one of these at all costs:



These little FN's are bad ass.  Even the civilian semi-auto only models are not something I'd be ashamed to carry into combat.   I'm a big fan of this particular weapon.  


If only I could afford one....

----------


## Malum Prohibitum

> If I didn't have a shotgun handy, I would want one of these at all costs:
> 
> These little FN's are bad ass.  Even the civilian semi-auto only models are not something I'd be ashamed to carry into combat.   I'm a big fan of this particular weapon.  
> If only I could afford one....


holy CRAP!  50 round mag, full auto, looks like you could strap it to your arm and point shoot it.

Id be in love even with the semi auto version if it didnt come with that extra foot of barrel on the end of it.  Imagine carrying that thing in a shoulder rig...

----------


## noxagol

> holy CRAP!  50 round mag, full auto, looks like you could strap it to your arm and point shoot it.
> 
> Id be in love even with the semi auto version if it didnt come with that extra foot of barrel on the end of it.  Imagine carrying that thing in a shoulder rig...


You can get them with different barrels sizes. I have seen one in a gun store exactly as pictured.

----------


## noxagol

Oh, and that FN is what Secret Service have under their coats now a days.

----------


## 1000-points-of-fright

That's my favorite CQC gun in Call of Duty 4.

But it's fugly as hell.  Whoever designed it has absolutely no sense of aesthetics.

----------


## Maz2331

I'd say go with the 5.56.  That little cartridge is nothing to sneeze at in the terminal ballistics department, and the light recoil means more rounds on target, plus the light ammo weight means more rounds in pocket.

It's your best bet for general use.

For heavy hitting, then go to an AR-10 in 7.62 X 51 or even .243 Winchester.  For really heavy hits, get a Barrett .50 BMG.

Or just get whatever you can shoot best.  A hit with anything beats a miss with anything else.

----------


## Dequeant

> .243


You had me till you suggested a .243 for "heavy hitting".  It's a varmit round with ballistics very similar to a 5.56 (which is only .223)

----------


## Malum Prohibitum

> You had me till you suggested a .243 for "heavy hitting".  It's a varmit round with ballistics very similar to a 5.56 (which is only .223)


I thought technically that any small hyper velocity round is considered a varmint round, and that the .223 technically a .qualifies.  Im not sure Id use a .223 for hunting anything bigger than coyotes.

----------


## noxagol

> I thought technically that any small hyper velocity round is considered a varmint round, and that the .223 technically a .qualifies.  Im not sure Id use a .223 for hunting anything bigger than coyotes.


.223 will put a really big hole in a deer, I have seen it.

----------


## Richard in Austin

One thing about the AR design: gas gets vented back into the chamber, fouling the mechanism fairly quickly. This causes many malfunctions.

I speak from experience, as I used to compete in practical rifle matches. The guys with ARs had the most weapons-related failures. You have to keep them clean. 

OTOH, there was a guy who owned an AK and never bothered to clean it - he wanted to see how long it would keep working without cleaning, and he never had a problem with it.

The AK also has the price advantage - you can get a decent one for $400-500, and ammo is cheaper than many other calibers as well ($189 for 1K rds).

Regarding .243, the cartridge is basically a necked-down .308. Average bullet weight is 100 grains at 3000fps muzzle velocity, 1999fpe, vs. 55 grains at 3200fps for .223, 1251fpe. Big difference, but you don't see many EBRs (Evil Black Rifles) chambered in .243. Supposedly you could get an AR-10 in that caliber a while ago. http://www.handloads.com/calc/

Any caliber that was not a military standard is going to be more expensive ammo. With military calibers you often find military surplus ammo for cheap.

----------


## Razmear

Just noticed this thread, I'd go with an SKS instead of an AK and of course 7.62x39. 
Just don't use the 'soft point' rounds in an SKS cuz the soft lead tips will cause jams. FMJ rounds have plenty of stopping power and I've knocked down trees over a foot and a half thick by shooting a horizontal line across a target from 100 yards (It took about 150 rounds to knock it down, but it was cool as hell when it fell.)
SKS's are incredibly low maintainace, easily customized, and a whole lot more reliable than an AR15/M16. 
And yes I have three of them.

----------


## conner_condor

> I'd say go with the 5.56.  That little cartridge is nothing to sneeze at in the terminal ballistics department, and the light recoil means more rounds on target, plus the light ammo weight means more rounds in pocket.
> 
> It's your best bet for general use.
> 
> For heavy hitting, then go to an AR-10 in 7.62 X 51 or even .243 Winchester.  For really heavy hits, get a Barrett .50 BMG.
> 
> Or just get whatever you can shoot best.  A hit with anything beats a miss with anything else.


It means they can shoot back also..

When you point a gun at a person, it is with the intention to kill them. That is reallity. The 5.56 will most liklely only wound if your shot is off and if armor is on,no penitration at all. This gives you little room for error without armor or a person who can shoot back if they got armor on. If recoil is a problem for anyone.
2 options coil reduced ammo for the 308 and 06 most available ammo out there or a limb saver recoil pad. You will not feel the recoil with the limb saver on from a 308 or 06. It is quite an amazing  recoil pad I have to say. I use it with my 300 mag and is very awsome to reduce recoil. My small 90lb daughter shoots a 12GA when we bird hunt and trap shoot without any bruises or discomfort at all. Use ear protection also and it makes it much more enjoyable. I believe the noise is the biggest factor than recoil. The combination of them both intimadates many newB shooters. Just a thought for you all.

----------


## noxagol

> It means they can shoot back also..
> 
> When you point a gun at a person, it is with the intention to kill them. That is reallity. The 5.56 will most liklely only wound if your shot is off and if armor is on,no penitration at all. This gives you little room for error without armor or a person who can shoot back if they got armor on. If recoil is a problem for anyone.
> 2 options coil reduced ammo for the 308 and 06 most available ammo out there or a limb saver recoil pad. You will not feel the recoil with the limb saver on from a 308 or 06. It is quite an amazing  recoil pad I have to say. I use it with my 300 mag and is very awsome to reduce recoil. My small 90lb daughter shoots a 12GA when we bird hunt and trap shoot without any bruises or discomfort at all. Use ear protection also and it makes it much more enjoyable. I believe the noise is the biggest factor than recoil. The combination of them both intimadates many newB shooters. Just a thought for you all.


I am use to shooting 7.62x54 rounds from a bolt action rifle that has a steel butt plate heh. Only issue with recoil is the follow up shots.

----------


## conner_condor

> I am use to shooting 7.62x54 rounds from a bolt action rifle that has a steel butt plate heh. Only issue with recoil is the follow up shots.


The recoil really isn't as bad as people think as for hurting. Shouldering the rifle also contributes to recoil for some. They pull the trigger before the gun is rested properly alot of times. If you get it tight against your shoulder it will push your shoulder back like a shock absorber. But if you squeeze that trigger before it is rested right you got that space before the coil touches your shoulder. Have someone place their fist against your shoulder and push as hard as they can. It wont hurt. But have them keep their fist back a few inches and do the same thing.
Punch your shoulder instead of pushing. The recoil on most guns up to the 06 are actually quite mild if it is shoulder correctly.Another thing might I say. Your not going to feel anything if you end up shooting at someone. Your adrenilin will be pumping way to fast to even know what just happen. We get this from buck fever also.

----------


## john_anderson_ii

7.62 Vs. 5.56 -- Some tips from a vet:

The 5.56 round is logistically sound.   They are lighter and made with less materials so they are cheaper and less taxing on industry in time of war.  Each round is lighter so not only can a single troop carry more rounds, but you get more bang for your buck when transporting the rounds.  Ammunition is heavy, and it has to be floated, airlifted, trucked and/or shoulder carried to the lines.  From the brass/lead mine to soldier's magazine the M855 (5.56x45mm ball) round is logistically superior.  We can all agree that the .22LR round would be logistically superior to the 5.56, but it wouldn't be effective.  So a balance must be struck between logistics and effectiveness.


As far as effectiveness is concerned, the M855 is fairly effective.  It's high velocity, so it's very accurate even in winds.  I've personally gone 10 rounds/10 hits at 500 meters from an M16A2 (iron sights) with this round.  However, anyone pulling targets in the butts when shooters are firing at this range will physically notice that at this distance the round doesn't have anything left.  The targets don't rattle, and you barely any dust kick up on the backstop.   The 5.56, along with the generous buffer spring of the AR/M16 platform makes for very accurate follow up shots.  You can get a lot of well placed rounds in a short amount time with this round.  

As far as the 7.62x51mm cartridge.  It's just outright effective.  It's accurate enough, and it packs a bigger punch.  Unlike the 5.56 it doesn't have a problem with sheetrock/stud-frame walls, thick reeds or small saplings.  It plows right through them.  It says accurate at up to 500+ meters, and it still carries energy at that range.  Its a lot heavier though.

In short, if I was a solider on the line, I would prefer the 7.62, even if it added a couple of pounds to my combat load.  If I was tasked with supplying a war effort, I would prefer the 5.56.  

The 7.62 is not inaccurate!  It's the cheaply produced AK-47 that makes it inaccurate.   A well made, moderately expensive early Soviet AK-47 is fairly accurate.  A cheap Chinese  knock-off isn't so great.    The M240G can hit area targets up to 1000M firing the 7.62.   So invest in your hardware!

If I had my druthers I'd choose the SS192 FN round before I chose either of these rounds.  But since they punch through body armor like it's cool, they are illegal in these United States.

----------


## Malum Prohibitum

> john_anderson_ii;547012]7.62 Vs. 5.56 -- Some tips from a vet:
> 
> The 5.56 round is logistically sound.   They are lighter and made with less materials so they are cheaper and less taxing on industry in time of war.  Each round is lighter so not only can a single troop carry more rounds, but you get more bang for your buck when transporting the rounds.  Ammunition is heavy, ...


This is an interesting analysis, and explains why the M-14 and its variants are preferred by many specialty units, particularly snipers and recon platoons.  My father did a couple of tours in VN and has nothing but contempt for the AR platform, saying that in his experience they arent reliable weapons.  He really liked the M-14, and absolutely LOVED the BAR (though was not a fan of the M-60).

Since we are entering the realm of microwarfare, its probably time for logisticians to revisit the model, and get the right tools in the hands of those whose lives depend on them.

----------


## rpfreedom08

> 7.62 Vs. 5.56 -- Some tips from a vet:
> 
> The 5.56 round is logistically sound.   They are lighter and made with less materials so they are cheaper and less taxing on industry in time of war.  Each round is lighter so not only can a single troop carry more rounds, but you get more bang for your buck when transporting the rounds.  Ammunition is heavy, and it has to be floated, airlifted, trucked and/or shoulder carried to the lines.  From the brass/lead mine to soldier's magazine the M855 (5.56x45mm ball) round is logistically superior.  We can all agree that the .22LR round would be logistically superior to the 5.56, but it wouldn't be effective.  So a balance must be struck between logistics and effectiveness.
> 
> 
> As far as effectiveness is concerned, the M855 is fairly effective.  It's high velocity, so it's very accurate even in winds.  I've personally gone 10 rounds/10 hits at 500 meters from an M16A2 (iron sights) with this round.  However, anyone pulling targets in the butts when shooters are firing at this range will physically notice that at this distance the round doesn't have anything left.  The targets don't rattle, and you barely any dust kick up on the backstop.   The 5.56, along with the generous buffer spring of the AR/M16 platform makes for very accurate follow up shots.  You can get a lot of well placed rounds in a short amount time with this round.  
> 
> As far as the 7.62x51mm cartridge.  It's just outright effective.  It's accurate enough, and it packs a bigger punch.  Unlike the 5.56 it doesn't have a problem with sheetrock/stud-frame walls, thick reeds or small saplings.  It plows right through them.  It says accurate at up to 500+ meters, and it still carries energy at that range.  Its a lot heavier though.
> 
> ...


Did you mean 7.62x39?

----------


## SWATH

> Did you mean 7.62x39?


Yeah big difference. 7.62x51 is not even in the same class.

*5.56x45/.223* 
AR-15
M16
M4
M249 SAW
Galil
SA-80

-muzzle velocity: 3250 ft/s
-Bullet Weight: 55gr.
-Muzzle Energy: 1300 ft-lbs
-EPP: 52000 ft-lbs/lb

*7.62x39*
AK47
SKS
AR30
mini-30

-Muzzle Velocity: 2300 ft/s
-Bullet Weight: 123 gr.
-Muzzle Energy: 1500 ft-lbs
-EPP: 45000 ft-lbs/lb

*7.62x51/.308*
M1A
M14
M40
M24
M60
M240B/G

-Muzzle Velocity: 2800 ft/s
-Bullet Weight: 147 gr.
-Muzzle Energy: 2500 ft-lbs
-EPP: 50000 ft-lbs/lb

However, when talking about terminal ballistics (lethality), there are more factors to consider than just energy alone. Velocity and fragmentation (due to bullet construction) tend to be far more effective all else being equal, which is why 5.56mm dominates this area. Unfortunatly, due to cold war pressures the standard M193 ball rounds (55gr. fmjbt/3250fps) was replaced with the M855 rounds (62gr. fmjbt w/ 7gr. steel core penetrator/ 3100fps) using the SS109 bullet. As a result of the slower and more structurally sound bullet, fragmentation and thus terminal performance declined, while penetration at extended ranges against hard targets slightly improved. A new 5.56x45mm round is being used now among certain circles called the M262mk1 which uses a 77gr. OTM (open tip match, hpbt) at 2800fps/1350ft-lbs. This round offers substantialy better performance across the board, but is expensive right now and hard to find. If the military adopted this round as standard, they would be a lot better off than switching calibers.

----------


## john_anderson_ii

> Did you mean 7.62x39?


No, I specifically meant the 7.62x51 NATO (M59 Ball) round.  I was talking about military rounds that I'm familiar with, and comparing the logistical effectiveness with the combat effectiveness.  The USMC fires the M193/M855 in 5.56 & the M59/M80 in 7.62.   The difference between the designators is bullet weight.    

However, I'm sure my statement comparing the 7.62 & 5.56 above applies to both the x51 & x39 variants.

----------


## rpfreedom08

Thanks guys for the explination.  would you guys ever go with a ak that shoots the nato 5.56 round? Would this remove all issues with the problematic ar?  I still can't decide between the ak and the ar.

----------


## travismofo

> Thanks guys for the explination.  would you guys ever go with a ak that shoots the nato 5.56 round? Would this remove all issues with the problematic ar?  I still can't decide between the ak and the ar.


The AR is in no way 'problamatic'.  It's initial problems were resolved shortly after its introduction.  Its just a bit more complicated than the AK.  To be honest I would take an SKS over an AK.  Better price with similar reliability.  The ammo is also a little bit cheaper too.

----------

