The Gun Thread

In the later 2010s, AKs became more expensive than ARs. I was wondering if that's still true.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 9th 2020 at 11:21:58 AM

Generally speaking, AKs are a bit more expensive than ARs in the US simply by virtue of the fact that less of them are available. Cheap AKs usually sit in the 700 dollar range, while a cheap AR can be found sub-500 pretty easily. For a quality rifle of either kind you should expect to spend 700-100 dollars, though.

Edited by archonspeaks on May 10th 2020 at 10:11:10 AM

Finally, a burning question that's been really bugging me recently.

Guerrilla warfare (then asymmetric warfare, and now irregular warfare in general) is inherently associated with the AK, which is why it's popular with insurgents.

It's definitely true that the AK is easy to maintain, can be procured in large numbers, and its operation is very simple. But the AR has tighter tolerances and is still lighter, and guerrillas have to carry everything with them, like SOF units and the old LRRP. As for the question of reliability, you always have to clean your gun regardless; it's a basic skill and emphasized always.*

So I wonder; for an armed group operating deep in hostile territory using guerrilla tactics - both actual guerrillas and SOF units apply - which rifle would be more ideal for irregular warfare?

• Case in point: Fidel Castro used to have a badass number two known as Frank Pais back in the Cuban insurrection. Pais carried out the urban work, but expected all his operatives to be able to field strip and put back a weapon within minutes. One day he went up to the mountains to check on Fidel, and was royally pissed that the guerrillas hadn't cleaned their weapons at all. He just sat there cleaning all their rifles (likely Mexican Mausers and M1903 Springfields then) himself with a Death Glare. The guerrillas took good care of their weapons after that.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 10th 2020 at 1:40:08 AM

The best weapon for a guerilla is whatever is abundant and you can get parts for easiest.

In the modern day there's nothing any AK can do than an AR can't and vice versa. Even reliability has evened out apart from a few select AR models.

So if the enemy force is using ARs, capturing and using those would be best.

You're correct, that's the principle - the FLN in Algeria used captured MAS-36s from French police, the Cuban revolutionaries of M-26-7 used captured Garands from Batista's soldiers, the VC made off with ARVN munitions all the time. There's reports of M16s and M4s showing up in the hands of Taliban, ISIS, Iraqi and Syrian insurgents recently.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 10th 2020 at 1:56:49 AM

If you can get parts and ammo and other stuff for them reliably, sure.

As a guerilla you are by definition without a really nice robust supply chain and central logistics center to get you whatever you need.

You gotta make do with what you have.

As for SOF, generally they have a supply chain, but if they're usually deep in enemy territory, captured weapons can help not alert enemies. I think MACV-SOG operated on that principle when touting their captured AKs around.

Then again, if they're in the enemy's backyard, it's almost certainly special recon work with the occasional ambush if they can pull it off, not direct action.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 10th 2020 at 2:00:17 AM

Part of the reason the Ak is so common for guerillas is the Soviets literally dumped millions around the globe into the hands of just about anyone and the massive black market in arms that flowed and still flows in and out of Russia.

Yeah, the weapon of choice for a guerrilla is whatever happens to be handy. In most parts of the world, that’s an AK. It’s not that it’s inherently better for guerrilla warfare, it’s just easy to find.

So if the AR was common in such an environment, they'd capture and use that. Got it. It really is a matter of location rather than the armament itself.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 10th 2020 at 4:57:42 AM

The IRA somewhat infamously adored the AR-15 and AR-18 and used them extensively during the height of their insurgency, if you want an example.

They even got their hands on some Barret .50BMG rifles.

You see a lot of fighters in the Middle East with ARs these days, the War on Terror has made it a fairly common weapon there. Insurgents usually aren’t picky.

On purely technical grounds, if supply and logistics were not an issue, I would go for the Ruger AC 556 (the military variant of the Mini-14).

I’m not sure a Mini-14 is a great choice for a combat rifle, unless you’re the A-Team.

Are the A-Team not the ideal insurgents though?

Look at what they did in that one episode with the little 2x4 chucker

Aside from Russia, China, the Eastern Block and other dumping cheap AK's, the thing is so damn simple to build and maintain.

If I was tasked with equipping an insurgency quickly (and in a way that can't be tracked back to my government/employer) - I'd go with AK's.

Not an AK itself, but the Vektor R4, R5, and R6 (South African versions of the Galil) work well.

Insurgents generally come in one of two types:

• Full-time ones tend to live outside of a society as recluses, equipping themselves with foreign aid, training, and planning their next move to forward their planned revolution to take over said society one day. Although they practice what observers call guerrilla warfare, they envision themselves as professional soldiers in a conventional army, and that using guerrilla warfare is only a temporary stage before they are able to challenge and defeat the government in open battle. Since they operate outside of a society, these "soldiers in waiting" sustain themselves by receiving supplies from foreign allies or domestic supporters. If they fall on hard times, they turn to seizing provisions from government forces or civilians. Since they tend to reside in sanctuaries that straddle borders and are away from the government-controlled cities, they are much more likely to be equipped with foreign weapons provided by their external allies.
  • Examples include the Chinese Communists, Cuban Communists, Viet Minh, George Washington's Continental Army, and Afghan mujaheddin.

• Part-time ones live within a society as seemingly normal and productive citizens, and using their free time or weekends to plan, equip, train, or launch attacks on government forces or loyalist civilians. Since they're not social outcasts, they can easily procure food and basic supplies for themselves, if not often being the producers of those essentials (e.g the working-class). Unlike full-time insurgents, they can't afford to risk getting into open firefights with the police and army simply because they don't have the numbers, ammunition, and training. So they are forced to turn to more "primitive" tactics that the government will call terrorist attacks. Instead of hoping to become a professional army capable of going head to head with the government, they hope to destabilize society so much that the government will make concessions to them or withdraw from the region entirely if it no longer wants to pay the cost of occupying it. Since they live in government-controlled areas, it's much more difficult for them to procure firearms, so they are likely to use domestic weapons already being used by the government forces obtained through smuggling or looting.
  • Examples include the Patriot militia, Algerian FLN, anti-Nazi resistance groups in Europe, IRA, PIRA, Viet Cong, and al-Qaeda.

The two types are not mutually exclusive in a conflict, often existing to support one another: part-time insurgents will provide intelligence and provisions to the full-timers and keep operating in hopes that they become strong enough to liberate them one day, while full-time insurgents operate communication and supply lines that the part-time ones need to obtain weapons and ammunition. They can become one another if government forces become too competent: part-time insurgents are likely to flee and become full-time ones if it becomes too dangerous for them to live in government-controlled areas, while full-time ones typically become part-time ones after the government destroys most of their forces.

• Cases in point, the relationships between the Viet Cong and the PAVN, the Patriot militias and the Continental Army, and anti-Nazi resistance groups and the invading Allied or Soviet forces.

Edited by FluffyMcChicken on May 11th 2020 at 3:47:21 AM

Interesting article regarding the Balochistan seperatists, who possess both the usual Eastern Bloc gear and NATO arms flowing in from Afghanistan.

"This grouping is known as BRAS (Baloch Raji Aajoi Sangar) or Baloch National Freedom Front."

What an unfortunate moniker.

Can't be worse than the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.

There's rumors going around again that the Russians are considering switching back to the 7.62x39mm. It's a pretty old rumor, though, dating far back as the early 2000s.

Doubt it, the 5.45 does great.

The 7.62x39mm only ever shows up in the hands of operator types.

I think counter-terrorist agencies made a request a while back because they say 7.62 does better against barriers and cover but I'm not sure what became of that.

So that might be why. Plus, well, there are entire warehouses of 7.62x39mm lying around for free use. 9x39mm does great, but so far only for the VSS.

Generally, SOF tends to favor heavier rounds more than ordinary troops.

Edited by TheWildWestPyro on May 14th 2020 at 7:51:41 AM