Semi-auto AKs are available nearly anywhere in the U.S., save for those “people’s republic” (kind of ironic, isn’t it?) areas of the U.S. where any such type of semi-auto rifle is banned. Fortunately, that doesn’t include too many places (not yet, anyway). Further, they are far less expensive than almost any decent AR. If your finance’s are limited, you are much better off buying an AK, magazines, and as much ammo as you possibly can for the cost of an AR rifle alone.
The AK-47 was designed with simplicity and reliability as its primary requirements. It had to function in the extraordinary weather extremes found in the Soviet Union, which tended to generate loads of mud, dust, snow, and ice, depending upon the time of year and location. It was also expected to function this way in nations within the sphere of Soviet influence, places like Cuba, Africa, and, of course, Vietnam. Not only did it have to function in those extremes of climate, but also in extremes of abuse, neglect, and ignorance. Mister Kalishnikov knew full well who the end users of his design would be. Even in the once mighty Soviet Army, the level of education and training wasn’t the highest, with many of its ranks coming from rural peasant society. So the Bloc’s weapon had to be simple enough for even the most uneducated person, without access to tools, to field strip and maintain. Thanks to the AK’s long piston operating system, which assures that the action stays cleaner than the direct gas impingement AR-system, Kalishnikov accomplished his goal in spades. The AK is the most widely distributed firearm, for better or worse, in the world.
The AK is chambered for what I consider to be the ultimate intermediate battle cartridge, the 7.62×39mm. If the 7.62×39mm could be made to function with absolute reliability in the AR-15, there would have been little or no need for newly introduced rounds like the 6.8 SPC or .300 AAC Blackout. As of this writing, though, Rock River Arms has introduced an AR with adaptations that will allow it to operate reliably with this round, the Model LAR-47. I did not have the opportunity to test it for this book, but I can tell you that it stands a good chance of exhibiting superior performance, due to the fact that it accepts standard AK-47 magazines, not modified AR-15 mags. While it does hold promise, its MSRP is $1,200, which could pay for two decent quality AKs instead.
If an AK becomes your choice, stick with the 7.62×39mm over the 5.45×39mm. The 7.62 is more effective generally than the 5.45. (The Soviets introduced the 5.45 in their war in Afghanistan, replacing it with the 7.62 before they left. Guess that says something.) Ammo is universally available and inexpensive, and an AK chambered for 7.62×39mm will function with any commercial or military ammo you feed it. It is simply not ammo sensitive. Just stick with the non-corrosively primed brands. To me the cost savings of buying corrosively primed ammo just isn’t worth the extra work to clean the gun afterwards.
The AK’s overall length is short enough that it is ideal for any mission from open battlefield conflicts to room entries. Folding stocks are available, and they do shorten the gun’s overall length considerably, but they aren’t necessary for shelter-in-place guns. For use as a travel firearm, the folding stock allows the use of short gun cases that have less attention getting profiles.
The single biggest disadvantage of the AK versus the AR weapons system is the AK’s less than sterling reputation for accuracy. When I say this, I only mean that you can’t just pop a scope on an AK and turn it into a designated marksman weapon, something you very nearly can with an AR. Its accuracy, however, is more than enough for the battle conditions it has been used in for the past 65 years. So, instead of a 1.5-inch or less group at 100 yards that you can produce from about any AR, you will probably be looking at three- to four-inch groups. There are several reasons for this.
The tolerances of the AK are not as tight as those on an AR. On the other hand, this is, in part, what accounts for its reliability and ease of maintenance.
The second drawback is the gun’s iron sights. They are open in style and not as precise as the peep sights found on the AR.
Overall weight of the AK is at least a half-pound greater than the weight of a basic M4 AR carbine. Models that have the milled steel rather than stamped sheet metal receiver models will weigh even more.
The operational controls, well, frankly, they stink, at least in terms of their ergonomics compared to the AR’s. The AK safety, in particular, is the biggest headache. Kalishnikov had economy of manufacture in mind as part of the design. So, instead of having a separate ejection port cover or something that protects the inside of the weapon from getting mud in it, the safety, when on, also covers the receiver cut that allows the bolt handle to be drawn to the rear. It’s clever (two functions, one piece to manufacture), but it makes it comparatively difficult to operate. Your fingers can’t reach it without releasing your grip on something. Also, releasing an empty or full magazine requires the full-time attention of an entire hand, rather than just the use of a single finger, as with the AR. With an AR, your thumb has to hit the paddle release while it removes the magazine.
While these last two problems can be mitigated with practice, when it comes right down to it, running an AK just isn’t as fast as running an AR. On the other hand, no one who has ever faced an AK in combat, to the best of my knowledge, has ever reported any deficiency of the opposing force in terms of being slow to continue to deliver firepower, nor in terms of reloading or getting the AK into action against them.
In talking with one of my Army Special Forces operator friends about his opinion of the AK, accuracy was the only downside he could see for this weapon. Still, the accuracy issue is one that only becomes readily apparent when it comes to the vast open spaces of places like Iraq and Afghanistan. For jungle fighting or inter-urban combat, where ranges are not likely to be greater than 100 yards, there is very little practical difference between rifles that can hold 1½ inches or four inches at that distance. There’s even more validity to this argument when you are on the two-way range, where stress will defeat your ability to fire accurately, at least in the opening phases and until your adrenalin dump becomes a positive factor, rather than a negative one.