This week's Question: The battle between Ak-elites Vs Arma-guys, what's that all about?

Well, this weeks blog goes out to all those newbs who have come across this bitchy phenomenon whilst snooping around on the boards. Basically what we're talking about here is the battle between those airsofters who adore Kalashnikov guns and those who get hard over Armalites. Both these sides are battling out the big question; which is better: AKs or Armalites?

In airsoft, as in the real steel world both have their advantages and disadvantages, making a decision between the two hard for most airsofters. However, for those whose minds have already been made up by films and news the decision isn't there. These groups known as all manner of (normally derogatory) things are completely devoted and overly loyal to their own favourite gun series, which normally results in many threads digressing entirely and becoming discussions over the which is better.

Unfortunately, the majority of times, people on both sides try to answer the question through a giant slagging match, with the picture threads acting as the front line. Most of the arguments are aimed at the aesthetics and operation of the models and not their peformance. This is because, with enough time and money both ranges of guns can be upgraded to become equally good. And, more often than not people DO upgrade their guns, afterall they love them to bits.

N.b -where M16 is used in this section it is also used to denote M4 AEG models and most other models in the Armalite range, e.g. SR25.

Some popular 'arguments':

Generic arguments:

-M16/AK is too common.

-M16/AKs are too boring.

-M16/AKs all look the same.

Armelite arguments:

-The controls on an AK are too spread out.

-AK mags are too big/bulky and awkwardly shaped (aimed more at 47 style).

-AKs aren't practical enough in terms of mounting sights and other 20mm accessories.

-Brand new AKs look to spotless.

-Roughed up AKs look too battered.

AK-wh0r3 arguments:

-The M16's selector digs into the users thumb when in semi-auto.

-Version 2 Gearboxes are harder to work with, e.g. motor adjustment.

-Its more difficult to take apart M16s (excluding real-steel snap style split gearbox models)

-M16 look overly tactical, too many rails.

A typical situation on the boards may involve someone posting a pic of an AK in the 'My own weapon' thread and an Armelite declaring that its un-tacticalness is blasphemous. At this point a small engagment may ensue dragging folks in on both sides, with the occaisional G3-snob adding in his opinion that "G3's are best anyway so theres no need to fight over it, you silly little people".

TBH, things have died down abit in recent weeks but rest assured the continual struggle between both sides will rage on. A conclusion will likely never be reached as to which is better, partly because there is no single way to quantify it. Rather there is a a whole range of factors why the AK range and M4/16 range of guns are so popular and now account for almost half of the entire airsoft guns in the UK.

I have owned many examples of both ranges of guns, from the humble TMs to CA's, ICS's and some others. Being completely on the fence on this issue gives me reasonable insight into the situation, allowing me to advise that the key to knowing which is best is knowing which is best for you as an individual and you alone. When I say that I am aiming it mainly at new airsofters who ask themselves the question when it comes to buying their first AEG.

I won't comdemn the situation entirely however, as I think that the everlasting struggle is some times fought with great fortitude by both sides. And some new and interesting arguments can come up from time-to-time relating to and supported by facts on such things as anthropemetrics and ergonomics.

P.s. until you have owned at least one of each of the AK range and Armalite range of AEGs then try not to get dragged in and make random comments about the downsides of the 'other side's' guns.