What is better a scar-h or ak47?

Answer 1

The scar is the most modern but the AK 47 is now over 40 years old, but the 74u is more compact and has a carbine barrel, this also occurs on the g36C not e. The cartridge on the AK is a 7.62 mm round which is more powerful then the m4,scar or AUG. the scar has a rail inter face system, this can be used to equip a EOTech holographic sight or an acog sight, all are great guns but the AK has more recoil then the others and the scar is the lightest and in my opinion the best looking. so you can choose which gun you want but some are easy to use, if you are going to buy a gun I recommend the XM8 as it is light to use and the rounds are cheap... but get what you are more comfortable with...

To add-Ak74u is the best in my opinion, since it is a small version of ak47 and has less recoil.

I dont really care what a gun looks like, as long as it does its job, im happy.

Also, i recommend buying any Carbine weapons, since they are light and average and my fav weps

Answer 2

A lot of different variables to be considered here. For one, the SCAR-H is intended for special operations personnel, and the SCAR-H specifically would be more likely to be used for a niche role, supporting personnel armed with the SCAR-L, rather than as a primary individual weapon.

The SCAR-H fires the heavy 7.62x51 NATO cartridge (the SCAR-L is the 5.56x45 variant), whereas the AK fires the 7.62x39 M1943 cartridge.

Benefits of the SCAR would include the fitting of the MIL-STD-1913 rail as standard, a short recoil method of operation, a cartridge which is more powerful and has a longer effective range, better accuracy, more ease of aiming due to the use of peep sights and a long sight radius, and that it's equipped to take a suppressor. Disadvantages would include the length of the system, the amount of recoil generated by the 7.62x51 cartridge (particularly in full auto), weight of the weapons system, and weight of the ammo, which will affect how many rounds the operator of this system is able to carry.

The AK has, to its credit, a typically larger magazine capacity, more ease of control on full auto (though it should be noted that the AK rifle is not particularly easy to control in full auto), is forgiving of harsh abuse, is easy to manufacture and inexpensive to purchase (with the possible exception of Finland, no country manufacturing the AK series spends more than $250 per unit to manufacture the weapon), shorter overall length, and is a battle proven system. To its disadvantages are the limitations of the cartridge, inaccuracy compared to contemporary Western weapons, weight compared to contemporary Western individual general purpose weapons (which are typically 5.56), and a somewhat excessive rate of fire which makes controlling it in full auto more difficult.

Both systems have their strengths, and both have their weaknesses.