AR15 - why so expensive?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have seen Armalite and Bushmaster ARs in the M4 configuration at gun shows for $725 new. I do not consider this exspensive at all for a quality weapon made by a quality company. You are comparing the cheapest version of a weapon (WASR) that was already designed to be as economical as possible with one that was not. Look at the more upscale version of the AK and compare it to the AR's, even then it is not a solid camparison.

Gun owners maybe the only consumer group in America that want a product priced so cheaply that the company would fail as a business if it charged what most consumers want to pay. Especially for a product that will outlast the person who bought it, if properly maintained. I understand trying to get the most value for my money but I never understood being cheap when it comes to buying guns. BTW, the AR pattern rifles are exceptionaly reliable if properly maintained.
 
I just built an 16" Lightweight AR for $420.00. I was able to buy a Cav-Arms SEBR Lower at AR15.com for $165.00 and got an upper off the parts board for $175.00. Then bought a Bolt Carrier Group and Charging Handle for $85.00.

Then I found a 20" Parts kit minus the lower for $320.00. I bought another Cav-Arms SEBR Lower for $110.00 (I had the lower parts kit this time).

With complete lowers from Mega running $149.99. All you need is the upper, Bolt Group and Buttstock. You can find this stuff cheap on the gun boards.
 
Most of this has already been covered:

1. The AK is designed to be as economical as possible. The AR/M-16 is not.

2. Both are reliable. The AK is VERY reliable, but the AR is, frankly, good enough for army work (literally).

3. You're getting a bad deal on mags. ;)

4. You're comparing a bargain basement surplus AK to a new production AR.

5. The AR has the whole modularity thing going for it. The AK much less so.

6. AK sights and trigger are awful, but can be fixed.

Basically, you have to ask yourself what you want the rifle to do. If you want an iron sight plinker that eats cheap food, go with the AK. If you want an uber-accurate ninja gun with multiple tactical doodads, that seems more like an AR. You can probably make either one to perform either role (and most in between), with varying efficiency for varying amounts of money. So, just get the one you want. ;)

Mike
 
Because once you have a lower, you realise you want a bunch of uppers, once you have your uppers then you realise you're lazy and find excuses to buy lowers for all of the uppers :)

In reality it's fairly economical for what you get. Lots of competition. There wouldn't be all this competition if the AWB hadn't popularized EBRs. So, the AWB drove up demand but supply has jumped to compensate. So, I think now you're in the same boat as the 1911. You've got umptean mfg making parts that very from worthless junk to art and everything in between making the results and the reputation highly variable.

Now that the AWB is gone I think this is the golden age of the EBR.
 
Rockjock, I thought Blkhawk73 was making a pretty good point, and very reasonably pointed out his experience. Now I will say that in my limited experience (I've only been shooting about 40 years and usually only get to shoot every other weekend) you see similar numbers of yahoos with AK's as with AR's, it's just that the guys with the AR's have a little more money to spend. Very, very few of the AR/AK shooters I see around ranges in Houston would qualify as precision marksmen. I don't know the numbers, but it would be an incredibly small percentage of owners that actually shoot NRA Hipower or 3-gun with their AR's. Since you're the expert why don't you describe the typical owner of a couple of mine:
Kel-Tec Sub2000 - Glock 17 mag well (31 rd. mags, fits in a briefcase)
SKS 59/66 - 7.62x39 (a lot of cheap fun for plinking)
FN 49 - 8x57 (this is a real battle rifle, no AR's/AK's need apply)
Remington 81 - 300 Savage (fun to shoot with no recoil)
HK SLB 2000K - 30-06 (2,5 and 10 round mags, although the 10 rounders are $65 ea. now that they quit importing them)
Gr. III BAR - 30-06 (no reason you can't look pretty when you're in the woods)
Gr. IV BAR - 270 ( when you really want to look your best for the deer)
Dumoulin Mauser- 338 Win (Late 50's vintage, FN Mauser based rifle)
Argentine Mauser 1891 - 7.65x53 (customized in the 50's, an incredibly accurate old warhorse)
Weatherby Vanguard - 30-06 (well Walmart was closing the display Deluxe model out for $249, how could I leave it there)
Plus a few small size Martini's in 300 Sherwood through .450 x 1 1/2" and a custom or two. For Pistols I usually carry Browning Hi Powers although I do have a Bersa .380 for a BUG, and a couple of Beretta .22's, and a couple of High Standards, and, you get the picture.

Crap, I just noticed I don't have an AR or AK in the safe. I guess I need to get myself to a gun show pretty soon to correct that. Everybody laugh, don't take this stuff so seriously or you'll have a stroke.
 
I can get Wolf .223 for $99/1000 at gunshows. It runs fine in all the ARs I have had. I have had more jams in my SAR-1 than in all four of my AR-15s combined. All of my ARs have been parts guns as well!

:The main problem is I'm terribly worried that if I ever have an AR in my hands when I REALLY need it it's going to malfunction in my hands."

Lets be honest here, what is the chance that you are going to need an AR-15 in a self defense situation? DO you really think a $800 AR-15 is less reliable than a pieced together Romanian SAR-1 that sells for $300? Those SAR-1s are not exactly what I would call quality firearms. Some of them do work but the level of cheapness involved makes me leary that something could go wrong with them as well.

The AR-15 is going to be far more accurate than an SAR-1. It is also going to be much lighter as well. It will recoil less and be easier to keep on target in rapid fire shooting. If you plan on using it in a self defense situation, the fact that it will not jump all over the place might be a concern. Most SAR-1s have trigger slap that can vary from minor to really painful. Mine was so bad that I stopped shooting it because I didn't like having a bruised trigger finger.

I can't imagin a situation where I would choose an AK over an AR-15. I started out thinking that the AK was great like most newbies but after shooting both types, I found that the AR is more to my likeing.
 
I guess it is what you like best. Either one will get you through the night with proper training. I prefer the AK myself, but a plain jane un-pimped out AR will work also. I have never been a gadget person, and it seems like all of the people that have reliability problems with ARs are the ones that have every "new better idea" thingamajig hanging off of it. IMO the only accessories you need for an AR or an AK are magazines and ammo.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
browningguy,

Very, very few of the AR/AK shooters I see around ranges in Houston would qualify as precision marksmen.
Click to expand...

Personally, I got my AR as a replacement for my 870, not my Garand. :eek:
 
Well I like them both and do not care what the other guy at the range thinks as I think they are both fine weapons. As far as price goes never gave much thought to what I wanted do to cost as I really wanted a few ak type of rifles and bought what I wanted when it was possible.

I have 3 of the match service rifles put together by a mentioned gunsmith
and use them in matches and one is just a back up rifle and only was shot like less than 200 rounds down it last year. One is my NTIT rifle and besides practices for that 1 match a year it gets only 64 rounds down it in 1 match a year. The other is my main rifle and it gets shot all the time during the season.
I also have a custom built spacegun match ar15 that I just picked up and it will get shot in a few matches this year not not alot.
Did buy a pre ban on sat also so thats like 5 ar15's for me.

Now my main goal is matches with most of them but I also like the ak's

I bought a sar 1 back in 2000 and put a adjustible sight on it and it shoots just fine with no trigger slap. did pick it out of a larger group of them a dealer had so I made sure it did not have any off center barrels or sights.
Also had a amd-65 built and have only test fired it but it works fine.
I only use usgi mags for the ar15's and with the ban gone the prics have fallen alot on good mags. I have seen them at shows around here for the last couple of months at under $10 and I man piles of them. The ak mags are also pretty resonible also if you buy them on the internet when you find a deal.
 
On another front, in the M4 profile, I'd go with M193 as opposed to the green tip M844. Same price, and you get a bit more effective range. The M855 is fine, though. Just my preference. I have both. :evil:
 
We all have our different reasons for buying what we buy.

For me, personally, I'll probably never own an AR. I can't see spending $800 or more for a rifle that would sit in my safe and I'd plink or range shoot occasionally. If I was going to spend that kind of $, it would be something more useful to me, like a higher end deer rifle, better optics, a custom carry pistol, sporting clays shotgun, etc. etc. I basically can't see spending that kind of $ on what would be a "plinker" for me anyway. They're great guns, I don't have anything against them.

That said, I'm about to get an AK variant, because, I don't have a problem spending $300 on a plinker, especially when ammo is just so dirt cheap, mags are so cheap, it's reliable as heck, and I don't think I'd be taking 400yd shots in a "shtf" scenario anyway. They're easier to break down and clean, battle tested, and I like rifles with wood. And since I don't get into being a "tactical Joe", and could care less how many Surefires I can mount on it, it will be perfect for me. To each his own.

Of course, if there ever comes a time when the morons in Washington decide they are going to ban AR's, well, I'll probably go out and buy 5 of them, just because. ;)
 
"That said, I'm about to get an AK variant, because, I don't have a problem spending $300 on a plinker, especially when ammo is just so dirt cheap, mags are so cheap, it's reliable as heck, and I don't think I'd be taking 400yd shots in a "shtf" scenario anyway. They're easier to break down and clean, battle tested, and I like rifles with wood. And since I don't get into being a "tactical Joe", and could care less how many Surefires I can mount on it, it will be perfect for me. To each his own."
-LoneStar .45

I completely agree. In a SHTF scenario the AK will provide absolute reliability for within 100 yards and the scoped bolt action can meet 100+.
 
Tamara, that's the spirit, those M1's are an excellent tool. By the way, my own Tamara (eldest offspring) just finished graduate school in December and got a job in NYC. With her off the payroll now I can afford to go look at the AR's.
 
I went probably the route less traveled. My weapon is a Saiga Converted AK, ran me about 400 bucks from a seller here on THR. My first time with the rifle, eager to test that AK reliability I sat down in 12 degree weather and worked through a thousand rounds, with occasional forays into "Christ My hand is roasting through the forestock!". That said the rifle grouped a few times at 1.5" on a filthy barrel(I'll call it a fluke) but is mostly a 2"-3" rifle on the 89 dollar case of a thousand dollar 122 grain Wolf FMJ.

I have 4 Bulgarian Wafflemags:12 bucks each. 100% reliability
I have 3 Russian steelmags:10 bucks each 100% reliability


Not ergonomic? My AK fits me a hell of alot better than my dad's DPMS or Wilson combat m4 thing thats in a gawd awful shade of green. One handed mag changes, done. Magdrop from the pistolgrip, done. Operation of the safety from the pistolgrip, done.

Right now as we speak I've got maybe 1600 rounds through my AK, will be 2K plus my next range trip. I've encountered 100% reliability. My Ak is not flimsy, it is not poorly made.If you really just get sick to death over a stamped receiver, buy an RPK based Vepr and forget about ever buying something like the AR-180.


I dont get why everyone with an AR has to dump on us lil'ole AK guys. Ok not everyone. I'm not a conscript, your not a Delta operator. Cant we all just get along? I like my AK, you like your AR. We have rifles which make us smile everytime we bring them out've the case and make noises fit to write poetry about. The sound of the AR charging handle dropping, or the AK bolt dropping onto a loaded magazine? Just be happy for one another folks.

You'll take your AR, I'll take my Ak. We'll both end up killing plenty of zombies.
 
You're comparing apples to oranges.
Your completely wrong they are two battle rifles made by the lowest bidder for national defense. The difference is ammo and constuction. I think your comparing a green apple to a red one here.

Further, remember the East Block of the Cold War era followed the mantra of "quantity has a quality all of its own." Hence, the AK design is designed to be able to stamped out cheap in a hurry for third world peasant conscript armies, while the AR design was designed to be milled out of aluminum forgings and put together for highly trained professional soldiers.
Comparing construction is nuts. If I take a M-16 varient of any kind, and drop it off a 2 story building it would shatter. An AK can fall 2 stories and be run over by a double decker bus and still shoot. Cheap doesnt always mean poor quaility and in this case it is disproven. As for the M-16 for highly trained soldiers should I point out vietnam?

The wonder is not that the AK is all-fired great, the wonder is that something made so cheaply can still run, much less run well. (And that it does, certainly!) Thus, by focusing on "bang for the buck" you're pretty much taking the East Block perspective.
You realize the US military bought the first M-16s because of bang for the buck IE lowest bidder. Tell me who was smarter a battle rifle made fro 45 bucks that works reliably every where and can be beaten, or the US that has a M-16 that is less then reliable?

Still, remember that most every time East ran up against West resulted in a victory for the good guys (southeast asia being the one very notable exception) -- I'd say that history has proven the "tech-n-training,training,training" model to be superior on the field. Now granted a lot of that has to do with air power, superior targeting and stealth tech, etc etc etc... but I'd argue it trickles down to rifles to.
How does training come into the point of a reliable useful weapon? This point is moot and shows nothing more then the US has superior forces not superior firearms.

If you've got enough people to throw at the problem, the quantity-over-quality approach is fine. Personally, since I've only got one me, I don't like that answer so much. (though I guess that means one of these days I should take my own advice and get my lazy pink butt over to front site or somesuch. )

Play with both systems, come to your own conclusions.
Great answer I wish you had said this at first

Look I havent had the experince of many of you. Plus I havent personally owned a M-16, even though I shot a good many of them. However the M-16 is better is propaganda. In the hands of a person who cleans and takes care, pampers and love the newer ones they work great. I however have shot a good bit of M-16s and every last A2 I have touched in my life has jammed. One AK has jammed. I dislike the belief that the M-16 is a great weapon because they have a 2000 dollar tricked out masterpiece. They can be a great gun, but pound for pound the AK beats it. Accuracy and all it seems to me the Russians did a far better job at creating a cheap battle rifle then anyone. You can make your own decision and a M-16 will kill just as well as a AK. By the way those of you buying Armor Piercers for home defense etc, need to read the original Black Hawk down and see what M-16 AP did compared to say a M-14.
 
I have a colt competion Hbar and a norinco mak 90. The trigger in the colt is so horrrible that the rifle is a safe queen. Its off the scale on my rcbs trigger gage. I have had the AR for 2 1/2 years and only put 60 rounds through the rifle. The AR was my gonna be m 2nd rifle on pdog trips, to let my 22-250 cool down a bit. But I cant hit **** with it. My MAk gets @ 2k fired in a it year without many probs. The MAK is by no means a varmint gun. but neither is my $1000.00 Ar!!!!!! :cuss:
 
I built an AR about a year ago, using quality parts it cost me around $550 to build, it's not exactly a safe queen, I've put a couple of thousand rounds through it in the last year, and I don't go out and just blast away, each shot was a careful aimed shot.

In December I built my second AR, it is built for varmint/target use, it cost me about $650/700, and I must say it shoots quite nicely! I have used the JP Rifles spring kit on the hammer and trigger springs on both rifles, it cleans the triggers up a lot!

I might also mention I have never had a malfunction of any kind with either one of these rifles. (2,000+ rounds)

This group is from the new rifle.
38720321.jpg
 
Hmmm... I shouldn't drop an AR-15 out of my second-story window because it will fail miserably when it hits but an AK will survive just fine. The drop from the second story doesn't seem that bad though... :rolleyes:

I like the AR myself, as it fits me way, way better than an AK. I imagine the AK as being better suited to those people who agree with a gunwriter or two about shotgun stocks needing to be shorter than 14" LOP for a turkey gun, to "accomodate shooting from sitting" or Col. Jeff Cooper's assessment that rifle stocks are too long for the average shooter. The fact that the AR is accurate enough that it makes hitting things easy and the recoil is non-existant are just icing on the cake.
 
"For that price I can get 3 WASRs, 3 krebs custom peep sights, creep trigger done by armorer and some mags for $6.95 a pop."

Think how many High Points you can get for the same money.
 
I hope that I have finally reached the point where I have achieved Musashi's principle:

"Have no preference in weapons".

IF SHTF tommorrow,

I'd go Bushy.

If I was going into the swamps for a long time with limited cleaning kit,

I'd go AK.

I currently favor the AK,

because the ranges on my current domicile are quite short,

and I favor the open leaf sight over an aperture.

Lengthen the range,

and my choice would flip.

Both are just tools, and the upside/downside of each should be soberly appraised.

Even if you are involved in a righteous shooting, the cost differential between the AK and the AR is only about an hour's billing from your deefense lawyer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
AR15 vs AK47 vs Mosin Nagant
Replies
2
Views
1K
nalioth
N
B
  • Locked
Why are bakelite ak47 mags so expensive?
Replies
16
Views
8K
HorseSoldier
H
E
  • Locked
First AR15 "build"
Replies
5
Views
793
Everready73
E
S
  • Locked
Why Is The Steyr AUG So Damn Special?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
9K
Zangetsu
Z
T
  • Locked
Ok. AR15 it is... Or maybe AR180B Now, few questions.
Replies
13
Views
892
alphach64
A
Back
Top