# Does the US need a new battle rifle now, and if so, what?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-us-need-a-new-battle-rifle-now-and-if-so-what/336013>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [December 17, 2005, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-us-need-a-new-battle-rifle-now-and-if-so-what/336013 "2005-12-17T02:31:25Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\
**Post date:** [December 19, 2005, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-us-need-a-new-battle-rifle-now-and-if-so-what/336013/41 "2005-12-19T21:01:36Z")

</div>

> [@SenorBeef](#):
>
> It would be a strange misuse of terms to label the M16 a “defensive weapon” but the AK-47 an “offensive” weapon based on the diameter of the bullets, as they serve the same purpose. Also, 7.62x51 NATO is a lot more powerful than 7.62x39, which is what the AK uses.

Yeah, I think he’s conflating the _applications_ of the 7.62x51 and 7.62x54 (medium MGs and sniper rifles) with the 7.62x39 (asault rifles and SAWs). The Russians dropped the calibre of their service “AK” round to 5.45 in the late 70s to provide more ammo carrying capacity and maybe partly in a fit of copycatting (since NATO had gone to 5.56).  
Regarding relative reliability/accuracy of one design or another, any indication if the 5.56NATO versions of the Finnish Valmet or Israeli Galil (Kalashnikov mechanism, Western manufacturing) are particularly notable for one or the other vs. the “native” AK or the M16?

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-us-need-a-new-battle-rifle-now-and-if-so-what/336013.md?page=2)