User blog comment:Leolab/Retroactive Unfair Battle Enforcement/@comment-24180428-20131109055815/@comment-5559147-20131110044849

It's true that newer weapons can improve on older designs, but that doesn't mean they always do. Lets look at the 1911 again, more then 100 years old, still in service and well regarded. In that hundred years how many hand gun designs do you think have come and gone? How many do think have failed? How many do you think are worse then the 1911?

I guess what I am looking for is specific reasoning. Specs, stats etc. I'll start

( some of the numbers are rounded/averaged )

......................M2............................AK

WEIGHT:  5.8 LBS........................9-10lbs

LENGTH: 35.6 In...........................35 In

CARTRIDGE: .30 Cal..........................7.62x39mm

MUZZLE VELOCITY: 1990 ft/s............2900 ft/a

ENERGY ( Ballistic ): 1311J...............1679J

ROF: 850-900RPM..........................600RPM

EFFECTIVE RANGE: 300m...........3-400m

FEED: 30 round detachable box mag for both.

Once agains as you can see pros and cons on both sides. The AK is more powerfull and has slightly better range, but the M1/M2 is much lighter and has a higher rate of fire. So while I think the AK is a superior weapon it by no means completely out classes the M2.

Similarly the rest of the weapons in the match can easily be argued either way.