I have owned both and was in the military so this is my take on it.

The AK variants are very rugged and designed to function no matter what. Doesn't matter what the conditions are or how dirty they get, chances are they will fire a round when you pull the trigger.

The down side is they are mass produced very cheaply out of the cheapest materials and to sloppy tolerances. They function well, but are not very accurate or consistant from rifle to rifle. The fit and finish is very poor and the triggers are nasty.

Also because of the caliber they use they are a medium range weapon, the poor accuracy doesn't help much either. They are simular in ballistics to a 30-30, with the 30-30 being a bit better because it can be had in heavier bullets. However some of the newer rifles are being offered in the 5 mm nato round.

The M-16 got a bad rap when it first came out, it had functioning problems. This was mostly due to the military not using the ammo that the manufacturer suggested. They were using a different powder from what I understand and it was gumming up the action. I doubt field care was all that great at the time either. Most likely very little training when they were issued.

Now a days they are a very reliable weapon when properly maintained, which really isn't that hard. The military now has pretty intensive training on the use and care of the m-16. Will it function is reliably as an Ak, maybe not, but it works plenty well from what I have seen.

The M-16 is a finely crafted weapon made from machined metal of good quality and to pretty tight tolerances. They tend to be more accurate weapons and shoot flatter because of the lighter faster loads. If you campared it to a regular rifle it would be like a hopped up .223 I believe. It does have less downrange energy than a 7.62x39 round (AK), but plenty enough for shooting people in combat. The goal is not really to drop a combatant on the spot like hunting big game. But rather to injure them and remove them from the field.

When you see the two side by side and hold them in your hands and fire them a few things become evident. The Ak looks like something that was made in someones home workshop out of cheap wood, stamped metal and crudely machined metal. The M-16 or AR-15 is a well crafted weapon made from quality machined metal to better tolerances with a much better fit and finish. It has a much better trigger, sights and easier to operate controls. The only upside to an AK is the excellent functioning ability. However I have seen Ak's break and missfire, they are not perfect.

If I were going to pick a budget military firearm for the 7.62x39 I would look at a good SKS before the AK's. Much better weapon in my opinion.

Again, these are just my opinions, I am not a gunsmith or weapons expert.

Paul