Tell me, military emperor, why are Russian goods so rough at all times?

Looking at things from different angles, before the disintegration, polar bears thought that weapons were consumables in war, and almost no one could die. It is not cost-effective to waste resources and manpower on longevity, and there are abundant raw material resources, so there is no need to haggle over every ounce, and it can be comparable to Uncle Sam in performance. On the basis of satisfying the performance, relative rough machining can provide a large number of guarantees faster in wartime. A simple example is the German Tiger Tank Vs Polar Bear T34 in World War II. In terms of performance, the tiger tank can be one to five, but the rough tank sea introduced by T34 flooded the tiger tank.

The performance of AK47 is average, but it has good reliability and low requirements for the use environment. It is still widely used in Africa. During the Vietnam War, many Sam soldiers used the captured AK47 and M 16, but they were not the first choice.