There is an error in the question. The cost of AK is not lower than that of AR. During the Soviet era, state-owned factories had low profits and aid, which led to production in many former Warsaw Pact countries. The M16 used aluminum alloy, which was high-tech back then but is now relatively cheap. Don't expect the United States to assist a country that has no air force in its aluminum alloy production line. Wouldn't it mean to let them build aircraft to weaken the United States' air superiority? (The aluminum alloy sold to them is either not sold or sold at a high price. In this way, AR is of course more expensive than AK in these countries.) The equipment and talents trained by the Soviet Union are specialized in AK manufacturing. The total cost is staggering, but the Soviet Union gave it to them for free. to these countries (including China). In this way, it is cheaper for these countries to build AKs, but it is more expensive to build ARs. The AK is not as easy to produce in a small workshop as the M16. The most difficult-to-manufacture components of the M16, such as the bolt and bolt frame, use rotary bodies that are easier to manufacture, but require higher materials. As long as steel columns can be purchased, they can be built. AK's bolt carrier and bolt frame require extremely high precision. If the tolerance is large, parts can only be allocated according to the tolerance for assembly. Talking about the cost, as long as they are mass-produced, both the M4 and AK are between $200-$300. M4 manufacturing requires forged aluminum and CNC. The lifespan of these equipment is measured in hundreds of thousands of times. This is thanks to the excellent processing performance of aviation aluminum and the low equipment depreciation rate. Moreover, the surface precision of aluminum alloy after forging is higher than that of steel. To make an M4, you only need a hand drill and aluminum and steel blocks. If you don't have the skills, a milling machine and a lathe will suffice. These are not enough for AK, and a lot of complete industrial facilities are needed. If the Soviet Union had not provided assistance and trained talents, AK would still be extremely expensive now. AK material costs are lower, but the equipment life is shorter and the total cost is higher. The latter is the factor that has a higher impact on the cost of firearm manufacturing. As the saying goes, rare things are valuable. Since AK sleeves and automatic machines are difficult to produce in small workshops, the Soviet Union made the choice to quickly manufacture AKs before the start of the nuclear war and license a large number of AKs to other countries. The most common of these rifles are the AK47 and AKM. Among them, the AK47 Type 1 is almost unusable, and the stamped receiver has a very short life. The AK47 Type 2 is extremely expensive and uses a milled steel receiver. Nowadays, steel milled receivers can only be seen on high-end products such as AS

VAL and VSS. Of course, these rifles are also expensive to make, not to mention the AK47 Type 2 more than ten years ago. Converted in gold to today's US dollars, the AK47

Type 2 is about $2,000. AK47

The cost of Type 3 has been reduced a lot, and it already looks like the current AK. The lowest-cost AK is the AKM produced from 1959 to 1962. The cost was $300. Later came the AK74, which had a small-caliber barrel and was already at the same price as the AR at that time. With the development of industry, it is difficult to improve the original high cost part of AK, while the cost of AR has indeed dropped again and again. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, AK was mostly used by Russia, which was under economic stress, to earn foreign exchange. At the same time, the political chaos caused by the disintegration made it difficult to trace the direction of AK. Warehouses full of AKs are all on sale, and they no longer care whether the selling price is higher than the cost. The 56 punches produced in China are also sold abroad to earn foreign exchange. Nowadays, AKs are spread all over the world, and their parts are all available. Those difficult-to-make bushings and BCGs can be easily purchased and assembled with other self-produced parts to turn into an AK. Most ARs in the United States have been destroyed, and it is difficult to find AR parts in foreign markets. Therefore, even if you can produce your own AR receivers and automatics, you cannot buy gun barrels. You can make your own AK stock and receiver, buy a barrel and assemble it into an AK. That's why AK is so popular in war-prone areas. It's not that AK is any easier or cheaper than M4. If a poor country is determined to become a world power (with an air force) and decides to adopt AK or M4 as its own rifle, build a production line from scratch, and purchase machines, they will find that the cost of producing M4 is much lower than the cost of producing AK many. Of course, it is still very cheap to dismantle the parts of the old AK and assemble it into a new AK, but assembly is the only way for small workshops to produce AKs (does it have a forging machine, milling machine, or a small workshop)? If you can buy M16 parts, then assembly The M16 is easier to assemble than the AK. AK can only be said to be low-priced, not low-cost. On the contrary, the M16 can be said to have a low cost and a high selling price. To sum up, the lower limit of the cost of AK is low (it is cheaper to make one that can be shot), and the lower limit of cost of AR is higher. However, the cost of making AK and M16 of the same quality is higher than AK. It is not advisable to use Tian Ji's horse racing comparison. As for the fact that AK is more convenient to operate than M16, I don’t know why. Doesn’t the M16 have one more short position and hang-up button than the AK? The rest of the steps such as bolt loading, gun inspection, etc. are all available for M16 and AK. Maybe it's because the Soviet manual has fewer words, which makes people feel that there are more precautions for operating the M16. The AK's cost and ease of operation are now inferior to the M16. The only thing left is market retention and reliability. (The reliability is also questionable. In the jungle, if the AK is left in the humid air for three or four days without wiping the bolt frame, it will rust into the receiver. The M16 receiver is an aluminum alloy with excellent corrosion resistance. In AK is not as good as M16 in this respect) So AK is just cheaper in price rather than cheaper in production.