Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AK-47/74 rifles from around the world...

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Till
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    I didn't say much about milled receivers. Here's pretty much everything I wrote on the subject on page 1:



    Frankly, milled receivers look cool, weigh more, and the rigidity they add can actually lead to cracks and other less desirable effects. The Russian military went to stamped steel and didn't look back. Other than rounding out a collection, I don't see the point of a milled receiver.
    Good advice that is helping me make my first AK purchase, thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    I didn't say much about milled receivers. Here's pretty much everything I wrote on the subject on page 1:

    Historically, the AK-47 was originally designed in 7.62X39. The receiver was made from a machined piece of steel, like the Thompson submachine gun, and other rifles of the era. It later underwent a modernizing campaign, where its weight was significantly reduced (and money saved!) by making the receiver out of folded stamped metal. The modernized model was dubbed the AKM-47. Later still, the Russian government wanted a lighter weight bullet that created less recoil and developed the 5.45X39. The new model that chambered this round was called the AK-74. Milled receivers were no longer being produced, so all AK-74s are made from stamped metal receivers.
    Frankly, milled receivers look cool, weigh more, and the rigidity they add can actually lead to cracks and other less desirable effects. The Russian military went to stamped steel and didn't look back. Other than rounding out a collection, I don't see the point of a milled receiver.

    Leave a comment:


  • Till
    replied
    Unless I missed it somewhere in this thread, I don't see a discussion on milled vs. stamped receivers.

    Besides price, what are the other pros and cons of each?

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Ah, that makes sense. If the WASR fits the budget, it is the one to go with....

    Leave a comment:


  • moose7289
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    You are MOST welcome!



    I did?! I'll have to go back and find that comment... It doesn't sound like something I would say.

    I messaged you and told you my budget and you sent me a link , you didn't say wasr over saiga you showed me an ak that fit my budget, I patiently waited to save more money and did the saiga conversion ! Sorry about mix up

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Originally posted by moose7289 View Post
    Great info ! Thanks jwise
    You are MOST welcome!

    I know you said to get the wasr
    I did?! I'll have to go back and find that comment... It doesn't sound like something I would say.

    I went ahead with the saiga and did the conversion. I love it!
    Well that's all that matters! You bought one; and you love it. Good on ya! Now go shoot the snot out of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • moose7289
    replied
    Great info ! Thanks jwise I know you said to get the wasr but I went ahead with the saiga and did the conversion. I love it ! I posted pics in pic section

    Leave a comment:


  • farrellsm77
    replied
    Bump! Thanks for all the good advice Jwise!

    Leave a comment:


  • Smokerr
    replied
    I am going to weigh in fully admitting a limited view and expertise as an MAK90 owner (though I also do own a RA XCR that is what the AK would have or should have evolved into).

    The MAK90 was owned by an old freind who had never shot it (15 years after he bought it we took it shooting). It ran with no issues, was reasonlay accurate and I was impresed with how solid it felt (vs the views and comments I have read). He has since passed it onto me.

    I have since researched it in depth, and the MAK90 looks to have more substance to it than it was orignaly thought to.

    1. Very heavy stamped receiver
    2. Heavier than normal battale
    3. Chromes barrel
    4. Chromed bolt

    So the stamping is not that great, certainly not an issue, it has been reliable (and regardless of what you read about AKs, not all of them are). A lot knock it for the stock, but that is a compliance fact, not anything to do with the gun itself (and resolved with 5 US made parts if you want to convert it).

    Supposedly the special forces had Norninco make their AKs for them, no idea if that's accurate. If so it says something about the gun.

    It certainly seems to merit high respect, and its now to the point people are looking for the thumb- hole stock to convert it back to OEM. I.e. low level collectors item now. It puts it up in the hierarchy a bit in my thinking.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    VLTOR's conversion unit is VERY nice. However, for MUCH less I used the Blackjack Buffers conversion unit. It's not as nice as the VLTOR, but it worked for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • daspy21
    replied
    oh got it.
    and here I thought they were mostly universal. I guess I forgot about the QA and just the over all differences between the manufacturers / assemblers.

    I guess I was right when I got this and took it apart and realized it is designed to do nothing more than go bang. And go bang it surely will.

    I saw that VLTOR has a rear receiver available. Anyone know about these? I know VLTOR is pretty good and they are not cheap. But is the price worth it?

    Leave a comment:


  • NORCOCOP
    replied
    Not all ak's rear reciever areas are the same. Even if you have a stock that SHOULD go onto the rear trunnion a particular maodel has there is alot of difference in specs between the diffrent plants. There yogos, MAK 90's, milled reciever, Hungarian variants all come to mind. The Romanian and saiga aks are run of the mill rear trunnion types and most of the cheapy m4 style or widely available stocks should be installable with the removal of and repalcement of a screw. Some fitting is often required. HE was speaking in general due to the fact that many people may end up with an ak that is not rear trunnion mounted and be sorely vexed to find it both easier and cheaper to buy an new ak than to try to fully mod out the one they have. My Arsenal krink is a prime examlple.

    Leave a comment:


  • TimK
    replied
    Some stocks you can change. You can use a Romanian-style wire folder with a stamped-style trunion. Pretty much all the cheap American replacements go right on, and Ace will happily sell you a conversion block that adds an inch and a half to the back of the rifle to use their folders without any smithing.

    If you want to go further, then yes. You do need to do some gunsmithing. But hey, it's still easier than putting a folding stock on a DI AR-15

    Leave a comment:


  • daspy21
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    The difference between ARs and AKs, is that once an AK has a particular stock, it is not an easy thing to switch them. It requires a good bit of gunsmithing, removing the rear trunion and is not for a hobbyist or shooter to undertake. AR stocks can be switched around at will (hence the comment, "Legos for grownups.")
    Perhaps I took it out of context. I am not sure. But I think I finally found a post by Jwise that I can disagree with. (hey there is a first for everything)
    But I just bought my first AK. It is a used Romanian Wasr10.
    I just took it apart and cleaned everything. The only thing I did not take apart was the trigger assembly.
    I even took apart the stocks and handguards. And even though I spent 10 years in the Army and can disassemble an AR in my sleep. I found the AK much easier. I dont know about switching the stock to a side folder or an underfolder.....but it sure is going to be a breeze to switch it to a collapsible M4 type of stock. The handguards on this AK are aqlso a heck of a lot easier to replace than the AR.

    But then again that is just me..... perhaps I am weird like that
    Last edited by daspy21; 08-13-2010, 03:45 PM. Reason: wrong coding on the quote thingy

    Leave a comment:


  • zeplin
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    I had the best of intentions, but it is hard to get motivated to go out to the public range. I miss being able to use the department's private range...

    My range time has dropped off significantly, forcing me to focus almost entirely on pistol shooting.
    Public ranges suck. You can't practice anything remotely realistic.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 11471 users online. 350 members and 11121 guests.

Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X