AK-47 question?

The original spec for the AK called for a stamped receiver. Due to production problems, the Russians for a short time used machined receivers until they could get the stamping processes worked out.

Stamped AKM's have been the standard in AK's for many decades. The Russian military uses the 1mm thick receivers because it works. In a fighting rifle there is absolutely no need for a receiver thicker than 1mm as decades of Russian AKM's fighting in wars the world over have proven. Hell, there are Russian AKM's out there being used today that are older than many of the people posting in this thread... and their 1mm receivers are holding up just fine.

Some of the best AK's on the market right now are Russian made rifles. They have some of the best barrels (hammer forged, chrome lined) and are true military spec rifles in all the critical areas. If you want a "real" AK, you'll be hard pressed to do better than an Izhmash made AKM.
 
9-ball>> You can still get them here. Not sure if they're still being imported, but there's a dozen or so on GB right now from between $600 and $1K.

As to accuracy, as I said--I can tap pigeons on the 200 yd. berm all flipping day. 2-liter soda bottles on the 300 yd. berm are nothing to get excited over either. In honesty, I haven't stretched it beyond that. If I want to play long range, I have rifles for that purpose. The target photo was just a quick snap during load development because someone was asking me about it at the time and needed something I could email--I don't typically have a camera on me for that, just a stack of paper targets full of holes in the back seat of the truck afterward that I go through, dissect the info from, and start the fire with later in the evening. That group measures roughly 1.75" C-to-C on 1/4" grid paper. I've had some better, some worse, and lots in that area. What I've come to settle on is a mid-range load of 16.5gr. H335 and shoots a really consistent 1.5 MOA. From any AK, that's freaking outstanding. From an AK spitting cast bullets, it's often called BS up alongside a Loch Ness sighting. *shrug* The ones saying so are usually the ones who also say lead ruins a barrel and blows up your gun, too. ;)
 
If you had the choice of a 1mm receiver or a 1.5mm receiver and the same quality parts/barrel etc, why wouldn't you choose a good quality 1.5mm receiver over 1mm?

There are lots of junky guns that are still serviceable. Lots of Lorcins (I have one) made of ZAMAC pot metal that work (mine works). There are Eagle .45 Carbines made from cheap cast aluminum that work....even in full auto, and those were made in the early '70's!

Just because the old Russian Communist Government can save money by using thinner 1mm receivers doesn't mean that American AK owners have to. Unlike Russia, we can buy upgraded receivers, parts, stocks, and other doo-dads for our AK's. The Israelis developed the Galil - a much better version of the AK. The Finns developed the Valmet - a much better version of the AK.

There is no reason to emulate the old 1mm Russian AK's. AK's have evolved, just like the original AR / M16's.
 
Skans,

If I had the choice I'd take an Izhmash AK everyday, 1mm receiver or not. Their AK-10x lines (including the Saiga) are MOA accurate, have awesome stocks and quite decent finished IMHO. I can understand that you hate to change the furniture, here Saigas come standard from the factory with AK-10x folders. As for the milled receivers, I've yet to see a bulgarian milled AK shoot MOA groups.
saiga3.jpg
 
9-ball,

I hear what you are saying about better accuracy of the Russian guns. But, how is this accuracy achieved, and better than which builds exactly? When it comes to AK's, I'll forgo accuracy past 100 yards for the most rugged, durable gun possible. I can get long range accuracy from my Savage 30-06, AR, or FAL. I like the AK for other reasons.

This is why I like the Polytech AK's the best. The stamped receivers are 1.6mm and the barrels are forged, chrome lined and thicker. The bolt carrier, bolt, hammer and other internals are more robust as well.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that my "dream AK" would be one that looks, feels and shoots like it was over-engineered - built like.......a Galil, or even better.:D
 
Skans,

Are you trying to link ruggedness to accuracy? Are you aware that original SVD's had a 0.7mm receiver? Newer ones have 1mm receivers too. Thickness of the receiver doesn't affect accuracy. Barrels however do, and Izhmash has excellent barrels (look at their biathlon rifles).

I'm not straight up comparing them, so I can't specify another build, all I can say is that the Saiga's I've seen we're very capable of delivering MOA groups at 100m with quality munition, the Romanian and Bulgarian ones I've seen shot between 1.5-2.5 MOA. If you have other experiences, please share.
 
9-ball, no I'm not saying that receivers affect accuracy - not at all. What I'm saying is that I'd forgo a little accuracy for something I consider to be an overall thicker, sturdier rifle - in an AK. I don't know if the Russian barrels are more accurate than the Chinese barrels or polish barrels.

You can make a very accurate barrel, but it wouldn't necessarily be corrosion resistant or desirable for sustained semi-auto or full-auto fire. Machine gun barrels and target barrels are 2 different birds. What I'm saying is that when it comes to AK's I want a machine gun barrel, not a target barrel. Perhaps the Russian semi-auto barrels can stand up to sustained full-auto fire - I really don't know. I do know that the pre-ban Chinese barrels are thicker and intended for full-auto fire. Prior to 1986, Polytech AK's were converted to full auto because they were cheap and some of the best full-auto AK's available.
 
My experience as far as AK's and accuracy goes, depends on where the gun was originally made, and barreled. All my "foreign" made, stamped AK's have shot well (SAR's, WASR's, Saiga, etc), regardless of receiver thickness, where my US guns assembled from parts kits on US receivers, didnt.

I think all the worrying over thickness and or milled receivers is just needless worrying. I seriously doubt youre going to ever see a difference in accuracy or see a difference in the guns life. I have a "lot" (more than most ever shoot) of rounds through a number of mine now, and they all seem to be as tight and accurate as they were from day one.

If youre interested in an AK and dont want to spend a lot of money, you dont have to. I think youll find the (no longer) "cheap" WASR shoots and works just as well as the more expensive "fancy" guns. They just arent a pretty.
 
Just because the old Russian Communist Government can save money by using thinner 1mm receivers doesn't mean that American AK owners have to. Unlike Russia, we can buy upgraded receivers, parts, stocks, and other doo-dads for our AK's. The Israelis developed the Galil - a much better version of the AK. The Finns developed the Valmet - a much better version of the AK.
Click to expand...
What proof do you have that Izhmash uses 1mm think receivers to save money? How do you know it's not because that's all that's required? Do you have any evidence Russian 1mm receivers are known for failures in combat?

I would much rather have a brand new Russian made AK with a hammer forged, chrome lined barrel using Russian military spec parts than a US made AK with a non-hammer forged barrel built on an old shot out demilled AK parts kit.

I also know for a fact 1mm thick Russian AK's are known the world over for being some of the best AK's out there.
 
Just stay away from kit guns that use USA made receivers. I prefer Polytech AKS, MAK90's , SAR's and WASR's. My experience with them has been.. if they work once they will work forever "so to speak".

I agree that what I seen on the market today is way way over priced. The best deal is typically a Mak90 if you take your time.
 
High quality polish parts set (numbers matching and excellent condition) professionally built on a NoDak (DCI) 1.5mm receiver, or a Global trades 1.6mm receiver (if you can find one - I never could) is the way to go. Especially if you want a classic underfolder.

I have an older Polytech stamped receiver AK (fixed stock, spike bayonet) and a Polish Underfolder professionally built on a DCI 1.5mm receiver. I have measured the differences between the two guns with regard to receiver thickness and barrel diameter as well as inspected the internal parts. While, I feel the DCI with polish parts is a well made gun - and it functions flawlessly, it is still not the quality of the Polytech stamped AK. The Polytech has a very slightly thicker receiver that is better finished than the DCI receiver (blued v. some kind of coating). The chinese bolt is superior (sprung firing pin v. floating). My polish AK has some Tapco internals. The trigger on the polish AK is crisper with less play than the Chinese AK, but the internals on the Chines AK, specifically the hammer, are better finished.

The stock set that came with the Polish AK I have is black poly, well made and well fitted to the gun. Contrarily, the stock set that came with the Chinese AK I have was completely un-finished, and fitting was what you would expect on an AK.

I have looked at many different AK's, including Saigas. I'm sure that most of the professionally built ones function fine. I have examined the 1.5mm receiver, 1.6mm receiver and 1mm receiver guns side by side - all I'm saying is that a number of the 1mm receiver AK's I saw looked pretty rickety compared to the 1.5 and 1.6mm receiver guns. Honestly, I haven't had the opportunity to do the side-by-side examination of other AK brands that I have with my Polish/US underfolder and my Polytech fixed stock AK's.

Take this information for whatever its worth - those of you who have really had the chance to examine a Polytech stamped receiver gun in comparison to other AK's will know what I'm talking about.

Here's a picture of my Polish AK - don't have one of my Polytech.

GunsBoo072.jpg
 
Last edited:
I had a Global Trades SSR-85C and while it was the prettiest AK Ive ever owned, it was also one of the least accurate. Its groups were easily double what my others shot/shoot.

The front sight was pegged in the left side of the tower, and it still was not zeroed. I had to put an RPK rear sight on it to get things to line up to where I could stand it.

It also had some pretty crappy US made compliance parts and the disconnector broke within the first 200 rounds.
 
Nice AK Skans,

One question: why is the muzzle compenator upside down? Wouldn't it give the rifle an upward boost instead of battle muzzle rise?
 
I had a Global Trades SSR-85C and while it was the prettiest AK Ive ever owned, it was also one of the least accurate. Its groups were easily double what my others shot/shoot.
Click to expand...

That's probably because it was built with a US barrel - I recall looking at one of those and turned away just for that reason. However, the Global Trades receivers are really very nice - just never found a build using them that I liked. Basically agreeing with what you've said, and you've confirmed that I made the right decision - boy, I was tempted though!!!

One question: why is the muzzle compenator upside down? Wouldn't it give the rifle an upward boost instead of battle muzzle rise?
Click to expand...

I was probably playing with it when I cleaned it and just forgot to put it in the position it was supposed to be in. :p
 
It was my understanding at the time I got mine (right around 99-00), it was assembled from a Polish parts kit and the only US part, other than the compliance parts, was the receiver.

I suppose it could have been a US barrel, but that wasnt what I was led to believe at the time. Where the US barrels chrome lined?
 
No us made AK barrels that I know of are chrome lined. On my AK, the stock, grip, and some of the fire control parts are US made for compliance purposes. The barrel is often used as one of the US made compliance parts, but they are not chrome lined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top