K
Kame B.
Guest
Because the Mini is a good rifle also.
AK-47
- Thread starter greyghost01
- Start date
- Status
Because the Mini is a good rifle also.
WinThePennant
Member
I can tell you that I have shot the absolute piss out of my IO Inc AK 47 and have never had a problem.
Well that really clarifies it. Care to explain what makes it "a good rifle also." Or more to the point why chose it over a decent AK.
Look at all the reports of Mini 30s having trouble with some of the most common ammo. There may be minis that shoot it all fine but I have heard and seen this issue A LOT. If you want to shoot cheap ammo and wind up with a gun that wont fire it reliably you probably wont feel like you also have a good rifle.
See e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQA3gKNoXmo Shooter experiences about 10 Failures to fire in 50 rounds
Quality magazines for an AK can be had for $9. Check out the price of factory Ruger 30 round magazines! That alone makes a ruger mini 30 a tough sale if one plans to own more than a couple mags.
After market support is significantly stronger for the AK than for the mini.
K
Kame B.
Guest
I'm sorry but I have been flagged in these forms, so I can not enter anymore pissing matches over rifles. I like both.
Not inviting a pissing match I would genuinely like to know what if anything is a true advantage to the mini. Never had one problems on these forums when it comes to stating facts. It is a fact the mini has known issues with ammo with hard primers. It is a fact there are not a ton of cheap high quality mags available everywhere for the mini. It is a fact there is not as much aftermarket support.
I'm just asking what the facts for the mini are. Generally that is how meaningful discussion and learning occurs.
I'm just asking what the facts for the mini are. Generally that is how meaningful discussion and learning occurs.
xxjumbojimboxx
Member
I've shopped my fair share of AKs. I like them to be nice, so I have indeed met up with folks, and turned down their rifle... Whenever I go look at a used Wasr, there's just a good chance that it wont be top notch. Even in gun stores. I feel like if you paid the wasr price for an ak and it was a good one, your probably not going to sell it. Whereas if you got one with a lot of mag wobble and canted sights, but didnt know til you got it home, or someone a little more savy clues you in. Well, that rifle is probably making its way down the road.
K
Kame B.
Guest
Well look all you are doing is gripeing over price, and what kind of bullet it shoots. Lot of guys use the 30 as deer and hog gun because of the caliber. So in all actuality they well be trying to tune a load with high quality ballistic tip ammo. So in that order the Mini 30 does not make a good plicker but a good hunter. But still, gripeing over the price of how much it cost, and how much it cost to shoot is still irrelevant to a person like me. I don't have a Mini 30 but I do have a Mini 14, I hog and deer hunt with a few guys that have Mini 30's and praise it highly. And I tell ya what, we have paid for our rifles ten fold in bacon. So it maybe expensive, but if you work with a rifle it will pay you back
The rifle functions well, shoots accurate enough for a brush gun, will drop a deer or hog in there tracks, can run dry, easy to clear obstructions with the open bolt system (drop the mag, and jerk the handle a few times, reload and ready to go). There are tons of accessories for the mini 14/30, and I find the Ruger scope mounting system to be better, more secure, and inline with the barrel of the rifle. It is a short, light handy rifle, and very good at quick drawing when you use an African carry. I like the five round mags cause they sit flush with the stock, and I like the traditional ergonomics of the rifle stock. Ruger has a great customer support service, quality products, and I have never had a problem making any of the products that I have owned go bang. Also I don't think there is such a thing as "cheap high quality"... And if there is, I dont believe in it. Sounds like some newfangled hooky religion. As far as accuracy goes, that subject is still up in the air with me... Accuracy is up to the shooter, I've seen people that shoot well with the rifle and I've seen people that couldn't shoot the Mini at all. But then again I've seen that with AK's and AR's, bolt actions to. But all in all they are both good rifles, they both have roles they can function in, the Mini really isn't the retarded step child everyone makes it out to be.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swampman
Old Fart
The reason used WASR's aren't "top knotch" rifles is because new WASR's aren't.
I like WASR's and I own a couple, but I harbor no illusions that they're a top tier product.
They don't need to be, they're reliable, accurate enough and I didn't pay so much for them that I'm going to cry over a few dents and dings.
I still don't understand why you think buying a new WASR is going to lessen your chances of getting a bad one. When you buy a used rifle locally, you can look it over for problems like canted sights or a sloppy magwell before you purchase. If you order a new weapon from an online retailer, it's pretty much just a leap of faith.
Without getting too much in-depth in this, there actually are situations where one might prefer not to exhibit cosmetic hoplic cues some may associate with stereotypical street thug armament and no, not everyone is short on cash yet anxious to hoard a magazine supply for a whole long distance recon squad at the same time. As far as functionality and ergonomics are concerned, search function is a great place to start and if the wealth of information available that way won't suffice, there's quite a bit more on The Perfect Union forum.
To put a timely end to this digression I'll have to second Kame B.'s statement: I like both.
That makes you lucky as well. A cast front trunnion with an undetectable void in the casting will work until one day it doesn't anymore.
That's not a risk I'm willing to take when there are plenty of options available (many costing no more than the IO rifles) with proper forged trunnions.
Ash
Member
"To put a timely end to this digression I'll have to second Kame B.'s statement: I like both."
I agree. I have owned a number of AK's, from milled Bulgarian SA-93 & SLR-95 and Norinco National Match Mak-90, to stamped WASR's of several flavors. They all worked fine. I don't have any of them anymore, just a Mini. It works great and I don't worry about canted sights.
I agree. I have owned a number of AK's, from milled Bulgarian SA-93 & SLR-95 and Norinco National Match Mak-90, to stamped WASR's of several flavors. They all worked fine. I don't have any of them anymore, just a Mini. It works great and I don't worry about canted sights.
meanmrmustard
Member
Anything the Sub2k can do, the Su-16c can do better.
OP: century C39v2 is a fine weapon, as I the RAS47, its stamped counterpart. Stay far from IO, and there isn't enough savings to me to wanna buy a used WASR. Polish are GTG, and converted Saigas are premium as well.
meanmrmustard
Member
Depends on the cast. IO is a known problem company in many regards, the trunnion one among many.
But there are investment cast trunnions in AKs that see many rounds, more than many of us will fire, in a years time at our local 3 gun and carbine events. Reason I bought my latest AKM and over looked the lack of a forged trunnion was I have never personally seen one crack, ever, and I'm not one to jump on a bandwagon for a half dozen internet horror stories.
Hell, James Yeager runs AKs with cast trunnions during Practical Carbine at Tactical Response. Good enough I suppose
If its done right, then so be it. People loathed the S&W M&P Sport when it first came out. Gun rags took it to Gunsite to make it fail. "No AR should be without FA or a dustcover". No failures in the entire test. They're still flying off shelves today. Hope crow tastes good.
xxjumbojimboxx
Member
Swampman, It is a known fact that the WASRS being put out today are considerably better than those put out by century in years prior...
Swampman
Old Fart
Is that really relevant?
Every company puts out an occasional "lemon".
I just feel that the best way to avoid problems is to personally inspect a weapon before you put your money down.
That means either buying used, or paying a significant premium to purchase the rifle new from a local stocking dealer.
The best way to avoid canted sights is to look at them and see if they're cockeyed. Avoiding a sloppy magwell only requires that you insert your prefered flavor of mag into the gun to check how it fits and feels when locked in.
I'd rather depend on what I can see and feel instead of relying on a generalized "known fact" that can just as easily result from an internet herd mentality as from actual, quantifiable measurements.
Please note that I'm not knocking Century or saying that the current guns aren't better than those from a few years ago. I just haven't examined and wrung out enough WASR's of various years to form anything like an informed opinion, let alone state "facts" about quality variations over time.
WASR's are NOT top notch AK's, in my experience they're very reliable and usually give acceptable accuracy. Quibbling over whether they've gotten better over time is kinda like arguing over which year model of AMC Pacer was the best.
Who cares?
I don't know anything about I.O. or their trunnions, but I've got a 35+ year old M1A that's fired many thousands of rounds and worn out a couple of barrels with absolutely no problems from the cast receiver.
xxjumbojimboxx
Member
Its not quibbling. Its a real thing. Century seemingly had ZERO quality control for a very long time. Nowadays its rare to pull a bad WASR from new stock. (though the price is higher now). But its still a thing. There are a lot of old trash wasr's still out there. And to they leyman, they may not know what to look for. Buying new stock is a good way to maximize getting a good one. That's all I'm saying. Cause those old ones are still moving around the used circles. I see them frequently.
"I want a GOOD well made reliable and accurate weapon only"
The only unreliable AK-based firearms I've ever had were: a incorrectly assembled Century Galil (from poor quality, highly worn, serviceable surplus parts that shouldn't have been re-used on anything,) and a VERY over-used MAK-90 I only bought because it was $300. The Galil clone LITERALLY ripped the lips off of two steel mags, double fed, jammed, you name it. The MAK-90 had almost no barrel left from the previous owner shooting thousands and thousands of bullets through it, couldn't hit a damn thing and every now and then would double feed or not strip a round from the mag.
Since then I have had several WASRs, (i have one now, as well,) the 10 and 10/63 series, a GP-75 as well. They work fine. No problems, though some are definitely more accurate than others, I would not expect anything below 2.5" groups on any AK. Granted it can be done but you'll pay through the butt for it and to be honest the AK platform in general will never be too accurate as it was originally designed because the barrel is held at the very beginning by pins and whether you see it or not wiggles and wobbles when shot. While it's everyone's right to buy and get what they want, I personally would not dish out a couple grand or anywhere near that for any AK-based firearm, whether it be Arsenal or IWI or what have you. AKs were meant to be clunky far-spaced-between-parts guns that could easily be taken apart and always shoot. They weren't intended to be nail drivers, just bullet hoses to anyone they are handed to. You'd be hard-pressed to find one that doesn't work well, just avoid a Century Golani or a really beat-to-hell MAK-90 and you should be fine.
The only unreliable AK-based firearms I've ever had were: a incorrectly assembled Century Galil (from poor quality, highly worn, serviceable surplus parts that shouldn't have been re-used on anything,) and a VERY over-used MAK-90 I only bought because it was $300. The Galil clone LITERALLY ripped the lips off of two steel mags, double fed, jammed, you name it. The MAK-90 had almost no barrel left from the previous owner shooting thousands and thousands of bullets through it, couldn't hit a damn thing and every now and then would double feed or not strip a round from the mag.
Since then I have had several WASRs, (i have one now, as well,) the 10 and 10/63 series, a GP-75 as well. They work fine. No problems, though some are definitely more accurate than others, I would not expect anything below 2.5" groups on any AK. Granted it can be done but you'll pay through the butt for it and to be honest the AK platform in general will never be too accurate as it was originally designed because the barrel is held at the very beginning by pins and whether you see it or not wiggles and wobbles when shot. While it's everyone's right to buy and get what they want, I personally would not dish out a couple grand or anywhere near that for any AK-based firearm, whether it be Arsenal or IWI or what have you. AKs were meant to be clunky far-spaced-between-parts guns that could easily be taken apart and always shoot. They weren't intended to be nail drivers, just bullet hoses to anyone they are handed to. You'd be hard-pressed to find one that doesn't work well, just avoid a Century Golani or a really beat-to-hell MAK-90 and you should be fine.
BluesDancer
Member
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 146
Fishbed77 and WinThePennant,
I actually have something to contribute to this "discussion inside a discussion" as I purchased one of the newer IO AKs approximately 1 year ago.
The good things about the IO are that it is fairly well put together and does "technically" work as advertised. I've shot over 1000 rounds through it and put it through its paces for a portion of a recent carbine class I took and it performed without issue. It is quite accurate, takes mags good, no canted sights, receiver seems well done. Internals look good and the rifle seems well put together
Now on to the bad things. This is not a longevity-oriented firearm. I thought that this could have been a gun to shoot for many years and pass on to my eventual kids...yeah right! First, as you mentioned Fishbed...critical parts in high stress areas are cast and I do absolutely worry about this in the long run, no doubt about it. I wish I would have been more informed about this at the time of purchase but I did not, which is my fault.
Additionally, the rifle comes with a recoil buffer installed. What IO does NOT tell you is that the recoil buffer is actually mandatory in their design. I had this discussion about this over the phone with the IO CS manager about a month ago. Even though they are using nitride barrels, my understanding is that they are knowingly and deliberately drilling the gas port hole in the barrel too large, causing the bolt carrier assembly to slam into the rear trunnion (cast part) harder than it needed to be, hence the "need" for the recoil buffer. My understanding as well is that if the recoil buffer is taken out the bolt carrier will jump the internal receiver rails because of the overgassing issue mentioned above.
I do not think it is right to have a recoil buffer as a "mandatory" part to mitigate the effects of an oversized gas port hole. IOs quality control is fine, but all the quality control in the world is moot if they are deliberate design flaws and/or cast parts used for high-stress areas.
As mentioned above, while my IO AK does work my plan is to somehow sell it soon and purchase a better, foreign-made AK. I may get the draco AK pistol + arm brace that Girodin mentioned but I'm still pondering the issue as I don't want to get this wrong a second time. I think it's true...ARs are a much better deal than AKs these days. Oh well...
greyghost01
Member
I went with the C39V2 for my first AK it will work, I've always been a AR person but times change as do people so I will give the AK a try and study them a little more, May buy another if I like this one, Should have done it when they were 1/2 the price better late than never. Thanks to all Happy shooting
- Status
