Problem with putting all that stuff on an ak is the front end is already heavy. I had just an ultimak and aimpoint on my front end w/ a folding stock and it was very front heavy.
Putting that stuff on anything makes it front heavy. Even on ARs and other carbines lacking the AK's gas piston, slapping Surefires, Aimpoints, VFGs, bipods, and other stuff is going to add weight and complexity to the rifle.
With the KAC RIS, RCO, VFG, 3-battery Surefire, and PEQ-2, my M16A4 weighed several pounds
more than my Romanian AK clone with a Kobra and VFG. Even after I eventually add a white light to it, the weights will be similar, and I'd rather have the AK, because if I am packing 10 or 11 pounds of rifle, I want it to be something other than poodle shooter.
I would also have to disagree with the notion that upgrading or accessorizing the AK defeats its purpose, and I know Mikhail Kalashnikov and many of the Russian military groups his rifle was assigned to would agree with me. After all, they've done some crazy crap to it themselves, including strapping white lights, lasers, scopes, suppressors, grenade launchers, and other crap to it.
OMG! It has plastic on it! Surely that boasting look of approval on the creater's face is in jest! He'd never accept anything but the Plain Jane wood stocked version with the milled receiver! Everything else is a fraud, and counter to the design's original intent!
And if you can't understand why I would do this to my own AK:
It must dumbfound some people that they did this to their own design:
"Modernized" is the "M" in "AKM," so that means that a modernized AK would by necessity require the stamped receiver, rather than the milled. I realize that the Galil and the Valmet are sometimes regarded as the best versions of the Kalashnikov, but I disagree with this. The milled receiver offers only slight advantages in accuracy and durability over the stamped receiver while increasing weight and production costs. A milled receiver AK weighs about as much as a carbine version of any of the Big Three MBRs--the M14, FAL, and G3, without the accuracy or the power and range of any of them. Which explains why people choose to carry battle rifles rather than issue the milled AKs in any significant numbers, and is why it was the stamped receiver AKM that earned the AK its reputation for durability and reliability in adverse conditions.
Once you have an AKM, modernizing it is pretty simple. You don't have to, and probably shouldn't, screw with much of the functionality of the rifle, since Mikhail got that part right. The ergonomics and sights leave a lot to be desired. So I replaced the spatula style pistol grip on mine with an M249 style grip that works much better. I also added a folding six-position M4-style ACE stock that allows me to adjust LOP as well as folding it for transportation. These two modifications made it a lot easier to handle and shoot.
Now days, there is even an ambi-safety available for right-handed shooters that have problems coping with the safety that comes with it. I shoot left handed and find the standard safety works very well for me.
Next up is sights. I would prefer a set up like Krebs offers with a fold-down receiver rail mated to their aluminum quad rail set up. This allows an improved rear sight to be mounted near the back of the receiver, increasing sight radius. Mojo ghost ring sights were the best on the market when I bought them, though now days, even better options are becoming available. Any aperture style sight that is adjustable for windage and elevation would be an improvement. Preferably, it would have a BDC feature built in like the rear elevation dial on the A2 or my M1A, and would have night sight inserts. Onto the rail you can now mount anything you need depending on the mission at hand. A red dot or reflex style sight probably suits the use of the AK better than most choices, but I could see a 2x ACOG or one of the low power variables like a 1-4x or 2.5-10, being used as well.
The Surefire is no more prone to failure on an AK than it is an M16 and seems to work well enough on the latter to trust it on the former. If you might be using the rifle at night or in low light, it might make a good addition to the quad rail, even at the expense of a little added weight.
Finally, I like the VFG for carbines that might be engaged primarily in close to moderate range work. I find that it does help me get on target faster and helps me control muzzle rise. And it is simply more comfortable and natural, so I put a Tango Down on my AK. Be aware, however, that the rock-n-lock motion of the AK's magazines requires the grip to be located farther out than some find comfortable. I have a long enough reach that I can put it out far enough to not interfere with the 30 round magazines, but the 40 rounders are a tight fit. If you shoot right-handed, you might just want to use the magazine as a VFG to pull the rifle in. As a left-handed shooter, I find I have a tendency to get my thumb whacked by the charging handle.
Most or all of these mods exist in some form or another, and as mentioned, many have been tried in combat by the Russians.
Also, the 7.62x39 is still reportedly in demand by certain elements of Russian special operations and counter-terror groups who favor its increased lethality and effectiveness, as well as its ability to break some forms of cover better than the 5.45mm round. Until I see an AK in 6.8 SPC or similar, I almost refuse to acknowledge that the rifle was ever chambered for something other the 7.62x39. Mikhail seems to approve of almost every modification that has been done to his rifle, save for chambering it in 5.45mm and making them out of glass to be filled with the Vodka that share his name.
"Tis weapon of war not to be filled with spirits!"
traditionalist are unhappy ... 
![url]](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Burl%5Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.soberania.org%2FImages%2Fmikhail_kalashnikov_1.jpg%5B%2Furl%5D&hash=d4b509e8582667eb8dcee81ef676325b)
