[Newbie] Need help shopping for an AK

[Inebriated]

I suspect it would still be less than my Arsenal

Not in my case. I have about $1300 in my Saiga without counting the sling, Aimpoint, light, and light mount. You said you paid for the plug and play aspect, I paid for the fact that it's everything that I have ever wanted an AK to be. We all have our preferences, and it's nice that we have the variety to satisfy them.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I would call that form. I'm not going to dissolve this thread, but I just don't see the SAM7SF as anything more than another milled AK with a neat safety.

Trust me, I'm not bashing the SAM7SF, I've been in the market for a SAM and I own another Arsenal myself. I'm just saying that there isn't much that's uniquely more functional about it. Yeah the safety is cool, but a Kreb's is just as quick and training to use the standard safety has kept people alive for decades. The folding stock does nothing for me, and most factory-built AK's have optics rails, the same standard GB/FSB layout, and a somewhat effective brake/comp. Simply put, they all just work.

Personally, of my Arsenal and Saiga, I vastly prefer my Saiga because I've fixed everything I didn't like about the AK-103 design. I put a better comp, a combo FSB/GB, Ultimak rail, and an AR stock adapter to allow a better cheekweld. Is it more functional? Except for having a light, no. But the form is what I like about it. I have a Macbook instead of a Dell. More functional? No. But I like the form better. That's all I'm really getting at.

I understand your point of view even if I disagree. For me "form" is about appearance unless specifically created due to "function" and then "form" and "function" become one and the same. I did not buy the SAM7FS for the way it looks. I like the stock design because of its right side folding, simplicity, strength, and minimal bulk when folded. With the low height scope rail I have, cheek weld is not a problem.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^

And this has what to do with a new buyer looking for sensible advice for the basic first cheap AK purchase? I'm baffled.


"As far as practical improvements, you may not find the features of the Arsenal SAM7SF practical improvements over a WASR or Yugo, but all that really means is you have lower standards than what others have for an AK."

With a fairly good collection of Valmet's and Galils to compare all of these to, I hardly think that the Arsenal is really anything terribly special. In any event, the OP was expressing interest in the cheap plinker version, and for that anything above a nice Yugo is a waste of money. When you have 20 or so different AK's in your box, you end up realizing that they really are all just about the same... Galil's and Valmets included.


Willie

.

 

[PabloJ]

I looked over two Arsenal AKs with milled receivers. One was older one with Bulgarian receiver (discontinued model with 10 in circle receiver) second was made with US receiver. Both were second-hand in little shot condition for $1100 each. I passed on both and bought Chinese with sheet metal bolted receiver for $450 which included new telescoping stock plus old wood. While finish on Arsenals looks far more durable than polished blue of the Chinese the differences between the guns do not justify difference in price. It does pay to wait and I waited long time before making this purchase.

 

[CZ223]

Picked up my new N-PAP yesterday

I couldn't be happier. Good looking wood, well fit and finished, way better than any AK I have seen. I think that the wood is birch and since I am a cabinet maker it is a pretty good guess. The trigger on mine is way lighter than any AK I have ever handled, much better than my Saiga sporter. It came with a used metal mag and a Tapco. I also have 5 brand new Korean mags for it. They all fit snugly with no wobble. I fired it at 65 yards resting the mag on a wobbly bench. It shot an inch or two high at that distance and I could cover the group with my hand. I could probably have done as well with my pistol but it is still an AK. All in all I am very pleased with it so far. I only put 80 rounds through it but heck, I have only owned it for about 12 hours at this point. I will try to put a couple hundred more through it very soon.

 

[PabloJ]

SGAmmo has good deal on heavy sheet metal European AK magazines. I would buy good supply as these will only get more expensive as time goes on.

 

[dvdcrr]

My first AK, in 1999 Arsenal slr 101 or 95 I forget bought for just north of 420. Latest one : arsenal slr107 fr stamped bought for around 900. Arsenals really shot up in price in ten years. Ive maybe had about a dozen AK's in most calibers and barrel length. These two arsenals are at the top for accuracy, while very close second was a saiga 5.45, and 308. I dont regret the purchase of the slr107 even at the price. I also bought a bunch of circle 10 mags. Very nice but maybe over rated, good steel mags are fine, bakelite 5.45 are really nice.

 

[UKWildcatFan]

I appreciate the info, especially Willie's. I greatly appreciate it.

 

[highpower]

Of course all this arguing between the Arsenal and Saiga fanboys is off the original OP's question, i.e., what can he get with a $700 budget.

Even though the AK snobs don't like to admit it, a WASR will shoot as good as a Arsenal or Saiga at 1/2 to 1/3 the price. Right now the OPAP or NPAP rifles are hands down, the best deal going. As of today, Saturday 8/16, you can get an OPAP for $545. They are 100% factory made rifles that only have the modifications that make them legal to pass 922r. These are the exact same modifications the both Arsenal and Saigas have to have done to them to make them legal to sell as well.

Stay away from kit guns if you can. Some are excellent and others are dogs. The Century M39 has a milled receiver and by all accounts is a good rifle. I have a Century M70AB2 and it has been 100% reliable.

 

[henschman]

I don't like how the Yugos don't come with a chrome lined barrel... same with a lot of the kit guns that are getting built now with American made barrels instead of original foreign CL ones. There are certain reasons that a CL barrel was spec'ed by everybody who fielded the AK with the exception of the Yugoslavs, and I agree with those reasons.

I would prioritize a CL barrel over fit/finish, and in the OP's price range would lean more toward the WASR over the PAP, IO, or these new "Bulgarian" builds I'm seeing that are using American made barrels. In your online window-shopping, f it doesn't say whether it has a chrome bore in the product description, you can bet that it doesn't have one.

 

[highpower]

Chrome lined barrels are the darlings of the internet commandos, but in reality don't add all that much to a semi auto rifle. Basically it has no real basis in reality. Unless you are shooting a full auto rifle or living in the jungle, it is just an affectation for those that care about having being able to say they have one.

Back when corrosive commie surplus was readily available, there MIGHT have been a small argument for it, but that has been virtually unavailable for many years and besides, you should clean your piece after shooting anyway.

I have a AR15-A2 that I built back in '89 or '90 that has a Wilson non chrome lined barrel. I cannot count the number of rounds that have been fired through it over the last twenty five years and it is just as accurate as it ever was. But then I don't do mag dumps with it or bump firing. All that does is waste ammo for no particular reason.

Lets say that it would take about 10,000 rounds + to wear out a barrel. At the current price of around .23 cents per round that would be $2300 worth of ammo. I doubt if very many people would have the money to shoot out a their barrel and even if they did, I bet the rest of the gun would be pretty tired. At that point, just get another rifle.

But I do agree, A WASR is a decent gun for the money.

 

[henschman]

Though providing 3x or so increased barrel life is a big advantage, it is not the only reason CL is better for a fighting rifle. Increased resistance to chamber fouling, increased extraction reliability, and increased resistance to throat erosion are big ones too... and both are very important when you're talking about a rifle who, for most users, will be shot with cheap steel cased ammo that fouls the chamber a lot more quickly than brass cased ammo.

Also, don't assume that just because you have owned a rifle for 25 years and haven't shot it enough to wear the barrel out that everyone else will do the same.

 

[Willie Sutton]

Though providing 3x or so increased barrel life is a big advantage

Uhh.... no. You are joking, right?



Even though the AK snobs don't like to admit it, a WASR will shoot as good as a Arsenal or Saiga at 1/2 to 1/3 the price.

Absolutely true.

It's funny that the guys who have 20 or so AK's of varieties and all price points like myself and Trent think that they are all more or less the same no matter what, while the guys who have one expensive one that they have bolted all of the tacti-cool-krap onto think it's magically better for the effort. It isn't.

In my humble opinion, having had several of each, If I were walking into a gunstore for an off the shelf AK and could just as easially point at either a WASR-10 or any of the Yugos, I'd buy the Yugo. "In General" the quality is a bit better from a fit and finish standpoint, and they just seem a bit more... finished. The chrome barrel requirement "fetish" is just that... it's essentially irrelevent.


Willie

.

 

[ShooterGuy]

Good points henschman, and Nom, I can go back and take a pic of the little tab that sticks out to make it pistol grip safety lever later (since that's literally all it is) but ya I do mold all of my guns to be what I want, to me that's the point of owning them, and familiarizing yourself with them so you can honestly bet your life on your own work instead of someone else's out of the box.

As for being an AK guy, nah not really, just a gun guy all around, I have as many AR's as I do AK's (I'm sure the tekmat in the picture gave the impression, but below is it an AR diagram tekmat, and to the sides of those, 6 other types.)

However I do need to apologize, I can be subconsciously bias to the guys that start with an Arsenal since the stereotype is they generally just want it for the name, and treat them as dust collectors and safe queens to show their buddies. It's like the guy that claims to be a car guy so they go buy the latest stock muscle car for sticker price and the most they do to it is add an accessory or pay someone else to tune it so they can rattle off random product names and stats they've memorized almost like a script when they talk about it.

Either way it doesn't matter what we think, but your example for your baby was out of the scope of the OP's designated budget to begin with. So like with most Arsenal guys I would have asked if you're genuinely trying to get good applicable info in front of the OP to help sway his decision towards a good one. Or just fishing for an opportunity to talk about your Arsenal and convince him it's worth doubling his budget for?

Not trying to beat a dead horse here. Either way, whatever he ends up getting luckily all of use informed and experienced AK owners will be here to help him right any wrongs he might receive along the way right? Cheers

 

[highpower]

just because you have owned a rifle for 25 years and haven't shot it enough to wear the barrel out that everyone else will do the same.

I built that rifle to shoot in service rifle matches. I practiced at the rate of about 2 hundred rounds a week in addition to shooting at least a match a month. I did that for about three years before I moved away from the range that was close to my house.

I still shoot that rifle a couple of hundred rounds a month. Especially now that I live in the desert.

If you don't know me, don't assume that I don't shoot my rifles.

Edited to add. My OPAP has a non chrome lined barrel and it has never shot any other type of ammo but inexpensive steel cased Wolf or Tula. It has been 100% reliable with it so your argument that the chamber has to be chrome lined to be reliable has no relevance. As to the battle rifle statement, how many civilian shooters are heading out to war?

 

[Nom de Forum]

^^

And this has what to do with a new buyer looking for sensible advice for the basic first cheap AK purchase? I'm baffled.

Baffled? I doubt that is an accurate description. Annoyed to be disagreed with and identified as being a little hypocritical is probably a more accurate description. What’s the big deal Willie, we all agreed early on that for what the OP wants just about any of the AKs in his price range will suit his purposes. No one suggested the OP buy a rifle above his budgeted price. What is you problem with some of us doing exactly what you do frequently, expand the subject matter of the thread with related information. It almost seems as if you are worried we are stealing the spotlight from you.

"As far as practical improvements, you may not find the features of the Arsenal SAM7SF practical improvements over a WASR or Yugo, but all that really means is you have lower standards than what others have for an AK."

With a fairly good collection of Valmet's and Galils to compare all of these to, I hardly think that the Arsenal is really anything terribly special. In any event, the OP was expressing interest in the cheap plinker version, and for that anything above a nice Yugo is a waste of money. When you have 20 or so different AK's in your box, you end up realizing that they really are all just about the same... Galil's and Valmets included.

I agree, compared to a Valmet or Galil the Arsenal SAM7SF is not “really anything terribly special” but neither of those are readily available at the LGS and even if they were they still would not be “really anything terribly special” compared to the Arsenal SAM7FS. That being said the Arsenals, Valmets, and Galils are a step up from the WASR, Yugo, etc. even if it is a small (but significant enough for many users) expensive step up. “20 or so different AKs in you box” does not impress me and is certainly not necessary to determine when it comes to AKs “they really are all just about the same”. I’m surprised with all your claimed experience you would realize for many shooters small details can be significant differences and consequently they have a higher standard of expectation for their firearms.

 

[Willie Sutton]

I built that rifle to shoot in service rifle matches. I practiced at the rate of about 2 hundred rounds a week in addition to shooting at least a match a month. I did that for about three years before I moved away from the range that was close to my house.


^^

Yeah... the chrome barrel "thing" is just plain and simple nonsense. The guys who are brandishing it are not out shooting enough to know the difference. Just one data point, my non-chrome "cheapest possible rifle" Yugo that lives on my boat in the tropics has signs of external rust on the dust cover, etc (salt water will do that), is shot with the cheapest surplus ammo (about 500 rounds a year, just because it's fun to shoot now and then), total maintenance is dropping a weighted string thru the bore to pull a rag thru now and again, with my end-plan being to toss the thing overboard if and when I need to call at a port in Mexico or someplace that doesn't allow firearms. With all of that abuse the bore is as shiny as new. So the internet commandos who insist on chrome are, well... just not speaking from experience.




compared to a Valmet or Galil the Arsenal SAM7SF is not “really anything terribly special” but neither of those are readily available at the LGS and even if they were they still would not be “really anything terribly special” compared to the Arsenal SAM7FS. That being said the Arsenals, Valmets, and Galils are a step up from the WASR, Yugo, etc.


Not in my experience, which includes owning examples of each. Right from the WASR-10 right thru the Galil and Valmet, they are all just about the same from any practical standpoint.

Bottom line: From a practical standpoint neither the Galil or the Valmet is worth any more than a WASR-10 and if I needed to grab one and run, it would make absolutely no dfference to me what one I grabbed. The bottom line is that the GALIL isn't anything terribly special. It's really *just another AK*, which is good news to the guy wanting to buy a cheap plinker. The simple fact is that $450 buys you 99.9% of what $5000 buys you. You can skip the $1000 price point completely because all that gives you is entry into the fanboy "my tacti-cool is better than your tacti-cool" club. There's no practical difference between any of them.


I love my high end stuff, as they bring me the pleasure of ownership and frankly have been good financial investments (I bought them new back in the 80's new when they were cheap), but I would *never* think that they are really worth more *as a tool* than the cheapest stuff that goes "bang" reliably.


Baffled? I doubt that is an accurate description. Annoyed to be disagreed with and identified as being a little hypocritical is probably a more accurate description.

No, simply amazed that every thread started by a guy who wants solid advice on his first cheap AK purchase seems to end up with the same few guys posting photos of their "3X his dictated budget" project AK's that have no bearing to the question posed.



What’s the big deal Willie, we all agreed early on that for what the OP wants just about any of the AKs in his price range will suit his purposes

True. Noting that you can always start a thread for showing off and arguing about the superiority of Saigas and Arsenals for free but that it's not helpful to the subject at hand.



Willie

.

 

[henschman]

What you are saying is basically that every weapons designer who developed nearly every military rifle for the past 60 years are idiots for insisting on the extra expense of chrome bores, because the guns would be just as good without them... from the AK to the M-14, the M-16, the FAL, the AUG, the L85, the FAMAS, and right up to the modern designs like the SCAR... everybody who designed those must be idiots. I will leave it up to the OP to decide who to trust on that.

You can quibble over whether they only last twice as long instead of 3 times, or whatever, what can't be argued is that chrome results in SIGNIFICANTLY longer barrel life... not to mention the benefits to chamber fouling and extraction that I said were the MAIN reasons to go chrome on a fighting rifle. And if you don't want a fighting rifle, then you have to ask yourself, why the hell are you buying an AK?!?!?

 

[Willie Sutton]

For the OP having a chrome barreled AK could only be a benefit and would never be a liability.



That's where you are wrong.


Let's try logic and reasoning to start:

First Postulate: *Within his budget range*, if he insists on chrome, he will likely get a WASR-10

Second Postulate: If he accepts non-chrome, he will probably end up with a Yugo.

Argument: The Yugo is, by all standards, a more robust rifle, 1.5mm receiver, with better fit and finish. It is, in all balance, a better rifle by a slight margin than the WASR, and it comes without a chrome barrel. Bearing in mind this *balance*, he will likely get a better rifle with a Yugo.

Ergo: Within his price range, insisting on chrome is a liability, not an advantage.



You can quibble over whether they only last twice as long instead of 3 times, or whatever, what can't be argued is that chrome results in SIGNIFICANTLY longer barrel life

Nonsense. :banghead:


If logic and reasoning isn't working, try this: Perhaps placing it in rhyme will help:


"Not for you, and not for me, and certainly not for the OP...."





Willie

.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

I would go with a Century VZ2008 rifle from PSA. They aren't "real" AKs, but they're at least as good as a WASR if not a little better. They've got a milled receiver, better safety, a folding stock, and a bolt that can hold open. Right now you can get one with five mags for $400, which is a steal.

http://palmettostatearmory.com/inde...ms-vz2008-sporter-rifle-7-62x39-ri1554-x.html

That rifle, including shipping and a transfer fee, plus a case of ammo, is almost $700 on the nose. So your budget would not only buy you a new gun, but also a bunch of ammo and mags to feed it. I'm not an AK expert, but if you just want a plinker, I think it'd be the way to go.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^ This, truly.

The VZ is a real sleeper. I like Czech things. Just ask my wife (imported from Prague).

They are highly undervalued and are excellent choices.

Not an AK, but with very similar attributes and higher overall quality. Just superb.



Willie

.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I'd like it new, with wood furniture. Budget about $700. Century pretty good? Just for plinking.

Thx!

Yes you could get a pretty good rifle from Century but you should do a QCC before buying, because all the builders of AKs at all price points put out duds. I passed on one Arsenal SAM7SF because it had a canted front sight. That being said the cheaper rifles have a higher percentage of duds. So given the choice of grabbing a unknown WASR or Yugo of the shelf or an Arsensal for immediate use the percentages favor the Arsenal for not being a dud.

Willie Sutton - That's where you are wrong.

*Within his budget range*, if you insist on chrome, you will likely get a WASR-10.

If you accept non-chrome, you will probably end up with a Yugo.


Further:

The Yugo is, by all standards, a more robust rifle, 1.5mm receiver, with better fit and finish. It is, in all balance, a better rifle by a slight margin than the WASR, and it comes without a chrome barrel. Bearing in mind this *balance*, he will likely do better with a Yugo, but really.. he could do fine with either. Similarly bearing in mind that he is not likely to be shooting corrosive ammunition in Viet Nam with zero maintenance, chrome or not is completely irrelevent.

Wrong? What was the liability of chrome? Not having the thicker receiver of the Yugo? Hey all you guys that have the thiner stamped receivers Willie is implying your rifle is not robust enough so you better trade them in. I guess since I have a milled receiver and a chrome barrel I am in even better shape for any eventuality. Thanks for confirming that. Honestly Willie how can you even think for a minute we are going to buy into any minor additional robustness of a 1.5 mm receiver being a reason to not get a chrome barrel. The only rifles of any kind that should not have chromed barrels are ones requiring the highest lever of accuracy, historical accuracy, or that have stainless steel barrels. With you last post you seem to be contradicting your previous sentiments that AKs are basically all the same.

 

[Willie Sutton]

Yes, we have all heard of the epidemic of regular 1mm AK receivers breaking, and of the dire consequences of not having a rifle with a nice pretty fit and finish. Clearly these things are more important than something that actually affects the functioning of the rifle like a chrome lined bore.


Yeah... like the rash of rusted out bores in AK's owned domestically in the USA by guys who keep them in their safe and bring them out for photographs now and then to show others how they look in photos....


As for the balance of your rant, if you will notice a trend, I discuss technology and hardware and not the value of the people in the discussion. With all due respect, if you wish to engage in further technical debate, you might consider the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Or in sports terms, for those without formal training in logic, "Play the Ball, not the Man".




Willie

.

 

[highpower]

Yeah... the chrome barrel "thing" is just plain and simple nonsense. The guys who are brandishing it are not out shooting enough to know the difference. Just one data point, my non-chrome "cheapest possible rifle" Yugo that lives on my boat in the tropics has signs of external rust on the dust cover, etc (salt water will do that), is shot with the cheapest surplus ammo (about 500 rounds a year, just because it's fun to shoot now and then), total maintenance is dropping a weighted string thru the bore to pull a rag thru now and again, with my end-plan being to toss the thing overboard if and when I need to call at a port in Mexico or someplace that doesn't allow firearms. With all of that abuse the bore is as shiny as new. So the internet commandos who insist on chrome are, well... just not speaking from experience.

^^^^^this^^^^^

The thing is those who have bought into the "chrome lined barrel" thing are loath to admit that they have spent money on what is, in essence, a myth. Just as those who insist that anything less than a Arsenal or Saiga isn't worth spending money on because they shelled out big dollars for a name.

In the end it is what you expect your rifle to do for you that counts. If you want to polish it and agonize over any little marks it may acquire, then by all means get the most expensive one you can afford.

If on the other hand, all you want is a reliable shooter that you don't have two months rent into buying it, then get a Yugo or a WASR, use the difference in price to buy a bunch of ammo and go have fun.

Right now the AK that I have the most fun with is my M70 Yugo because I really don't care if it has a scratch or two on it.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^ Highpower:

Looks surprisingly like what is on my boat. You been into my arms-locker? Far prettier than any tacti-cool AK as well. Not that looks count....



That may be how you treat your rifle

You're obviously not paying attention to how my working rifles are treated in the salt water marine environment, where non-chrome bores don't seem to be a deficit. And unless you're personally immersing your rifle in salt water after shooting corrosive ammo and then not cleaning for a year, your chome barrel isn't doing you any good either.


Get out there and spread the word to all these arms designers that they are just buying into a myth by insisting that combat arms have things like chrome bores.


You are not buying a combat arm. You're buying an domestic armchair commando fanboy-toy. And the OP isn't buying a combat arm. He's buying a plinker for shooting at tin cans in a quarry. On a budget. The Yugoslavians DID buy combat arms, and fought several wars with them, and then cut up many of their rifles and exported them to us as parts sets to us so we can pretty well evaluate how their materials selection choices worked out for them. Nope... no real rash of rusted bores there either based on looking thru several hundred of them.



Willie

.