AK Info???

[BWT]

I figured since I posted what I did several months ago (before I got the gun back), I've shot the SGL 21-71 on a semi-regular basis, I've got probably... oh I don't know... 800-1000 rounds through it? Without any magazine feeding issues, FTF's, FTE's, of any kind, which is more than I can say for any other gun I own. To be fair, the only Failures to Feed I've ever had with my BCM were squarely on the magazines (Because I replaced the followers, and haven't had a problem in any of those magazines in probably I dunno...1,000-1,400 rounds), and the only other issue I've ever had were stuck cases with Wolf Ammo.

I haven't had any problems with the SGL other than the safety lever when I initially received it. I had some words with Arsenal, and it took some convincing, but, they took it and received it. The Safety Lever chewed up the finish (minor issue) and it would stick and I mean stick, the term I came up with was "Russian Gun Lock" itself, there was rust on the sight (I mean... not that I really wound up about it, just full disclosure), and the back portion of the sight was just bare metal.

When I received it back, they had refinished the gun, replaced the safety lever, there was no rust on the sight, and they put a finish on the back of the sight (I didn't even know they did that, but, they did on this one).

I think AK's are like AR's in that, honestly, it depends on who's assembling the gun and what the part quality is like. No gun runs on it's namesake alone.

I'd go with an Arsenal, honestly, I would. They took care of me, just like any gun, thoroughly overlook it and use it after purchase. If I've learned anything (and preaching to the choir at this forum), it's test a gun, you really don't know what a gun is like until I think you've put about a 300-500 rounds through it. (Closer to a thousand)

I went the Arsenal because it was quality, matching parts mated from the Factory (in Russia), constructed to Russian Military Spec (Meaning chrome lined, hammer forged barrel, chrome lined op-rod, correct rivets, magazine dimpels), and it was priced in what I felt was appropriate for an AK of said quality, I expected it to work (and it has).

I'd go with a stamped receiver over a milled receiver, the gun weighs around 9-ish lbs loaded, the muzzle break makes it very controllable, but also keep in mind I weigh about 228 lbs, so I may be bigger (or smaller) than other users. The other thing I've heard FWIW, is that Stamped guns are more preferrable to Milled in one aspect, even though they're typically less accurate, the receivers do flex (obviously not much), the milled do not, the problem being, over time they will crack.

Now that's what I heard from someone I'd consider extremely knowledgeable on the subject. Also I'd go with Chinese magazines, they have metal followers, I don't care for the huge back on the Bulgarian magazines (and they also come with Plastic followers).

That being said, AK's if properly built are designed from the ground up to be reliable, now you hear that everywhere, but what I'd say to the layman (which I'd still consider myself, I own one, that doesn't therefore make me an expert) is it's got several features that make it so.

- The Taper of the cartridge, the actual taper of the 7.62x39mm makes the round feed well, also if you shoot polymer coated rounds, etc, because of that taper you don't have a rigid/sharp angled shoulder such as with the .223/5.56mm the round, it is a bit more inherently reliable, as far as feeding, also, frankly, if you shoot polymer coated steel rounds (like I do), you don't really have to worry about a case getting stuck with the shape of that casing (or at least I've never seen or heard of one).

- The Magazines, there are several benefits in these (IMHO, probably the most unappreciated and unrecognized portion of the AK), the Feed lips alone on the magazine are usually right around .090'' thick, they're about .030'' thick on an AR Magazine (for comparison), I've never seen a double feed in AK platform, and I also think they can take drops on the ground a lot better loaded than AR Magazines. They're also made of solid steel (which is a weight issue). They also get something right from the factory, given what I've seen with some unreliable 1911 magazines and AR magazines, I've developed the opinion that magazine followers should be long so that they can embrace the four corners of the magazine at all times while in motion, meaning that should offer the rounds to the weapon in a much more stable fashion and much more consistently than a shorter follower, also that follower is metal, and durable. (I think that's part of the reason the Magpul Anti-Tilt followers are so reliable, the length)

Also, the consistent curve on the magazine, now... if you're designing a magazine, to open that can of worms, you want the way/route it feeds to be consistent in movement, either you want the magazine to have a consistent curve, or you want it to be consistently straight, but whatever you want it to do, it needs to be consistent, that's ideal. Now the AR magazines do extremely well, and they're not (at least the 30 rounders aren't), and there are plenty of examples that are the same situation, but that's just a general rule of thumb.

You'll notice at this point, we haven't even discussed the gun, so next time someone points at an AK and goes "Hey it's piston driven, that's why it's so reliable" (like in an AR for example), roll your eyes, you know better.

So now we actually talk about the gun, part of the reason I went with the Arsenal was the above matching parts mated from the factory.

- The 3-lug Bolt, I've never seen of a bolt lug ever cracking on an AK, I think they over built them for reliability, and that's exactly what they deliver.

- The Op Rod/Carrier/Receiver/Gas Tube, I mention these all four, because I really think they all work in conjuction for the actual management/propulsion of the carrier. I believe the AK is overgassed (The shells do regularly eject forward of 4 o'clock, depending on the loading), but it's more of a non-issue because they have 4 big old vent holes (in the SGL-21 anyway, these ports are also what make the gun a poor gun to suppress, it doesn't yield great results suppressed, it's the truth) in that gas tube in the front. I also think it doesn't lead to carrier tilt (like it does in Piston AR's), because the carrier rides on a rail, so it's complete travel cycle is controlled. I think the Op Rod being directly attached to the carrier makes it more reliable than the Short Stroke Piston guns, because it is not propulsion transferred to a piston that strikes the a carrier, it's just transferred directly to the carrier/op Rod.

Which I think is inherently better, because I think that the kinetic strike versus gas propulsion in the Short Stroke Piston guns is more of a push rather than a hammering of the carrier. You also don't see any tilt because their are rails built into the receiver, that the carrier rides on.

- The Safety Lever, let's call it what it is, that's no safety lever, that's a giant dust cover that pulls part time duty as an Safety lever. When the gun is put in safe it effectively seals off the receiver and protects one of the largely finicky components, which is discussed some in circles like this, but largely... not by the rest of the shooting public. The trigger, if you get dirt/debris in that trigger, that will stop an AK, and is recognized as somewhat unreliable portion of the gun (at least when it has debris in it, again I've never had a FTF). I think the reason that's largely unknown is, if you carry a gun, you're usually going to carry it in safe, and switch it to fire when you intend to fire, so the majority of that gun's life will see safe, they incorporated this into the design.

I think that's really what attributes to the AK's reliability.

Also one last thing, I think there's been a mis-translation over the years... I think people say (and I believe it's a mistake, something lost in translation by translators translating from Russian to English and not knowing the entire significance of what they're saying.) I think the AK has clearances built in, what is said a lot, and I believe it's a msitake is that it has loose tolerances.

There's a distinct difference, loose tolerances are a lack of aptitude and quality of design. Clearances are built in by design, the gun is designed to have those areas unoccupied. But tell any engineer that you're designing something to have loose tolerances so it's more reliable and they'll look at you like you have no idea what you're talking about, because it's usually parts that are out of specification or out of tolerance that cause the item to be unreliable.

Anyway, I'm no expert, I work on computers for a living, but that's just observations/information I've gathered.

That's what makes the gun reliable IMHO.

[Kyle Reese]

BWT,
Outstanding post and 100% spot on.

AK's do fail, and most of the ones I'm aware of that do so can be attributed to the poor quality ammunition manufactured in say.....Iraq. Got a friend in the south of Iraq now who has the unenviable task of repairing and refurbishing worn and damaged AK's.