AK Sponsor
Posted: 10/25/2011 12:07:29 PM EDT
|
Greetings,
I've reviewed the posts regarding the quality of the Polish Milled AK from (or what most say NOT really from) Century for $669. The question that I have is, would you bet your life on one? I'm getting a patrol rifle and because I have the "fever", I don't want to rush and get the Polish AK when I should simply wait to get the Red Jacket, Vector, RAK or something along those lines for $175 to $300 or so more which will take a bit more time. I'm leaning towards getting it but know not to rely on my limited knowledge and humbly ask for your opinions. I would NEVER trust it with a WASR and spooked by Century Arms because of the seriousness of what I may have to use it for! Thanks in advance, K90 |
|
Well, I’m not sure what you’ve heard about WASR’s. Certainly the early Century WASR’s had assembly issues with canted front sights, wobbly magazines, etc. But I’ve yet to encounter one’s that didn’t work. Current made WASR’s are assembled much better, and work just fine. They’ll never win any beauty contests, but they work. As for the rifle in question…It’s nicer in appearance, but I couldn’t see myself buying it. As a practical defensive rifle the milled receiver offers nothing but increased weight; they are not any more accurate or reliable. From a collector standpoint I can totally understand the desire for a milled AK; they’re COOL. But the AK in question’s receiver just isn’t “right”, the lightening cuts are just wrong, and that just kills it for me. I just can’t get my brain around it. If you go to all the effort of milling an AK receiver, THE most noticeable cut is the one you go cheap on?
If you need quality and reliability, on a budget; here’s where my money would go: http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/storeproduct1010.aspx No it doesn’t have the cool ’74 muzzle brake; but functionally the ’74 muzzle brake is pretty much worthless, and even a liability on a semi-auto rifle. Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan complained about the noise level of the ’74 because of the muzzle brake and it made more than a few of them deaf by the end of the conflict. For full auto fire, the ’74 brake is damn impressive. But for a semi-auto rifle, the 7.62x39 just doesn’t recoil enough that you need a muzzle brake. So on a fighting rifle, you’re better off without it. I keep my ’74 brake on mine just for looks, but I have a Bulgarian flash suppressor that will replace it should I ever need to employ my AK as a fighting rifle. If I didn’t have the Bulgarian FS, I’d just shit-can the ’74 brake if I were going into a fight. As for the rest of the rifle, it’s Russian with a real Russian receiver and US 922 parts, so the quality is pretty much as high as you’re going to get and this rifle doesn’t break the bank. If you want to trick it out, that’s easily done at a later date; you can add whatever furniture you want (although I do like the Saiga forend; allows you to get your weak hand further out which is a good thing in CQB), and you can swap front sight bases to get the 24mm threads and add the ’74 brake or Bulgarian flash suppressor. To me, this is THE budget AK. You mention Vector, if that’s a maker you like and trust, then this would be a decent AK for just $50.00 more than the milled you mention: http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/storeproduct917.aspx Under folders have a weird cheek weld, but they fold up VERY compact and tuck into small spaces and bags; that’s really handy. When I was doing bodyguard work, I always had an under-folder AK in a duffle bag as my oh-shit gun. Even if you choose another AK, an under folder is always nice to have in the arsenal. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Any one that you've function tested and has run 100% for you (including those worthless WASR's).An AK to trust your life to? Waffen Werks or Arsenal. Well sure, but if the OP is willing to spend in the range of $650-700, why not buy a rifle from a company that has already guaranteed it to run 100% for you straight out of the cardboard box you receive it in? |
|
Quoted:
I would go down the Arsenal road. I don't have any useful knowledge about the century, but I know I would take a slightly overpriced Arsenal over an overpriced Red Jacket. My $700 dollar Polish UF from RJ wasnt exactly OP and its quality exceeds most of the shit ive seen and handled on the market that are in that price range |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Any one that you've function tested and has run 100% for you (including those worthless WASR's).
An AK to trust your life to? Waffen Werks or Arsenal. Well sure, but if the OP is willing to spend in the range of $650-700, why not buy a rifle from a company that has already guaranteed it to run 100% for you straight out of the cardboard box you receive it in? Not starting a pissing match but Arsenals have had issues too, every manufacturer has problems here and there. Not everybody puts out perfect products all of the time. I would rather have a WASR that runs fine and save the $$ for other things. As long as you function test for problems that WASR will run just the same and probably be just as accurate as that Arsenal. An AK is an AK is an AK, more $$ gets you a prettier rifle that's about it. |
|
Quoted:
Well sure, but if the OP is willing to spend in the range of $650-700, why not buy a rifle from a company that has already guaranteed it to run 100% for you straight out of the cardboard box you receive it in? Does anyone take any firearm out of a box and stake his/her life on it before it's had 500 -1000 shots through it? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Arsenal. I've had Romanian rifles, the Yugo, Chinese. My Arsenals are outstanding rifles. The others were not. Arsenal > Chinese? I just threw up in my mouth a little. I have to agree. Over the years, I've owned several Arsenal rifles and currently have a pair of them that I enjoy quite a bit. But my best Arsenal rifle is just about equal to my worst Polytech or Norinco. Of course, this mainly related to fit, finish and accuracy. I've yet to own a truly unreliable AK from any country or manufacturer...with the exception of some truly screwed up home builds. |
AK Sponsor