Saiga .308 vs. PTR-91


PDA






maasenstodt
June 8, 2006, 09:58 PM
I've been determined to purchase a battle rifle since the start of the year, but held off on my purchase of a battle rifle for several months to do more research. The past week or so, I was getting very close to pulling the trigger on a PTR-91. It is undoubtedly a fine, accurate rifle (especially after the virtually required trigger job), and it meets or beats the competition (M1A, FAL) in a couple of areas that are important to me: bang for the buck and reliability.

Then, on these very boards, I found out about the imminent availability of 20 round mags for .308 Saigas, and just as I thought I'd considered everything, another option arrives. :)

Previously, with the 8 round mag limitation, I had ruled out the Saiga altogether. Now I'm reading everything I can about them, and the concensus seems to be that they are similar in both accuracy and reliabilty to the PTR-91. What's more, even a tricked out Saiga doesn't look to cost more than a vanilla PTR, and I like the 16" barrel to boot.

With all of that said, I'd like your opinions on these two rifles, how they compare favorably and unfavorably with each other, and whether there's something important I might not have considered.

Thanks. ;)

If you enjoyed reading about "Saiga .308 vs. PTR-91" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rangerruck
June 8, 2006, 10:29 PM
well , first off i have never even seen a ptr 91 much less fired it. the saiga 308 is excellent, good mid balance, stiff heavy bbl, they are also hammer forged cold pour , chrome lined bbls. they are moa capable with you finding the right milsurp ammo, i got mine to do it with 5 diff milsurps. american , any of the old british empires, and the nazi heavy s. american countries. It is reliable, you can put a ton of diff furniture on it, though i like mine plain. You can mod the 8 rounders , and make them 10's, easy to do , just need a heavy pair of snips. Inexpensive to be sure, you cna find them on gunbroker, gunsamerica, and the saiga12forums, for 250 to 300 bucks , all the time.
I have all three cals, they are all excellent, withthe 223 , being a one hole punch with black hills.
they are consistent. I had one and sold it about 1.5 yrs ago, super accurate, missed it, got another one about 3 months ago, also super accurate. the 223 have a 1/9 twist, so you can fire the heavier stuff. i like piston driven system better,also I think, I may be wrong, that the twist is 1/10. although the ptr has polygonal rifleing, which is superior. Then again, for 300 bucks...."If you have the means , I highly suggest you pick one up!" Ferris Bueller

Onmilo
June 9, 2006, 09:27 AM
I own both a PTR91 and a Saiga .308 20" barrel wood stock version.
The Saiga is an excellent hunting rifle. It will hold MOA to 400 meters with top notch ammunition and it is reliable.
It is the only .308 rifle I own that I have no reservations about shooting steel case ammunition through and I do so.
The drawback to the rifle is that it is in no way a battle rifle.
Even with the heavy barrel it heats up quickly and the shot groupings begin to spread open fairly quickly.
You would be lucky to hold a respectable grouping after firing sixteen rounds quickly downrange.
The 16" plastic stock carbines are even worse.
I have fired three of them and all become super hot, super quick, and begin throwing shots all over the paper.
Plus the short barrel makes concentrated shooting difficult because the blast and muzzle jump is excessive.
The 8 to 10 shot conversion idea doesn't work very well.
I have tried it and the magazine reliability suffers and there is no imminent availability of 20 shot magazines in the US.
King George the First saw to it that this won't be allowed with his non-domestic assault weapon ban.

The PTR91 is everything the Saiga is not.
It is a battle rifle design.
It is designed to function hot and maintain groupability hot or cold.
It is dead reliable and would probably run on a constant diet of steel case or less than top quality ammunition though at the price of the rifle I don't make a point of shooting cheap ammunition in it though I have just to see what would happen, no suprises.
I could afford the rifle and I can darn well afford to feed it high quality ammunition.
If I had to keep one over the other, I would keep the PTR91.
It is more expensive, yes, but spare parts abound, 20 shot magazines can be bought for about five bucks each, a telescope can be readily mounted, and the rifle is pure fun.
http://www.fototime.com/714FACEDE2B09ED/standard.jpg
http://www.fototime.com/9A139DECD23DE74/standard.jpg

Correia
June 9, 2006, 09:45 AM
Onmilo,

20 round magazines should be available by August. Nothing to do with Bill Clinton. FBMG is building them here.

I haven't seen the heat stringing problems that you mention either. That is kind of weird. Blast and muzzle jump is the same as any 16" carbine .308 with no muzzle attachment.

MechAg94
June 9, 2006, 09:46 AM
I can't disagree with your comments on the PTR. If you want to go further up the food chain, the M1A has a lighter recoil, a wood stock design rather than a pistol grip, and better sights. I would say the PTR still has the edge on magazines.

I have never shot the Saiga so I don't know where it sits. For the price, I can see where it would easily beat the CETME's and other cheap clones. I also couldn't tell you where the DSA SA58 or Stg rifles. Probably up there with the M1A and PTR depending on where your interests lie.

Onmilo
June 9, 2006, 10:04 AM
Corriea.
To be clear I didn't say stringing, I said the groups begin to open up.
By open up I mean the groups begin to double or triple in MOA measurement depending on the ammunition and temperature.
The rifles don't string shots vertically or horizontally, they just open up faster than almost any other semiautomatic rifle on the market that I have personally fired or owned and I have shot, and owned, oodles of these rifle designs, both semi-auto and full auto versions..
Well OK, I can't legally own the full auto versions in Illinois, but my buddies in Indiana can and do(lucky bast**ds).
The only rifles worse for this tendency were Reminton 742 and 7400 rifles.
At least from my own personal shooting experience.
As for blast and muzzle flip, there is a reason I do not personally own any .308 rifle with a barrel less than 18" and that rifle wears a very effective Smith Enterprise Vortex muzzle break.
Short barrel, full bore, rifles are unpleasant, for the shooter, and for anybody unfortunate enough to be standing nearby when the rifle is fired.
Don't misunderstand me either, I like my Saiga .308 rifle and I like my Saiga 7.62X39 rifle, I like them a lot.
But the comparison between a PTR91 and a Saiga is sort of like comparing a groundhog and a ground squirrel.
They are similar in design but not the same in execution.

SpookyPistolero
June 9, 2006, 10:20 AM
I agree that the two are different breeds entirely, but I certainly haven't noticed my groups 'doubling or tripling' after extended shooting sessions. Any rifle firing a full size rifle cartridge is rapid succession is going to have some issue with that, as I'm sure the saiga does, but I just haven't seen it to any noticeable degree.

I heart AK's, so my vote is for the Saiga, pending 20 rnd mags. Reliable, accurate, sights work just fine, and optics options out the wazoo.


Edited to change: I have not noticed massive group size increase...

Correia
June 9, 2006, 10:50 AM
I can see the groups opening up, but I'm not seeing a massive degredation in accuracy. Not enough that I've ever noticed it while hosing. (and for those that have shot with me in 3gun, you know I'm a HOSER.) :) I've never really benched one, rapid fired some mags, and then benched it again. It is much lighter than a PTR, so it probably will be hit by heat more.

Tankcommander
June 9, 2006, 06:24 PM
I had a Saiga 308 with a 16 inch barrel and now own a PTR91. The PTR wins hands down. The iron sights much better on the PTR. 4 way adjustable rear peep not the half way down the barrel on the Saiga. The PTR trigger is stiff the Saiga is horrible. It pulls up not back so a conversion to pistol grip required. 20 rounders for the PTR abound now as low as $2.99 for surplus will the Saiga be that good. The quality of manufacture PTR way on top. I outfitted mine with a scope and surplus wooden stock. I actually traded the Saiga in toward the PTR and never looked back.

In Jersey we can't have muzzle brakes so I have seen the muzzle flash on each and the PTR is a bit less then the Saiga. I have been able to get 1.5 inch groups with the PTR at 100 meters without a trigger job.

PTR you will not be sorry.

TC

Correia
June 9, 2006, 10:42 PM
Comparing the $350 unconverted Saiga to the $800 standard PTR, then the PTR is nicer, and costs twice as much. With a converted Saiga, the trigger is better than a PTR, weighs less, can have a folding stock, and better sights, and still costs less.

But obviously I'm biased. :p So keep that in mind.

telomerase
June 9, 2006, 11:58 PM
Got a picture of the optimized Saiga?

SpookyPistolero
June 10, 2006, 12:12 AM
http://www.hunt101.com/showphoto.php?photo=411917&sort=7&thecat=500&password=

http://www.hunt101.com/showphoto.php?photo=372984&sort=7&thecat=548&password=

Optromix prime.

Nightcrawler
June 10, 2006, 06:13 AM
Correia, you're going to have to let me fire one of these. Eventually I'm going to get my FAL back from Arizona Response Systems, and I'd like to see how it stacks up.

hso
June 10, 2006, 07:11 AM
I'm curious as to why the M1A and FAL washed out of the "competition" based on reliability and accuracy? I understand the M1A's price would be a deal breaker, but a good FAL fits into the price range, has good accuracy (notice I said a good FAL, is dead reliable and has a gentler recoil.

WeedWhacker
June 10, 2006, 07:18 AM
I can't disagree with your comments on the PTR. If you want to go further up the food chain, the M1A [...]
I'm still trying to get a PTR-91 after choosing it over the FAL (paranoid about fine sand), M1A (price, number of parts[?], and/or some other downside which I can't recall?), Saiga (lack of aftermarket parts/addon market), and a few others.

The selling points of the PTR-91 were reliability of the rifle and availability of parts. It'll be the main .308 shooter, right after the Galil, the latter which is 1. stupid expensive and 2. hard to find parts for.

For those that may have orders pending with various distributors, you may want to consider cancelling them and order one dealer-direct. JLD is now shipping to dealers, and Impact Guns only waited two months to cryptically tell me "they're not making the PTR-91 anymore" (!?). JLD's lead time is roughly three weeks, when I'd asked on Friday.

maasenstodt
June 10, 2006, 10:08 AM
Thanks for all of the replies to date. I'm glad to have read them and am certainly interested in others. Particularly, I'm interested in whether Saiga owners feel that it is in fact a battle rifle or not.

The reason that the M1A and FAL didn't make the grade is two-fold. The first reason is cost. I could swing a quality M1A or FAL, but that would leave me short on storing up ammo, accessories, etc. It would also preclude the purchase of some other firearms that I'd like to buy. Something no more expensive than a PTR better fits my budget.

The second reason is reliability under adverse conditions and without gunsmithing support. The M1A and FAL are not unreliable, but based on my study, neither does either quite match the HK-91 or AK designs in this area. I want a rifle that will work, period, in poor environments for extended periods - a guerilla's rifle, one might say.

Based on my research, those criteria point strongly at the PTR and Saiga. Were I to get a Saiga, I'd certainly trick it out a bit (or go with a converted model), mitigating the sights issue. Perhaps it just comes down to a matter of the Saiga being lighter (easier to handle but more prone to heat up) and the PTR being heavier (a bit more to carry but better able to tolerate heat)?

Fingolfin
June 10, 2006, 03:41 PM
The standard chrome lined barrel on the Saiga is a big selling point for me. If they would offer some options and improvements on the PTR(rework the mag release, offer a chrome lined and lighter barrel, improve the factory trigger) I would probably break down and buy one.

WeedWhacker
June 10, 2006, 04:58 PM
Yep - the heavy barrel is better able to dissapate heat, another one of the features of the PTR I like.

One caveat: it doesn't come with a bolt hold-open gizmo. It can be added later by a good 'smith, but just be aware of it.

Drakejake
June 10, 2006, 08:49 PM
If the promise of 20 round mags for the Saiga proves out, this rifle will become an extremely attractive option for those looking for a .308 carbine. The Saiga is strong and reliable, as well as compact and handy.

Drakejake

American By Blood
June 10, 2006, 09:40 PM
In the vein of what Drakejake said, if I had known about those soon to be produced 20 round Saiga .308 mags I wouldn't have put that DSA SA58 carbine on order in April. I wanted a hicap .308 and love the AK's ultra-reliable design (I already own a Bulgarian), but the limited capacity (at the time) of the Saiga was a deal-breaker for me. Ah well. Perhaps I'll just have to own two .308s.

roscoe
June 11, 2006, 12:48 AM
What is with the Saiga not being a 'Battle Rifle'? I mean, come on, it's an AK. Just what, other than the magazine issue, prevents it from being a battle rifle? The fact that no armies have fielded it in .308? For my money, the AK action is about as proven as could be. All those AK 47s are in a .30 caliber, so I am not sure whether the barrel issue is real.

Correia
June 11, 2006, 10:33 AM
Actually, I think that the M1A, FAL, and G3 designs are all pretty equivelent in reliability. All three work rather well.

You may want to do a search, I did a massive comparison of each of these, (including pouring sand in the actions) a few years ago, and posted it here. :) That was before I owned a Saiga though. :p

SnakeEater
June 11, 2006, 06:19 PM
I'd like to chime in and clear up one misconception about the PTR's recoil. JLD reduced the number of flutes in the chamber which cut recoil substantially in comparison to original HK's. After adding an HK21 rubber buttpad my PTR has less felt recoil than my LRB M14. IMHO the PTR wins due to spare parts, modular design, heavy barrel, mag prices, sights, and lastly looks.
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-3/975911/PTR002.jpg

TruckSTR
July 11, 2006, 02:40 PM
Put me in the PTR column. I bought one back in January and have enjoyed it immensely. It has been dead reliable and very accurate (more accurate than I'm capable of shooting).

As SnakeEater said, adding the HK21 rubber butt pad helped reduce felt recoil. My shoulder can witness that.

I also added the real HK furniture, low profile scope mount and a 10x mil-dot reticle equipped scope. I will be adding a good bipod soon. Why? Because the beast is HEAVY!

I ordered 20 magazines from Cheaper than Dirt. All of them were genuine HK and at least 10 of them were brand new. Only one was dented significantly and it serves as a parts mag for any others that will need parts.

I plan on having Bill Springfield do a trigger job on it.

Saiga .308? I can't say as I've only had the opportunity to shoot the AK-47 and AK-74. It should be reliable, however, it would likely need more than a little work before it would be as accurate as the PTR.

M1A? I've heard good things about them, but I already have it's grand daddy, an M1 Garand.

Like I said, for me, I'd get the PTR. Just make sure that you aren't buying a "parts gun" (PTR receiver with the rest being from various suppliers) and don't get one with the "match chamber" (early production had a chamber tighter than the current NATO spec. and would cause case head separation problems - from what I have been able to gather. S/Ns above 2000 should be safe).

Of course, YMMV. Have fun!

MTMilitiaman
July 11, 2006, 03:08 PM
I too am interested in a good .308 battle rifle. I do keep briefly pondering the Saiga and the M14, but for issues of parts availability (Saiga) and price (M14), my main two considerations are the PTR and the DSA. Right now I am favoring the FAL because I like the idea of a 21 inch barrel in a battle rifle. I already have an AK to cover anything out to 200 or 300 yards, so if I am packing a battle rifle, it is likely for the range. Also, I've been told it is friendly to lefties and easier to clean. The PTR, lacking a gas system, apparently has the same problem with fouling in the reciever as the ARs, although it doesn't appear to affect reliability as much. When you add the price of a trigger job and paddle mag release, the PTR is priced similarly to the FAL. The PTR is a nice rifle, but I don't think anyone in their right mind doubts the reliability or durability of the "right arm of the free world."

I have little or no experience with the battle rifles, so this is just where my research seems to lead me.

Pixsurguy
July 11, 2006, 05:00 PM
I've been lucky/unlucky; in that I've had one of every one of the guns you guys have been talking about. I HAD a PTR, a Saiga, a CETME, a milled AK47, and HAVE an M1 Garand, an M1A, and a FAL.

The first four were stolen in a burglary in 11/04, along with a 16" FAL and a number of hand guns.

I replaced the FAL with a 20 inch, but did not replace the others.

Anyway, i'm in a good position to speak to the high and low points of each.

Right off the bat though, have to admit that I was not aware of the recoil reduction on the newer PTR rifles. My experience with my PTR (a 2003 version) was that it was a shoulder bruiser from the bench, which pretty much amazed me, since my CETME did not do that at all and I've NEVER been particularly sensitive to recoil even in much more powerful rifles.

PTR - loved the good peep sights; the functionality, the pistol grip, the tough and apparently durable finish, the inexpensive and readily available magazines.
I did NOT like the fluted chamber because it beat hell out of brass and I reload. Also, it was the single dirtiest rifle I've ever had. Shoot a couple of hundred rounds in it and you look like you just left a coal mine. No - it was not some particular brand of ammo. Happened regardless of brand or type of ammo, milsurp, commercial, or handloads. Also, I did not like the charging handle up on the barrel on the left. That's a personal preference and it would seem that such an arrangement is better than most, so my dislike for it is not reasonable. Also not a fan of the STANAG scope mount that supposedly allowed for repeated removal and remounting w/o zero loss. Bull!!! The mount is waaaay too high and puts your eye many inches above the line of the bore. If you were firing from a foxhole, you would expose a lot of head to your foe. Trigger sucked. Accuracy with the best ammo (Fed. GM Match 168 gr. HPBT) was under 2 min. of angle.
I was not crazy about the el cheapo sheet metal construction of the weapon or the way the barrel attaches to the receiver.

CETME - Pretty much the same comments as the PTR, except that the sights were not worth much. Accuracy not up to the level of the PTR.

SAIGA - Truthfully, I bought it on a whim and never really took much of a liking to it. OK - it's an AK on steroids. While I'm not really an AK fan, everybody knows that they are reliable, if nothing else. I did not like the short barrel - too much flash by a long shot. Trigger not good. Felt cheap and especially so with the plastic magazine. Mine had the standard AK type side mount so I was able to put a scope on it. Thus, I had no problem with the poor factory sights. Can't say that I recall any problem with groups opening up after barrel got hot. Maybe I was not paying enough attention or maybe I did not shoot it enough. Even possible that the groups did not open up. My Saiga was very, very picky about ammo. I never used any high test in it - only milsurp and it shot best with Port milsurp. Worst with Indian (or Pak) milsurp. Two minutes of angle was the best I could do (but then my eyes are awful and I'm not that great a shot anyway).

M1 Garand - Naturally it is not in the running for a modern "battle rifle", but my M1 is my all-time favorite rifle that I've ever had (and I've had many). Despite its weight and size, I've hunted with it and carried it all day in the field. I've shot everything from rabbits (110 gr. handloads) to deer (Sierra 165 gr. Matchking handloads) and everything in between with it. If I had to go to war with it, I'd not feel at a disadvantage pretty much regardless of what my opponent was carrying.

M1A - It is a Super Match and shoots so much better than I can that I won't even talk about its accuracy. True - it is heavier than it needs to be with the NM glass-bedded walnut stock (so I have a GI synth. stock too) and genuine GI mags are waaay too expensive. It is as reliable as any rifle I've ever had and maintains its grouping long after you could get 3rd degree burns from the barrel. I don't appreciate the complicated and overly expensive scope mounts. Let's face it - the rifle really is not intended for a scope anyway, despite the fact that they are using them in Iraq today.

FAL - Not for any reason that I can really put my finger on, but the FAL appeals to me more than any of the other "modern" battle rifles. I just sort of like it even better than my M1A. I love the feel and the rakish look of the pistol grip. The wonderfully adjustable gas system is unique and lets you use anybody's ammo without a problem. For example, I've got some of that crappy Indian milsurp. My M1A will not digest that ammo well (misfires, failures to eject, etc.), but the FAL, after simple adjustment handles them without a hitch. The rifle is heavy!!!
Mags are cheap and readily available.
My FAL has the sand-cut bolt carrier. I don't really know if that makes any difference or not, but some 26 countries found the FAL sufficiently reliable to adopt it. Only the Izzys reported sand problems and I understand that the bolt carrier cuts pretty much handled that. With a change of springs the trigger is fine. The sights are not all that wonderful, but an after-market receiver cover from TAPCO allows me to mount any sort of optic I want. Had to add some height to be stock comb though.

geekWithA.45
July 11, 2006, 08:42 PM
FWIW, my friend Egregious Charles and I did a PTR-91/M1A side -by- side comparison, scroll around here for details:

http://geekwitha45.blogspot.com/2006_04_23_geekwitha45_archive.html


One thing I'd point out is that _some_portion_ of the AK's reliability is due to the angled design of the 7.62x39's case. The angled chamber is more forgiving than straight walled chambers such as with .308.

razorburn
July 12, 2006, 03:11 AM
Have you also considered a ar-10 type rifle? I was looking into buying a .308 battle rifle too, and looked into the PTR-91, though not much into the saiga. From what I gathered, the ar-10s will outshoot the ptr, and are capable of submoa groups out of box. Although the PTR has reportedly excellent aperature sights out of the box, I was planning to use a scope anyway seeing as I wanted a precision rifle. Also not quite as expensive as a good M1A, and based on a good platform.

The Grand Inquisitor
July 12, 2006, 11:49 AM
Roscoe is correct. The claim that the Saiga is not a "battle rifle" is just silly.

While the Saiga has been slightly changed to fit importation restrictions, the Saiga is a pure AK, and with a little bit of extra effort and a few dollars, you can turn a .308 Saiga into a regular looking AK. Also, with the mods to the Saiga, the Saiga would still probably cost less than the PTR.

Nothing against the PTR's, I own a CETME (similar but not the same) and I enjoy it very much, but I would never choose that kind of rifle (be it a G3, CETME or PTR) over an AK. The Kalashnikov platform is absolutely reliable, and the makers of Saiga have turned a rock solid reliable rifle into a rock solid accurate rifle as well.

MechAg94
July 12, 2006, 12:04 PM
How comparable is a CETME to a PTR? I have never fired a CETME.

Onmilo
July 13, 2006, 09:48 AM
Well,,,, I'm just plain silly then.
OK,OK, I admit it, I never considered the AKM much of a battle rifle either,,,,,

TruckSTR
July 13, 2006, 11:17 AM
MechAg94: How comparable is a CETME to a PTR? I have never fired a CETME.

It depends on the CETME. Most come through Century, which has a very mixed reputation. I've seen a few "good" Century-built CETMEs, but most were not built to where I would trust them with my life.

The "good" CETMEs have somewhere around 2 moa capability. The barrels are the typical H&K polyagonal rifling. The chambers are fluted like the HK91, as well. Many (most?) HK91 parts will fit the CETME with some notable exceptions. My advice is to look at the CETME rifle website and delve for the information.

Just my $0.02

BTW, I love my PTR, but it does get dirty when fired alot. It has been as reliable as an anvil, though. YMMV

geekWithA.45
July 13, 2006, 12:54 PM
Charles bought the PTR-91 in the review I posted as the go to replacement for his CETME, which he described as "built by crack addled monkeys". It was a century build, IIRC.

The PTR is lighter, better fit and finish, and all around a better build.

NineseveN
July 13, 2006, 10:05 PM
I'd buy a converted Saiga in a heartbeat, if I could find data or good info that they're capable of 1.5 MOA (or even 2 MOA in a pinch) with good ammo out of an 18" bbl.

I'm leaning towards a PTR-91 (have a FAL, can't stand the whole mark-up on the M1A's)...

I believe the PTR-91 can easily do 2 MOA, how about a converted Saiga with the dust-cover sight upgrade? Also, do they hold zero (accounts seem to vary on that) after the sight upgrade?

mordechaianiliewicz
July 13, 2006, 10:28 PM
Thank you all for this, I've been looking to get a .308 Saiga to make up for an FAL that I stupidly got rid of.

longhorngunman
July 13, 2006, 11:26 PM
Haven't shot the Saiga so I can't compare it. Got a PTR awhile back and sold my Cetme to finance it. No comparison when it comes to fit and finish, PTR hands down. The PTR has different and better sights than the Cetme. Also the saftey lever operates in a more normal position than the Cetme. The PTR's also use a bull barrel that helps when shooting a lot. Only put about 200 rd's through the PTR but is hasn't missed a beat. Only had one failure to extract with the Cetme. The G3 type guns do get awefully dirty inside but their design has reliability written all over it. Read a review one time that the only military type rifle that could keep up with the AK in non-stoppage was the G3. Though all the designs are built with reliability in mind.

roscoe
July 14, 2006, 12:58 AM
I'd buy a converted Saiga in a heartbeat, if I could find data or good info that they're capable of 1.5 MOA (or even 2 MOA in a pinch) with good ammo out of an 18" bbl.
My Saiga .223 is 2 MOA all day, over the stock iron sights.

NineseveN
July 18, 2006, 10:39 PM
Anyone have a definitive word on whether or not Tromix's G3 sight modification to the Saiga will hold zero?

Correia
July 19, 2006, 09:43 AM
Yes.

I've used Krebs sights on a dust cover on a Vepr for years now. I have not had any issues. As long as your dust cover is a snug fit, you are fine. Saigas have snug dust covers.

NineseveN
July 19, 2006, 10:49 AM
Correia, did you install this, or did Krebs? If Krebs did it how he normally does it, it would use a set screw to hold it in place. From what you're saying, it sounds like it's just been put on there without the screw and you're making a valid comparison with the Tromix cover sights, I just wanted to be clear. I'd hate to shell out a grand for an AK and then $45.00 for each mag (still having a hard time what that hehe) only to end up with a sight that doesn't work as well as I want it to.

Correia
July 19, 2006, 01:10 PM
I installed it myself back when he would sell them to the public. I did not use the set screw. If I recall correctly (it has been several years) from what Mark told me, the set screw was only neccesary on guns that had wobbly dustcovers.

I've got guns with Tony's HK style sights in stock. However I've not used them on a rifle yet. The Saigas dust covers are not wobbly, so I don't envision a problem.

Does the zero shift? Maybe, but not enough that I've ever noticed it with an iron sighted AK. If I was using it in High Power, I might be dissapointed, but for 3gun, I've got no problem hitting things pretty quick. :)

NineseveN
July 19, 2006, 01:23 PM
Thanks Correia, that's the info I was looking for. I figure as long at it'll hit out to 400meters with some repeatable accuracy, what more do you need from a battle rifle?

For some odd reason, I like the idea of the diopter sight. I know, I'm goofy.

shllyshny
July 19, 2006, 07:36 PM
Hey TruckSTR-

I am considering a PTR with a serial number between 1200 and 1500.

You said: "Like I said, for me, I'd get the PTR. Just make sure that you aren't buying a "parts gun" (PTR receiver with the rest being from various suppliers) and don't get one with the "match chamber" (early production had a chamber tighter than the current NATO spec. and would cause case head separation problems - from what I have been able to gather. S/Ns above 2000 should be safe)."

Were all PTR's built before sn 2000 match chambers?

If so, can they be loosened up in any way or are they to be avoided all together?

Thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "Saiga .308 vs. PTR-91" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!