Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR rilfe so exspensive?


PDA






Click Click Boom
November 19, 2008, 01:31 AM
Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR so much more exspensive than the other stamped steel 5.56 Arsenal guns. The cheapest I can find this rifle for is $999.99 and some places are asking $1200.00. What makes this configuration that much better than the other 5.56 AK options?

If you enjoyed reading about "Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR rilfe so exspensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jpwilly
November 19, 2008, 01:32 AM
Demand...

Click Click Boom
November 19, 2008, 01:39 AM
When compared to there other models they are $200 bucks more.

I havn't seen any price hikes in NW Houston. Heck!, Gander MTN had ORC S&W AR15s for $899.99 Today! and Pruetts prices wernt any higher than normal.

45B@cav
November 19, 2008, 01:58 AM
It's that good.

Evil Monkey
November 19, 2008, 02:02 AM
It's that good.

Yeah right, this one guy had a cr and ur on youtube and both had serious issues with feeding and ejecting. Other have reported similar issues on various gun forums.

HorseSoldier
November 19, 2008, 02:19 AM
Arsenal apparently botched their early production run of 5.56mm guns (which is strange, since actual .mil Bulgarian 5.56mm service rifles run just fine), or so I've heard.

I think they got it sorted out, though. Several guys were shooting Arsenal 5.56mm guns when I took Larry Vicker's AK class and none of them were having issues with them.

CAVHOOAH
November 19, 2008, 03:30 AM
45B check your box

Click Click Boom
November 19, 2008, 05:05 AM
When reading the Arsenal website the SLR-106Fand SLR106CR have the same specs. The only difference I can see the muzzle attachments. and the front sight location. Is that really the only difference?

stubbicatt
November 19, 2008, 08:18 AM
Guys in my group went out and bought several copies when they were first out. Of 3 that I know of, two exploded, and the other sent back for feeding issues. Until the 106 came out, I was a firm fan of the Arsenal rifles, but since then, they have stepped in it a few times, including off center bores in the 107 line, misaligned front sights, and other issues one should not encounter in a rifle at that price point.

Nowadays, I'm reluctant to buy anything from them, or their high priced sister company, K-Var.

Reid73
November 19, 2008, 08:53 AM
Several guys were shooting Arsenal 5.56mm guns when I took Larry Vicker's AK classSomeone is offering a special course on how to employ the AK-47 series (that dirt-simple, short-range assault weapon, designed for use by untrained peasants and factory workers)?

The mind boggles.

grimjaw
November 19, 2008, 10:35 AM
Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR rilfe so exspensive?

No good reason. They established a name for themselves with their milled receivers, but pulled those at least for awhile in favor of producing the (less expensive to manufacture higher profit margin) stamped versions. I'm fairly certain that the SAR3 I had would have run just as well with Weiger mags and no other modifications.

I bought a stamped SAM5 (Arsenal milled 5.56 AK) new for $650 OTD in late 2005 or early 2006. No way on any level of Dante's Inferno I'm paying that much for a stamped AK.

jm

Hoppy590
November 19, 2008, 11:16 AM
Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR rilfe so exspensive?

because you will pay it.

Click Click Boom
November 19, 2008, 12:58 PM
OK, all the BS anwsers aside....

I feel like Im on ARFcom here.

HorseSoldier
November 19, 2008, 01:21 PM
Someone is offering a special course on how to employ the AK-47 series (that dirt-simple, short-range assault weapon, designed for use by untrained peasants and factory workers)?

Larry Vickers does an AK class. Gabe Suarez does a whole bunch of them. I think the Tactical Response guys in Tennessee run some AK-specific classes these days. I'm sure there are others these days.

I think once the cost of 5.56mm started rising and the cost of 7.62x39 and 5.45mm stayed low, a lot of the places teaching tactical rifle/carbine classes started seeing more and more AKs in their classes, especially in those that called for really high round counts and so it was probably inevitable that they'd take a look at AK specialized classes. I think someone on here posted a review a while back of Tactical Responses "High Risk Contractor Class" (think I got the name right) and said they'd shot something like 5000 rounds of long gun in a week there -- you could buy a whole spare rifle with the cost differential between 5.56 and 5.45 on that one, and probably have enough left over to get the wife or girlfriend something nice to distract her from the several thousand you'd just spent on a shooting school.

Anyway, the Vickers AK class is good stuff -- very good info on running the weapon, and runs them hard enough to really challenge the mythology surrounding the gun (i.e. it's more accurate than people think, and less reliable than they think).

And he brings his WW2 vintage StG-44 out with enough ammo for everyone to run some rounds through it. That by itself was worth the cost of admission to me.

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j132/jboschma/Stg44VickersClass-2.jpg

J32A2
November 19, 2008, 05:56 PM
Just picked up a 107CR!

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/bvh1980/ak107024.jpg
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/bvh1980/ak107023.jpg

aka108
November 19, 2008, 07:02 PM
I have a milled Arsenal SAM 7S. Think arsenals are expensive because of the name and a decent paint job. They don't shoot one damn bit better than a Saiga.

jpwilly
November 19, 2008, 07:17 PM
I agree most of the cost is in the name that was built up on the good quality of the rifles they built and the time required by American Workers to do it right (half the cost I presume). I bough a Lancaster Arms AKM and paid $700 for it and am very pleased again the extra cost was for all the same; finish, quality parts, American Labor & Profit.

Click Click Boom
November 19, 2008, 10:22 PM
I found one for sale for $809.99 but its getting close to property tax time. Its time to pay Uncle SAM rent for living in my house.

This dealer wants $809.99 + TAX for a Arsenal 106CR. Is this a decent price for this rifle? Im not looking for the deal of the year. Just lookig for a decen price.

geojap
November 20, 2008, 08:52 AM
I paid $760 plus shipping and FFL fee about a year ago for my SLR-106FR. I knew that bad things were on the horizon and wanted to go ahead and buy what I needed. It's a fantastic rifle, never had a problem. It's a late serial number too. It is really accurate and just a super package with a PK-AS-V scope, Bulgarian mags and a Vickers Combat Applications sling.

I also own an SLR-95, which I love. But the accuracy, PK-AS-V scope, nice trigger, and the really great-quality folding stock on the 106FR make it a very functional rifle that really stands out in my collection. It gets taken to the range more often than most of my other guns, along with my Sig 556 and FN PBR XP. I love shooting it.

Is it worth $809+tax? If you really wanted an SLR-106, then sure. If you just want a .223 AK clone, then I would look at a Saiga if that will work. I do shoot my SLR-106FR more than my Tromix .223 Saiga though. If you get it, make sure you get LOTS of Bulgarian circle-10 poly mags. They work great but are going to be hard to get your hands on in the future with demand so high.

I was wondering in the past if all the nay-sayers about Arsenal were really owners of the rifle. I posted this poll a while back, and you can see the results. Experience by far has been very positive.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=382172

Evil Monkey
November 20, 2008, 09:20 AM
AK rifle were bound to be popular in the US market, not because the AK is such a good rifle, but because of how cheap they traditionally are.

Paying 800 for a freakin AK, no matter what brand or what country it came from, is just ridiculous.

Had it not been the low prices during the influx of AK's many years back, the AK today would've barely had a supporting after market or consumer base as it has today.

The AK's fate in the firearms market just could've been something reminiscent of the HK93, Daewoo k1/k2, etc.

Click Click Boom
November 20, 2008, 01:03 PM
The days of cheap AKs are gone. CAI AKs are $450-$600 now

I wasn't asking if 809 was a good price for any AK. I was asking if that was a good price for that model. SLR-106CR.


People are paying $2000 to $4000 for IMI Galils in 5.56 and .308. They are "JUST AKs".

kurtmax
November 20, 2008, 01:15 PM
Someone is offering a special course on how to employ the AK-47 series (that dirt-simple, short-range assault weapon, designed for use by untrained peasants and factory workers)?

The mind boggles.

Wrong. The AK was designed for the Russian military; hardly untrained peasants, and somehow factory workers wouldn't be able to figure out how to use a rifle, but can operate complex machinery?

I swear, if the tables were turned and the AR-15 made it's way into the 3rd world as the de-facto weapon it'd have the same 'reputation' as the AK.

The AK is very accurate (if you don't get one made in a trench). Accurate enough that I doubt you would see a difference in a fighting AR and a fighting AK. (Yeah alright, so a tarded out AR made for shooting paper might be more accurate than a tarded out AK... so what?) AKs are actually not ungodly reliable. They can and will malfunction without proper care. They are just more reliable than AR-15s...

sernv99
November 21, 2008, 07:05 AM
someone locally near me is selling a NIB Arsenal 5.56 AK for about $800 and some odd change. On gunbroker I see them go for $1000 and more. I have the Arsenal in 7.62 that I bought this summer. Excellent fit and finish, no problems so far. Very accurate. I handled the cheaper CAI Yugo AKs and they felt like crap, there was a rattle from fit of the wood and metal and overall finish was subpar.

Reid73
November 21, 2008, 01:58 PM
The AK was designed for the Russian military; hardly untrained peasants, and somehow factory workers wouldn't be able to figure out how to use a rifle, but can operate complex machinery?Well, I guess you have much more confidence in the Russian army, its recruits and its training, than I do.

Throughout the last half of the 20th-century, the vast majority of professional AK-users were untrained, or semi-trained, guerrillas. And they used their rifles pretty effectively: among other notable victories, they prevailed over the US military in Vietnam, and the Soviets in Afghanistan. It doesn't take a highly-trained professional to shoot an AK-47 (or derivative) effectively.

I had a look at the Vicker's syllabus (Google is our friend!): looks like bog-standard stuff that would be covered on any decent basic training course. Why pay for what the military gives for free?

Ian
November 21, 2008, 02:40 PM
The 106CR and UR use much less common components (front sight blocks, barrels, etc) than the normal 106. They're intended primarily for people who want to make SBRs or guns that look like SBRs (ie, fake suppressors), and those people are willing to pay a premium. Look at the prices for short-barreled AK kits versus regular kits and you'll see the same sort of prices differences. Just supply and demand.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why is the Arsenal SLR106CR rilfe so exspensive?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!