What is so great about a milled receiver AK?


PDA






Sebastian the Ibis
December 11, 2009, 12:47 AM
What is so great about a milled receiver AK?

Ak's were designed to be stamped not milled, they are not precision rifles. Stamped receivers are solid enough for any abuse I am likely to give my rifle.

Why are milled receivers so desirable? I understand that generally milled receiver weapons are better than stamped (i.e. thompson v. grease gun) however, specifically when comparing AK's what is the difference? Strength? Accuracy? Heat Absorption?

If you enjoyed reading about "What is so great about a milled receiver AK?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
zt77
December 11, 2009, 01:05 AM
the ak-47 is milled. it was designed as a milled receivered rifle.
later cost effective improvements made the akm-47, it has a stamped receiver.
somewhere down the line the 45 degree gas block also was deleted.

I have heard the stamped receivers are actually more accurate and supposedly lighter.
I have two of each and they weigh very close the same. if there is a difference I cannot tell; accuracy wise, I think it has more to do with each individual rifle than ak or akm.

that said I prefer the milled just for the fact that there was more work put into it. If cost was a factor I would see no reason not to get the less expensive stamped version.

MM60
December 11, 2009, 01:12 AM
I would think that, if the front trunion was milled into an AK receiver instead of being attached to a stamped receiver - it would nearly eliminate the possibility of installing the barrel crooked. I would prefer that the receiver, and both front and rear trunions, were all milled from a single piece of steel (or aluminum or carbon fiber - if that was possible).

nathan
December 11, 2009, 03:33 AM
More sturdy platform . I go milled if given the chance but they do weigh heavier. I sold my MAK 91 years ago . I should nt have done it , stupid me .

But all the SKSs are from milled receivers. Accurate as the AKs shooting the same round. The reason I sold my MAK 91.

atlanticfire
December 11, 2009, 06:17 AM
Im a milled guy, They are just sturdier and feel better to me. I think that they are slightly more accurate as there is less flex and wobble to the whole unit when firing. The AK was never meant to be a precision instrument. But that doesn’t mean it has to be inherently inaccurate.

Glockman17366
December 11, 2009, 06:30 AM
the ak-47 is milled. it was designed as a milled receivered rifle.
later cost effective improvements made the akm-47, it has a stamped receiver.

I believe you are incorrect there...
The original AK'swere stamped, but the tooling used wasn't accurate or robust to maintain the required tolerances. So, they went to a milled receiver for a number of years. IIRC, stamping the receivers started again in 1958 or 1959.
History of the AK-47 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47)
Read this section: Receiver development history

benEzra
December 11, 2009, 10:08 AM
Primarily aesthetics and pride of ownership, I think. Many consider the milled receivers to be an example of better craftsmanship. Functionally, I prefer a thin stamped receiver to the heavier milled or RPK-style stamped.

Sam1911
December 11, 2009, 10:47 AM
the ak-47 is milled. it was designed as a milled receivered rifle.

Glockman got it! The milled receiver was a stop-gap measure until they got the bugs worked out of their production process to make the stamped receiver with acceptable efficiency.

It is funny that so many folks latched onto the idea that the AKM (stamped) was a "dumbed down" version of the weapon, kind of like a "Post '64" Winchester. Those folks are certain they really want a stamped "original" design AK. So there's quite a market for the makeshift version of the gun, because folks believe it's better! :D

Having said that, I have an AK collector/builder friend who counts one milled receiver AK among his collection. I've watched him put surplus ammo EASILY into a 2" group at 100 yds. That gun is a fluke, for sure, but it is impressive to see.

-Sam

briansmithwins
December 11, 2009, 11:10 AM
I'd worry more about what ammo or the quality of the crown than what kind of receiver the barrel is attached to when it comes to accuracy.

As far as longevity goes, both the RPK and PK, which were designed for much heavier firing cycles than the AK rifles both use stamped receivers.

BSW

Z-Michigan
December 11, 2009, 11:17 AM
Well, they're much heavier and don't reflect the original design nor the most common design in use. What's not to like??!? I always get a chuckle at how so many people worship HKs that are made from stampings and a few small trunions and then sneer at AKs made the same way.

The 1.5mm-1.6mm stamped receivers (RPK and VEPR) are as tough as anything you would ever need or want. And it's not as if the standard 1.0mm stamping is known for breaking easily.

I believe you are incorrect there...
The original AK'swere stamped, but the tooling used wasn't accurate or robust to maintain the required tolerances. So, they went to a milled receiver for a number of years. IIRC, stamping the receivers started again in 1958 or 1959.
History of the AK-47
Read this section: Receiver development history

Yes, this.

HexHead
December 11, 2009, 11:23 AM
I believe you are incorrect there...
The original AK'swere stamped, but the tooling used wasn't accurate or robust to maintain the required tolerances. So, they went to a milled receiver for a number of years. IIRC, stamping the receivers started again in 1958 or 1959.
History of the AK-47 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47)
Read this section: Receiver development history
Oh well, if it's from Wikipedia it has to be true. LOLOLOL

I was watching a show on the History Channel about AKs, might have been "Tales of the Gun", and the originals were very definitely milled, not stamped. They showed footage of them being made that way.

Ian
December 11, 2009, 11:26 AM
Yeah, anyone who has seen an HK91 front trunnion should be terrified of firing the rifle. It's really skimpy compared to an AK front trunnion.

Sam1911
December 11, 2009, 11:37 AM
Oh well, if it's from Wikipedia it has to be true. LOLOLOL

I was watching a show on the History Channel about AKs, might have been "Tales of the Gun", and the originals were very definitely milled, not stamped. They showed footage of them being made that way.

Careful Hex, don't dig yourself too deep a hole. "I saw it on the History Channel, it HAS to be true!" LOL!

Here's a slightly better source:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as01-e.htm

The original stamped design was used from 1949-1951.

In 1951 the Soviets switched to the milled receiver and used that up until 1959, when the AKM was developed.

If you don't feel like clicking and getting to look at all the pretty pictures of prototype assault rifles, read this:
It must be noted that the original design of the receiver, which was assembled from stamped steel 'box' with large machined steel insert pinned at the front, caused a lot of troubles at factory. The technology (equipment and labor) level of the time resulted in extremely high percentage of rejected receivers due to misformed walls, improper pinning of parts, bad geometry etc. After critical revision of the process at the factory it was calculated that it will be more economically feasible to return to the 'old-school' machined receivers. New, machined receiver was designed by one of factory's staff designers, and after approval by military, it was put into production at IzhMash in 1951, under the same basic designation.

And this:
Trials for new weapons were held in 1957-58. Kalashnikov team from Izhevsk submitted an improved AK with new type of stamped receiver and other minor improvements, which competed against a number of weapons from other design teams from the Kovrov and Tula. In technical terms, the Kalashnikov entry fared about average in these trials, with certain rival weapons proving to be more combat-effective and less expensive to make. The trials commission, however, decided again that the better is the enemy of the good, and recommended the improved AK for adoption due to its proven performance and familiarity to the industry and troops. It was officially adopted in 1959 as the AKM ( Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovannyj - Kalashnikov Automatic rifle, Modified) along with companion RPK squad automatic weapon / light machine gun.

Now you know!

-Sam

If you enjoyed reading about "What is so great about a milled receiver AK?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!