Sorry I just get really irritated by people who haven't been there, don't build guns for a living but can tell ya all bout em.... and are more than willing to pass on mis-information based on what they have heard versus what they have seen
First of all the second 'word' in my post was AFAIK, so it obviously was not stated as fact. Second, thank you for the info regarding WASRs. It's interesting to hear about the actual process, and I'd rather be right than wrong next time, so getting the right info is cool by me.
QUALITY the Yugo was recomended for much much better QUALITY so tell us how many AKs have ya built? surly some at least so ya can be an authority on riveting correct? I build about 4-7 per week every make and model as well as dealer post sample "Real" AKs....... been doin it goin on 20 years now so how much experience ya got riveting an ak together?
I've built 0, and never claimed to be a builder. The yugo may be better quality individual parts, but a factory rifle is a factory rifle. My only way to explain it would be this: if my life was in jeopardy and I had an untested yugo build, and an untested SAR-1 in front of me I would grab the SAR-1 without question. I have absolutely no idea the quality of the receiver on the yugo, or barrel condition, or build quality. With the NDS receivers and a quality build, yes, the US receiver guns are not quite the sore spot they used to be, and are arguably better, but a SAR-1 is so close to the real thing I'd grab it first, as I would a saiga, arsenal inc, vepr, etc. This isn't a slight against just yugos, I'd pick any of those rifles listed over a vector or lancaster or any other untested US build (even if I built one) despite the reputation. I'm sure your work is great, but until I know for sure its not on the same level as a factory built gun (except for a wasr, maybe, although most of them reliably function).
As for the quality process for civilian romanian rifles, were SAR-1 parts handled the same way, ie rejects are used for SAR-1s? I've had 4 SARs and 4 G kits and from looking over them, the SARs actually seemed to be built
better. All 4 of my demilled G kits have canted sights. None of my 3 SARs had canted sights or any other build problems. I've seen some ruff parts on WASRs, genuinely curious as to if the same selection process was true for SARs, since they seem better. Are G rifles perhaps rifles that were rejected from normal service for some reason? That would explain the canted sights on all 4 at least.
Edit: and to clarify on the US-bulit vs. factory, my most expensive AK is a bulgy AKS-74 clone. I have no problems owning a US receiver AK, but its no more of an 'AK-47' than my SAR-1, and arguably the SAR-1 is closer to the real thing anyway, which was my point. Love my 74 though, it's my favorite AK.