Zastava AK

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think there's much of an advantage over the WASR with this one. There is no side rail for sturdy optics attachment and I am sure the pic rail on the dust cover would prove to be useless.
 
Actually, I think that the thick walled receiver and the furniture are a real step up from the WASRs. Dunno that I think that to be worth more almost seven bills, but those are still reasonable upgrades.
 
I have no idea if this applies, but since it's a Yugo, check to see if it has a chrome-lined barrel.
 
I hear they are good guns but the slant at rear of receiver makes conversion more challenging. For the price i'd just pay $100 more and grab an arsenal.
 
It's a tiny bit of step up from a WASR for a significantly larger amount of money. Functionally it's no better than a WASR (assuming your WASR has no problems) so all you're really getting is nice fit and finish. If it was me I'd just spend the money to do some minor upgrades on my WASR like a nicer stock set or something and you'd have just as good of a rifle for a whole lot less. Unless your current one has mechanical issues in which case it might be worth it to buy that.
 
Stick with your wasr but if you want to sell it look at the M+M rifles if your on a budget.
 
shootist i was also lookin for another ak, and saw the pap never caught my interest. but the amd65 from jgsales did, i say skip the pap and saiga/arsenal and get the amd65, got mine 2 days ago and very happy with my purchase. as a plus its a unique ak type variant, as compared to the saiga/arsenals
 
I have some experience with the Zastava RPK. The furniture on that AK looks really similar and I remember it being pretty much junk on the RPKs. I can't tell if the AK has the little flip up white dot that covers the front sight for close range and night shooting. That was the only thing about our RPK's I liked.

The only AK I would bother with is a well done Saiga conversion. And even then I would prefer some other weapon type.
 
The new Zastava AK's are really nice. Fit and finish is 500% better than a WASR. The recent imports do not have the slant at the rear of the receiver.
 
I hear they are good guns but the slant at rear of receiver makes conversion more challenging. For the price i'd just pay $100 more and grab an arsenal.

That's what I'd do. My SGL-21 just came in... worlds nicer than any AK I've used, other than a Poly Tech and a real nice MAADI.
 
It's a tiny bit of step up from a WASR for a significantly larger amount of money. Functionally it's no better than a WASR (assuming your WASR has no problems) so all you're really getting is nice fit and finish. If it was me I'd just spend the money to do some minor upgrades on my WASR like a nicer stock set or something and you'd have just as good of a rifle for a whole lot less. Unless your current one has mechanical issues in which case it might be worth it to buy that.

Interesting point - how tough would it be to obtain and then swap out the wood? I take it there are supply sources on the 'Net for that sort of thing.
 
I'll have to agree with the above on it not being an upgrade from the WASR. Buy more goodies for the 10/63 unless you got one of those clunckers I've heard about then trade up but not for that Yugo.
 
if it is the same quality as the old M70 underfolder then it absolutely is an upgrade over a WASR
 
I keep seeing that the Zastava is an upgrade to a WASR. If one has a good WASR (everything is straight and properly assembled), this is not an upgrade. The thicker receiver only means more weight as the WASR can handle thousands of rounds without issue. I am pretty sure the Zastava hasn't a chrome-lined barrel. That is a bid step down from the WASR. The absence of the side rail on the Zastava is certainly a step down as well. Compared to a properly inspected WASR, the Zastava's only advantage that I can think of is going to be finish.

I am not a fan of Arsenal, but if you're dying to spend $650.00 on an AK, spend a few extra bucks and get one. Otherwise, stick with your WASR.
 
There are a lot of good AK's out there.
What you might want to do is a little more research before buying. As the owner of two AK's I can assure you that the Arsenal's with a proper conversion are rock solid.
I have one built by Red Jacket and another by AK 103. I like them both but prefer the AK 103 and got it gently used for what you are looking at for a new rifle there.
As far as modifications.
I would seriously spend some time with a stock AK and then take it from there.
Things I have found useful
Quality red dot sights. Think Trijicon or EO Tech.
TWS railed cover. It comes pretty close to holding an exact zero when you use it right.
Better Furniture to fit your needs. I like a "Quality" folding stock. There used to be an excellant imported one from China that is all steel and rock solid.
But Most important.
There is a lot of low quality crap you can hang off an AK. Stay away from it, your research should guide you and save you lots of $$.
 
I keep seeing that the Zastava is an upgrade to a WASR. If one has a good WASR (everything is straight and properly assembled), this is not an upgrade. The thicker receiver only means more weight as the WASR can handle thousands of rounds without issue. I am pretty sure the Zastava hasn't a chrome-lined barrel. That is a bid step down from the WASR. The absence of the side rail on the Zastava is certainly a step down as well. Compared to a properly inspected WASR, the Zastava's only advantage that I can think of is going to be finish.

Yeah no complaints about my WASR - it ain't pretty but it DOES go bang every time. The accuracy is satisfactory - call it "minute-of-badguy". :evil:

But the wood upgrade caught my eye if only to be seen carrying less of a battlefield pickup at the range.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top