SkinnyGrey
Member
I am looking to buy an AK 74. I would appreciate any help as to which manufacturers make the more quality variants of this rifle. Many thanks in advance!
I think the Saigas are the best deal going... the IZ-340 with the AK front end parts is what I would get. Converting the rest of it back to AK configuration is child's play. Afterwards, you have a real-deal Russian AK74 for a lot less than what an Arsenal would cost you.
It isn't too much work to use rivets, and finish the whole thing correctly.Not exactly. A "real-deal" AK does not have nuts and bolts holding the trigger guard and safety stop in place. Nor does it have two empty holes on either side. It also has a consistent finish on the bottom that matches the rest of the receiver. I'm not knocking at home conversions but i don't consider them equal to professionally assembled Arsenals either. For the record i have a home converted Saiga 12 and I'm doing a .308. I am however debating the expense of the proper tools to do rivets instead of nuts and bolts.
Arsenal is the gold standard. Either Bulgarian or Russian, both are as good as it gets.
A "real-deal" AK does not have nuts and bolts holding the trigger guard and safety stop in place. Nor does it have two empty holes on either side. It also has a consistent finish on the bottom that matches the rest of the receiver.
Really depends on what you're willing to spend and if you have any particulars you are looking for (this or that style stock, street legal or SBR'ed Krinkov, etc).
If buying a $1000 AK means shoot it and forget it, money better spent than an AR. I baby mine, or rather, clean religiously. The AR vs AK has been done to death, it's not about modularity or weight, as the AK has neither going for it. It's reliability. Plain and simple.I guess if an aresenal is the gold standard then something like a Fuller build is diamond encrusted platinum.
If you think its not as good than rivet them on, weld up the holes, and refinish the thing. Its not like those are particularly hard things to do. If you cannot manage some of those tasks yourself, say welding up the holes or the rivets you could get them done easily by someone else and still come in well under the Arsenal price tag.
That said, I've never seen the things you mention make an ounce worth of difference in function.
+1 Those really affect what the best buy is. If you like the configuration and just what an arsenal come with they are often the best deal. That said they are antiquated configurations and if you are after function first you are likely going to change enough things that it may not make a whole lot of sense to buy an arsenal and then swap all the parts you want onto it after the fact. On the other end of the spectrum if you don't necessarily want the look of a particular configuration one can get a rifle that is the functional equivalent while spending hundred less.
What is your price range? What is your intended use? Do you want a particular look or are you building to serve a particular task?
Personally given the price of AKs vis-a-vis ARs right now I'm not sure I'd be buying an AK unless I REALLY wanted one and had my AR bases covered. I say that as a guy who loves kalashnikov guns and owns a dozen or so. Many Arsenal models run nearly $1000. That is pretty hard to justify when PSA was selling mil spec ARs with FN hammer forged barrels plus an Aimpoint and mount for $999 last weekend. AKs are as a class really over priced right now.
ive heard good things about waffen werks and interarms(although their tantal has been reported to have some problems)
If buying a $1000 AK means shoot it and forget it,
If buying a $1000 AK means shoot it and forget it, money better spent than an AR.
I baby mine, or rather, clean religiously.
. . . i would give a field cleaning every few thousand rds or when environmental conditions warrented cleanining.
Doing the front is easy enough. But you won't come in very far under the cost of an Arsenal, if you're actually using quality parts, or unless you just happen to have the parts laying around.I think the Saigas are the best deal going... the IZ-340 with the AK front end parts is what I would get. Converting the rest of it back to AK configuration is child's play. Afterwards, you have a real-deal Russian AK74 for a lot less than what an Arsenal would cost you.
I can't speak for Waffen Werks, but the Interarms Tantal is good to go. You're thinking of the Century Arms built Tantals which had a significant (wrong caliber barrels) problem in the past. I'm told those are fixed no too but I went with an Interarms Tantal to avoid the problems. Mine has been 100% and I couldn't be happier with my choice. Interarms also has a lifetime warranty, Century has a one year from the day it left the Century factory (ie it will likely be expired by the time the rifle is available for purchase).
So with an Interarms build you're good to go (I've never heard a complaint about them). With a Century Arms build you should at least inspect yourself and it might be good to do a test fire to ensure it doesn't keyhole.
I really like the way the "bakalite" mags look in the rifle.
How many have you? As if it mattered to me, what is your basis for round count before inspection? Where does mil spec give you a by when cleaning anything other than bore is concerned? What does a carbine course have to do with proven track record of reliability of the AK? Shooting however many rounds in a week I can afford, how much is that in AR speak? I shoot my AKs more than my ARs in prep for hostile situations, is that bad? In every thread you're on, if youre disagreed with you start asking for credentials. For all anyone knows, I'm an instructor from Venus. Your "Dirty Dozen" or whatever that's called has been thrown around before. All it does for me is show the evolution of the AR into, finally, a half way decent rifle as of late. AKs were already being abused before the AR was born. Good thing they're cheap?We are talking about an AK-74 here. Most folks want them to shoot cheap surplus ammo. That ammo is corrosive. Is that fire and forget? I'd worry much less about shooting a few hundred rounds or cheap 5.56 through any AR and sticking it the safe than doing the same with a 74 and some corrosive surplus.
Furthermore with respect to reliability and "fire and forget" generally:
How many and which AK and AR variants do you own?
How many carbine courses have you been to with either type of gun?
How many rounds have you shot through your AK that has the most rounds?
What is the greatest number of rounds you've put through your Ak and AR in a day, a weekend, between cleanings?
What malfunctions have you experienced with each and what was the suspected source of the malfunction.
Anyone that talks about ARs (or even AKs) as a monolithic group likely doesn't know what he or she is talking about. There is a huge range of ARs. They very widely in how they are built and in the quality of the components used. The end products vary from crap to really good guns. I would always rather have an AK than a crap AR. However, when we talk about ARs it behooves one to be more specific than simply referring to ARs as if they are all the same.
A properly built AR is going to be more than reliable enough for 99% (or more) of shooters. In fact a proper AR can go more rounds without cleaning than most owners will ever even shoot through it. See for example "Filth 14" a BCM rifle that had tens of thousands of rounds put through it in carbine courses without being cleaned. If that's not fire and forget I don't know what is.
I'm sure you know something about reliability that guys like Pat Rogers, Travis Haley, or Larry Vickers don't about reliability of guns. Travis Haley states he shoots over 100K rounds a year. Rogers put about 1300 rounds every 3 days down "Filthy 14" (last I heard it had 41K+ through it. That gun is not an anomoly. Rogers states they have run a number of guns to 15,000+ rounds without cleaning or malfunctions. How many guns have you put 15,000 rounds through? Plus, these guys see many many many more go down range through lots of different guns. Haley and Vickers teach AK classes as well. I'd suggest folks look to their informed opinions and experiences about reliability over yours or mine.
I personally have shot cases of wolf through my Noveske without cleaning it. I've put a case through it in a two days of training and then done the same thing the next time I've taken it out without any failures. Sure maybe a Del ton or DMPS or other guns where manufactures cut corners can't do that but any of the quality mil spec (or better) guns should do it without much problem.
You might chose to baby your AR. You might have a poorly built weapon that requires such nonsense. However, to project that on to quality guns is silly. That type of maintenance is what Pat Rogers referred to as, and I quote him directly, "Absolute stupidity..." Rather he says that if he was still carrying a gun for a living
How often do you clean your AK? I tend to clean mine every couple thousand rounds, about as often as my ARs. Any gun that is going to be a "go to" weapon needs to be inspected every five thousand rounds or so, be it a Sig, an Aug, an AR or an AK.
For $1000 (and less) one can get an AR that is boringly reliable with no more maintenance, or cleaning than an AK requires. I know I know, the experience of the top people in industry (and my own experience) doesn't matter because we have good old internet conventional wisdom to refute it.
What the AK has really had going for it until recently is a lower cost than other weapons systems.
I guess if an aresenal is the gold standard then something like a Fuller build is diamond encrusted platinum.
If you think its not as good than rivet them on, weld up the holes, and refinish the thing. Its not like those are particularly hard things to do. If you cannot manage some of those tasks yourself, say welding up the holes or the rivets you could get them done easily by someone else and still come in well under the Arsenal price tag.
That said, I've never seen the things you mention make an ounce worth of difference in function.
are they actually higher quality than arsenal or do they just add some cool features?
Yes, one can weld or add rivets but to install them correctly is a different matter and both methods require tools which cost money. Unless one already has the tools laying around it will generally just be cheaper to buy an Arsenal.
Regardless these are things that the vast majority of "at home converters" never do.
I don't see them as altering function either but i question if they will be as durable and reliable.
I tend to prefer the methods that the designers AK's decided on.
Each must of course decide if the extra cost is worth paying.
I do however still prefer the best methods even if i'll almost certainly never rely on them.
In every thread you're on, if youre (sic) disagreed with you start asking for credentials.