We're all aware that there are many AK parts kit with demilled receivers, leaving only the receiver stubs. I was wondering if anyone knew anyone who could do a re-weld of the receiver stubs (of course, provide you leave all the full-auto components out) or, if at all possible, you yourself could provide these services.
AK Stamped Receiver Rebuild?
- Thread starter McDaniel
- Start date
- Status
BBBBill
Member
I'm sure that it could be done, but given the problems you would have finding sections with enough material left to clean up the torch cuts with enough left over for fitting, aligning the parts correctly, getting the weld correct without warping the receiver parts, and the fact that quality aftermarket receivers are so readily available for very fair prices, it would be an exercise in frustration. No, an exercise in masochism!
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That would be a really inefficient way of doing the job, and would almost certainly produce an inferior product.
There would have to be some REALLY important reason to do that as opposed to getting a brand new (just about better than original) Nodakspud receiver shell and doing the job "right."
Why would you want this done as a re-weld?
There would have to be some REALLY important reason to do that as opposed to getting a brand new (just about better than original) Nodakspud receiver shell and doing the job "right."
Why would you want this done as a re-weld?
I want it done as a re-weld because:
1) I'm not content with having a Mutt rifle
2) I want to preserve the history
I highly doubt it will make an inferior product if it is done right.
tyeo098
Member
You still have to follow 922r, and the receiver counts as one of the 'parts.'
So without it, you have to replace a different part.
So without it, you have to replace a different part.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
You'll end up with 30% of the receiver replaced (they don't give you the middle bit -- and you can't have the 3rd axis pin hole drilled, so you'd have to replace that part anyway) and the fire control group replaced anyway. So, the only difference is going to be saving the original 1/3 of the front and 1/3 of the rear of the receiver shell itself.
Now, as to a "Mutt" rifle, you will have to follow 922(r) regardless, so you'll be replacing a number of parts anyway, just to remain in compliance. Keeping a re-weld version of the receiver would only mean you'd have to replace some other perfectly good part to stay legal. Doesn't make any sense.
That's not possible. You're functionally changing the receiver, subjecting it to serious heat and warpage issues, and then will have to throw away six parts anyway. (http://gunwiki.net/Gunwiki/BuildAkVerifyCompliance)
If you want to preserve the rifle in its pristine condition, you'll need to find a transferrable machine gun and pay dearly for it. Any semi-auto conversion you'll find is not a pristine piece of history.
I have to give you the benefit of the doubt that you have some idea of how gunsmithing and metal fabrication is done, but the idea of re-welding a 1.0 mm thick sheet metal receiver shell, and restoring proper heat-treat, and grinding it all smooth again (I assume inside as well as outside?) and mounting new receiver rails and cross-member, and not having it warp all to uselessness ... well, that's going to be quite a trick.
And expensive. And then you'll just have to throw away some other bit 'cause you "saved" your receiver.
Or maybe you won't. By the time you've done that much work to it, you'll almost certainly be able to claim that it is "US made".
Seriously, though, this is not worth a gunsmith's time to even talk to you about it. All lose, no win.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
And if the weld breaks somewhere down the road?
You get a bolt carrier and a big nasty spring & guide rod in the face!
Bad mojo.
rc
You get a bolt carrier and a big nasty spring & guide rod in the face!
Bad mojo.
rc
Last edited:
Armchair Bronco
Member
Eight posts into the thread, and the poor guy still hasn't had anyone address his core question.
With all due respect to the folks who took the time to answer, I've noticed on this subforum on the site (e.g. gunsmithing) that if someone asks a question "off the beaten path", the responses are generally are of the "Why in the hell would you want to do that?" variety having nothing to do with the original question. (Ask me how I know this...)
The guy was asking for feedback on folks who could do the welding job he wants to have done. That's not the same thing as asking "Hey, do you guys think this would be a bad idea?"
Just my 2 cents...
With all due respect to the folks who took the time to answer, I've noticed on this subforum on the site (e.g. gunsmithing) that if someone asks a question "off the beaten path", the responses are generally are of the "Why in the hell would you want to do that?" variety having nothing to do with the original question. (Ask me how I know this...)
The guy was asking for feedback on folks who could do the welding job he wants to have done. That's not the same thing as asking "Hey, do you guys think this would be a bad idea?"
Just my 2 cents...
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
The OP has presented himself as new to the concept he's investigating. The way he's framed his question and responses indicates that there are matters informative to the subject that he is not aware of, or had not considered.
Those matters are significant enough to make the entire premise of the question moot. (I.e.: the 922(r) issue alone makes the question without merit, even if the cost would not be extreme and the result would not be unsatisfactory.)
So, we can tell him, "No," and send him away no less enlightened than when he came.
Or we can educate him -- "No, because...," and give him information that will make him a more informed enthusiast.
...
As a parallel, one question with two answers:
Q: "I'm planning to walk to Hawaii. Should I turn right at the next light?"
A1: "No."
A2: "No, because walking to Hawaii isn't practically possible due to the wee bit of water in the way."
Sometimes folks really get annoyed when we don't stick to the "A1" answer, leaving the questioner in the dark, no closer to his goal, and potentially all wet.
Seems like the "High Road" thing to do to try and be more helpful.
dirtyjim
Member
to actually do what your asking legally one would have to be a licensed manufacture not just a gunsmith. atf changed the rules a few years ago on what is considered gunsmithing and what is considered manufacturing. this would fall under manufacturing if someone was to reweld the receiver for you.
your best bet would be to try making your own receiver from one of the receiver flats that are available or downloading one of the tepmlates and making your own receiver from sheetmetal. i used to sell the screw kits to builders years ago but since the cheap parts kits pretty much gone i haven't put together any of the screw kits in a while
- Status