Gonna Grab an AK, probably an Arsenal

[Girodin]

but it will look very different from a real AK and lack the quality

It will look different, unless one also adds traditional handguards, but the Arsenals I've seen don't have any "quality" advantage over converted saigas I've seen. If one is just after looks the Arsenal might be worth looking at. In terms of function they don't offer anything over a converted saiga, and are likely inferior to a purpose built converted saiga.

I set my guns up for function and thus converting a saiga has always offered a significant price advantage to get the gun in the configuration I want.

 

[nathan]

CAI Polish milled AKs are nice for less money. Nonchromelined barrel is a nonissue as long you clean it with water and the proper lubrication afterwards.

 

[Shear_stress]

It will look different, unless one also adds traditional handguards, but the Arsenals I've seen don't have any "quality" advantage over converted saigas I've seen. If one is just after looks the Arsenal might be worth looking at. In terms of function they don't offer anything over a converted saiga, and are likely inferior to a purpose built converted saiga.

That's a pretty bold statement. The problem I've seen with converted Saigas is that every yahoo with a drill press thinks he's Tony Rumore. Now, I'm on the fence when it comes to Arsenal, but you're basically arguing that those converted Saigas out there with buggered up axis holes from over zealous drilling, trigger guards held on with screws, unpainted surfaces exposed by relocating the trigger guard, bullet guides installed by someone who thought you run a tap in a drill (I'll try to find the post), etc are of the same quality as Arsenal.

I set my guns up for function and thus converting a saiga has always offered a significant price advantage to get the gun in the configuration I want.

I did a bare bones Saiga conversion and it was cheap and fun. Still, I didn't crow about what a great value it was, because unless you do the absolute minimum it really doesn't save any money. Saigas aren't $189 any more.

 

[aka108]

Arsenal does a good job on the Saigas from what I've seen. Guess if I was in the market for a AK I'd go with one of theirs. (I have a milled Arsenal from years ago). On the other hand, if you can live without the AK appearance, a stock Siaga is just as accurate and equally fun to shoot as the Arsenal. All a matter of how much money you wish to spend.

 

[philpost]

I bought an Arsenal SGL-20 over a year ago for $699, and I've been perfectly happy with it. I wasn't set up to do a conversion myself (lived in a rental with no tools), and it feels better in my hands in terms of fit & furniture than other AK's I've fired. Can a well done conversion be just as good? Probably, but I just wanted something nicely put together straight out of the box. I can honestly say I haven't regretted the purchase even once.

 

[Gelgoog]

Mostly what Arsenal does is take the imported Saigas, make them 922r compliant & convert them to the "assault" configuration. You could do this yourself for a fraction of the price or twice as much depending on the 922r parts and how you go about it. You would need a few tools to do it.

No not quite. What arsenal does is not only make them 922 compliant, but they return the rifles to AK-100 spec...something that you in fact can not do cheaper then they can, because buying all of the parts needed for such a conversion will cost you just as much/more.

 

[Girodin]

That's a pretty bold statement. The problem I've seen with converted Saigas is that every yahoo with a drill press thinks he's Tony Rumore.[/QUOTE

Putting a pistol grip on one hardly requires Tony Rumore skill or knowledge. We are not talking about building an 8" SBS that will run light loads. A pistol grip conversion on a rifle doesn't really take much skill and doesn't mess with anything complicated or that will change function that much. As long as you can install an AK FCG, and drill and tap a whole and bolt in a bullet guide, it will work and run fine. I've seen arsenals with canted sights and other issues. They are selling name more than quality.

but you're basically arguing that those converted Saigas out there with buggered up axis holes from over zealous drilling, trigger guards held on with screws, unpainted surfaces exposed by relocating the trigger guard, bullet guides installed by someone who thought you run a tap in a drill (I'll try to find the post), etc are of the same quality as Arsenal.

If you think that is what I'm a arguing you might want to actually read what I wrote. I'll put it below for you.

he Arsenals I've seen don't have any "quality" advantage over converted saigas I've seen.

Re-read that. Think about it and let it sink in before you misrepresent what I said.

I'm sure that people can screw up anything but I believe when it comes to saiga conversions that is certainly the exception. Anyone with a modicum of mechanical ability, who takes their time to learn what to do and takes their time doing it should be able to handle it just fine.

trigger guards held on with screws

Yeah that is pretty much a non issue, I've never heard of one coming off. You could actually stick on in and use no screws and the tension between the mag latch and the grip will hold it very secure. I wouldn't do that but one screwed in will stay put.

they return the rifles to AK-100 spec...something that you in fact can not do cheaper then they can, because buying all of the parts needed for such a conversion will cost you just as much/more.

Calling the AK100 spec is an overstatement, no happy switch. That said it is true that if you are going for that look an arsenal may or may not be the cheapest way to go. It depends on what parts you have or where you can buy them and what work you can do yourself. If having that particular look is not your highest priority there are better buys.

 

[Shear_stress]

Re-read that. Think about it and let it sink in before you misrepresent what I said.

Mispresent? All I can do this is read what you write:

It will look different, unless one also adds traditional handguards, but the Arsenals I've seen don't have any "quality" advantage over converted saigas I've seen.

Before you start throwing around pissy language, stop, take a deep breath, and allow yourself to consider that other people might have a different definition of quality. You seem hung-up on the functionality of the gun. To me, this represents the absolute rock bottom of what constitutes "quality". Call me an elitest, but I also like a gun that doesn't look like crap, as many of the converted rifle I've seen look despite your assurances of the fool-proof nature of the conversion.

And maybe I'm just crazy, but I've never seen a Chinese, Bulgarian, Hungarian, Russian or Romanian AK slapped together with screws. Seems like your definition of quality isn't shared by any country that actually produces AKs, and most of those countries are damn well concerned with functionality above all.

I know you are a Saiga DIY evangelist, but for the love of god look past your narrow definitions and try to understand that some people might want something different than you.

 

[-v-]

I have an SGL-21, and I have handled several Saiga conversions. What I can say is that the fit and finish on the SGL-21 tends to be much better then the conversions. Some guys can bang out a great conversions, others...eh...it runs.

While it is true that the SGL-21's are imported in "import" configuration, I suspect that that configuration is a interim setup to get around import laws and would be very hard if not impossible to actually shoot. Things that leads me to believe this is one the lack of drilled out rivet holes in the back of the receiver for the hunting stock. Sure, they may have been welded over and then ground flat and seamless with the receiver, but Occam's razor screams the more likely answer was that they were never there.

Example 2 is the lack of a cut for the bolt-hold-open lever inside the trigger guard. Again, I find it unlikely that they went through all the effort to fill the cutout and grind it to a seamless state versus it simply not being there.

Is the SGL-21 an imported Saiga? Yes. Is it the Saiga you can pick up at the LGS? My suspicion is no. Its most likely an intermediate configuration set up so as to get around import laws and make any conversion as simple and hassle-free on the receiving end as possible. Thus, you what Arsenal imports is more likely a 90% built SGL-21, that they then swap some parts out and make it 922(r) compliant and look like the Arsenal's we're so used to seeing.

 

[Girodin]

Before you start throwing around pissy language, stop, take a deep breath, and allow yourself to consider that other people might have a different definition of quality. You seem hung-up on the functionality of the gun. To me, this represents the absolute rock bottom of what constitutes "quality". Call me an elitest, but I also like a gun that doesn't look like crap, as many of the converted rifle I've seen look despite your assurances of the fool-proof nature of the conversion.

I'll spell it out for you. The key language in the sentence I wrote was "that I've seen".

I know you are a Saiga DIY evangelist, but for the love of god look past your narrow definitions and try to understand that some people might want something different than you.

I think I pretty clearly stated that if one is after a 100 series look alike the arsenal ight be the best buy. Again, reading comprehension helps, as does not putting words in peoples mouths.

 

[Shear_stress]

I'll spell it out for you. The key language in the sentence I wrote was "that I've seen".

That you've seen? Well I guess everybody else must have seen the others. Some of the Saiga conversions I've seen looked pretty sad. If you saw an Arsenal with a canted barrel, okay, but Arsenal doesn't put the barrel on, Izhmash does. Any problems with Izhmash's quality would affect the sporter Saigas just as much.

I think I pretty clearly stated that if one is after a 100 series look alike the arsenal ight be the best buy. Again, reading comprehension helps, as does not putting words in peoples mouths.

So I guess we are a bunch of illiterates talking to eachother. The whole Arsenal thing is not just about the look, but attempting, more or less succesfully, to restore most of the features and quality of an AK-103 (without the full auto, of course). But I guess countries that actually make these guns are so focussed on looks that they go to extravagant lengths like using threaded FSBs and fancy rivets to attached parts.

Look, we both know that a competently converted Saiga is a perfectly functional rifle. That is not in dispute. But to act like a decent quality factory conversion--one that mainly just restores the factory features within legal limits--is merely about looks is pure bunk.

How about this: you do what you want and I'll do what I want. As I've said several times already, I have no beef with people who just want a functional rifle. I've done my own Saiga conversions to that end. On the other hand, I'd respectfully ask that you reconsider your apparent view that wanting a rifle that more closely conforms to Izhmash factory standards is about looks alone.

 

[Girodin]

Again reading what I actually wrote would help advance the conversation.

I've seen looked pretty sad. If you saw an Arsenal with a canted barrel, okay, but Arsenal doesn't put the barrel on, Izhmash does. Any problems with Izhmash's quality would affect the sporter Saigas just as much.

Sights not barrel, the Arsenal has a different front sight block no?

Well I guess everybody else must have seen the others

So you extrapolate your experiences to be those of "everybody else"? Interesting. Honestly, I've never seen first hand a butchered conversion. I've seen pics of mangled S12 someone sent Tromix. Even frequenting the S12 forums for years I've seen many good conversion and precious few someone botched. Of those they could have likely avoided their problems with a tiny amount of care.

That is not in dispute. But to act like a decent quality factory conversion--one that mainly just restores the factory features within legal limits--is merely about looks is pure bunk.

Well there are, depending on uses, more functional items than what comes from the factory. What's functional depends on the intended use. What comes on an Arsenal that greatly improves function over something one could relatively easily do at home?

It can't be the brake because sporters are now coming in with threaded barrels under the shroud of the sight block. Cut it off and screw on a brake.

Its not the hand guards. I, and many I've discussed it with, find them inferior to even the sporter hand guard. For my money and uses there are certainly better options than either.

Perhaps the polymer folding stock. It is a matter that is debatable I suppose, but I personally believe there are other very good folding stock options. Further would that feature alone justify the price such rifles command versus just installing one? Maybe, that depends on a few factors.

What else besides hand guards with less surface area, which aren't well suited to using a shooting sling, and which don't have rails; a muzzle brake and perhaps a folder stock is there? Oh, I know, a cleaning rod that is attached. That must be the big functional advantage (never mind that there are other ways to have full cleaning supplies and various tools on the gun).

How about this: you do what you want and I'll do what I want.

When has anyone suggested anything contrary? How about this. In a discussion forum you can offer your experiences and opinions, clearly denoting them as such, and I'll do the same.

I'd respectfully ask that you reconsider your apparent view that wanting a rifle that more closely conforms to Izhmash factory standards is about looks alone.

I'm not sure what else it would really be about. I think you could name any purpose (apart from just being a clone) and build a rifle that will be better for it by going outside the bounds of what is on a AK103. Aside from authenticity I'm not sure why else one would limit themselves. As discussed above, any functional items are rather easily added, and there is in most cases IMHO an even better choice of things to add, better brakes, better grips, better hand guards, better gas tube (ultimak), better stocks (depending on use, I will say I like the polymer folders but for some uses there are doubtlessly better choices).

Further, there are some other platforms that are probably worth at least looking at if one is going to spend $1200 ( http://www.k-var.com/shop/product.php?productid=17700&cat=353&page=1 ) on an AK. This is true even if one is after what an AK is thought to bring to the table.

If an Arsenal offers the best value in getting someone the features they are after then they might want to look in that direction. I personally wouldn't buy from a Harry Reid campaign contributor either way, but that's just me.

I take no issue with people buying what they deem the best value that offers what they are after. Aside from that list including a particular look, I believe a Arsenal AK will rarely be the best value. Feel free to disagree on that point.

 

[Cryogaijin]

My take on the Saiga conversion issue: If someone like me, who has quite unsteady hands for using powertools, and a tiny little apartment for workspace, can do a conversion that functions flawlessly on the first attempt, it is pretty damn "foolproof."

 

[Shear_stress]

So you extrapolate your experiences to be those of "everybody else"? Interesting.

Just pointing out that two can play at the whole "ones I've seen game." You've seen ones that looked good, I've seen ones that looked bad.

Well there are, depending on uses, more functional items than what comes from the factory. . . That must be the big functional advantage (never mind that there are other ways to have full cleaning supplies and various tools on the gun).

Okay, so now we agree that the features that come with SGL are functional and more than about just looks. However, just because there are features available that you like more (some of which I don't see offering a substantial functional improvement) is irrelevent. As I've said several times, this rifle gets you back to a more or less what Izhmash would ship us if we could import it.

I take no issue with people buying what they deem the best value that offers what they are after. Aside from that list including a particular look, I believe a Arsenal AK will rarely be the best value. Feel free to disagree on that point.

Okay, so all our bickering comes down to this. You feel the SGL is not a good value because it doesn't offer the features you like or that you could get a rifle you'd be satisified with for less. I feel it is a decent value because these days it would cost just as much if not more for someone at home to properly restore a sporter Saiga to how it should have left the factory, and that Izhmash does nothing just for looks.

 

[Moose458]

Better than an AK is a VZ-58. CAIthe VZ-2008 for about $350.00-$400.00, or you can get a real Czech CZ vz-58 from Czechpoint-usa.com for $800.00. They are really worth your time to check them out. My AKs pretty much sit in the safe since I got my CZ vz-58.

 

[Shear_stress]

My AKs pretty much sit in the safe since I got my CZ vz-58.

Same here.

The irony of this thread is that I'm on the fence when it comes to Arsenal, which is a decent, not great, manufacturer. However, I have a problem with what I see as simple product preference masked by questionable assertions that Arsenal's SGLs are on average lower in quality or value than home built guns, or that they offer nothing in terms of functionality. I feel that the opinions of the avid pro Saiga conversion crowd were formed when the guns and parts were a lot cheaper than they are now. To me, a lot of the air has gone out of the "value balloon" in the past few years.

On the bright side, though our exchange here has been snide, it's no where near as ugly it can get on other forums, where anyone who makes a different choice is seen as a sucker or poser.

 

[Girodin]

Just pointing out that two can play at the whole "ones I've seen game." You've seen ones that looked good, I've seen ones that looked bad.

I don't think it is a game per se, more the purpose of message boards like this. I think everyone benefits from hearing peoples experiences which are often different. No one came along and twisted your statement in order to attack it did they.

Okay, so now we agree that the features that come with SGL are functional and more than about just looks.

If by that you mean that we agree a brake can be functional (but the one on the SGL probably isn't the best available and brakes and be added to other guns, and that a some SGLs have folding stocks which can be useful but may or may not be the best option for a particular user and folders can with varying degrees of difficulty and expense be added to other guns, then sure.

You feel the SGL is not a good value because it doesn't offer the features you like or that you could get a rifle you'd be satisified with for less. I feel it is a decent value because these days it would cost just as much if not more for someone at home to properly restore a sporter Saiga to how it should have left the factory, and that Izhmash does nothing just for looks.

I'd recast that as the following: I don't believe the Arsenal rifles are the best buy for some end users. We both agree that if one is after the set of features the SGL offers there is a good chance they will be the best value (I still wouldn't buy from them because of their financial support of Reid). If one is after the features offered for functional reasons as oppossed to getting an AK "that looks like an AK" there are better options. Getting and keeping an SGL is largely about looks for most buyers. There is little on those rifles that is about function that cannot be improved upon if one favored function over that particular look.

I feel that the opinions of the avid pro Saiga conversion crowd were formed when the guns and parts were a lot cheaper than they are now. To me, a lot of the air has gone out of the "value balloon" in the past few years.

The last part of that statement is true. When one could buy a saiga for $250 versus the $350 of today they were an even better value.

I think you believe I have a giant conversion bias. I don't per se. I do think at times it is the best route. I advocate that people look at how they plan to use the rifle, what things are important to them (it doesn't even bother me if looks are at the top of someone else's list) and then take a moment to look at what will meet their needs and best satisfy them. That might be a WASR 10, a Draco SBR, an Arsenal, a very basic saiga conversion, a purpose built saiga conversion, or ...

 

[Shear_stress]

I think you believe I have a giant conversion bias. I don't per se. I do think at times it is the best route. I advocate that people look at how they plan to use the rifle, what things are important to them (it doesn't even bother me if looks are at the top of someone else's list) and then take a moment to look at what will meet their needs and best satisfy them. That might be a WASR 10, a Draco SBR, an Arsenal, a very basic saiga conversion, a purpose built saiga conversion, or ...

Fair enough. I appreciate the chance to hash this out, as it's been on my mind for a while. I think we've both made some cogent points.

 

[zephyr89]

Wow, very spirited. My people. Thanks for all of the feedback guys, I bought an SGL21 yesterday!