Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NEW WASR vs. SAR-1

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by briang2ad, Nov 6, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. briang2ad

    briang2ad Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    671
    I read plenty of posts of folks who with newer WASRs have better experiences, and generally are as accurate as SAIGAs and Arsenals.

    So... are they as good or better than the old SAR-1s which became very popular once they were gone...?
     
  2. Bovice

    Bovice Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,593
    My friend was shopping around for an AK style rifle back in March/April. We went to gun shows and looked at lots of different makes of AK style rifle.... But to me, they all pretty much looked exactly the same. Seemed to be of the same construction and similar if not identical materials. He went with a WASR and I think it probably shoots as well as any of the other ones out there. The bolt cycles nicely, the bore was in good shape, and the stocks weren't bad. They weren't finished as nicely as some that we saw, but a little bit of wood stain would fix that.

    As far as I know, he hasn't had any failure to fire for any reason, shooting steel case wolf/brown bear or the winchester brass stuff. Only investment I think I would make is a red dot and a mount for it. The sights just suck, and its easy to get the rear notch maladjusted for elevation. But this is coming from an AR guy, so take that for what it's worth to you.
     
  3. nalioth

    nalioth Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,841
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    From a quality standpoint, they should be equal or better.

    Today's WASRs are made from surplussed Romanian military Kalashnikovs. Every commercial Kalashnikov to come out of Romania from the early WASR era and before used parts rejected for military service.

    IMHO, you're still better off buying and converting a Saiga, as it's made from all-new non-rejected parts (many right off the military assembly line). You just don't know if the WASR you're buying came from the Romanian military test-to-destruction batch . . .
     
  4. Packman

    Packman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    826
    Location:
    Southwest Florida
    Should be ok. Just watch out for a canted front sight block or gas block. Some of them have problems with this. It can be fixed, but it's a pain. Easier to just check ahead of time. If you look down the barrel as you're holding it in a firing position, it should make itself relatively obvious.

    I have the WASR, mine has a canted front sight block. I'll get around to fixing it someday. Right now, I haven't shot it in a couple years. I wish I'd known to look for that when I bought it, but I was young and dumb.

    Other than that, you should be good to go with either.
     
  5. W.E.G.

    W.E.G. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    7,392
    Location:
    all over Virginia
    Where did you hear this, and what constitutes a "rejected" part?

    With a condemnation like that, I'd think we would be hearing about SAR and WASR failures left and right.

    ...crickets.
     
  6. mshootnit

    mshootnit Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,074
    Dad's got an SAR-1 which is a Clinton ban era AK with no muzzle device or bayonet lug. The rifle is pretty cool and I found the quality to be OK. I think the new WASR's are on par with that rifle. I don't think you would be disappointed.
     
  7. Dionysusigma

    Dionysusigma Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    3,671
    Location:
    Okay City
    The triggers in present-day WASRs are much nicer feeling than my old SAR-1. That's without firing, though--the SAR had a nasty case of trigger slap going on that nearly ruined the whole hobby of shooting for me early on. Aside from that, they seem fairly comparable in terms of quality. Not so much a fan of the "laminated" wood furniture, though...
     
  8. nalioth

    nalioth Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,841
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    If you read what you quoted, I said "rejected for military service", not "rejected for safety" or "rejected for overall quality". There have been many WASRs reported with bad barrel chrome, odd shaped parts, etc. None of which affect safety.

    THe military has standards for it's equipment. Some of these standards make no sense to a civilian, but fwiw, the Romanians recycled their military rejects for more than a decade, and are now recycling their old military rifles.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page