Romanian SAR-1 vs. Bulgarian SLR

[WonderNine]

What are the pros and cons of each. I'm thinking of upgrading my SAR-1 to an SLR, but I don't know if I want to spend that much on a 7.62X39mm rifle. I also like the Robinson Arms and VPER's. I've seen new SLR's advertised at $479.

I understand the SLR's are milled steel while the SAR-1 is stamped. Does anybody have an SLR that they feel is reasonably accurate @ 100 yards?

What are some other differences between the two?

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Looked at an SLR at the shop last weekend---compared to the SAR-1-------the quality of the SLR is off the scale-------there is really no comparison to these rifles of than the 7.62x39 chambering and they both use AK mags.

 

[WonderNine]

How is the trigger on the SLR? I don't get slap with my SAR-1, but the trigger pull is long and creepy and has two stages, but it is not too heavy. It reminds me of the trigger on Phoenix Arms HP-22's. In other words, it's pretty bad. I hate to sell it though, it's never jammed on me in the 300-400 rounds I've put through it.

 

[RevDisk]

You get what you pay for.

 

[MAKOwner]

One of my best friends/shooting buddies has had a SLR-95 for nearly a decade now I guess, purchased back in '95 or '96 I guess and I've shot it quite a lot. It's definitely a nice fit and finish AK, but as far as accuracy/reliablility/etc is concerned it's not any better then my Romanian guns. I personally don't like the milled receiver since it adds like a whole freakin pound of weight yet gives you zero benefit as there is nothing at all wrong with the stamped receiver setups... Mine feel much more handy to just grab and go. The SLR has a damn smooth action and I seem to recall the trigger being pretty nice too. But like I said where it really counts function wise it's not any better at all... Of course I do have a pair of fairly nice SARs, literally 100% straight with good triggers and now refinished wood, etc...

I wish I had picked one up for the $295 bucks he got his for at a local gunshow back when they were new and plentiful, but I don't want to spend nearly $500 on one now.... Then when you figure in converting to a pistil grip stock setup wth the US parts it's getting on up there in the cost. Of course Arsenal, Inc sells the converted SLR101s I think it is for under $500, might be the way to go if you just have to have one...

 

[dfariswheel]

If I'm careful about basic marksmanship, my SLR-96 will group within 2" at 100 yards. For an AK-47, that's Match rifle accuracy.

The Arsenal SLR 95 and 96 both have hammer forged barrels with chrome bores and chambers.
Supposedly, these are rated to last AT LEAST 25,000 rounds.

The SLR is the Cadillac of AK's. If you can find one and afford it, it's as good as it gets, and better than most anything else out there.

 

[bad_dad_brad]

I like my Romanian SAR-1 but she ain't no Bushmaster AR-15. Then again she cost ($320) me about a third as much ($875).

The AK in any form is what it is, a robust, 100 yard accurate, effective semi-automatic weapon. I just wouldn't pay a lot for them.

 

[Gewehr98]

Having owned and shot both stamped and milled...

I'll take the milled Bulgarian SLR over the stamped Maadi/Norinco/SAR/WASR clones when it comes to accuracy, fit, and finish, thank you!

 

[Dionysusigma]

Back when I bought my SAR-1, my reasons were 1) cheap ammo, 2) cheap mags, 3) inexpensive gun and 4) reliable as a screwdriver. It's served me well over the months.

But do I want an Arsenal SAM-7S or VEPR II 7.62x39? Uh, yeah!
Either fit all of my above criteria, but are MUCH better made. It's like comparing go-kart with a 3500 Dodge Ram. Both'll get you places, but one is obviously a hell of a lot better (and, in turn, is reflected by the price).

One thing I've heard, tho--SLRs have cast trigger groups. Not sure if it's true or not, but it's a moot point anyhow if you're gonna install an RSA trigger.

 

[SteelyDan]

I've handled and shot both, and the SLR-95 looks and feels a lot more solid. And it probably is. I wish I owned one. It definitely has better fit and finish. But when it came to punching holes in targets, I really couldn't tell the difference. Maybe because my eyes aren't that great, and we weren't doing benchrest shooting. If I won the lottery tomorrow I'd get an SLR-95 in a heartbeat--it's a great gun. In the meantime, I think the SAR is functionally more similar than the price differential between the two would suggest (especially with an upgraded trigger group).

 

[goalie]

What do you want it for? I love my SAR-1. It always goes bang when I squeeze the trigger, and it shoots 1/2 MOBG (minute of bad guy) at 100 yards. It also weighs less than a milled receiver AK does. A lot less.

When I want to drive tacks, I use a different rifle.

When I think someone may be wanting to come into my house without asking, well, in the front of the safe is my SAR-1 and on the shelf are 8 loaded Bulgie waffle mags.

I have shot the "polished" AKs. To me, it is not like comparing a Lexus to a jeep, it is like comparing a jeep to a pimped out, highly polished jeep. I don't need my tools pretty, I just need them to work.

If you want a tack driver, for less money you could have a .308 bolt gun that shoots circles around any AK.

 

[Warner]

Very well said goalie.....a full 1/2 ton of common sense there. I too see little little reason to chose the extra weight of a milled AK.

 

[RevDisk]

AK clones are (supposed to be) cheap, reliable and fun. You can buy expensive AK clones that are rather accurate...

For the purposes of most posters, a SAR-1 will fit the bill nicely. If you have extra cash and want a more accurate AK clone, by all means buy one. If you're looking for a tackdriver, it's most cost effective to shop for another weapon.

To each their own.

 

[Gewehr98]

Sure, you can get an accurate .308 bolt gun...

But that's not what the original poster of this thread asked for, was it?

Apples and oranges. When he asks about a tack-driving bolt gun in another thread, be sure to send an AK comment his way, ok?

He asked if there were SLR's (a variant of the AK) that were reasonably accurate. The milled Bulgarian SLR's just happen to fit that category. Cheap, reliable, fun, *and* fairly accurate, see target above, fired with this rifle:





Cheap is a relative thing, I bought my Bulgie SLR-95 for $219.95 when they hit these shores, and now wish I had bought several more at the time.

And the extra weight of a milled vs. stamped AK is what, all of one 30-round magazine's worth at worst? Puhleeze! What biathlon or long-distance counter-insurgency is the average American AK owner supporting? Those duct-taped trauma plates on one's back weigh considerably more.

If your tired arms can't physically swing the extra weight of a milled receiver AK, fear not. There's the older Yugoslavian AK variants, which have a thicker stamped receiver, on the order of 1.5-1.6mm thickness. They sometimes pop up for sale here and there.

 

[goalie]

The guy asked for opinions on pros and cons. I gave mine. It's nice that you like your SLR, I'm happy for you. I just don't think that the SLR has much to offer to someone who already owns an SAR-1, esecially considering the price difference.

FWIW, my SAR is "reasonably accurate." That was kinda the point about the tack driver comment. Neither the SLR nor the SAR are precision rifles. By "upgrading you may get a slight increase in accuracy, but you are mainly paying for fit and finish, two things that really don't affect the reliability of an AKM type rifle at all. That is why I asked what exactly he wanted to upgrade for in my post.

 

[WonderNine]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I think based on what was said and looking at the rifle I'm going to stick with the stamped receiver. If I wanted something heavier I might as well go with a semi-auto .308.

The thing is when you upgrade the SAR-1 with a better trigger you still have an SAR-1 fit and finish wise with a stamped reciever, but you've now paid almost as much as for an SLR... I think I'm gonna leave my crappy trigger as is for now unless I find a screaming deal on a better one.

 

[SteelyDan]

WonderNine, just to be clear, the trigger upgrade on the SARs isn't anywhere near as expensive as getting the SLR. I got a Tapco upgrade on a group buy (with trigger, hammer, disconnector) for like $32. More normal would be somewhere around $40-$70. Even so, the upgraded SAR is still gonna be a whole lot less than the SLR. Plus, you don't have to do the trigger upgrade; it's just an option if you later decide to go that route.

 

[WonderNine]

How does it improve the trigger?

 

[DrDremel]

As I have owned both I can speak from experience. The SLR 95 is nice looking but shoots as accurate as any average AK. The SAR will do everything the SLR will do but is much lighter. Just my opinion.

 

[SteelyDan]

WonderNine, an upgraded trigger group is not a miracle cure, but it does improve the Century trigger group in the following ways:

1. Seems like a significant percentage of SAR owners experience some trigger slap on the trigger finger. I don't know what the percentage is, but if I had to guess it might be around 30 or 35 percent. I got some fairly nasty trigger slap after about 300 rounds. There's a dremel fix that usually works, but it didn't work for me. Anyway, it becomes a non-issue with the upgraded trigger group.

2. The stock Century trigger group is perfectly functional, but not exactly smooth. There are several upgraded trigger groups available, and some are better than the one I got, but generally speaking the trigger weight will be reduced and it will break sooner, more smoothly, and more crisply.

3. My personal belief, based on examining a grand total of two Century trigger groups, is that the design specifications, or the execution thereof, leave something to be desired. First time I looked at my disconnector I couldn't believe how little metal there was on one side of the hole. With the upgraded group, you probably won't have those concerns.

So again, my belief is that the SLR is easily the better overall platform. But for roughly half the price, the SAR is also a great gun, and upgrading the trigger group (or "fire control group") may be a cost efficient way to help narrow the gap between the two.