Scoping my AK and my FAL using a Picatinny base...

[saturno_v]

As far as I know, if i want to avoid drilling holes on the side of the receiver (both my Mak-90 and my STG58 do not have side rail) my only option is to get o of these receiver cover with integrated Picatinny rails.

It seems to me that they are not firm and stable enough and I heard someone that the resulting accuracy is horrible...

Any ideas, suggestions???


Thanks

 

[W L Johnson]

Apples and oranges.
The AK dust cover mounts give optic mounts a bad name for the most part, loose and they have to be removed for cleaning. You're lucky if they maintain any kind of zero. The FAL ones on the other hand are for the most part rock solid and don't need to be removed for cleaning.

 

[Hopkins]

I have the dustcover picatinny base on a FAL. It was quite good initially delivering sub moa groups out of a SAR 48. My groups have since opened up with the same loads and I have yet to locate the cause. Chances are the trigger in your FAL will rob you of more accuracy than the dustcover base.

 

[saturno_v]

Thank you guys!!!

 

[Robert]

I have the DSA railed cover on my FAL and it is rock solid. I mounted a Nikon M223 I had laying around in medium Burris Zee rings and it is perfect for me. Groups better than irons, but the real test will come when I use it in competition this year.

 

[Adam123]

For the AK:

http://texasweaponsystems.com/id1.html

My advice: Get good with irons.

 

[BruceB]

The DSA mount is VERY rigid when properly installed.

Mine has been in use for a couple of years to date, and has not shifted sat all, as far as I can tell.

Note that it's NOT an "easy-off" or quick-detachable mount, but it does no harm at all to leave it in place for iron-sight work.