SLR-106FR new AK by arsenal

[xd9fan]

Any thoughts on the new SLR-106FR coming out by Arsenal.
www.arsenalinc.com/about.htm
Dont own one but would like to.

 

[Spencer]

Looks very nice. Arsenal makes excellent guns.

The only thing I don't like about the gun is the stamped reciever, but if it's made by Arsenal, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I don't see the issue with the stamped receiver. The AK earned its reputation for durability and reliability with the stamped receiver rifles. The AKM and most other widely distributed models, including the AK-74, had stamped receivers. It isn't an issue.

As for the rifle, I'd own one. Looks nice!

 

[Spencer]

I don't see the issue with the stamped receiver. The AK earned its reputation for durability and reliability with the stamped receiver rifles. The AKM and most other widely distributed models, including the AK-74, had stamped receivers. It isn't an issue.

As for the rifle, I'd own one. Looks nice!

The original AK-47s, the first ones, made by Russia, had milled receivers. These were reliable and mostly earned the gun its reputation. Chinese copies of the AK-47 still have the reputation for reliability but are cheap and poorly made.

The issue with the stamped reciever is durability. A milled receiver is milled down into a receiver from a 10 lb block of steel. A stamped receiver on the other hand is made out of sheet metal, welded together. Milled is obviously more durable. Stamped is cheaper and easier to produce.

This probably wouldnt be an issue for a modern shooter since I'm assuming you wouldnt be using it for warfare. Still, I would take a milled receiver over a stamped one.

And yes, I would own this gun. Nothing is WRONG with it, I just, personally, like milled receivers better. And maybe with Arsenal the stamped receivers arent an issue.

 

[tI2ouI3LesoIVIe]

GOOD GUN

I have a friend that has one by Arsenal. They are a good and reliable AK derivation. You wanna see a gem? They have a REAL Russian Druganov SVD NIB for sale on Gunbroker.com, well at least yesterday they did.

 

[American By Blood]

The original AK-47s, the first ones, made by Russia, had milled receivers. These were reliable and mostly earned the gun its reputation.

Not true.

If I remember correctly, the Soviets barely issued any milled AKs. They required the design overhaul that lead to the AKM before widespread issuance. One of the changes was the thinner stamped receiver.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

There were many difficulties during the initial phase of production. The first production models had stamped sheet metal receivers. Difficulties were encountered welding the guide and ejector rails causing high rejection rates.[7] Instead of halting production, a heavy machined receiver was substituted for the sheet metal receiver.[8] This was a more costly process, but the use of machined receivers accelerated production as tooling and labor for the earlier Mosin-Nagant rifle's machined receiver were easily adapted. Partly because of these problems, the Soviets were not able to distribute large numbers of the new rifle to soldiers until 1956. During this time, production of the interim SKS rifle continued.[9]

Once manufacturing difficulties had been overcome, a redesigned version designated the AKM (M for modernized or upgraded—in Russian: Автомат Калашникова Модернизированный) was introduced in 1959.[10] This new model used a stamped sheet metal receiver and featured a slanted muzzle brake on the end of the barrel to compensate for muzzle rise under recoil. In addition, a hammer retarder was added in order to prevent the weapon from firing out of battery (without the bolt being fully closed) during rapid or automatic fire.[11] This is also sometimes referred to as a "cyclic rate reducer", or simply "rate reducer", as it also has the effect of reducing the number of rounds fired per minute during automatic fire. It was also lighter than the previous model, roughly two-thirds of the weight.[12] Both licensed and unlicensed production of the Kalashnikov weapons abroad were almost exclusively of the AKM, partially due to the much easier production of the stamped receiver. This model is the most commonly encountered, having been produced in much greater quantities. All rifles based on the Kalashnikov design are frequently referred to as AK-47s in the West, although this is only correct when applied to rifles based on the original 3 receiver types.[13] In most former Eastern Bloc countries, the weapon is known simply as the "Kalashnikov". The photo at right illustrates the differences between the Type 2 milled receiver and the Type 4 stamped, including the use of rivets rather than welds on the stamped receiver, as well as the placement of a small dimple above the magazine well for stabilization.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47

China as well as Bulgaria, if I am not mistaken, manufactured both stamped and milled receiver rifles. The milled receiver rifles are arguably more durable and accurate, but not so much so that it the improvements were deemed more important than the increase in production costs. The Finnish and Israelis both adopted or developed milled receiver weapons from the Kalashnikov family, and both the Valmet and the Galil are solid rifles, but they are heavier than any intermediate powered assault rifle should be and this alone largely negates any advantages they provide by making them impractical. If you're going to pack a 9 pound rifle, you can do so with a FAL or HK roller lock and gain the advantage of a more powerful cartridge and arguably better accuracy.

The stamped receiver AKs were the only ones to see widespread exporting and distribution. This was due directly to the fact that they are cheaper and easier to produce while being sufficently durable even in combat conditions to fire tens of thousands of rounds and suffer the basic abuse and neglect common in those conditions.

If you watch conflicts in Africa, the Middle East, and the Indies, the majority of the Kalashnikovs you will see are of the stamped receiver variety and easily identified as such by their lack of lightening cuts on the right side of the receiver, above the mag well. Many of these rifles have been bounced around in trucks, endured hardships and extremes of conditions, and general lack of maintence for several decades while remaining in working order. If there is a duribility issue with the Kalashnikov of any variety, I have yet to hear about it.

 

[Gixerman1000]

I own 6 Arsenal rifles (5 milled & 1 stamped) and I have been very happy with all of them, I just saw some pic’s of the SLR-106 tonight and I plan on buying one ASAP.

Arsenal SLR-105A1 --- 5.45x39.5
Arsenal SA M-5 G --- 5.56x45
Arsenal SA M-7 S --- 7.62x39
Arsenal SA M-7 SFC --- 7.62x39
Arsenal SAS M-7 Classic --- 7.62x39
Arsenal SAS M-7 Classic --- 7.62x39

 

[xd9fan]

What would be a great milled 7.62x39mm arsenal rifle?

Seems like there are so many models on the website. Hard to tell what the real diff is.

Gixerman1000 I like the SAM-7S and the SLR-105A1 you have. I dont understand these models yet. Still learning. (what make a SAM and what makes a SLR?)

 

[Evil Monkey]

There's nothing wrong with stamped recievers. Roller delayed HK rifles are stamped, no one talks about how they're less durable.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

If I had to guess I'd say the SLR were stamped receiver rifles and the SA Ms were milled. Whether that holds true over Arsenal's entire product line or just Gixerman's collection, I have no idea.

 

[Spencer]

Guys, all I'm trying to say here is that I would take a milled receiver over a stamped receiver because I like the higher quality, which I already said. I never said the milled receivers were more widely produced, I said the first AK-47s were produced with milled receivers.

And there's no doubt that these stamped receivers from Arsenal are great either, I just prefer a milled one.

On the HK delayed roller lock stamped rifles-
There isn't a problem with the gun, HK is a good company. But I don't like the fact that they wont sell their firearms to american citizens.
As for the Galil, it can be calibered in .308, so I don't see how an HK G3 or something of the like shoots a 'more powerful cartridge'. The delayed roller lock action also has more recoil than a gun that is gas-operated.

What would be a great milled 7.62x39mm arsenal rifle?

I like the looks of the SA-M7 classic and I heard they are great guns. We own an SA-M7 Carbine and it's an excellent gun. Both of these are milled and chambered for 7.62x39mm.

Recently though, Arsenal stopped producing some of the lines of their milled receiver AKs due to their commitment to make the stamped ones, and the SA-M7 Classic and SA-M7 Carbine lines were both discontinued.

 

[Gixerman1000]

All of the SLR models are imported from Bulgaria and are either sold with evil features removed or enough US made parts are added to allow it to be legal in the standard configuration.

The SA models are made in the US and for the most part are all in standard configuration.

There are 4 main models with a milled receiver chambered in 7.62x39

SLR-101 = For the most part the same as the SA M-7 but usually have a thumbhole stock, pinned muzzle brake and have had both the bayonet and cleaning rod mounts removed.

SA M-7 = Arsenal’s main platform in a milled 7.62x39 with several different variants and options.

SAS M-7 = underfolder model with a few different variants and options.

SA RPK-7 = RPK model with long extra heavy barrel, short stock and bipod.

The letters after the model number indicate additional info as to non standard features or the variant of that model.

Here are a few of the main ones

S = The was used to indicate that the rifle had a side rail for using a optics mount installed, this has been recently changed to R.

R = Side rail for using a optics mount installed

G = OD Green stock set.

Classic = models are closest to the original AK47 configuration with 14x1 LH threaded barrel with muzzle nut, heavier barrel, 45 degree gas block with ported gas tube instead of block, original sling mounts and locations and blond wood.

Arsenal has halted production of all milled receiver AK’s until some time next year to bring out their stamped receiver AK’s, when production of milled receiver AK’s resumes it will be with very limited models and in very limited runs.

 

[Inner Monkey]

To me the stamped is preferable to milled. My KTR03S is built on a Russian stamped receiver & is as durable as I will ever need. To me the milled receiver is un-necessarily heavy. I will have a couple copies of the stamped Arsenal AK’s in the ASAP.

 

[xd9fan]

thanks Gixerman1000
Thinking about getting a sam-7a1 (milled)

Its the paying for it that hurts!!

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Spencer

The first AKs were both stamped and milled. They had manufacturing difficulties with these so they switched to milled receivers because they had plenty of milling equipment and experience from the Mosin. However, this process was slower and more expensive and the rifles were heavier. These rifles weren't widely distributed and it is rare to see a milled receiver rifle produced after that company got the technology to build the stamped receiver models. Pretty much every AK produced by the Soviet Union after the mid-1950s was stamped, including the RPK receivers.

The Galil is available in 7.62x51, but these versions are a lot rarer than the 5.56mm version--much like comparing the popularity of the AR-10 to the AR-15. Or the possibly the popularity of the G33 compared to the G3. Pretty much the only country I am aware of that received 7.62mm Galils in any quantity was South Africa. So as a basic rule, the Galil is 5.56 and the HK roller lock was predominately 7.62mm.

I have no doubts that the milled receiver guns are excellent. Just most feel the added weight isn't worth any advantage it may offer in accuracy or durability. I, like you, would love to be able to afford an Arsenal or two (or twelve, lol) but simply can't. So I'll dream and envy those more fortunate than myself right alongside you.

 

[clange]

The original AK-47s, the first ones, made by Russia, had milled receivers. These were reliable and mostly earned the gun its reputation. Chinese copies of the AK-47 still have the reputation for reliability but are cheap and poorly made.

The russian milled rifles were only made for 8 years. The stamped rifles are what has mostly earned the AK its reputation (if the stamped ones had problems since 1959 the AK would not have the reputation it does).

And gixerman is right on the SLR, SA thing. SLR=import, SA=made here. I dont know why they would have had to halt milled production to make the 106, since it isnt made here anyway. Maybe they just needed the production capacity (people) for modification of the 106 once it gets here?

 

[Glockfan.45]

MSRP $849.00

for a AK? And why did they switch to stamped recievers? If I am going to pony up that kind of loot for a AK I want a milled reciever. Looks good though, but I will still take mine in 7.62x39 please.

 

[grimjaw]

why did they switch to stamped recievers?

Because many of us were asking for it. The SA M5 milled Bulgy is a very nice rifle, but it's heavy compared to just about any of the stamped versions besides a VEPR. If Arsenal put one together with the same attention to detail in a stamped version, many would be attracted to it quickly.

I think the excessive price is due to the folding stock that it comes with. K-VAR is selling that folding stock kit for $230, and just the buttstock for $180.

If they sold it minus the folding stock, I think the price would be more reasonable. I walked out the door with my (new) SA M5 and three mags for $700 earlier this year, and I don't see paying more than that for a stamped version.

jm

 

[SpookyPistolero]

I got to handle of couple of these new SLR-106fr's at my local shop, they are some lovely rifles. I really liked the folder and was impressed at how solidly it locked, both open and closed. Fit and finish were certainly on par with what one would expect from Arsenal. I'd love a chance to shoot one.

$850 was the sticker price, it's certainly a little hard to stomach. Fun to play with though...

 

[Gun Wielding Maniac]

A copy of an AK-100 series rifle in 5.56 with folding buttstock and scope rail, plus polymer furniture, would cost even more then what Arsenal is asking for.

Even so, I dont see myself buying one soon...

However, if I did have the money... I would.

 

[Evil Monkey]

If you like ammo commonality, then it's great because of the 5.56mm cartridge it uses. But, 5.45mm Soviet is just as cheap if not cheaper than 5.56mm. And if you can get your hands on lots of 5.45mm ammo then it's best you get an Arsenal SLR-105 (AK-74). Some might say "but 5.45mm doesn't have match loadings and isn't reloadable" (slaps the back of your head) SNAP! What are you going to accomplish using 5.45mm match ammo out of an AK!?!? And reloaded ammo, WHY? Isn't bulk 5.45mm cheap enough?

 

[atblis]

Maybe

maybe not

Milled is obviously more durable. Stamped is cheaper and easier to produce.

Is milled more durable? Why would it be? The receiver is pretty much just along for the ride. Obviously a steel pistol frame is more durable than a polymer one. Right?

 

[Husker1911]

My SLR-95 is milled. It came with the black thumbhole stock, but now sports a fabulous Ace folder.

 

[KaceCoyote]

Guys the barrel is gonna go LONG before the receiver stamped or not.


Even then the stamped receivers last plenty well, with 40-50 year old rifles still floating out there and STILL in frontline service. Only two weapons I know of with that sorta service record is the Lee enfield and the Mosin Nagant.