User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 2:04:34 PM EDT
I don't plan on ever mounting optics to this particular AK but it has the side mount.
Is it easy enough to remove, or more trouble than it's worth? TIA |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 2:32:11 PM EDT
[#1]
Do it!
Some will say it's heresy and de-values the AK, and maybe that's true, but I never use them, and am about to pull one myself. Mine is just two spots, front just holds the scope mount so will be a hole to fill, either welded or maybe just a "dummy" rivet. For the rear have to pull and replace one of the rear trunnion rivets. Shouldn't be too bad at all. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 3:03:24 PM EDT
[#2]
Why remove it? Does it get in the way of anything?
Seems like a lot of trouble for no benefit. Personally I love the side rail. I use RS Regulate mounts and it gets the optic really low. Lower than a top cover rail could. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 3:58:29 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: Why remove it? Does it get in the way of anything? Seems like a lot of trouble for no benefit. Personally I love the side rail. I use RS Regulate mounts and it gets the optic really low. Lower than a top cover rail could. Have you ever picked up a rifle that didn't have one, and think to yourself "man, I sure would like to rivet a big chunk of metal to the side of this rifle, so I can attach a big clunky cantilevered doodad over the top of the receiver, all to mount an optic regardless of the fact that there are already other ways to do it" ? AK's sans the side mount are gorgeous. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 7:19:31 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Have you ever picked up a rifle that didn't have one, and think to yourself "man, I sure would like to rivet a big chunk of metal to the side of this rifle, so I can attach a big clunky cantilevered doodad over the top of the receiver, all to mount an optic regardless of the fact that there are already other ways to do it" ? AK's sans the side mount are gorgeous. https://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2015/07/01/4475262_01_sa_85m_feg_hungarian_7_62x39_a_640.jpg Exactly this: And I am building a Hungarian clone, and they typically don't have the mount... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 8:01:52 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoorKicker: Exactly this: And I am building a Hungarian clone, and they typically don't have the mount... For sure, it's one of the things I really like about that 63 you just had done. If you need a nice pistol grip for your new build, PM me as I have a couple extra's laying around in the parts box and i'd like to see 'em go to a good home. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 10:52:24 PM EDT
[#6]
I would not remove one that is installed, I would just omit it on a bare receiver when building
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2024 11:28:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1Gunner: I would not remove one that is installed, I would just omit it on a bare receiver when building That's about what I have decided. As much as I don't want the mount, I don't want the extra holes even more. I may do a bit of figuring and look into filling the holes, but most likely will just leave it on... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 1:12:03 AM EDT
[#8]
The rail should be held on by 3 rivets. Rear trunnion, center support rivet and one through the receiver. Not a big deal to remove if you have the ability to re-do the rivets, tig/mig weld the receiver hole and refinish the receiver.
I would personally leave it on. It doesn’t get in the way and it’s there if you ever decide you want to use it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 8:22:23 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Have you ever picked up a rifle that didn't have one, and think to yourself "man, I sure would like to rivet a big chunk of metal to the side of this rifle, so I can attach a big clunky cantilevered doodad over the top of the receiver, all to mount an optic regardless of the fact that there are already other ways to do it" ?  As stated above, 3 rivets hold it on. I'd do it carefully because you may be able to resell it in the EE. The only time I have ever done this was to make an UF. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 10:43:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: dmk0210]
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoorKicker: Exactly this: And I am building a Hungarian clone, and they typically don't have the mount... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoorKicker: Exactly this: And I am building a Hungarian clone, and they typically don't have the mount... I'm typically not that obsessed with details. Originally Posted By DoorKicker: That's about what I have decided. As much as I don't want the mount, I don't want the extra holes even more. I may do a bit of figuring and look into filling the holes, but most likely will just leave it on... |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 10:45:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: dmk0210]
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Have you ever picked up a rifle that didn't have one, and think to yourself "man, I sure would like to rivet a big chunk of metal to the side of this rifle, so I can attach a big clunky cantilevered doodad over the top of the receiver, all to mount an optic regardless of the fact that there are already other ways to do it" ? AK's sans the side mount are gorgeous. But I'm not a buyer of collectible AKs either. I'm more of a modernized practical AK guy than a classic old school AK guy. That Hungarian does nothing for me. It's just an AKM that's missing a side rail.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 11:35:42 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: I do avoid buying AKs that don't have side rails. I'm not a big fan of top cover mounts or rails on gas tubes. But I'm not a buyer of collectible AKs either. I'm more of a modernized practical AK guy than a classic old school AK guy. That Hungarian does nothing for me. It's just an AKM that's missing a side rail. I started popping corn when I saw Doorkicker make this thread, lol, then of course I had to throw some fuel on it with my first post. At least for once, I didn't start the heresy thread.  But dude, how you not gonna like an SA-85? Truly one of the finest AK's ever made. And secondly, you say "modernized practical", yet insist on that archaic afterthought of an optic mount? Here, modern and practical, yet stuck with a clunky chunk of communism on the side that will never be useful, I should have removed that tumor before I painted it: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 11:48:28 AM EDT
[#13]
If nothing else the rail adds rigidity to the receiver. This was supposedly one of the reasons it became a standard bit on the 100 series rifles.
I wouldn't go to all the trouble to remove it just to make it clone correct to a level nobody but an AK nerd would notice. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 1:37:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: dmk0210]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: I started popping corn when I saw Doorkicker make this thread, lol, then of course I had to throw some fuel on it with my first post. At least for once, I didn't start the heresy thread. But dude, how you not gonna like an SA-85? Truly one of the finest AK's ever made. And secondly, you say "modernized practical", yet insist on that archaic afterthought of an optic mount? Here, modern and practical, yet stuck with a clunky chunk of communism on the side that will never be useful, I should have removed that tumor before I painted it: https://i.imgur.com/1VrTY8I.jpeg But again, I'd use the side rail vs that rear sight RD mount. Using a good quality side mount like a Midwest or RS Regulate would be a lot more durable, solid and they have repeatable return to zero if you want to swap between an RD and magnified optic (or just go old school with irons). I think the side rail gets a bad rep because a lot of people use inferior mounts on them. Though I fully admit well, you know, that's just like, my opinion, man. |
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 1:51:39 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Have you ever picked up a rifle that didn't have one, and think to yourself "man, I sure would like to rivet a big chunk of metal to the side of this rifle, so I can attach a big clunky cantilevered doodad over the top of the receiver, all to mount an optic regardless of the fact that there are already other ways to do it" ? AK's sans the side mount are gorgeous. https://cdn2.armslist.com/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2015/07/01/4475262_01_sa_85m_feg_hungarian_7_62x39_a_640.jpg Yes, I have. This is why I have a pile of side mounts so I can put them on rifle I need/want optics on. It's probably the best way to mount optics on the AK without worrying about things moving when I have to tear down the rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 7:17:09 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: Oh yeah, it's not that I don't like Hungarians. I like them all. I just didn't like the configuration of that first one you posted. I like this second one. But again, I'd use the side rail vs that rear sight RD mount. Using a good quality side mount like a Midwest or RS Regulate would be a lot more durable, solid and they have repeatable return to zero if you want to swap between an RD and magnified optic (or just go old school with irons). I think the side rail gets a bad rep because a lot of people use inferior mounts on them. Though I fully admit well, you know, that's just like, my opinion, man. Fair enough, but have you ever shot an AK with a red-dot and the rear sight replacement mount like an Attero? I have tried the Midwest and the RS regulate mounts, the Midwest just sucked, it was catty-wampus in multiple directions. The RS was a nice mount and centered pretty good with just a tiny amount of cant, but still, bulky and annoying to have that stuff hanging off the rifle. The Attero and TWS bitty mounts are just light years better, so light, great balance, and rock solid. Just a joy to shoot. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 7:40:53 PM EDT
[#17]
To each Thierry own bro. I e tried the Attero and did not like it. I find nothing wrong with people doing whatever they want with their guns. I mean, they spent the $ on it, they can whatever they want.
Which is why 5.45x39 is better than 7.62x39, but that's an argument fir a other thread |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 8:12:00 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By nictra: To each Thierry own bro. I e tried the Attero and did not like it. I find nothing wrong with people doing whatever they want with their guns. I mean, they spent the $ on it, they can whatever they want. Which is why 5.45x39 is better than 7.62x39, but that's an argument fir a other thread I too, am drinkin'  
|
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 9:41:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: dmk0210]
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dragynn: Fair enough, but have you ever shot an AK with a red-dot and the rear sight replacement mount like an Attero? I have tried the Midwest and the RS regulate mounts, the Midwest just sucked, it was catty-wampus in multiple directions. The RS was a nice mount and centered pretty good with just a tiny amount of cant, but still, bulky and annoying to have that stuff hanging off the rifle. The Attero and TWS bitty mounts are just light years better, so light, great balance, and rock solid. Just a joy to shoot. I use RS Regulate mounts on my AKs. I don't find them to be that bulky or obtrusive in any way. But yeah they are kind of the opposite of the simple rear sight replacement mount. Especially since I use a 30mm Aimpoint. At least we have a lot of options for AKs now. I remember a time when really crappy cheap Chinese stuff or kind of not much better ex-Soviet stuff was all there was. There's some really good stuff out there now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2024 9:56:48 PM EDT
[#20]
I didn't give AKs much thought for years. I had a pre 89 Chinese underfolder that I bought for a ridiculously low price a long long time ago but I sold it a few years ago when they were going for over 3K.
The PSA Spiker actually got me interested in AKs and it just took off from there. I am still of the mindset that AKs shouldn't have optics or rails. Maybe that will change one day but who knows. For now I keep them as close to original as possible. I won't be removing any side mounts any time soon, and I canceled that order and found an AK without optics mount. I am good for now
|
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 2/28/2024 3:50:42 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoorKicker: I didn't give AKs much thought for years. I had a pre 89 Chinese underfolder that I bought for a ridiculously low price a long long time ago but I sold it a few years ago when they were going for over 3K. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DoorKicker: I didn't give AKs much thought for years. I had a pre 89 Chinese underfolder that I bought for a ridiculously low price a long long time ago but I sold it a few years ago when they were going for over 3K. Originally Posted By DoorKicker: The PSA Spiker actually got me interested in AKs and it just took off from there. I am still of the mindset that AKs shouldn't have optics or rails. Maybe that will change one day but who knows. For now I keep them as close to original as possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2024 5:14:22 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: At least we have a lot of options for AKs now. I remember a time when really crappy cheap Chinese stuff or kind of not much better ex-Soviet stuff was all there was. There's some really good stuff out there now. I remember it well, no internet so everything was mail-order or gunshow stuff. And the only aftermarket stuff was Tapco. I have to admit, I fully Tapco-****ed the first SKS I ever bought, it was kind of a rite of passage, lol, everybody I knew did it at least once. I remember distinctly the first time I sawed through a chicom thumbhole stock on a MAK to split it into stock and grip, it actually turned out pretty good! Now i'm re-doing my 10/63 to really fine tune the thing to the way I shoot, and i'm almost overwhelmed with choices, looks like i'll wind up with even more crap in my parts box as I buy-try-toss. We are definitely spoiled these days. I'm really digging the pics of the no-rail models Atlantic just put up in the other thread about this subject, but I think if I bought one I might not use an optic at all, just roll with it like it is. |
|
|
|
ND, USA
|
Posted: 2/29/2024 12:01:58 AM EDT
[#23]
I have removed one before. There will be an extra “bump” with a rivet in the center. It’s cone shaped to provide support for the rail. It’s between the trigger and hammer pins. Looks like crap. I ended up disassembling the gun and building the parts on an 80%. If I had to do it again, I’d just leave it on there.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
