Ok, here's the situation.  I am looking at getting either a HK G3 Centurian Clone from J&G or a SAR1 from AIM.

The Centurian is on a Century receiver with refinished and new parts.  It is a stamped steel receiver without the dovetail mount like some of their other ones.  They are asking $629 for it.

The SAR1 from AIM is $289 with a 10rd and 30rd mag.

My main dilemma is that I would like both of these rifles.  I know the sar's aren't anything pretty to look at but they work great for the most part.  I have no Idea what the quality control and functioning is like on the Centurian.  I would probably be getting the sar later this summer if I got the centurain.  Should I get the Centurian or save some money by getting the sar, a case of ammo, and some mags?

Lets hear it.

Plan on changing trigger parts if you get the SAR1....The U.S. fire control parts SUCK! Other than that it seems ok.

BTT, anyone?

I would have to say go with the SAR they are not as bad as everyone says. And can be made to look great with a little work. For the same money as the HK G3 Centurian Clone you could buy the SAR a case of ammo 20 mags and a new stock set to give it the evil look. Or you can get the SAR-1 and a SAR-2 for the same money and do them up latter. These Sars wont be around forever and 5 years from now you dont want to look back and say I want one but damn I remember when they were under $300. I am a firm beliver in buying quality guns but lets face it a Ak is a AK they all run like you wouldnt belive and like said before the Centurian gun is a crap shoot. Just my opion
SCAR