User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/22/2015 10:51:56 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Besides the SLR-104FR having the folding stock in comparison to the SLR-105 having a fixed stock, is there anything else drastically different between the two in build quality, etc? IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2015 12:42:47 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Besides the SLR-104FR having the folding stock in comparison to the SLR-105 having a fixed stock, is there anything else drastically different between the two in build quality, etc? IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. Can you clarify that? Wasn't aware of a lawsuit or the receivers of both guns being built anywhere other than the Arsenal factory in Bulgaria. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2015 10:30:20 PM EDT
[#3]
The 105 was an original Bulgarian receivered AK back in the early days of the 5.45 ammo run in the US. All in the fixed stock.
The 104 is the current import of the folding stock version. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2015 10:06:08 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can you clarify that? Wasn't aware of a lawsuit or the receivers of both guns being built anywhere other than the Arsenal factory in Bulgaria. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Besides the SLR-104FR having the folding stock in comparison to the SLR-105 having a fixed stock, is there anything else drastically different between the two in build quality, etc? IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. Can you clarify that? Wasn't aware of a lawsuit or the receivers of both guns being built anywhere other than the Arsenal factory in Bulgaria. There was a lawsuit around 2006 brought by Izhmash claiming Arsenal owed royalties because Izhmash provided the machinery to make the AK74. I don't remember all the details but i think the solution was Arsenal stopped making stamped receiver and had another firm in Bulgaria provide the receiver |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2015 12:31:11 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was a lawsuit around 2006 brought by Izhmash claiming Arsenal owed royalties because Izhmash provided the machinery to make the AK74. I don't remember all the details but i think the solution was Arsenal stopped making stamped receiver and had another firm in Bulgaria provide the receiver Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Besides the SLR-104FR having the folding stock in comparison to the SLR-105 having a fixed stock, is there anything else drastically different between the two in build quality, etc? IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. Can you clarify that? Wasn't aware of a lawsuit or the receivers of both guns being built anywhere other than the Arsenal factory in Bulgaria. There was a lawsuit around 2006 brought by Izhmash claiming Arsenal owed royalties because Izhmash provided the machinery to make the AK74. I don't remember all the details but i think the solution was Arsenal stopped making stamped receiver and had another firm in Bulgaria provide the receiver Hmm..never heard anything of the sort during the period or since. (first time hearing it actually) |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2015 7:40:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was a lawsuit around 2006 brought by Izhmash claiming Arsenal owed royalties because Izhmash provided the machinery to make the AK74. I don't remember all the details but i think the solution was Arsenal stopped making stamped receiver and had another firm in Bulgaria provide the receiver Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Besides the SLR-104FR having the folding stock in comparison to the SLR-105 having a fixed stock, is there anything else drastically different between the two in build quality, etc? IIRC the receiver on the 105 was built in-house by Arsenal before the lawsuit. Can you clarify that? Wasn't aware of a lawsuit or the receivers of both guns being built anywhere other than the Arsenal factory in Bulgaria. There was a lawsuit around 2006 brought by Izhmash claiming Arsenal owed royalties because Izhmash provided the machinery to make the AK74. I don't remember all the details but i think the solution was Arsenal stopped making stamped receiver and had another firm in Bulgaria provide the receiver I'd like a see a source or articles cited on that. I know that Russia and Izhmash despise Arsenal of Bulgaria, but what choice did Bulgaria have after the Soviet Union collapsed? |
|
|
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.
