On the Kalashnikov Concern's Russian language Telegram channel, Alan Lushnikov stated the following:
"We have created a working group that is currently considering all issues related to the operation of the machine" referring to the AK-12.

Potential alterations include items that "allow you to quickly improve the AK-12". I am assuming they are looking at a different handguard system, potentially aluminum upgrades with significantly sturdier connection points between upper and lower than is currently offered. I'll keep an eye on this and report back when more is revealed.

What improvements would you like them to make to the rifle?

This is NOT GD.

I should give you a warning for shitting in a thread in a technical forum, you know better. dryflash3

Upgrade the handguards to make them capable of retaining zero, add a larger safety selector stop, delete the burst mechanism to improve the trigger, rework the dust cover so that the pic rail returns to zero reliably (or come up with a better optics mounting solution).

Spend a bit more on each rifle and just go with a Zenitco handguard out the door?

I agree with this. The handguard is an easy/ No brainer fix.


I’d like to see something with a full pic rail on the top handguard. I am not a fan of how Zenitco did their top portion. I like their attachment to the receiver though.

Hopefully we will know what they are planning in the near future.

UPDATE 1:

Translation from KC's Telegram post made mere hours ago:
"On the serial AK-12, the stock, the rear sight, the fire control handle have already been replaced, the fixation of the DTK oppression has been redone. In addition, solutions are being tested for the introduction of a two-way translator of fire modes with the simultaneous rejection of the blade protruding to the side, there are proposals for a new material for the forearm..."

I expect this means the Kreb's style safety will be altered, the selector will have two modes and a different stop system, the ak-19 grip system and sights will be used, and the handguard material will change.

I really wish things were back to normal so we can get our hands on an AK-12. European reviewers gave it bad marks, but I found many of the complaints to be sort of dumb.

As Capt Destro said, Zenitco fixed the handguard issue. Add a suppressor and training, the rifle should be good to go.

or perhaps the Russians really want a modern rifle with a monolithic upper receiver:

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/09/14/kalashnikov-concern-akv-521/

Cross between a SCAR and a Galil ACE. Would be nice to try out.

I think a lot of the complaints I’ve seen are very valid for a service weapon or rifle that you would run stock in competition.  Particularly the ones I listed above.  I didn’t mention the issue where corrosive ammo is going to cause it to rusting issues in wet environments, since it has little nooks and crannies that are difficult to clean.  That would be less of a problem if you didn’t have to confirm zero on irons and/optics every time you field strip and clean the rifle, since there can be some sizable POI shifts.

My opinion:  the unobtanium factor and good looks screw a lot of American collectors perspectives, causing them to dismiss largely legitimate complaints about the rifle as a service weapon.  And to be fair, I don’t think the complaints would really matter to military arms collectors anyway, since they aren’t going to be fighting wars with the rifles.

Admittedly, you can solve most of the identified problems by giving the AK-12 a Zenitco bath, but now you’re adding significant cost, complexity, and a lot of weight to solve problems the upgrade from 74/100 series to 12 series was supposed to solve from the factory.  I think the Russian government is making the correct move in working toward updates, but only time will tell if the updates are good or not.

The hand guard not holding zero isn't really much of an issue when 99% of their military doesn't have night vision or weapon mounted lasers.

I would be more concerned about the cover not returning to zero, but I haven't seen any documentation of this from a factory built rifle.

I found the rear sight on the AK12 to be rather half ass. It was basically an RPK sight adapted to the rail.

Here is the new one

Attached File

One of my dream guns.... that we will never see here sadly.. =(


The rear mount doesn't hold zero?

I wonder if they are selling this separately to people in Russia who might somehow send an evaluation copy to me...

I believe the entire receiver cover rail was changed to accommodate that new rear sight. Probably be best to try to get a whole assembly.

If the new design is sold with the civilian 366TKM model, it might be technically possible to get one... but it would still be highly illegal to send it through.
=(

This is the first that I have heard about the rear cover not holding zero. Handguard yes, but not the dust cover.

The AK-12 is a product of Putin’s graft and corruption. The reason something like the AKV-521 is not in service is because the military’s leaders and Putin’s cronies line their pockets and not invest in their troops. Hence, the poor performance we have witnessed in the Ukraine. Having said, it is still an AK, and it will run like one. I have yet read to the contrary.

The cover does hold zero, but it allegedly does not return to zero once removed and reinstalled.  This is all according to YoUTubERs with their small sample size of kit built guns.  I haven't seen anything regarding factory built guns.

It’s a great shooter actually. My current round count on mine is about 3 magazines, but the dust cover seems to hold zero (eotech, my usual groups, 100 yard range).
The adoption of the platform was due to cost savings, and didn’t have anything to do with any kind of corruption my friend.
The 521 is absolutely badass. There is a guy on Reddit from Russia who has one, though that place is an absolutely terrible site so I don’t recommend people sign up just to talk to him about it. Anyway, he said the upper is rock solid. I think he is associated with sureshot armament in some way as well. But the 521 is significantly more expensive to build, so it is unlikely it will be adopted for a million person army.


Are you saying that some long haired youtube grifter got it wrong, and the professional engineers at Kalashnikov Concern got it right? Sounds like a crazy argument!

Note: this is my experience as well, though I only have a few magazines through it, and I'm using a US barrel and receiver. Also I am a terrible shot and normally get pretty big groups.

Feel like they went more with form over function like some politician just wanted it to look cool.

I don't know I just feel like it's in the beta stage or something when I went through with releasing it

It has potential to be very good.

There will probably be many updates over the course of procurement, so you might look at this as kind of a beta stage, I don't disagree. They have less than 100k right now, with updates planned. My guess is the dust cover will stay, and the handguard, trigger system, and (as they mention) the safety selector will be upgraded. If we are lucky, we will get a look sooner rather than later!

Thanks and excuse the typos. I wish I released the AK12 lol.

Honestly it's par the course for gun companies. Let the consumer be the beta tester.

But I'm SMH that a military this day and age does it group wide lol.

Polenar Tactical was using a factory TR3, not a kit build.

BigSal mentioned something above that’s critical to understanding the AK12 development process:  it has to be an economical small arm (sorry Zenitco/sureshot fans).  This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as working under tight constraints CAN lead to innovation and CAN prevent excesses and waste like we see in America.  Trust me, I’ve met plenty of scientists and engineers in my life who would be perfectly content to spend the rest of their lives fiddling around with prototypes in pursuit of perfection without ever shipping a single finished product. Sure it’s great if you can afford the best.  But if you buy in big enough quantity, a Romanian AKm derivative is around $100 (not kidding, though my specific knowledge on this is from 2015 or so, a lot has happened since then), and the difference between not having a rifle and having a rifle is a lot greater than the difference between having a Romanian AKm and having the new Sig M5 or whatever you think of as newest and best gun.

The AK12 is supposed to provide a reasonable quality, light(ish) weight, simple to manufacture, economical platform for modern capabilities that the Russian military can grow into as the capabilities become affordable to them.  I think there are some conflicting design choices that will make it more difficult to attain that goal (welded gas tube, crunchy trigger, pretending like they’re not still using 3-4+ MOA corrosive ammo, free float hand guards that also don’t hold zero, optic mounting solution . . . Do they care about precision/accuracy or not?), but nothing is unrecoverable about the fundamental design of the firearm.  I even think some things like the QD muzzle device design are really clever, though time will tell if/how much that affects POI shift and shot dispersion.  

At any rate as someone who takes a lot of interest in modernization efforts directed at the AK design, I’m hopeful that the working group will come up with some good design tweaks and improvements that will make the AK12 a much greater improvement over the basic AK74m than it is now.

I feel the same.

peep rear sight

I am pretty attached to the notch sight from the original AK's myself. Learned to shoot AK's with those iron sights, and still am a bit faster with them. Since I am not going to win any prizes for accuracy (even if I run an optic), I prefer something that allows me to acquire targets faster. I mean, not that it matter since I only shoot at garbage piles in the woods...

Last I checked, the AK12 is issued with a rear peep sight.  In fact I thought there was a picture of one up thread a bit.  Is that not the case?