Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page AK-47 » AK Discussions
AK Sponsor: palmetto
Posted: 8/18/2006 9:52:38 AM EDT
does anybody here actually think it makes a difference, especialy in reguards to a pistol build?

what difference would it make?

Maybe if you want a side rail on there... anything else?


Link Posted: 8/18/2006 10:23:09 AM EDT
[#1]
Yes - it's heavier. I have 2 3 rifles with the 1.6 and I should have stuck with the 1.0.
Link Posted: 8/18/2006 11:20:47 AM EDT
[#2]
I have rifles with 1.0mm, 1.5mm and 1.6mm receivers.  They all work equally well.

If built properly, all of them will last a lifetime.
Link Posted: 8/18/2006 12:33:39 PM EDT
[#3]
the thinner the reciever the cheaper, weaker it feels.  also thinner recievers dent way more easily.
Link Posted: 8/18/2006 3:36:45 PM EDT
[#4]
I believe they do make a slight difference.  I have both 1mm and 1.6mm.  The 1.6mm is more accurate but there is nothing wrong with a 1mm.  It may be me as well but the 1.6mm feels alot more solid to me.  I like the heavier feel as well but that is just my preference.
Link Posted: 8/18/2006 8:14:00 PM EDT
[#5]

Quoted:
I believe they do make a slight difference.  I have both 1mm and 1.6mm.  The 1.6mm is more accurate but there is nothing wrong with a 1mm.  It may be me as well but the 1.6mm feels alot more solid to me.  I like the heavier feel as well but that is just my preference.


I've been training for this 6 mile biathlon in West Texas, and after a few miles of jogging, believe me, you can feel the difference.
Link Posted: 8/19/2006 9:07:20 PM EDT
[#6]
Link Posted: 8/19/2006 9:40:44 PM EDT
[#7]
I currently don't own any AK's with 1.0mm receivers, but I've had 3 that werel.  I have one built up on a 1.6mm receiver and several with milled receivers.  Aside from the major pain in the ass 1.6 are for building, they don't feel significantly heavier to me, but are much much stiffer.  The action on them feel much more like milled receivers.

Are they different? Yes.
Are they better? In my opinion, yes.
Are they worth the extra hassle to build?  From my experience, no.
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 7:18:09 AM EDT
[#8]
I prefer the thicker receivers for folder style rifles, the regular 1.0 for standard stock. The thicker receiver seems to solidify the folding stocks a little better. But, that is just my opinion...
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 8:24:31 AM EDT
[#9]
i have dented 2 before.  they were the thin skinned euro variety cheap AKs.  ever lean an AK on a wall & have it fall over & hit stuff?  this will put small dents on the 1.0 recievers.  do this, take your 1.0 and put ur check on the stock & look down the length of the reciever, most likely, u will notice pits & valleys & all around uneven-ness, esp where rivets are.  the thicker recievers have LESS of this and are way more flat/straight.

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped.  no cheap euro trash for me.


Quoted:
ttman, how many receivers have you dented and what did you do that dented them?  I've never seen one of any thickness get "dented" from use before.
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 8:46:27 AM EDT
[#10]
Just for the record, certain rivets are supposed to dent the receiver
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 9:34:42 AM EDT
[#11]
Thats the first time I've ever heard anyone refer to a European AK receiver as trash.
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 10:10:05 AM EDT
[#12]

Quoted:
i have dented 2 before.  they were the thin skinned euro variety cheap AKs.  ever lean an AK on a wall & have it fall over & hit stuff?  this will put small dents on the 1.0 recievers.  do this, take your 1.0 and put ur check on the stock & look down the length of the reciever, most likely, u will notice pits & valleys & all around uneven-ness, esp where rivets are.  the thicker recievers have LESS of this and are way more flat/straight.

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped.  no cheap euro trash for me.


Quoted:
ttman, how many receivers have you dented and what did you do that dented them?  I've never seen one of any thickness get "dented" from use before.


Pics please.
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 1:46:09 PM EDT
[#13]
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 2:11:20 PM EDT
[#14]
I've seen battlefield pickup AK's from African conflicts with no finish and broken stocks that didn't have dents in the receivers.  I've got a 20+ year old AK that has spent most of it's life in a truck toolbox and it doesn't have any dents in the receiver.  Hell, I'm not sure I could dent my 1.0mm GT receivers with a ball peen hammer.

Link Posted: 8/20/2006 8:38:05 PM EDT
[#15]

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped. no cheap euro trash for me.

You should call russia and tell them they're using trash, they obviously have no idea what they're doing.
Link Posted: 8/20/2006 9:36:10 PM EDT
[#16]
Well, guys like ttman are why Global built the 1.6. There is always someone willing to mill six thousanths of an inch off of critical hardened tool steel trunion so they can then add thickness to the not-critical-at-all stamped steel receiver area that is held on with three RIVETS on each side.

From an engineering standpoint, what could make more sense, right?


1.6mm receivers have some clear advantages that have nothing to do with denting or strength. Obviously 1.0mm is strong enough. A 1.6mm receiver is much smoother in operation. The strength is not an issue.

All the parts mounted to an AKM receiver are dimensional backwards compatible with the milled AK-47 standard (1.6mm thick). The important dimensions are the bolt carrier rails, FCG axis pins and selector lever holes. A standard 1.0mm AKM receiver is "fudged" to tighten up the tolerances by adding step down rails and crows feet stamps. A 1.6mm receiver is the correct dimension without being distorted and fully supports the moving parts. Anyone who has handled multiple examples rifles of both receiver thickness is well aware of the greater "smoothness" of sliding and rotating parts.

Whether it is worth the effort depends more on personal preference and tools available than any functional issues. A well built rifle on either type ought to be 100% reliable. I personally like the 1.6mm receivers, but I have access to machine shop tools that can do the extra operations in a few minutes. If I didn't, I would probably consider the extra smoothness of a 1.6mm receiver more hassle than its worth.  

s & p
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 6:09:34 PM EDT
[#17]
u mean they obviously know what they are doing switching to the 1.6mm recievers on the VEPR guns, 1 of the best AKs made, hmmmm wonder why.  and to add insult to injury the 1.0mm guns use a even THINNER ribbed receiver top,  paper thin!!!  

1.0mm=cheap disposable AK, made for 3rd world nations/militia who can't afford quality AKs.


Quoted:

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped. no cheap euro trash for me.

You should call russia and tell them they're using trash, they obviously have no idea what they're doing.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 6:24:55 PM EDT
[#18]

Quoted:
u mean they obviously know what they are doing switching to the 1.6mm recievers on the VEPR guns, 1 of the best AKs made, hmmmm wonder why.  and to add insult to injury the 1.0mm guns use a even THINNER ribbed receiver top,  paper thin!!!  

1.0mm=cheap disposable AK, made for 3rd world nations/militia who can't afford quality AKs.



The VEPR is made off of a standard RPK receiver which is purpose made at 1.5MM.
Link Posted: 8/22/2006 6:52:49 PM EDT
[#19]

Quoted:
u mean they obviously know what they are doing switching to the 1.6mm recievers on the VEPR guns, 1 of the best AKs made, hmmmm wonder why.  and to add insult to injury the 1.0mm guns use a even THINNER ribbed receiver top,  paper thin!!!  

1.0mm=cheap disposable AK, made for 3rd world nations/militia who can't afford quality AKs.


Quoted:

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped. no cheap euro trash for me.

You should call russia and tell them they're using trash, they obviously have no idea what they're doing.


Try again.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 12:10:32 AM EDT
[#20]

Quoted:
u mean they obviously know what they are doing switching to the 1.6mm recievers on the VEPR guns, 1 of the best AKs made, hmmmm wonder why.  and to add insult to injury the 1.0mm guns use a even THINNER ribbed receiver top,  paper thin!!!  

1.0mm=cheap disposable AK, made for 3rd world nations/militia who can't afford quality AKs.


Quoted:

if I don't buy milled, I will buy 1.5/1.6mm stamped. no cheap euro trash for me.

You should call russia and tell them they're using trash, they obviously have no idea what they're doing.

The standard rifle of the Russian military is now a VEPR? I could have sworn it was the AK-74M with a 1.0mm receiver.
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 11:07:09 AM EDT
[#21]

Quoted:

I've been training for this 6 mile biathlon in West Texas, and after a few miles of jogging, believe me, you can feel the difference.


Where in West Texas? Where is this biathlon?

buckmeister
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 2:49:47 PM EDT
[#22]
Link Posted: 8/23/2006 5:30:06 PM EDT
[#23]
I thought that might be the event to which you refered. Ain't this a great state?

Pecos... miles and miles of miles and miles...
Page AK-47 » AK Discussions
AK Sponsor: palmetto
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top