Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 9/16/2003 8:15:41 AM EST
Anyone have any experience with one of these?
as far as I know they are bulgy recievers that were originally single stack, redone to double stack. Only bad thing I have heard is they wont take drums.

Are they as good as other arsenal brand rifles?

Link Posted: 9/16/2003 9:30:06 AM EST
Very nice rifles for the price, but the SA M-7 is a better one, albeit for more money.

The single to double stack conversions are done well at Arsenal Inc., but alot of times the magazines will be very tight going in and out of the receiver, until it "breaks in".

If you can afford it, go with the standard SA M-7.
Link Posted: 9/16/2003 10:03:55 AM EST
No cleaning rod either.
Link Posted: 9/16/2003 10:57:15 AM EST
i think it looks very nice, their appears to be a version that has the cleaning rod too.
Link Posted: 9/16/2003 12:28:23 PM EST
Thanks for the replys guys...just so you know what kind of cost I am looking at the 101SG would run me $580 while the sam7 would be $680

I thought the 101sg would be a little bit better deal. Assuming its the same type of quality work that I hear Arsenal does.

What would these be running for in your neck of the woods? I am in assachusetts btw.

Link Posted: 9/16/2003 12:40:25 PM EST
I bought one with a green stock set. Its exactly the same as a sa m7 minus the cleaning rod which is no big deal to me and it comes with a side rail for a scope which is like another $100 on a sa m7. Drums are hit and miss i have 3 romanian drums 2 fit. The mag well on mine wasnt tight but the mag release was i had to grind it down a little with a dremel to make all of my mags fit. Other than that its a great rifle. Well worth the price imo.
Link Posted: 9/16/2003 7:56:24 PM EST
I looked at the SLR101S and the SAM 7 very hard before my purchase. In my OPINION they are the same rifle.One with a cleaning rod one with out.One was machined for a single stack magwell and then later opened up alittle more.And the other was machined to the double mag with on the mag well in one step rather than two steps.Really end results are the same. I paid $500 even for a SLR101S .The SAM's was going for alittle over $600. Something like $620 at the time I got mine. Put both rifle side by side.They are the same except the cleaning rod issue.I don't run a steel rod down my barrel anyhow.Thats been my opinion. If you find a SAM 7 close to the price of the SLR go for it. If there's a $100 difference ,grab the SLR and a case of wolf and two 30 round mags with the $100 saved. Best of luck to ya WarDawg
Link Posted: 9/16/2003 9:03:34 PM EST
Thats just what I wanted to hear wardawg....I will keep you guys posted.

Link Posted: 9/17/2003 3:05:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2003 3:10:40 AM EST by SSR-99]
This exact same subject was brought up on AK forty seven dot net.
A member was wondering if there were any real differences between the SA M-7 and the converted to high capacity SLR-101. The thread was pretty positive on the SLR conversion, up until a fellow poster brought up that the receiver needs to be milled "AFTER" it is already heat treated and assembled. He also stated the following:

When a part is heat-treated, the heat treating only penetrates to a certain depth. The outer layer of metal is hardened by heating, which introduces carbon atoms into the steel. Beneath the heat-treated "skin" the metal remains soft. This is okay, because it allows the soft inner "pulp" to give a little during stress, and the part is not brittle.

Now, add re-machining after heat treating. Machining as deeply as is required to enlarge a mag well undoubtedly penetrates the hardened "skin" and into the "pulp". Re-heating the receiver could increase the chances of brittleness unless the affected spot is the only part re-heat treated. This is possible, but very tricky with a complicated part like a receiver.

Not re-heat treating the receiver at all also leaves something to be desired because you're talking about some of that soft "pulp" being exposed to wear from insertion and removal of the magazines repeatedly, thus resulting in a receiver that wears out prematurely." (in that area)
End of quote

After we discussed this for a while, we pretty much left the thread believing that the areas that get machined are probably not so critical as to worry about the possible exposed soft areas, but still, it convinced some that they would rather have a receiver that was not modified after being heat treated and assembled. The thread raised a tiny bit of doubt about the whole mag well conversion thing on the SLR-101, enough to convince the original poster to go the SA M-7 route.

Realistically, this possible minute exposure of soft steel is probably a minor or even a non issue altogether, but again, it somehow had us look at the conversion in a different light. The possible exposed soft steel was not something most of us thought of.

Even though it may not be an important issue at all, I figured it would be a good idea to let you know what this discussion brought to our attention.
Link Posted: 9/17/2003 5:52:19 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/17/2003 5:52:41 AM EST by 1179]
does this one take high caps?
Link Posted: 9/17/2003 6:12:39 AM EST
Yes, all Arsenal Inc rifles that start with the SA M-7 designation, have receivers that are forged and milled to accept high capacity mags. No conversion to the mag well is done, since they are built from scratch as high capacity guns.

Hope this helps :)
Link Posted: 9/17/2003 9:07:45 AM EST

Would you happen to have a link to that discussion ok ak47.net
Link Posted: 9/17/2003 9:41:09 AM EST
Sure buddy, though I don't think I remember how to make it a hot link. Here it is: www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=129462
Link Posted: 9/17/2003 7:02:42 PM EST
Thank you kindly
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 12:16:13 PM EST
Im no expert. But think about how a mag locks up in an AK. It really don't touch the reciever ( Barely on some and not at all on others).It locks to a front trunion and the spring loaded mag release tab. The milled area of the reciever has no affect and function when the mags locks up other than being large anough to get the mag in.Now as far as the softness of the metal goes.These are forgeings (if thats a word LOL.) Think about this,many members here have AK's built of OOW recievers that are STAMPED and are not heat treated excepted in the pin holes and ejector tab.The Stamped sheetmetal is soft everywhere on the reciever ,at leats 97% of it is.IMO milling off x amounts of thousandths here and there would have NO affect on the reciever strenth that could be relisticly measured.The rifles are the same except for the cleaning rods.If had found a SAM 7 before I had run into the SLR's I would have a SAM 7 and be very happy.I found both and was able the put them side by side and compair. No difference .IMO. Im no expert but that is my opinion. Best of luck to ya and you CAN'T go WRONG with either rifle . Cheers WarDawg
Link Posted: 9/19/2003 3:26:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/19/2003 3:28:20 AM EST by SSR-99]
Again, I want to point out that it may not be an important issue at all. I stated this when I wrote the following in a post above:

"Realistically, this possible minute exposure of soft steel is probably a minor or even a non issue altogether, but again, it somehow had us look at the conversion in a different light. The possible exposed soft steel was not something most of us thought of.
Even though it may not be an important issue at all, I figured it would be a good idea to let you know what this discussion brought to our attention."

And that's really just it, trying to get as many facts as possible before making a final decision :)

Even though it may never compromise the integrity of the receiver, it is something that I felt the perspective buyer should know.
Of course the SA M-7 rifles have no mag well conversions done to them, so this issue (important or not) does not apply to them at all ;)

In any case, good luck with whatever decision you make :)

Link Posted: 9/21/2003 1:46:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/21/2003 6:52:21 PM EST by second]
Good news guys...the chicom 75rd drum fits perfectly!!!
Link Posted: 9/21/2003 1:58:47 PM EST
You guys need to shop around for your stuff better.

FAC has SAM-7's for $534 and SAM-7S's for $621.
Top Top