Most of us clown on Century a bit for the RAS-47 and C39 rifles and some of their known problems, but in all of the reading I've done, it really appears that there is a hidden gem in these rifles (as well as Century's newer imported rifles), and that is the RAK-1 trigger group. While it may not be as nice as an ALG, the consensus seems to be that the RAK-1 is a step up from the G2 in quality and performance. Even on AKFiles, where most Century products get ripped apart quickly, the RAK-1 has received a thumbs up from many users.

For reasons I'll describe below, it was about time to replace the four G2 FCGs that I have. When I found the RAK-1 was on sale at a few places for $19.99 each, I decided I'd give it a try.

While the Tapco G2 has been the gold standard for many years, it does have some known issues. These can include:

- Poor disconnector engagement, sometimes requiring hand fitting to a specific rifle. Additionally, the disconnector hook also appears to be too short to fully engage the disconnector shelf of the hammer, even when the G2 FCG is new.
- Poor or accelerated disconnector hook wear, leading to unsafe operation when wear becomes excessive - with a worn disconnector hook, hammer follow and unintended bump fire can become possible
- Overly aggressive, angular hammer face surface profile - this is probably the biggest problem with the G2. The strange profile of the hammer causes all sorts of issues, including a rough cycling BCG, increased wear/peening to the carrier tail stem, wear/peening of the bolt stem and firing pin, and the G2 hammer may not even strike the firing pin squarely on some AK variants with unique bolt tail lengths, like 5.56 AK variants like the Saiga .223, Vepr .223 and Romanian WASR/SAR-3.

I have a couple of higher round count G2 FCGs that I decided to replace entirely. These FCGs both had severe disconnector wear, to the point that I considered both rifles to be dangerous to use - the Saiga in particular has experienced several double-fires that could be traced back to poor disconnector engagement and wear. I also noticed the beginning of accelerated disconnector wear on my AES-10B RPK, which I don't shoot all that often.

All of these G2 groups were purchased around five years ago, and the highest round counts are about 8K (WASR) and 6-7K (Saiga .223). AES-10B and Bulgarian 5.56 AK-74 probably have around 1K rounds through each.

Recipients of new RAK-1 triggers:  AES-10B RPK, WASR 10/63, Saiga .223, Bulgarian 5.56 AK-74.



Here you can see the wear to the WASR carrier tail. The peening has accumulated to the point that I will likely take a dremel to the tail here and clean up the sharp edges that have pushed out around the circumfrence of the tail



Disconnector hook from the G2 installed in the WASR. You can see how the disconnector has worn away to the point where all that is left is a ragged, sharp edge, which could potentially break off of the disconnector and release the hammer when unexpected. This disconnector also engaged around half of the available area of the shelf on the hammer.



Hammer taken from the WASR. As you can see, the hammer has never really "worn in" over the course of those 8K rounds shot through the WASR. It still has the very aggressive profile that it started out with.



Here is the G2 installed in the Saiga .223. Here you can see I have demonstrated the maximum engagement of the G2 disconnector. The disconnector in this FCG is also worn similarly to the disconnector taken from the WASR. The front edge of the disconnector hook is worn flat, sharp, and thin. This wear pattern seems to be typical of higher round count G2 FCGs.

This FCG does not operate in a safe manner and needs to be replaced.



Here is what you get out of the box with the RAK-1. The FCG is fully assembled, including installation of disconnector spring, and hammer/disconnector sleeve. One hammer did have the spring installed backwards, so keep an eye out for that.




The RAK-1, like most aftermarket FCGs, appears to be cast. This isn't an issue in itself unless the casting QC is poor. I haven't heard of any failures from the RAK-1 FCG, we will have to wait and see.

The FCG includes a hammer spring, which is not braided. For the purposes of this test, I decided to use the factory spring rather than the braided spring that came with each AK - I can't really review the RAK-1 honestly unless I use it as-is with its intended components. We will have to see if there are any issues (light strikes, etc) with this spring, but it appears to be very similar to most other modern military hammer springs (similar to AR, SIG 55x, etc.), in a world where the braided spring found in most AKs is somewhat unusual.

You may also notice that the RAK-1 is a double-hook FCG, and will install in single-hook receivers without any issue. Some people prefer double-hook FCGs, some don't. I have no strong opinion either way, but it is a nice piece of mind to know that the hammer has two engagement surfaces rather than one, and there is some belief that a double-hook trigger will always provide a more consistent feedback in pull due to the fact that the trigger is not being loaded by spring tension on only one side, such as it is with a single-hook trigger.

Installation is straight forward, and if you've installed an AK FCG before, there is really nothing out of the ordinary here. One thing I noted while installing the hammer, is that the non-braided spring is somewhat of a pain in the ass to install. With the AK braided spring, usually you can slip the spring legs up over the hammer, clip them onto each other, and then install the hammer with the spring preloaded and ready to release. When you try this with the RAK, the coils want to pop off of the hammer axis channel, so you need to keep a pretty tight grip on the whole thing while installing. The RAK-1 instructions recommend using a pair of needle nose vice grips, which seems like it might work better, but this is the "by hand" method that I've always used.

Once installed, I function tested the RAK-1. In each rifle, the disconnector fully engaged the entire surface of the hammer's disconnector shelf. Each rifle properly blocked the trigger on safe. Each rifle demonstrated identical trigger pull characteristics, showing that the manufacturing consistency of the RAK-1 seems to be good.

The first thing I noted is that, due to the smoothly curved hammer profile of the RAK-1 FCG, each rifle's BCG cycled noticeably smoother,  and there was no BCG "sticking" typically found with the G2. While the RAK-1's smoothness could likely be improved further with some polishing of the hammer face, it's still miles ahead of the G2, and you shouldn't have to worry about completely reprofiling the face of the RAK-1 hammer like you would with the G2.

The RAK-1 hammer struck each bolt tail and firing pin squarely, even the AK-74 and the somewhat unique Saiga .223 bolt. The hammer also interacted well with the carrer tail stem - the curved RAK-1 hammer face provides a nice low friction surface, versus the G2 hammer which had several pronounced angled spots in its casting, which can "rake" these surfaces and over time likely leads to a lot of reported wear on these parts.

I will note that the RAK-1 produces somewhat of a "hollow" sound when resetting via the BCG, and I'll have to wait and see if this is noticeable while shooting.

How is the trigger pull and reset? The RAK-1 appears to provide a definite two-stage pull - the first stage is a very smooth, light pull, and at the end of it there is a very clearly defined stop - it's at this point that the disconnector hook makes contact with the rear of the hammer shelf, and the spring tension of the disconnector provides the 2nd stage resistance. I don't know that I can gauge the weight of the 2nd stage break, but it's nowhere near as stiff as an Arsenal 2-stage trigger.

I already like this much better than the G2, which had a breaking point that was inconsistent from one rifle to another, and wasn't always predictable. A slow, deliberate pull of the RAK-1 trigger will leave you with no mystery about when the trigger is about ready to release once you reach the 2nd stage.

If you are firing more rapidly, the 2nd stage is not really all that noticable - a quick, deliberate squeeze of the trigger is carried through every bit as smoothly as a G2, and you can only briefly feel the 2nd stage pressure while squeezing.

The main objective was satisfied, which was to replace two dangerously worn G2 trigger groups. A side benefit appears to be a pretty smoothly functioning FCG with what I consider to be a much improved trigger pull behavior over the G2.

Here is a closing shot of the RAK-1 installed in the WASR, where you can clearly see the solid disconnector engagement of the hammer. As a bonus, you can also see that the RAK-1 does not interfere with the hardware used by the East German side-folding wire stock's spring assembly.



YUGO USERS:  I have several Yugos but for this review I did NOT replace their FCGs with RAK-1, since I am still using the original Yugo FCG on these (M77 and M92). I have cleaned up the rough spots and polished these FCGs and will likely stick with them rather than replace then with US-made FCGs.

Nice information, thanks for sharing it!

I've been eyeballing the RAK-1 as replacements for the G2s I have in service as well, so I'll be interested to see what your feedback is.  The only negative I've heard is the hammer may be harder than the G2 and thus peen the carrier tail somewhat more.  Though if the geometry is better, maybe that isn't an issue.

The G2 is such an ancient design that it is hard to not improve on it.  If I remember right, Tapco purchased the Gordon Tech design which was one of the earliest "not crap" 922r trigger groups.

Thanks for the review, been curious about this FCG for a while.

I recently replaced the crapco g2 with the Rak-1 on my Polish PMKMS.  Such a relief to not have to worry about the bolt carrier sticking on top of the hammer anymore, it would happen even during firing if I didn't have it greased up enough.  The 2 stage trigger pull is nice as well.  I wasn't brave enough as you btw, decided to re-use my braided spring!

As I have thought about it, I really don't think that the hardness of the G2 is the primary issue, but instead that the G2 hammer has several angled edges on the hammer face that repeatedly rake the surfaces of the bolt and carrier tails during cycling. The RAK-1 and other hammers like it have a nice smooth, curved bearing surface all the way across that should facilitate smooth motion and no jarring action that may be occurring when the angular sections of the G2 hammer rake over the mating surfaces during cycling.

The RAK-1 is a nice trigger. I like the break on it. The only trigger I like more than it is the new trigger that comes in the SLR-107R. Never tried the ALG trigger, but I don't like my triggers too light.

does the 107 still come with the Arsenal 2-stage or is it something else?

They removed the ledge that the FR models had. I'll post pictures. It breaks better.

The SLR-107R hammer now has a block on the left side. The block adds height. Arsenal ditched the ledge that they had on the SLR-107FR hammer. The block makes the pretravel short and light. The break is lighter than the 107FR. The pretravel on the FR feels heavier and longer. The break also feels heavier. I like the new trigger a heck of a lot more.

Awesome write up. Thanks for the time you put into it