I'm planning on buying a new AK at the next local gun show.  I was looking at one of the Bulgarian or Romanian ones.  Is there much difference between AK's?  I've heard that some take double stack mags and some don't.  Which one don't I want?  How much should I expect to pay for it NIB?  How much do mags run.            

I own 2 AK's . One Romanian and one Bulg.
The Bulg is better but I paid more for it too .

My Romanian is my fun gun . I just had it too the range today . I am trying to get the
" bump fire " method down . had alot of 3 rd bursts today .

Both are good guns and take high caps .
Romanian is the SAR-1 .
Bulg is the SLR-95 .  
the SAR-1 has the pistle grip while the SLR-95 has a muzzle brake and thumbhole stock . Both have chrome lined barrels .                                     At the Indy 1500 gunshow last weekend I saw
SaR-1 's for about $350 .
The single stack mag AK's were running $200 .
Used 30 rd mags were $8-$15 .  I picked 2 40 rd mags in almost new shape for $15 each .
Both will are built like tanks though the Rom. is stamped receiver which is slightly cheaper and thus not quite as good.

Is a single stack better than a double, or vice versa?  Are the mags interchangeable?

get a double stack then u can use highcaps without having to mod the gun

The single stack mag guns are the "politically correct" pieces, since the single stack mags only hold 10 rounds.  The double stack guns, while sold with 10 round mags, will also take the standard 30 round AK mags---and that's why they sell for about $100 more.  

Actually, if you'll check out the AK section of this site, and go back in the posts over the past 6months or so, I'll bet you'll find some posts on opening up the mag wells of the single stack pieces to hold standard mags. It's not real hard to do, if you're at all mechanically inclined.  If you're not, then pay the extra for a double stack piece. You'll be much happier in the long run

Ranman223,

The stamped receivers on AKs built after the mid 1950's are every bit as good as the milled ones and lighter to boot. The original stamped AK-47 receivers had durability problems. Milled receivers were a temporary fix while the bugs were being worked out of the stamped receivers. The guns on the new stamped receivers were called AKM (Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovannyi or Modern Kalasnikov Assault Rifle) and sported a few other improvments to the original AK-47. This is why Bulgaria is one of the few countries to opt for the more expensive milled receiver.

One of the reasons they became so valued in the American market tis because the Bulgies are some of the best AK's made, and the imported receivers could be built into rifles with less specialized tools. This, and the problems with the original AK's led to the common misconception that the milled receivers are of higher quality than the stamped ones.

medicmandan,

If you have the extra money get the Bulgarian AK. I think that the better craftsman ship is worth the extra money. If you want a beater rifle that you can just throw in the back of a truck guilt free then get the Romanain.

Have you though about the Arsenal USA or Nevada guns?
Here is my Arsenal USA SSR-85B. They are built on a Hungarian receivers (or Ohio Ordnance Works receivers on the later ones) with Polish parts, and my Romanian AK-74 built out a converted Romak 992 (single stack SAR2).




Kyle

The Romanian SARs are a terrific bang for the buck. Probably will need a trigger job and the trigger slap fixed but these things are easily done at home with a dremel tool.

$350 or less should get you a SAR.

I'd recommend the 5.45 or 5.56 for longer range and lack of recoil.

My first and only AK is a SAR 1. I got lucky through Century and got one with beautiful wood and straight sights!!!!I may buy a SAR 3 at some point and put a scope on it. But for your first AK, get a SAR 1. Durable, and the ammo is CHEAP. 1/2 the cost of .223. Plus AK's love the cheap Wolf stuff.....

You can't go wrong with the Romanian SAR 1.  I love mine....the wood on it was finished terribly on mine, but I sanded and refinished mine.  Looks great now.  It has never malfunctioned in any way at all, and loves the cheap Russian Wolf ammo.  Plus, 30rd mags can easliy be found for under $10.  

Another Sar guy....Have all three.
I prefer the 3;more accurate than the 2 and way more accurate than the 1......
Any however are effective for plinking,battle,dependability.the 3 would be the one I would seriously aim at paper out of the Sar's.
www.aimsurplus.com
www.gunsnammo.com
and many others have them for ~300.
Left to right...Galil,Sar3 with bleached stock,sar2 with homemade pistolgrip and romanian nonfolder..russian collimater,sar1 with pso 4x24 scope(should be on the 3 really!)
Ohhh one thing,if you buy a 3,avoid mag problems by buying the German Metal mags (weigers).....Interordnance had a good deal on them with pouch.
http://www.printroom.com/_vti_bin/ViewImage.dll?userid=1Patriot%2Dof%2Dmany&album_id=72546&image_id=25&courtesy=1

That sure is a 'cheap ass' safe PATRIOT..any idiot knows that they just have to press both buttons at the same time to open it.   lol

I had an AK in 7.63x39, but after shooting the SAR-3 (.223) & SAR 2 (5.45x39) I don't believe I'll ever have another one in 7.62.

The SAR-2's are fantastic and the wounding capability is rumored to be phenomenol.   The SAR-3 will function reliably with slightly modified bakelite (5.45) mags as long as you have the robarms followers in them.  I would lean slightly towards recommending the SAR-3 over the SAR-2 by virtue of the fact that it could share ammo with an AR.  

Rule #1 with AK's is that unlike AR's you pretty much can't get bad ones.   They're all good!  Although you can get a prettier AK than the Romanians, I prefer to not spend alot of money for them.  I mean, c'mon, we're talking about AK's here!