Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
12/15/2017 11:52:10 PM
Posted: 6/5/2001 8:34:46 AM EST
Ok, here's the situation. I am looking at getting either a HK G3 Centurian Clone from J&G or a SAR1 from AIM. The Centurian is on a Century receiver with refinished and new parts. It is a stamped steel receiver without the dovetail mount like some of their other ones. They are asking $629 for it. The SAR1 from AIM is $289 with a 10rd and 30rd mag. My main dilemma is that I would like both of these rifles. I know the sar's aren't anything pretty to look at but they work great for the most part. I have no Idea what the quality control and functioning is like on the Centurian. I would probably be getting the sar later this summer if I got the centurain. Should I get the Centurian or save some money by getting the sar, a case of ammo, and some mags? Lets hear it.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 8:42:11 AM EST
Plan on changing trigger parts if you get the SAR1....The U.S. fire control parts SUCK! Other than that it seems ok.
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 12:45:54 PM EST
BTT, anyone?
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 12:56:49 PM EST
Link Posted: 6/5/2001 3:28:30 PM EST
I would have to say go with the SAR they are not as bad as everyone says. And can be made to look great with a little work. For the same money as the HK G3 Centurian Clone you could buy the SAR a case of ammo 20 mags and a new stock set to give it the evil look. Or you can get the SAR-1 and a SAR-2 for the same money and do them up latter. These Sars wont be around forever and 5 years from now you dont want to look back and say I want one but damn I remember when they were under $300. I am a firm beliver in buying quality guns but lets face it a Ak is a AK they all run like you wouldnt belive and like said before the Centurian gun is a crap shoot. Just my opion SCAR
Top Top