AK Sponsor
Posted: 3/12/2009 6:19:22 AM EDT
|
Hey guys,
Just wondering if anyone has any knowlege on a screw build. i know most of you dont like them becasue it isnt original, crappy or whatever but its what i want to do. I guess my question is what size tap and die's will i need? i have heard 10/32? is this correct? and for all of you that want to pursuade me to a rivet build, no thanks, my mind is already set on screws. Thanks 
|
|
Quoted:
mo-mo must be an ass, i screwed mine together, over 2k rds. through it an nothing has even started to come loose. don't let mo-mo shit you ,it works good and dosen't look bad either. I kind of assumed that mowow is a friend of the OP and is giving him "the business". |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
mo-mo must be an ass, i screwed mine together, over 2k rds. through it an nothing has even started to come loose. don't let mo-mo shit you ,it works good and dosen't look bad either. I kind of assumed that mowow is a friend of the OP and is giving him "the business". So did I, until he concluded that people are building and then posting pictures of illegal weapons on this site after failing to read the thread. |
| Back to the topic, all the screws in the screw build are not the same size. the two lower front trunion screws are bigger while the TG screws are smaller. I did mine with a screw kit from AK Parts. And, do your self a big favor and pull the barrel screw build or not. It just much easier to drill and tap without the barrel, you WILL drill into the barrel and you probally will snap a tap or two. It does not come out too bad, I even made my own center support out a piece of plain rod drilled and tapped the ends and screwed in. |
|
I like allen screws in a screw build. If done right it is really easy to dress the screw heads to look like rivets. (I prefer black wax or crayon as it is easy to remove)
Make sure you use grade 8's. Screwed Romy G 
If done right a screw build has some advantages over a rivet build. The big one being you can take it apart. Want a new barrel? Buy a front end, tap for screws and bolt it on. (Make sure to check head space and/or match bolts to barreled trunnions when possible) Folding stock? Fixed? Just swap rear trunnions. I have all the tools for a rivet build but my Romy G will probably end up as part of a "Modular AK" I want to try to build. 
If you find a configuration you really like and don't plan to change, pull your screws and rivet it up. In closing. A good rivet job is stronger, better looking, and with the correct tools easier. 
|
|
Quoted:
Back to the topic, all the screws in the screw build are not the same size. the two lower front trunion screws are bigger while the TG screws are smaller. I did mine with a screw kit from AK Parts. And, do your self a big favor and pull the barrel screw build or not. It just much easier to drill and tap without the barrel, you WILL drill into the barrel and you probally will snap a tap or two. It does not come out too bad, I even made my own center support out a piece of plain rod drilled and tapped the ends and screwed in. The 1 screw build I did has 10-32 screws in the rear trunnion holes. Larger screws are not necessary. Using a drill press with the understanding of how a stop works will prevent drilling into the barrel. I have tapped lots and lots of holes, both blind holes and otherwise. I've never broken a tap in a hole. The key (especially with a blind hole) is to turn the tap backwards often and remove it several times so you can clean out the debris. Use plenty of cutting oil too. Properly drilling out the rivets and tapping the holes makes a screw build a PITA (although less of a PITA than drilling through the barrel or breaking a tap). That's why I only did one. |
|
I have done screw builds, but I have no idea how people say you can take them apart later on...... I use redloctite on mine and they aren't coming out unless i use a blow torch or drill them out.
I have no issues with screw builds shoot, the last couple I have done are a total hybrid of threaded screws (trigger guard), u drives (rear trunion and two most forward on either side of front trunion), and rivets (front trunion near magwell and rear trunion on underfolders). All of my guns work great and I have no issues with them at all. I don't have a press and all the other tools. I built my first one with just a hammer, chisels (to chop off old rivets), hand drill, taps and tap handle, screw drivers, punch set. That was a long time ago, but that ROmy G still looks great. The hybrid method of three types of fastners gives the closet look to a rivet build for people without access to presses, etc. |
|
there is no "correct" way to do a fundamentally defective process. What's the "correct" way to drive drunk? There are ways to partially mitigate the fundamental flaws of using screws instead of the correct rivets, but its like driving drunk - but going slow and staying on back roads. You're still driving drunk. A screw is a fundamentally different fastener than a rivet. Nor is the concept of "stronger" appropriate in this application. Sure, a grade 5 bolt may in some narrow aspects be "stronger" (a dangerous term to use in metallurgy) than a rivet, but it does not expand to fill the channel or transfer the shear force to the trunion as v neck rivets do. A file is "stronger" than a hammer, but hit one with the other and see which breaks.
Don't do it. Its a ghetto half-ass way to build a fundamentally defective rifle |
|
I thought I'd gotten away from that all that "ghetto" build nonsense when I left the AK Files.
It looks like I was premature. A properly done screw build is safe. It's safer than an improperly built rivet job, and there are plenty of those built by hacks with air hammers who don't have any clue what they're doing. |
|
A properly done screw build
oxymoron. Screws in any application on any firearm are a liability and firearm designers have gone to great lengths when they have to use a screw to mitigate it - staking, flaring, castle nut, cotter pins, lock washers, safety wires, etc - all to deal with the inevitable failure. A screw has "failed" when it loosens even a small amount. There is no "proper" anything with a screw on a rolling, yawing, and heavily vibrating surface. It is the wrong fastener. Of course, there are those who are unwilling to learn how to build a gun correctly, even though the information and even one-on-one assistance is readily available and free. They figure that they are somehow smarter than 100 years of gun designers before them, and so they continue espousing that which is incorrect, defective, and in extreme cases, unsafe. Build it anyway you want - but don't pretend there is a correct way to utilize a fundamentally incorrect process. 
|
|
Perhaps you'd like to state the amount of shear force the fasteners on the trunnion and stock block have to withstand and how you calculated that force.
Perhaps you'd like to state the amount of shear force the rivets used will withstand, and the source of the information. Perhaps you'd like to state the amount of shear force the screws sometimes used will withstand, and the source of the information. Perhaps you'd like to ponder the question of how much shear force the rivets used to secure the trigger guard are required to withstand. The true reason for using rivets in a production AK is simple and has nothing to do with safety or durability. When using rivets two steps can be eliminated from the production process: the trunnion and stock block do not need to be threaded and the body of the fastener need not be threaded. When using rivets, a less well trained worker can accomplish the task. When using rivets that less well trained worker can accomplish the task in less time. Eliminating production processes, taking less time and using less well trained (and therefore less well paid) workers cut costs. Cutting costs is crucial when building millions of rifles. It hardly matters when building one. Rivet builds are desirable for two reasons: 1.They are easier to do when you have the proper tools. 2. Lots of people don't know much about how these rifles go together so they listen to "experts" who tell them screw builds aren't safe and believe the rifle built with rivets is better, so they'll pay more for it. |
| If you get a really cheap screw, it might shear, but shear is not the primary reason why screws are an inappropriate fastener. If the AK was static, it wouldn't matter (other than poor cosmetics). But the AK firing is a multi-axis, high-frequency dynamic like a ship hull. Watch a slo-mo video, there are several on youtube. Maybe then you'll grasp the concept. The reason you left the AK files is you found no audience for your flawed methodology. Maybe you'll find one here, but I doubt it. |
|
Quoted:
If you get a really cheap screw, it might shear, but shear is not the primary reason why screws are an inappropriate fastener. If the AK was static, it wouldn't matter (other than poor cosmetics). But the AK firing is a multi-axis, high-frequency dynamic like a ship hull. Watch a slo-mo video, there are several on youtube. Maybe then you'll grasp the concept. The reason you left the AK files is you found no audience for your flawed methodology. Maybe you'll find one here, but I doubt it. Locktite If you are like me and like to bump a 75 round drum you might need red or even green Locktite. I would also like to point out... Quoted:
for all of you that want to pursuade me to a rivet build, no thanks, my mind is already set on screws. |
|
Quoted:
If you are like me and like to bump a 75 round drum you might need red or even green Locktite. Why? To partially mitigate the fundamental defect of using screws in this application? for all of you that want to pursuade me to a rivet build, no thanks, my mind is already set on screws. While the OP may be determined to build a fundamentally flawed ghetto gun, there is a larger audience here who may tap into the wisdom of those more experienced and build theirs using the correct fastener. |
|
Quoted:
If you get a really cheap screw, it might shear, but shear is not the primary reason why screws are an inappropriate fastener. If the AK was static, it wouldn't matter (other than poor cosmetics). But the AK firing is a multi-axis, high-frequency dynamic like a ship hull. Watch a slo-mo video, there are several on youtube. Maybe then you'll grasp the concept. The reason you left the AK files is you found no audience for your flawed methodology. Maybe you'll find one here, but I doubt it. I really enjoy watching you flail around and contradict yourself and avoid matters when it becomes clear that you can't answer direct questions. Why not just admit that you can't compute the shear forces involved? Neither can I, but I know someone who can, and did when I aked him if he thought it would be safe to build one with screws, before I built my first rifle. He's an engineer. He assured me that if I did my part, the fasteners would do their's. As usual, he was correct. BTW: Do you know something about the AKs adopted in 1947 that others don't? The Type I had the receiver welded to the trunnion and stock block, AFAIK. If it was riveted, as your cute picture implies, please post the source of that information. A picture of a riveted Type I would also be appreciated. |
|
you are, of course, wrong again. There was one of the experimental models - I think #7, where the stamped rear trunion was attached by three plug wells on the left and right side. There are a few others where it is difficult to discern whether it is a flush machined rivet or a weld. But no screws. I wonder why. Maye Kalishinikov understood something you have yet to grasp?
Why don't you post a picture of a factory screw build. Any country in the world is acceptable, from any production year. (crickets) |
|
Quoted:
Maye Kalishinikov understood something you have yet to grasp? Why don't you post a picture of a factory screw build. There are no factory screw builds. MK understood the reasons for using rivets when mass producing AKMs well. I understand them well, since someone who understands mass production techniques explained them to me. Any one who can read and understand the English language and who reads this thread should understand them now as well. And they should also understand the difference between mass production and building a single rifle. But as the saying goes, "There's always 10% who don't get the message. |
|
Quoted:
you are, of course, wrong again. There was one of the experimental models - I think #7, where the stamped rear trunion was attached by three plug wells on the left and right side. From the Soviet Service Manual page 15: " There are also automatic rifles with stamped receivers (fig 14). The stamped receiver has the following construction: An insert is WELDED (emphasis supplied) to the forward part of these receivers, and back plate to the rear portion." So I guess you do know something that even the Soviets didn't know. They wrote a Service Manual describing an experimental model that the troops never saw and completely forgot to describe the production model. That's quite an oversight! LOL 
|
|
Quoted:
A properly done screw build oxymoron. Screws in any application on any firearm are a liability and firearm designers have gone to great lengths when they have to use a screw to mitigate it - staking, flaring, castle nut, cotter pins, lock washers, safety wires, etc - all to deal with the inevitable failure. A screw has "failed" when it loosens even a small amount. There is no "proper" anything with a screw on a rolling, yawing, and heavily vibrating surface. It is the wrong fastener. Of course, there are those who are unwilling to learn how to build a gun correctly, even though the information and even one-on-one assistance is readily available and free. They figure that they are somehow smarter than 100 years of gun designers before them, and so they continue espousing that which is incorrect, defective, and in extreme cases, unsafe. Build it anyway you want - but don't pretend there is a correct way to utilize a fundamentally incorrect process. http://www.arizonaresponsesystems.com/webpictures/akrivets.jpg Kaleshnikov wanted to keep costs down and manufacturing efforts to a minimum, end of story. i dont see how a rivet build is far more significant than a screw build if done correctly, and i will use the red locktite. as i stated earlier i dont want to be pursuaded. but thanks anyways. as for the rest of you thank you for the help and input, i will be working on finishing this up soon before it is illegal to buy gun stuff anymore, haha hopefully not, and probably not. and mowow is my friend, he is just goofy like that, no offense was taken, but its great that you guys ripped on him like you did, he is a noob, hes got alot to learn yet. Thanks again! |
|
i dont see how a rivet build is far more significant than a screw build if done correctly
again, for those who just don't get it. You cannot "correctly" us an inappropriate fastener. Why is this so hard to understand? Yeah, I know, those of no interest in developing the simple skills and techniques to build a rifle properly feel some motivation to insist their ghetto methods are "just as good" as a proper build. Why? Revel in your low standards! But to equate one with the other demonstrates either a willful refusal to learn the difference or simply standards so low the difference is immaterial. AK 47 experimental #3 (1947) has 3 welds and a rivet on each side of rear trunion. Front trunion has 2 rivets per side. These are the large front trunion versions AK 47 experimental #4 (1947) has 2 welds and a rivet on rear trunion, (at least) two on the front. AK 47 experimental #5 (1947) has 2 welds and a rivet on rear trunion, (at least) two on the front. AK 48 #1 has three welds. AK 48 #2 has 2 welds + 1 rivet. AK 49 (1949) has at 3 welds on the double tang, rear trunion and at least 2 rivets on the front. 2-slab PG . This was the one adopted and designated model 1947. Same with the AKS 1949 re-designated AKS-47. and Experimental model 1950 (both the FPG and standard model. Examination of the 1950 FPG model shows thee spots R side where it appears the welds were machined out and redone. This was the last 2-slab PG variant. Model 1951 changes to an angled rear tang and a stock ferrule, as well as a milled receiver, dropping the front insert. Model 1953 is the classic milled, with the double tang rear (riveted) and all the changes in the 1951-1953 program (end of slab side). It was adopted as standard in 1955 as the "light weight" model. Although it still had a milled receiver, it was 500g lighter than the stamped model 1949 with its large front trunion, slab mag and double-slab PG. Rear trunion rivets were higher. 51-53 included a number of variations on the milled receiver until the 1955 model returned to stamped, and despite its longer barrel is the first to lose the double-tang stock and switch to the socket type with 2 rivets per side. Also the small front trunion is in evidence with 2 rivets. No longer welded. The S-04-M 1955 model kept the stamped receiver and reverted to the previous barrel configuration, dropping the gas tube vents and beginning the ribbed top cover. A 55 #8 of 1955 has the ports back on the gas tube higher up. 1959 version 2 became the AKM with a number of additional subtle changes, such as lowering the bottom rear trunion rivet, changing impact surface for bolt carrier, etc. Version 3 introduced the slant brake. 1959 also ribbed the AKS stock making the AKMS first adopted variant. A few other versions up through the 1960 change to the 5.45 which over a dozen models became the standardized AK 74. None were screwed. 1962 went back to milled to test phenolic furniture. |
|
Quoted:
i dont see how a rivet build is far more significant than a screw build if done correctly again, for those who just don't get it. You cannot "correctly" us an inappropriate fastener. Why is this so hard to understand? Yeah, I know, those of no interest in developing the simple skills and techniques to build a rifle properly feel some motivation to insist their ghetto methods are "just as good" as a proper build. Why? Revel in your low standards! But to equate one with the other demonstrates either a willful refusal to learn the difference or simply standards so low the difference is immaterial. AK 47 experimental #3 (1947) has 3 welds and a rivet on each side of rear trunion. Front trunion has 2 rivets per side. These are the large front trunion versions AK 47 experimental #4 (1947) has 2 welds and a rivet on rear trunion, (at least) two on the front. AK 47 experimental #5 (1947) has 2 welds and a rivet on rear trunion, (at least) two on the front. AK 48 #1 has three welds. AK 48 #2 has 2 welds + 1 rivet. AK 49 (1949) has at 3 welds on the double tang, rear trunion and at least 2 rivets on the front. 2-slab PG . This was the one adopted and designated model 1947. Same with the AKS 1949 re-designated AKS-47. and Experimental model 1950 (both the FPG and standard model. Examination of the 1950 FPG model shows thee spots R side where it appears the welds were machined out and redone. This was the last 2-slab PG variant. Model 1951 changes to an angled rear tang and a stock ferrule, as well as a milled receiver, dropping the front insert. Model 1953 is the classic milled, with the double tang rear (riveted) and all the changes in the 1951-1953 program (end of slab side). It was adopted as standard in 1955 as the "light weight" model. Although it still had a milled receiver, it was 500g lighter than the stamped model 1949 with its large front trunion, slab mag and double-slab PG. Rear trunion rivets were higher. 51-53 included a number of variations on the milled receiver until the 1955 model returned to stamped, and despite its longer barrel is the first to lose the double-tang stock and switch to the socket type with 2 rivets per side. Also the small front trunion is in evidence with 2 rivets. No longer welded. The S-04-M 1955 model kept the stamped receiver and reverted to the previous barrel configuration, dropping the gas tube vents and beginning the ribbed top cover. A 55 #8 of 1955 has the ports back on the gas tube higher up. 1959 version 2 became the AKM with a number of additional subtle changes, such as lowering the bottom rear trunion rivet, changing impact surface for bolt carrier, etc. Version 3 introduced the slant brake. 1959 also ribbed the AKS stock making the AKMS first adopted variant. A few other versions up through the 1960 change to the 5.45 which over a dozen models became the standardized AK 74. None were screwed. 1962 went back to milled to test phenolic furniture. I want to hear more about #7. You seem to have missed that one. |
|
i wonder why they just dont weld them...if rivets are so great, i sure as hell know that welds are stronger.. and might help the ak with its flex while shooting. or maybe its becasue the ak47 was designed with loose tolerances, and made cheap, that explains stamped recievers and rivets to hold them together, easy to manufacture and do so in high volume. you have no proof that rivets are superior, ur just showing examples of different prototypes. this is why i do not care about a screw build vs. a rivet build, i will keep you all posted with my sucess on a screw build since there are many that i have seen so far. and not to offend anyone, but the AK47 is the most crude built assault rifle on the planet, im not ripping on its abilities, but honestly, its a very very cheap gun...y is it so necessary to tell me that the way i want to build it is dead wrong, when there is no proof stating that specifically, and also if it was such a major liability, then i dont think they would sell screw build kits.... and if you can trust screws on a gun, then you might as well throw your car away, becasue according to some people on here a car with rivets would be a better build as opposed to bolts...haha
Also... Stoner had many variants of the ar15 at first... i dont know what your point is? |
|
blackwahl,
You can always rivet it later. I chose rivets 'cause the build party made it look easy. With the right tools and experience, it is easy. Watch Norm Abrams of The New Yankee Workshop fame. He makes heirloom quality furniture, has a myriad of tools and a boatload of experience... and it looks like child's play. My homemade attempt are square and plumb, but look nothing like the "masters". Same goes for AK building. I appreciate the master's overwatch at the build parties. They have the tools and time using them to give me confidence in the safety and function of the final product. Hope the build goes well. buckmeister |
|
Stoner had many variants of the ar15 at first... i dont know what your point is? I am demonstrating that a particular members tangent on some early variants having some welded parts is just a smokescreen he threw up to obscure the lack of merit in his support for low-quality, fundamentally defective screw-builds. Like the blind man feeling an elephant's tail and describing thew animal as like a rope, only reveals his lack of perspective. i wonder why they just dont weld them...if rivets are so great, i sure as hell know that welds are stronger.. They are not "stronger" they are "different". "Stronger" has no meaning in this context. You must understand a little bit about metal to see why the word "stronger" is immaterial. Back to my file and hammer example - which is stronger? We work metal to a variety of applications. hard, flexible, malleable, have memory (spring), ductility, etc etc. There are many sheet metal receivers that are welded. I've built Uzis, AR70s, HKs and others with welded trunions. But there is a lot more to welding than melting some metal on the part. A poor weld can cause severe failure. But what is a poor weld? A cosmetically attractive weld with a poor choice in material can cause embrittlement and cracking. A cosmetically nice weld with insufficient penetration can cause severe failure. I blew my first uzi trunion out the front of the gun because although cosmetically nice, they lacked the necessary penetration. That's when I listened to those with more experience than I and went to TIG instead of MIG, and selected my filler based on the types of metal instead of just a generic type. I do not see a problem with a welded AK receiver per se. The problem is that those who are too ignorant or lazy to build an AK properly, using the methods that have been proven over 60 years, are also likely the ones with an exaggerated view of their welding skills and think a buzz-box is the epitome of grace. but the AK47 is the most crude built assault rifle on the planet to the uneducated, it might seem crude. But those who have studied the design in depth understand there is nothing random about it. It does what it was designed to do. I consider its simplicity and uncontested reliability to demonstrate its elegance. Is the classic park Picnic table crude? Or elegant in its matching of simple form to function? |
|
Quoted:
Stoner had many variants of the ar15 at first... i dont know what your point is? I am demonstrating that a particular members tangent on some early variants having some welded parts is just a smokescreen he threw up to obscure the lack of merit in his support for low-quality, fundamentally defective screw-builds. Like the blind man feeling an elephant's tail and describing thew animal as like a rope, only reveals his lack of perspective. i wonder why they just dont weld them...if rivets are so great, i sure as hell know that welds are stronger.. They are not "stronger" they are "different". "Stronger" has no meaning in this context. You must understand a little bit about metal to see why the word "stronger" is immaterial. Back to my file and hammer example - which is stronger? We work metal to a variety of applications. hard, flexible, malleable, have memory (spring), ductility, etc etc. There are many sheet metal receivers that are welded. I've built Uzis, AR70s, HKs and others with welded trunions. But there is a lot more to welding than melting some metal on the part. A poor weld can cause severe failure. But what is a poor weld? A cosmetically attractive weld with a poor choice in material can cause embrittlement and cracking. A cosmetically nice weld with insufficient penetration can cause severe failure. I blew my first uzi trunion out the front of the gun because although cosmetically nice, they lacked the necessary penetration. That's when I listened to those with more experience than I and went to TIG instead of MIG, and selected my filler based on the types of metal instead of just a generic type. I do not see a problem with a welded AK receiver per se. The problem is that those who are too ignorant or lazy to build an AK properly, using the methods that have been proven over 60 years, are also likely the ones with an exaggerated view of their welding skills and think a buzz-box is the epitome of grace. but the AK47 is the most crude built assault rifle on the planet to the uneducated, it might seem crude. But those who have studied the design in depth understand there is nothing random about it. It does what it was designed to do. I consider its simplicity and uncontested reliability to demonstrate its elegance. I again point out, OP is not interested in a rivet build. If it is so important that rivets are used write up a good evaluation and get it tacked in the AK builders forum. |
|
Quoted:
If the OP was the only one reading this thread, I'd leave him to his folly. I'm sure anyone reading this thread is pretty sure you think the only way to build an AK is rivets with a remote possibility of welding. As I've said the "proper" way to build an AK is rivets. Is there a way of doing it that's better than rivets? Kudos to someone who can prove they have a better way. I don't think the firearm industry would get very far if people didn't try something different every once in a while. |
|
to the uneducated, it might seem crude. But those who have studied the design in depth understand there is nothing random about it. It does what it was designed to do. I consider its simplicity and uncontested reliability to demonstrate its elegance.
Is the classic park Picnic table crude? Or elegant in its matching of simple form to function? Study an AK in depth? what like how the whole fram is flimsy and shakes, or how they were machined by hand? if you didnt read i did give it the appreciation it deserves, i said it has served its purpose well... and yes it is crude, magazines wabble in the well? some parts arent interchangable without minor modifications.... please i know some people get a hard on for ak's but they are not the greatest rifle of all time. i am interested in the mechanics of guns...and like the differences between them. and ak is an ak, 3rd world technology currently, it is no sig, although a sig is designed off the same exact principle, and the bolt and carrier are strikingly simular... wierd, however i am not uneducated... thank you for ur input, but you never answered my initial question, and ignored the fact that i didnt want to be persuaded or told that rivets are better... u still have no proof, and yes a ak done the proper way "traditionally" is built with rivets...that doesnt mean they are superior... Thank you |
AK Sponsor