AK Sponsor
Posted: 4/11/2010 8:29:27 AM EDT
|
I posted the below question on another forum and was curious what yall had in mind? This is completly hypothetical so throw out any ideas you have. Im curious what changes yall would make to the AK design if you could make your own parts. Before we start i would like to point ou the AK design seems great but i just want to see what kind of tweaks yall would make if you could change something even if it was as simple as a different shape to the top cover or trunion. To start here are some of the things i would like to change: -Redesign the carrier to a lower profile and make a flip forward top cover with a rail on top. -Try a dial recoil spring setup with the springs straddling the hammer to they would be inline with the bolt. I dont know how much that would effect the tilt and wear on the rails though. -Make a aluminum reciever with a replaceable ejector and carrier rails. I would definatly keep a nice chunk of steel for the front trunion though. -For the front trunion i would trim it down and shave off the sight. That would be moved to the top cover if the back end could be secured good enough. -I really like the feel of my bulgarian stock so i doubt i would change that but would like to add a buttpad that wouldnt make it much longer. -Thicken but flute the barrel under the handguards to help with flex. -While i have read that freefloating the forend hurts on a ak i would like to try it with different profile barrels. -Upgrade the quality of the barrel and MAYBE play with the chamber dimensions and profile. (find someone to load some match ammo for cheap  so it makes a difference.) |
|
Quoted:
To start here are some of the things i would like to change: -For the front trunion i would trim it down and shave off the sight. The rear sight base is not part of the trunnion. Maybe you ought to figure out exactly how the rifle is put together before you "redesign" it. 
|
|
I realize that. It was simply me getting a thought out faster than i should have. You got my point though. I dont doubt some of the ideas would be a failure but thats why its only a idea. This is more of something fun to think about. Nothing more and nothing less. The conventional AK rear sight i would do away with and either make the trunion higher to house the piston or keep it how it is and just make it lower profile and do away with the sight. The sight would be relocated to the top cover as i said. |
|
The main three improvements that would be nice for the already almost perfect Kalashnikov would be......
1.) moving the charging handle to the left side of the receiver. IWI did this change with the most recent version of the Micro Galil http://www.israel-weapon.com/files/0267_web_600x400.jpg 2.) moving the rear site father back, while maintaining a stable base. Finland was able to do this with the Valmet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RK_62_76.jpg 3.) as stated above....a Bolt Hold Open feature would be nice. I think the only way to have BHO feature now is to use Yugo BHO mags, but the action still slams forward upon removing the magazine, so its not a true BHO like an AR or an FAL. In terms of the left-side folding stock Kalshnikovs, a ride-side folding stock would be nice. Arsenal of Bulgaria did it..... http://www.arsenal-bg.com/images/defense_police/7.62ar-m4sf.jpg |
|
I agree things could be improved. Move the rear sight back, lighten it up a few ounces, put the charging handle on the left, etc...
I do like that new prototype Izhmash except for the fact that the rear sight wasn't moved all the way back like on the Valmet. I just really like a long sight radius and a peep-style sight––maybe if I weren't raised on ARs I'd have learned to appreciate the AK sight, but for now I use the Tech-Sights (though I'll probably try out a Krebs/Mojo peep someday)...I like my Eotech XPS more but sure wish it would bottom 1/3rd or 1/4th co-witness (I guess I'd like to see an eotech lowered with the battery hanging off to one side at a 4:30 position with the controls on the back of the battery compartment). Since Eotechs are generally used with ARs I guess there's no real need for a lower one. |
| Every so often someone brainstorms about how they'd "perfect" something and in many cases it actually leads to improvement. However, it's rare that a design like the Kalashnikov comes along and it's track record over the past 60 years or so speaks for itself! Point being, there's a fine line between improving and tampering and in the case of the AK, youre far more likely to tamper than improve. No doubt, there are most likely some things about the AK that could be "refined", but how many "refinements" does it take to change something to the point that it no longer possesses all of the things that made it what it was to begin with?? There's nothing about the AK that really aggravates me in the least and that's pretty rare for me. As an example, I couldnt warm up to the AR. The bolt handle arrangement seemed overly complicated and offered no way to push the bolt forward....so, a forward assist was added ,instead of simply adding a reciprocating bolt handle to the carrier and doing away with two sub-assemblies!?? I just think there's a point where you end up with an over complicated mechanism, even if that wasnt the original intention. |
AK Sponsor