AK Sponsor
Posted: 10/31/2010 6:16:25 AM EDT
| Why do some of you guys feel the milled receivers are best? The AK was designed as a sheet steel receiver, they milled them at first while they perfected the stamped one. Just asking because my stamped WASR outshoots my buddy's milled Arsenal using a third person as the shooter. |
|
Quoted: Once I can afford a milled receiver I will have one. Who does the milled receiver best by the way? I just bought one of these. Not certain if it can claim to be the "best", but I think its in the running - and for the price its no doubt the "best value". |
| Milled AK rifles are a nice option but not an absolute necessity . The AK platform has a lot of slop & looseness the milled reciever adds a bit more structural rigidty which helps improve accuracy. 90% or more of the AK's out in the world are stamped not milled and they are working just fine. |
The current Century Arms AK47 Polish 1960 Milled rifles are a nice deal for the price tag , our firm and others offer them for $599.00 & up however they do not have a chrome lined barrel if you had your heart set on this. The milled Polish 1960 is pictured below.
|
|
Quoted:
I posted long, long time ago that WASR outperforms milled Arsenal and have taken a lot of heat from it's fanboys. Machining tolerances on Arsenal are non-existent, and to make them run somewhat better I use E. German carriers and do modifications to the bolt. I think that's really going to come down to personal opinion and preference but not so much fact. Both styles have their particular pros and cons in a technical contest. It really comes down to someone's preference over the differences in weight, feel, performance, and aesthetics. |
|
I like how they look. I really prefer the classic style. Also, with a milled receiver the stock angles downward a bit, i find this to me more comfortable. Also the action on a milled receiver is much much smoother, just makes for a nicer feeling rifle.
Neither one is really better, just different. The only stamped guns I've fired that match the feel of the milled guns are the chinese. This is probably because they are thicker than usual and have a similar style stock. |
| It's all hogwash that a milled receiver some how reduces flex and leads to a more accurate rifle. I have many stamped and milled rifles and neither shoots better then the other. I just enjoy the milled receivers though because they are more classic, not because they work better. |
|
Milled AK's are like billet AR15 recievers, heavier and are said to bring better accuracy (even though its still mostly the barrel, esp. with the billet.)
There just diffrent, if its a range gun/clone/just something that I want then milled is fine. If I had to fight with a AK id pick a stamped but wouldnt matter to me if I had the milled. |
| to me its just like having a 1967 Chevy truck. it is a classic rifle to have but that's about it. the Chinese milled mak90 i had had very smooth action and the mag insertion was the smoothest but that's about it. when its all said and done there is no difference in my opinion. just a classic rifle. |
|
Why Milled?
-Because the receiver is milled from a solid block of steel as opposed to stamped riveted sheet metal. -Because of the added weight, it is ARGUABLY more acurate. They just feel solid. -It has the classic look. -It seems that Milled receivers are generally more desirable. Having said that, there is nothing wrong with Stamped receivers. I own several stamped and like them every bit as much. |
|
Quoted:
Why Milled? -Because the receiver is milled from a solid block of steel as opposed to stamped riveted sheet metal. Stamped receivers hold up perfectly fine -Because of the added weight, it is ARGUABLY more acurate. They just feel solid. Not more accurate, I have both stamped and milled -It has the classic look. True, that's the reason why I like them. -It seems that Milled receivers are generally more desirable it seems. Having said that, there is nothing wrong with Stamped receivers. I own several stamped and like them every bit as much. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Why Milled? -Because the receiver is milled from a solid block of steel as opposed to stamped riveted sheet metal. Stamped receivers hold up perfectly fine -Because of the added weight, it is ARGUABLY more acurate. They just feel solid. Not more accurate, I have both stamped and milled -It has the classic look. True, that's the reason why I like them. -It seems that Milled receivers are generally more desirable it seems. Having said that, there is nothing wrong with Stamped receivers. I own several stamped and like them every bit as much. Yes, stamped receivers hold up just fine. I wasn't implying that they didn't. As far as accuracy, I did state that they are ARGUABLY more accurate. Some think they are, some think they aren't. I like both, and don't necessarily have a preference. My stamped SGL-31 with Russian wood is probably my favorite out of the eight that I own. 
|
| I have owned a few milled AKs over the years. I don't like the extra weight or the limited furniture options. I would jump over 1,000 milled AKs to get to one stamped one if I were going to need to carry said rifle for any distance. I got rid of all of my milled AKs and I have zero regrets. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
how much heavier? 6 1/2 lbs vs ? Milled ones are about 7.5lbs. Oddly enough, the Arsenal SGLs are 7.2lbs... no idea what makes them heavier than other stamped AKs. I believe it's from the scope rail and dust cover. Yeah I thought the dust cover was part of it. It's a pretty solid piece where the usual ribbed ones are kinda flimsy. I've carried M249's and M240B's up to 20 miles at a time, so the extra 1lbs of a milled AK doesn't even register with me. It's still lighter than the M4 I was issued that had all sorts of shit hanging off it..haha |
| I've had both, or several. Of the one's I've had, accuracy was in this order. Arsenal SLR101S, SAR1, SAR1( had two of them, best one was with the very dark brown furniture), the Romanuian 10 rounder with thumbhole stock WASR 10, Yugo M70 underfolder, WASR, WASR, Maadi. The Aersenal wouild shoot into less than two moa consistently and fired quite a few 5 shot groups just at or less than 1moa using a Kobra sight and handloads, and some were at 1 moa with Wolf, back when it was still good ammo. The SAR1 shot on average 3 moa, but has shot close to 1moa with handloads. The other SAR shot about the same with the Kobra( different Kobra, a weaver mounted model and a Side rail mount that accepted weaver rings), but not quite as good. The Romanian 10 shot, about 3.5 on average, the Yugo once the proper cheekweld was marked ojn the stock with tape was about 4moa on average, as were the two WASRs. The Maadi was at best 5moa on a good day, if I was lucky and had my pet rabbit and a leprechaun in my range bag. All of them had a Kobra on them. The Arsenal was by far the superior weapon in all aspects, and the SAR1 was second on that list. None of them ever had any issues with feeding or anything like that. the only issue with any of them was trigger slap of the SAR1s and the first WASR, which I remedied by cutting the extra metal and re-hardening. |
|
Quoted:
GET BOTH.  As I did http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee57/Hawkeye59/AKs-1.jpg |
| I like the milled models for the aesthetics and better ergonomics for me, not because I think it shoots better. The problem is finding a reasonably priced model that not made by Lancaster. I like everything about the Century model except that the barrel is not chrome lined. |
|
Quoted:
I prefer stamped just because it was the way Kalashnikov designed it. Do you only own Type I AKs then? 
I just never understood the whole "I like stamped because that was the original design." When realistically he made many designs, multiple prototypes, some were stamped, some were milled. The AKM type stamped receivers aren't anything like his original stamped designs. |
|
I have a SAM-7SF that I really like. No particular reason and I don't think it's better than a good stamped AK...I just enjoy it. Something about it just feels solid.
On a side note...I know someone that has a Type 1 that I'm trying to get my hands on. Just gotta figure out what it will cost me...... CMS |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I prefer stamped just because it was the way Kalashnikov designed it. Do you only own Type I AKs then?
I just never understood the whole "I like stamped because that was the original design." When realistically he made many designs, multiple prototypes, some were stamped, some were milled. The AKM type stamped receivers aren't anything like his original stamped designs. Also keep in mind a lot of his designs incorporated concessions he had to make based on what the Kremlin required - it's not all entirely him in those designs. I think when time goes on, there's going to be a lot of surprising information regarding just how much true material he inputed. |
|
My gunsmith, who incidentally firmly believes that form must always follow function, thinks that a milled receiver is a waste of money. You want a classic look? Okay, but I think you'd be paying a lot more for an image. and that's not what an AK is about. I've been to a lot of crappy places; Africa, Afghanistan included, and I've yet to see a milled receiver AK. Those places necessitate a weapon that will work, period, regardless of the conditions, for the least amount of money.
For me, any slight benefits in accuracy of a milled receiver over a stamped one are totally erased once you start looking at how much more it will cost you. Besides, as many have pointed out, accuracy has more to do with the barrel than the receiver. You want sub MOA accuracy in an assault rifle platform using other than match grade ammo? Get a good AR. But if you want an assault rifle that can eat match grade ammo along with military surplus that takes whatever abuse you give it, then you should have an AK. I have both, but for the money and reliability, I always pick up an AK first. Now it I want to shoot through a large tree to get the bad guy on the other side... that's what the FAL is for!
|
|
Quoted:
My gunsmith, who incidentally firmly believes that form must always follow function, thinks that a milled receiver is a waste of money. You want a classic look? Okay, but I think you'd be paying a lot more for an image. and that's not what an AK is about. I've been to a lot of crappy places; Africa, Afghanistan included, and I've yet to see a milled receiver AK. Those places necessitate a weapon that will work, period, regardless of the conditions, for the least amount of money. For me, any slight benefits in accuracy of a milled receiver over a stamped one are totally erased once you start looking at how much more it will cost you. Besides, as many have pointed out, accuracy has more to do with the barrel than the receiver. You want sub MOA accuracy in an assault rifle platform using other than match grade ammo? Get a good AR. But if you want an assault rifle that can eat match grade ammo along with military surplus that takes whatever abuse you give it, then you should have an AK. I have both, but for the money and reliability, I always pick up an AK first. Now it I want to shoot through a large tree to get the bad guy on the other side... that's what the FAL is for!
Tell your gunsmith that with milled you don't have to sacrifice form or function!! 
|
AK Sponsor