AK Sponsor
Posted: 6/7/2012 2:19:18 PM EDT
|
I have an Arsenal SGL-21 and am thinking about adding the Ultimak with an Aimpoint T1/H1. I was curious if this makes the balance of the rifle worse than it already is. I realize the optic and rail will add a little bit of weight, but I don't want it to be too front heavy if that makes sense. I guess I'm just really used to my AR's.
Any input or suggestions is appreciated. |
|
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver.
With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. 
PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. |
|
Quoted:
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver. With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90/redguardrm/b2682c00.jpg PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. What model are you using? I'm looking to put one one on my 101-S ,also milled. I wasn't sure if they work with both milled and stamped or if there are different versions. Thanks |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver. With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90/redguardrm/b2682c00.jpg PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. What model are you using? I'm looking to put one one on my 101-S ,also milled. I wasn't sure if they work with both milled and stamped or if there are different versions. Thanks PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell.[/quote]Ultimak makes both milled and stamped rail tubes. However the stamped tube on the milled receiver works really good. I went with that combo it is softer for some reason in the recoil don't ask me why but I tried both and I like the stamped tube on the milled receiver. |
|
Quoted:
Ultimak makes both milled and stamped rail tubes. However the stamped tube on the milled receiver works really good. I went with that combo it is softer for some reason in the recoil don't ask me why but I tried both and I like the stamped tube on the milled receiver.
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver. With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90/redguardrm/b2682c00.jpg PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. What model are you using? I'm looking to put one one on my 101-S ,also milled. I wasn't sure if they work with both milled and stamped or if there are different versions. Thanks PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. [/quote] I've never seen then offer a stamped or milled gas tube mount. They're simply listed by model. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ultimak makes both milled and stamped rail tubes. However the stamped tube on the milled receiver works really good. I went with that combo it is softer for some reason in the recoil don't ask me why but I tried both and I like the stamped tube on the milled receiver.
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver. With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90/redguardrm/b2682c00.jpg PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. What model are you using? I'm looking to put one one on my 101-S ,also milled. I wasn't sure if they work with both milled and stamped or if there are different versions. Thanks PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. I've never seen then offer a stamped or milled gas tube mount. They're simply listed by model. [/quote] Its where the gas ports are located and how many there are. In a milled reciever the ports are at the front of the gas tube towards the barrel. The stamped have three holes in the middle of the tube to vent gas. They used to offer both I can't believe they don't now. Just checked they still do both types. The ports at the front are ment for the milled reciever and the three holes where ment for the stamped. I have found on the SLR-95 the three hole gas tube works best but thats me I took a chance getting the stamped tube in place of the milled tube.
|
|
It's more an issue of AK47 vs AKM. Not milled vs stamped. Yes, milled receivers are AK-47 pattern with overpressure vent holes on the gas tube, but Chinese stamped receivers as well as other AK-47 stamped receivers have the ports on the tube. AKMs moved the ports to the gas block. So using a 2B (ports on tube) is fine on an AKM, but using a 1B (no ports) should only be used on an AKM. Use the 2B for an AK-47 pattern - milled or stamped.
|
|
Quoted:
Its where the gas ports are located and how many there are. In a milled reciever the ports are at the front of the gas tube towards the barrel. The stamped have three holes in the middle of the tube to vent gas. They used to offer both I can't believe they don't now. Just checked they still do both types. The ports at the front are ment for the milled reciever and the three holes where ment for the stamped. I have found on the SLR-95 the three hole gas tube works best but thats me I took a chance getting the stamped tube in place of the milled tube.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ultimak makes both milled and stamped rail tubes. However the stamped tube on the milled receiver works really good. I went with that combo it is softer for some reason in the recoil don't ask me why but I tried both and I like the stamped tube on the milled receiver.
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did not notice the weight on my SLR 95 and I used a M3 Aimpoint. However I was using a forged receiver AK (Bulgarian SLR95 arsenal) so the front weight was offset by the weight of the receiver. With a T1 I doubt you would notice the weight even on a stamped receiver. The ultimak does not weigh much more than the normal gas tube. You should be good with the T1 aimpoint on a stamped receiver. http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90/redguardrm/b2682c00.jpg PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. What model are you using? I'm looking to put one one on my 101-S ,also milled. I wasn't sure if they work with both milled and stamped or if there are different versions. Thanks PS try a PSO-1 scope with the T-1 Aimpoint its fun as hell. I've never seen then offer a stamped or milled gas tube mount. They're simply listed by model. [/quote] Okay, I see what you're saying. But as Mark (Gunplumber) said it's really not a difference of milled vs. stamped but more AK47 vs. AKM pattern. Chinese AK's for example use a Type 3 (milled) barrel assembly with a stamped receiver. |
|
I didn't have an Ultimak set up, but I did run my H-1 on the top of a Midwest Industries rail for a bit. Personally, I prefer the balance of having it over the receiver. I definitely like the AKML mount better than having it above the gas tube.
Of course, the difference in feel may also be because I swapped out the MI handguard when I moved the optic to the AKML. http://i.imgur.com/jX3rB.jpg Excuse the white legs. 
|
|
Quoted:
The Ultimak tube weighs less than the gas tube/upper handguard it replaces, MRDs are very lightweight. The combo only adds a couple of ounces to the weight of the rifle. I didn't know that Ultimaks were that light, that's really impressive. Thanks for info. |
| I currently have about 4 Ultimaks mounted on different AK's. You won't notice a balance difference as long as you're using one of the micro dot sights, like the Aimpoint Micro or the Bushnell TRS25. I do have an Aimpoint CompC3 mounted on one and I can definitely tell a difference. It's still a great combination, but the balance definitely shifted forward on that configuration. |
|
Quoted:
I currently have about 4 Ultimaks mounted on different AK's. You won't notice a balance difference as long as you're using one of the micro dot sights, like the Aimpoint Micro or the Bushnell TRS25. I do have an Aimpoint CompC3 mounted on one and I can definitely tell a difference. It's still a great combination, but the balance definitely shifted forward on that configuration. ^This is my experience as well. I have one with an Ultimak and PA micro dot, and one with nothing at all, and it's never occurred to me there might be a difference. There probably is a difference, but not enough for me to notice. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I currently have about 4 Ultimaks mounted on different AK's. You won't notice a balance difference as long as you're using one of the micro dot sights, like the Aimpoint Micro or the Bushnell TRS25. I do have an Aimpoint CompC3 mounted on one and I can definitely tell a difference. It's still a great combination, but the balance definitely shifted forward on that configuration. ^This is my experience as well. I have one with an Ultimak and PA micro dot, and one with nothing at all, and it's never occurred to me there might be a difference. There probably is a difference, but not enough for me to notice. How has the PA Micro Dot held up to the heat? I've been thinking about picking one up. |
|
I have never had a problem with PA micro,Ultimak combo on my SAR1. I don't do a lot of mag dumps but I do put 300 rounds or so through it in a range session. I know that's not a lot of rounds but the gun does get warm with no ill effect on the micro. Recoil is a non factor as well My only complaint with mine is it's an older version of the micro with the emitter sitting at the 6 O'clock position, I have a very slight co-witness. I'm going to upgrade to a newer version when they are in stock again. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I currently have about 4 Ultimaks mounted on different AK's. You won't notice a balance difference as long as you're using one of the micro dot sights, like the Aimpoint Micro or the Bushnell TRS25. I do have an Aimpoint CompC3 mounted on one and I can definitely tell a difference. It's still a great combination, but the balance definitely shifted forward on that configuration. ^This is my experience as well. I have one with an Ultimak and PA micro dot, and one with nothing at all, and it's never occurred to me there might be a difference. There probably is a difference, but not enough for me to notice. How has the PA Micro Dot held up to the heat? I've been thinking about picking one up. Mine are the later model with the electronics and controls on the top, which I think were specifically relocated from the side in order to address heat issues. I have them on both my AK74 and my Mini-14 and have had not any problems over the last year or so. And I have heated them up quite a bit doing plenty of mag dumps, to the point that you wouldn't want to be touching the Ultimak rails on either one. |
|
My buddy has the H-1 with the Ulti-Mak and I noticed no difference in balance.
I run the MI-SIde Rail and Aim-Point PRO on mine and prefer it. Though not because of the balance, but rather the placement of the optic in my eye's fov/relief. Balance (again) seems unchanged on my rifle vs his. Worth noting on both sides though for the sake of science (I guess) is that his is a milled (SLR-95) and mine is a stamped (SGL-21) therefore the intrinsic weight positioning of the rifles are somewhat different from the start. Bottom line: Neither of us really noticed much/any of a difference in the overall weight or balance of our weapons with the addition of the optics and their mounting solutions. We are both in agreement that if we were doing it over again, the whole decision would be made based on: - Quality of optic - Battery life - Field of view (and dot's MOA size in relation to placement) - Mount's ability to maintain/return to zero - Ability to co-witness iron sights (or be quickly removed w/o tools to use iron sights). Hope some of this is helpful. I know I offered my opinion on a lot of things outside of what your question specifically addressed, but after going through all of it myself (and spending a large sum of $ doing it) I thought I'd share the rest of my experience and findings which may address other things you'll be dealing with aside from just the mounting solution. IMHO the T-1/H-1 mounted all the way forward on (op at the gas-tube) just provides much too narrow objective view for me in contrast to having my Aim-Point PRO mounted over the center of the receiver. My friend is really happy with his, but I wonder if he's just keeping quiet about wishing he had the same set-up as me? I know I certainly wouldn't trade him...? Good luck, whatever route you go with. |
|
Quoted:
I have never had a problem with PA micro,Ultimak combo on my SAR1. I don't do a lot of mag dumps but I do put 300 rounds or so through it in a range session. I know that's not a lot of rounds but the gun does get warm with no ill effect on the micro. Recoil is a non factor as well Do you have a fixed base model? The old fixed base I have on mine is in the 6 O'clock position and I get a nice lower 1/3rd. The dial is on the top. 
|
AK Sponsor