AK Sponsor
Posted: 5/2/2016 7:43:24 PM EDT
| I see a lot of positive reviews on the latest batches. People say they are much better than they used to be. Less than 6 bills for a new AK is not bad. If true, I think they should be rewarded with more business rather than just letting them stay a pariah. |
|
No.
There's videos from this year of IO's shitting the bed, one of which was of a bolt shearing off a lug after only 40 rounds. Plus, the owner is still a lying piece of shit. ETA: I would also ask where are these positive reviews coming from? From organizations that were paid off to give a good review? Or from novice shooters/AK users where the IO is their only AK and/or they only shoot a box of ammo a range session and then feel as though they can weigh in on the quality? |
|
Quoted:
I see a lot of positive reviews on the latest batches. People say they are much better than they used to be. Less than 6 bills for a new AK is not bad. If true, I think they should be rewarded with more business rather than just letting them stay a pariah. Let them be pariahs for life. Freaking loser company deserves it. |
|
I.O's customer service is awful. You might get a good one and be ok, but if you have problems, it will be a pain in the ass. They took my money for a Vepr IV, then canceled the order to sell it on gunbroker. I tried to order Beryl mags last month. Once again, they over sold and canceled the order. They promised a 20% discount on a future order on the Vepr cancelation, but would not honor their promise later. We all make mistakes, but its making the mistake right that counts.
Anyway, you are taking a big chance. For little more money, a Wasr or Npap is a much better deal. |
| Not a big fan of "The AK Guy" but he has some good info about the bad of the company and rifles seen here. |
|
Quoted: No. There's videos from this year of IO's shitting the bed, one of which was of a bolt shearing off a lug after only 40 rounds. Plus, the owner is still a lying piece of shit. ETA: I would also ask where are these positive reviews coming from? From organizations that were paid off to give a good review? Or from novice shooters/AK users where the IO is their only AK and/or they only shoot a box of ammo a range session and then feel as though they can weigh in on the quality? |
|
I still don't understand the mentality of wanting to save a few dozen dollars by buying a rile from a company with a horrendous reputation for dangerous build methods. Their guns may "work", but their entire philosophy from the ground up is built on flawed ideas. I will not "reward" their behavior - they are not my child who needs gold stars for encouragement, they build machines designed to control an explosion that propels a projectile to kill someone.
The bad WASR reputation is long gone. Just. Get. A. WASR. |
|
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. |
|
Quoted:
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). |
|
Quoted: This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). Quoted: Quoted: I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. |
|
Quoted:
I don't think I said or implied that "my main concern was the cosmetics". I said the rifle ran 100% of the rounds I fed it, and it looks nice. I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. |
|
Quoted:
Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. He's not a bullshit biased hater, he's a respected member of the community with a lot of knowledge. Many people have a lot of experience with various AK manufacturers and call it like it is. I don't have a dog in the fight but don't be so quick to call someone a hater because they don't agree with you. Lots of companies have earned their bad rep, IO included. Z |
|
Quoted: You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. If the gun broke in the first few hundred rounds I would have put it in the video. But it didn't. So what am I supposed to say? "this gun ran 100% and it looks great but I still think it's junk because I read some shit online"? As an honest product reviewer (something that is WAY more rare on YouTube than you think) I can only post the results as they happened. IMO this gun is not a waste of money, it's functioned 100% with the wolf and tulammo I fed it and it's reasonably accurate at least. If it breaks after 600 rounds, or 900 rounds, or 2000 rounds, I'll post a follow up video. Something I've been clear about. Until something bad happens I can't call anyone delusional for giving one of these a shot. If you think 400 rounds in a row and getting the gun to hot to touch is a bullshit test that's fine, if I had more rounds I would have used them. I think it's irresponsible to be dishonest in tests/reviews. I despise the number of popular gun channels on YouTube that do it. So I make it a point to be fair and objective even though I often want to give my opinion. |
|
Quoted: He's not a bullshit biased hater, he's a respected member of the community with a lot of knowledge. Many people have a lot of experience with various AK manufacturers and call it like it is. I don't have a dog in the fight but don't be so quick to call someone a hater because they don't agree with you. Lots of companies have earned their bad rep, IO included. Z Quoted: Quoted: Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. He's not a bullshit biased hater, he's a respected member of the community with a lot of knowledge. Many people have a lot of experience with various AK manufacturers and call it like it is. I don't have a dog in the fight but don't be so quick to call someone a hater because they don't agree with you. Lots of companies have earned their bad rep, IO included. Z |
|
Quoted:
No. There's videos from this year of IO's shitting the bed, one of which was of a bolt shearing off a lug after only 40 rounds. Plus, the owner is still a lying piece of shit. ETA: I would also ask where are these positive reviews coming from? From organizations that were paid off to give a good review? Or from novice shooters/AK users where the IO is their only AK and/or they only shoot a box of ammo a range session and then feel as though they can weigh in on the quality? Yep, positive reviews are like "this is my first ak :) I shot 100 rounds, these new rifles are good to go!!!" |
|
Quoted:
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. 500 rounds might as well be zero rounds. Come back when you have had 5000 trouble free rounds. I still won't buy one, but that would be semi-diligent. |
|
Quoted: 500 rounds might as well be zero rounds. Come back when you have had 5000 trouble free rounds. I still won't buy one, but that would be semi-diligent. Quoted: Quoted: I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. 500 rounds might as well be zero rounds. Come back when you have had 5000 trouble free rounds. I still won't buy one, but that would be semi-diligent. I've never seen that with any other gun ever. Hell most magazines and professional gun reviewers don't come close to 1000 rounds through a gun, I never hear people call those tests inadequate. I guess you have to run $1100 worth of ammo through a $550 dollar gun before you can call it good lol. The thing that IO haters can't seem to grasp is that I'm not telling anyone to buy one. They automatically jump from "this gun ran 100% for 500 rounds and looks nice" to "EVERYONE GO BUY AN IO ARSENALS SUCKKKK". I just don't understand that. I will say though, I didn't see any paint bubble and peel off this IO lolol |
|
Quoted:
If you're going to put something in quotes it should actually be a quote. On the contrary I said "It's not a $1200 AK", because it's not. If the gun broke in the first few hundred rounds I would have put it in the video. But it didn't. So what am I supposed to say? "this gun ran 100% and it looks great but I still think it's junk because I read some shit online"? As an honest product reviewer (something that is WAY more rare on YouTube than you think) I can only post the results as they happened. IMO this gun is not a waste of money, it's functioned 100% with the wolf and tulammo I fed it and it's reasonably accurate at least. If it breaks after 600 rounds, or 900 rounds, or 2000 rounds, I'll post a follow up video. Something I've been clear about. Until something bad happens I can't call anyone delusional for giving one of these a shot. If you think 400 rounds in a row and getting the gun to hot to touch is a bullshit test that's fine, if I had more rounds I would have used them. I think it's irresponsible to be dishonest in tests/reviews. I despise the number of popular gun channels on YouTube that do it. So I make it a point to be fair and objective even though I often want to give my opinion. I'm not seeing where I put something in quotes that was attributed to you that wasn't an actual quote that you made, but alright. I can't comment on your testing practices or if you've been clear about post follow ups because I've never seen your video. So to make the claim that I would think your testing methods are bullshit isn't really valid. As to you saying you're an honest reviewer, well then all I can do is applaud you for that as I don't have any issue with it. I just don't see the point in reviewing a product with a long a sullied history of being shit put out by a company known for being shit unless things have actually changed. And make no mistake, if IO were to radically change their product to the point that it would be comparable to a WASR or something like that, you better believe that they would be snagging up every interview they could to show it off. So again, until that time, I'll rely on my first hand experience of their terrible company and product and continue to discourage people from giving them money. I do hope that you'll be honest if anything does ever happen to your IO. Hell, nothing may ever happen to it and I've never said that it was a guarantee that the gun would fail or have a catastrophic event, only that your chances are much, much higher. And if Uli ever steps down and IO does a 180 on their product and company, I'll be the first one to admit it and begin recommending them. But I'm not one for holding my breath. |
|
Quoted:
Back before I got into AKs I had someone that knew I was a gun guy come to me about his I.O. He had it for like three days and it completely locked up on him, he couldn't even get the carrier out of it. I still have no idea what could have caused that. Probably roll pin coming out of piston assembly and locking up in the gas tube or trunion. Just a guess. |
|
Quoted:
I will say though, I didn't see any paint bubble and peel off this IO lolol Yup, and that's something Arsenal needs to own up to and fix. But I'd rather have a bubbling finish than the higher than normal chance that the rifle will shear a lug and KB in my face. To each his own, I guess. |
|
Quoted: You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. |
|
Quoted:
What other gun do you need to run 5000 rounds through before you can say "ok this is now justified as being good"? I've never seen that with any other gun ever. Hell most magazines and professional gun reviewers don't come close to 1000 rounds through a gun, I never hear people call those tests inadequate. I guess you have to run $1100 worth of ammo through a $550 dollar gun before you can call it good lol. The thing that IO haters can't seem to grasp is that I'm not telling anyone to buy one. They automatically jump from "this gun ran 100% for 500 rounds and looks nice" to "EVERYONE GO BUY AN IO ARSENALS SUCKKKK". I just don't understand that. I will say though, I didn't see any paint bubble and peel off this IO lolol Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. 500 rounds might as well be zero rounds. Come back when you have had 5000 trouble free rounds. I still won't buy one, but that would be semi-diligent. I've never seen that with any other gun ever. Hell most magazines and professional gun reviewers don't come close to 1000 rounds through a gun, I never hear people call those tests inadequate. I guess you have to run $1100 worth of ammo through a $550 dollar gun before you can call it good lol. The thing that IO haters can't seem to grasp is that I'm not telling anyone to buy one. They automatically jump from "this gun ran 100% for 500 rounds and looks nice" to "EVERYONE GO BUY AN IO ARSENALS SUCKKKK". I just don't understand that. I will say though, I didn't see any paint bubble and peel off this IO lolol I don't know. IO stands alone at the pinacle of shitty AK building |
|
Quoted:
That's the part you put it quotes that I never said. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I did a review video on one and the only issue I had was the front sight post walked down because the split screw wasn't spread out. 2 seconds with a flat head screwdriver fixed it. I didn't care for the mags that came with it, they were tight and I couldn't fill them all the way even after flipping the spring over. Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad. I've got 500 rounds or so through it and it's run 100%. This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. Didn't read the sentence right after that, did you? Not to mention that preceding that quote I referenced it as the reviews that "others give when they talk about IO". |
|
Quoted: I'm not seeing where I put something in quotes that was attributed to you that wasn't an actual quote that you made, but alright. I can't comment on your testing practices or if you've been clear about post follow ups because I've never seen your video. So to make the claim that I would think your testing methods are bullshit isn't really valid. As to you saying you're an honest reviewer, well then all I can do is applaud you for that as I don't have any issue with it. I just don't see the point in reviewing a product with a long a sullied history of being shit put out by a company known for being shit unless things have actually changed. And make no mistake, if IO were to radically change their product to the point that it would be comparable to a WASR or something like that, you better believe that they would be snagging up every interview they could to show it off. So again, until that time, I'll rely on my first hand experience of their terrible company and product and continue to discourage people from giving them money. I do hope that you'll be honest if anything does ever happen to your IO. Hell, nothing may ever happen to it and I've never said that it was a guarantee that the gun would fail or have a catastrophic event, only that your chances are much, much higher. And if Uli ever steps down and IO does a 180 on their product and company, I'll be the first one to admit it and begin recommending them. But I'm not one for holding my breath. Quoted: Quoted: If you're going to put something in quotes it should actually be a quote. On the contrary I said "It's not a $1200 AK", because it's not. If the gun broke in the first few hundred rounds I would have put it in the video. But it didn't. So what am I supposed to say? "this gun ran 100% and it looks great but I still think it's junk because I read some shit online"? As an honest product reviewer (something that is WAY more rare on YouTube than you think) I can only post the results as they happened. IMO this gun is not a waste of money, it's functioned 100% with the wolf and tulammo I fed it and it's reasonably accurate at least. If it breaks after 600 rounds, or 900 rounds, or 2000 rounds, I'll post a follow up video. Something I've been clear about. Until something bad happens I can't call anyone delusional for giving one of these a shot. If you think 400 rounds in a row and getting the gun to hot to touch is a bullshit test that's fine, if I had more rounds I would have used them. I think it's irresponsible to be dishonest in tests/reviews. I despise the number of popular gun channels on YouTube that do it. So I make it a point to be fair and objective even though I often want to give my opinion. I'm not seeing where I put something in quotes that was attributed to you that wasn't an actual quote that you made, but alright. I can't comment on your testing practices or if you've been clear about post follow ups because I've never seen your video. So to make the claim that I would think your testing methods are bullshit isn't really valid. As to you saying you're an honest reviewer, well then all I can do is applaud you for that as I don't have any issue with it. I just don't see the point in reviewing a product with a long a sullied history of being shit put out by a company known for being shit unless things have actually changed. And make no mistake, if IO were to radically change their product to the point that it would be comparable to a WASR or something like that, you better believe that they would be snagging up every interview they could to show it off. So again, until that time, I'll rely on my first hand experience of their terrible company and product and continue to discourage people from giving them money. I do hope that you'll be honest if anything does ever happen to your IO. Hell, nothing may ever happen to it and I've never said that it was a guarantee that the gun would fail or have a catastrophic event, only that your chances are much, much higher. And if Uli ever steps down and IO does a 180 on their product and company, I'll be the first one to admit it and begin recommending them. But I'm not one for holding my breath. I think some of you should keep in mind what Eric did to an AK in just a couple hundred rounds. (I know full auto is going to get it a lot hotter than just squeezing them off) |
|
Quoted: Didn't read the sentence right after that, did you? Not to mention that preceding that quote I referenced it as the reviews that "others give when they talk about IO". Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: This is what I'm talking about. Your main concern is the cosmetics, when that's not the issue with IO's. IO has become very skilled in polishing turds and paying for positive advertisement compared to when they were in NC. However, they are still using sub-par parts, run by a sub-par human being, while using a sub-par build practice of using the barrel as a bucking bar for affixing the front trunnion, a long ago abandoned practice in the US that was never a build practice in any military factory (for good reason). But hey, people have 500 whole rounds through their IO's and they're still okay, so you know, that means they're totally proven guns that will last a lifetime, right? So long as they stay just that couple dollars less than the competition people will continue to buy them, because 95% of the firearm community has a Walmart mentality (not you specifically, since I don't know your reasoning for buying the IO, although it's probably safe to say it was because of the price). I never said it would last a lifetime. Bullshit biased hater comments like yours make posting an honest review downright impossible. I simply tested the gun with the ammo that I could afford to use up and posted the results. I don't have unlimited resources and I pointed out ALL the positive and negative aspects of the gun that I saw. But people can never accept a review for what it is when they HATE a product, they have to pick it apart and you'll always hear "oh you only ran x number of rounds through it, ha!". Using the barrel as a bucking bar CAN cause problems, does it happen in every gun? Do their post bucking bar QC checks catch the ones that were damaged? These are questions I never hear people answer. It's not a $1200 AK. 95% of everyone have the Walmart mentality, people like cheap stuff that's "good enough". My reasoning for buying the IO had nothing to do with price, it was actually because I had read so much on the internet about how terrible they were I wanted to test one for myself. Same reason I will buy a Hi Point and probably a Taurus some day. If I had an ammo sponsor I would have run a couple thousand rounds through it but most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds. So I did 400 to try and cover any "infant mortality" issues. You hate IO and think people shouldn't buy them, you're entitled to your opinion. But try to realize when someone is posting an honest review to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money. You're right, I am biased. I'm biased because I've actually had to repair a few IO's for friends and clients when IO told them to essentially go fuck themselves for "abusing" their rifles simply by shooting 1,000 rounds at a carbine class. Based on your OP, your main focus when it came to your IO was the cosmetics, as evident by "Other than that it looks great, better than my WASR. The finish and wood are very nice. A couple rivets weren't pressed perfect but they didn't affect function and they aren't really that bad." That echos the reviews that others give when they talk about IO, "Oh the finish is really nice! The rivets don't LOOK bad so they must be good. I've put 500 rounds through mine using slow fire and nothing has happened, so basically it's just as good as an Arsenal." Again, not saying you specifically are making the Arsenal claim, just something actual IO defenders have said to me in the past as well as IO's president. You even said it yourself that "...most of the bolt breaking and rivet backing out stuff I read online happened within 200-300 rounds." Tell me, what company in the entirety of all firearms manufacturers today would that be acceptable? So what did your review do but reinforce in some delusional guy's head that "Hey, his rifle was okay so far, so maybe I'll be a lucky one too." So your wanting to help people make a better decision with their hard earned money may have only helped them waste their hard earned money. Don't get me wrong, I would have zero issue recommending an IO if they ever get their shit together. But so long as Uli Wiegand is president of that company, he will ALWAYS put cost/corner cutting above his customers. They've had all these years to do so, they even had the opportunity to get their shit together when they moved to Florida, but instead they decide to get better at hiding their sub-par product under a pretty finish. So forgive me if I feel that it's irresponsible to recommend a product from such an non-upstanding company, because I do care about people spending their hard earned money on a quality product. Didn't read the sentence right after that, did you? Not to mention that preceding that quote I referenced it as the reviews that "others give when they talk about IO".  |
|
Quoted:
I read it all it's just an irresponsible thing to post. "Here's a quote you didn't say in quotes" Again, never said that YOU said it at all, and even preceded it stating as such and proceeded stating as such. When I've attributed a quote directly to you, I made mention that it was something YOU said. |
|
I agree with AEnemaBay. Having shot many AKs and worked on a few. I know a few people who stand by their IO's, that's cool. They love their cheap AK and the fact that they are into firearms gives them brownie points. BUTT... If you are reviewing AK's you should know a thing or two about them and your sample size of "400 rounds thru 1 rifle" doesn't provide ample proof that IO Ak's are "as good as any other or "better than a WASR" . Ive literally beaten and gone 3000 rounds w/o cleaning my WASR. Dumping rocks and dust into the chamber while firing. Soaked in water you name it. Never had a Malfunction and sights hold zero. My favorite Ak I own. (Since then Ive scrubbed clean and CEREKOTED gold) But I'd never vouch for anyone else's WASR.
Who cares who said what... IO is trash. In the words of Rob Ski "The Mighty WASR has prevailed!" |
|
Quoted:
The difference is my bias is based on first hand experience with a sample size greater than 1. From IO with love: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y143/AEnemaBay/Avtomat%20Kalashnikova/IO%20Crap/IMG_6395Large_zps91a18571.jpg http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y143/AEnemaBay/Avtomat%20Kalashnikova/IO%20Crap/IMG_6392Large_zpsbe5f3994.jpg Quoted:
Quoted:
If only he didn't admit to being biased already LOL The difference is my bias is based on first hand experience with a sample size greater than 1. From IO with love: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y143/AEnemaBay/Avtomat%20Kalashnikova/IO%20Crap/IMG_6395Large_zps91a18571.jpg http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y143/AEnemaBay/Avtomat%20Kalashnikova/IO%20Crap/IMG_6392Large_zpsbe5f3994.jpg In all fairness, looking at the markings on that receiver, that is an older IO AK. My 2015 IO AK has much better looking rivets than those in your photo. Mine has also had no issues.....yet. It is a better looking AK than my 2014 WASR, but the WASR is hands down better built. The only feature I prefer on my IO is the extended mag catch. Personally, I wouldn't recommend an IO to anybody when the WASR and even the NPAP are about $100 more. I'm actually ordering a second WASR this week and may wait until around November to see if there is another mad rush on guns and ammo. If so, that may be when I part with it. The fact that these rifles will not function without the recoIl buffer is absolutely retarded. That single feature automatically disqualifies the IO rifles from a real serious use rifle. If I were stuck with a single AK, I wouldn't want one designed that way. I truly would like to see US built AK's with foreign built quality, but I don't think we're there yet. I am curious to see how DDI does in n the next couple years. |
|
Quoted:
In all fairness, looking at the markings on that receiver, that is an older IO AK. My 2015 IO AK has much better looking rivets than those in your photo. Yep, that's the excuse I get FROM OTHER PEOPLE when I showed them those pics (I hope that was clear enough to avoid butthurt from anyone that would read it). Again, not saying you're trying to make excuses to defend IO, rparrish (as evident from the remainder of your post). But as I've said in the past, I have also worked on new IO's, it's just that I had permission to take photos of that repair and it definitely was the worst I've seen. Plus, those rivets didn't start out looking like that from the factory. That was after the dude "abused" his rifle after running it through a carbine class and IO wouldn't warranty it. As I said previously, IO has gotten better at making them pretty, I'll definitely give them that. |
AK Sponsor