AK Sponsor
Posted: 9/29/2009 5:03:26 PM EDT
| Can anyone tell me anything about this rifle. It's about 100 bucks more than a typical wasr 10/63. Appears to have a nice finish on it, everything looks strait. I just don't like the polymer furniture on it. Kinda looks a little cheesy. Its assembled by century arms any info is much appreciated. |
|
Quoted:
What else do you want to know? Well im thinking about buying this thing. Before I go drop $620 bucks I wanna make sure Im not gonna regret it later. If anyone knows of any other problems with this rifle other then what has been listed already I'd like to know about it. |
|
Quoted:
The GP1975 has correct receiver dimples... So it has that over the WASR series. Also, from what I have personally seen, the GP1975 is better built than the WASRs. Not sure what difference (other than appearance) the "dimples" make, but it's your money and will be your rifle. Any properly assembled AK will be reliable given minimal maintenance and a working magazine. Will a particular WASR be properly assembled? You won't know without an inspection. Will a particular GP1975 be properly assembled? You won't know without an inspection. Will a particular rifle of any make be properly assembled? (Bet you see it coming) You won't know without an inspection. If the rifles are properly assembled and as a result are all reliable, what does "...better built..." mean? 
You pay your money and you take your choice. |
|
Quoted:
" it won't hand eject at all. shoots fine but just drops the round in the reciever on hand cycle." That is odd, thanks for your reply. best i can tell the ejector is riding around the bolt and probably needs to be built up a bit. shooting it works just fine. Century offered to fix it but i figured the shipping cost wasn't worth it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
shooting it works just fine. Century offered to fix it but i figured the shipping cost wasn't worth it. It would seem pointless unless the President makes us convert our semiautos to straight pull manually operated rifles. only thing that worries me is things wearing down further and it just stops ejecting eventually. + it makes ejecting a live round no so much fun. sometimes it goes down the magwell sometimes just falls into the reciever and a few shakes to dump it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
only thing that worries me is things wearing down further and it just stops ejecting eventually. A trip to the local welding wizard, 10 minutes with a file and a dab of cold blue will solve that problem. thats why i didn't send it back. i figure any smith or for that matter bubba with a welder and file can fix it better than CAI. they may fix one problem and send it back with 5 more. |
|
I am not a 'smith. I don't have a welder. I may be a bubba with a file.
A friend had a similar problem caused when he was overzealous in trimming the ejector on a home build. He had someone weld it up. We took it to the range and I filed it, checking to make sure it worked properly. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
For me the correct mag dimples and the much better finish are worth the extra $100 bucks alone. Pardon my curiosity, but why did you ask, if your mind was made up?
If my mind was made up about what? If you read the initial post I asked if anyone could tell me anything about the rifle. Jams, misfeeds problems ejecting shells, how the rifle actually shoots etc. The looks of the rifle won't tell you any of that, hense my question. Its an american made reciever. Maybe thats a good thing, then again maybe it ain't. This is the type of question that only someone who either owns or has used this particular rifle could accurately answer. Yes it has a really nice finish, that along with the fact that it has the infamous dimples is a plus and worth the extra $100 bucks. IF and only if the rifle functions correctly. 
|
|
Quoted:
Will a particular GP1975 be properly assembled? You won't know without an inspection. Will a particular rifle of any make be properly assembled? (Bet you see it coming) You won't know without an inspection. You must have missed this. The fact that one example of a particular rifle has problems (or doesn't have problems) is not indicative of whether another example of that rifle will have problems. The key to getting a rifle that is reliable is inspecting it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Will a particular GP1975 be properly assembled? You won't know without an inspection. Will a particular rifle of any make be properly assembled? (Bet you see it coming) You won't know without an inspection. You must have missed this. The fact that one example of a particular rifle has problems (or doesn't have problems) is not indicative of whether another example of that rifle will have problems. The key to getting a rifle that is reliable is inspecting it. No I didn't miss that. Your answer to everything in that particular post is to inspect the rifle. I would hope anyone purchasing any rifle would inspect it, if they don't shame on them. I'd never purchase any rifle without inspecting it, however I unike you don't see anything wrong with asking others who may own that particlar gun what they think. You may learn something that may not present itself on inspection. Beer Slayer had a problem with his rifle hand ejecting. How exactly would you inspect for that seeing as how you would'nt be able to load the rifle at the counter. No its not indicative of whether another rifle will have the same problem. But guess what if 10 other people with that same rifle all chimed in and said they had the same problem guess who wouldn't be buying that rifle? |
|
Quoted:
No I didn't miss that. Your answer to everything in that particular post is to inspect the rifle. I would hope anyone purchasing any rifle would inspect it, if they don't shame on them. I'd never purchase any rifle without inspecting it, however I unike you don't see anything wrong with asking others who may own that particlar gun what they think. You may learn something that may not present itself on inspection. Beer Slayer had a problem with his rifle hand ejecting. How exactly would you inspect for that seeing as how you would'nt be able to load the rifle at the counter. The shape, size and/or location of the ejector on that rifle must be different than standard. A close inspection would reveal those differences to anyone who: a. is familiar with the AK and; b. inspects carefully. No its not indicative of whether another rifle will have the same problem. But guess what if 10 other people with that same rifle all chimed in and said they had the same problem guess who wouldn't be buying that rifle? My reliance on inspection results from the fact that I know what to look for. As a result I don't feel any need to rely on the experience of others with different examples of the same rifle. And given the fact that others' good experience is no reliable indicator of a properly assembled rifle (just as others experience of improprly assembled examples doesn't mean every example will be improperly assembled) a through inspection is needed in any case. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
For me the correct mag dimples and the much better finish are worth the extra $100 bucks alone. Pardon my curiosity, but why did you ask, if your mind was made up?
He didnt know the differences until he asked..Now he knows the difference and made a decision. I dont think he made up his mind until after getting the dimple info here.Polymer was icing..Reason I am dfending him is I dont want newb's to be afraid to post, cause i am newb to many guns. 
|
|
Quoted:
quote] My reliance on inspection results from the fact that I know what to look for. As a result I don't feel any need to rely on the experience of others with different examples of the same rifle. And given the fact that others' good experience is no reliable indicator of a properly assembled rifle (just as others experience of improprly assembled examples doesn't mean every example will be improperly assembled) a through inspection is needed in any case. Well heres my problem. You assume everyone has your same level of expertise......... everyone does not. I inspected the GP1975, and it appeared to function just fine to me, everything looked as it should (to my knowledge). It never dawned on me to look at the ejector and see if it was exactly like the known working amd rifle I have at home until it came up in this thread. Nor did I know the GP1975 did not have a chrome lined barrel. So IMO it didn't hurt to ask. There are plenty of newbies out there that are new to AK's kinda like myself who would like to think they know what there looking at but could easily miss things like this. I thought thats what forums like this was for, not some place to come and toot your own horn about how good you were. If you are truly that good and can look at a rifle and detect any flaws in it and predetermine how that rifle is gonna shoot eject and operate my hats off to you because your the first. To the rest of you, your input is much appreciated I have learned a lot. I may just get the wasr after all. |
|
Quoted:
Well heres my problem. You assume everyone has your same level of expertise......... everyone does not. I didn't get whatever level of expertise I have by asking other people their opinion of, or experiences with rifles. I developed it by examining rifles closely. I admit my examinations were probably more careful than most people's, because I was doing it for the purpose of making sure the rifles I built were correct, but that expertise serves others well when I examine a rifle for them to determine whether it was properly assembled. Lacking access to someone who can examine a particular rifle for you, it all comes down to this: you can rely on the experience of others as related in their posts, or you can develop the experience (or as you put it expertise) which enables you to rely on your own judgment. The choice is yours. |
|
Quoted:
If you are truly that good and can look at a rifle and detect any flaws in it and predetermine how that rifle is gonna shoot eject and operate my hats off to you because your the first. No I'm not. But if everyone else were to adopt the attitude of simply asking someone else what they thought, I could turn out to be the last. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well heres my problem. You assume everyone has your same level of expertise......... everyone does not. I didn't get whatever level of expertise I have by asking other people their opinion of, or experiences with rifles. You've lost me I have no idea what your talking about now. You said, "My reliance on inspection results from the fact that I know what to look for. As a result I don't feel any need to rely on the experience of others with different examples of the same rifle." No one accused you of having to ask other peoples opinion or anybodys experiences with anything. Quoted:
I developed it by examining rifles closely. I admit my examinations were probably more careful than most people's, because I was doing it for the purpose of making sure the rifles I built were correct, but that expertise serves others well when I examine a rifle for them to determine whether it was properly assembled. Lacking access to someone who can examine a particular rifle for you, it all comes down to this: you can rely on the experience of others as related in their posts, or you can develop the experience (or as you put it expertise) which enables you to rely on your own judgment. The choice is yours. So you build rifles, well that answers a lot right there. So if I understand you correctly one should never ask anybodys opinion or bother reading reviews of others who have purchased the same rifle at all. You should develop the experiece on your own so you can rely on your own judgement. Correct? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well heres my problem. You assume everyone has your same level of expertise......... everyone does not. I didn't get whatever level of expertise I have by asking other people their opinion of, or experiences with rifles. You've lost me I have no idea what your talking about now. I'm telling you that one does not get experience by asking anonymous people's opinions. In the next sentence I go on to tell you how one develops a knowledge base which allows that person to rely on his own judgment rather than the opinions of a lot of unknown people who may or may not have even the slightest clue what they're posting about. You said, "My reliance on inspection results from the fact that I know what to look for. As a result I don't feel any need to rely on the experience of others with different examples of the same rifle." No one accused you of having to ask other peoples opinion or anybodys experiences with anything. I didn't say or even imply that you "accused" me of anything. I'm telling you the benefits of not having to rely on the judgment of others, ESPECIALLY judgments provided by those unknown to you. Quoted:
I developed it by examining rifles closely. I admit my examinations were probably more careful than most people's, because I was doing it for the purpose of making sure the rifles I built were correct, but that expertise serves others well when I examine a rifle for them to determine whether it was properly assembled. Lacking access to someone who can examine a particular rifle for you, it all comes down to this: you can rely on the experience of others as related in their posts, or you can develop the experience (or as you put it expertise) which enables you to rely on your own judgment. The choice is yours. So you build rifles, well that answers a lot right there. Yes, and since I wanted do do a better job of it than simply fold up a flat and slap together a rifle that fired, I had to do some examination and measurements, so, among other things, the receiver would be as close to an arsenal produced receiver as possible. So if I understand you correctly one should never ask anybodys opinion or bother reading reviews of others who have purchased the same rifle at all.If you know someone well and have reason to trust them, it's perfectly acceptable to rely on that person's judgment. Those people who have asked me to examine rifles for them have done exactly that. OTOH, in that case I'm not an anonymous poster on a gun board.That's an enormous difference. You should develop the experiece on your own so you can rely on your own judgement. Correct?If the choice is between making the effort to develop your own expertise or relying on the judgment of unknown people, that's an easy one |
|
I picked up one of the GP1975s a few months ago. As with any century build you should inspect it for cant and strip it if possible. I was able to do all of that before i purchased it.
They have US made barrels, by green mountain i think, and are not chrome lined. A lot of folks feel the lack of chrome lining is a deal breaker, but just as many will tell you it doesnt really matter unless you shoot corrosive ammo. The receivers are also US made by Nodak Spud.They have a parkerized finish which is decent enough, tapco trigger group, tapco stock and pistol grip, and some generic plastic handguards that in my opinion are pretty shitty. I have replaced all the furniture on mine. Also has bayo lug, cleaning rod, and threaded barrel with a slant break which you can be removed and replaced. Since it is after all a century build be wary. The first time i took it for sighting in the gas piston rivet walked out. I was pissed but It was a minor problem and easy fix. Aside from that initial problem it functions flawlessly, shoots straight and eats whatever i feed it. Overall i am happy with it. http://perfectunion.com/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=17110&d=1254670461 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even without the dimples the mag wells were very tight and clean. Seated magazines are not located in the rifle by the "dimples". Lateral movement is limited by the locator tabs which are part of the lower rails and the width of the magazine well. I'd agree with that. What I can't understand is why all this talk then about how the dimples in the reicever help with mag wobble. If they don't help stablize the mag what is there purpose? With that being said, what is the purpose of the so called "mag stabilizers" that are welded into the wasrs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Even without the dimples the mag wells were very tight and clean. Seated magazines are not located in the rifle by the "dimples". Lateral movement is limited by the locator tabs which are part of the lower rails and the width of the magazine well. I'd agree with that. What I can't understand is why all this talk then about how the dimples in the reicever help with mag wobble. If they don't help stablize the mag what is there purpose? With that being said, what is the purpose of the so called "mag stabilizers" that are welded into the wasrs. I'll take the easy one first. The "L" shaped brackets in WASRs locate the top of the single stack magazines the way the locator tabs work for standard magazines. They're machined down when the rifle is converted to accept standard magazines. The next easiest is why do people think "dimples" control "wobble"? Because they've never investigated the matter. They're repeating what they read on the innernet. The "dimples" probably serve two purposes. First they add strength to the receiver where it's weakest. Second they prevent people from jamming the magazine into the well at the wrong angle, which could conceivably make it impossible to get it out. (Remember that this is an infantry rifle. You don't have to be stupid to screw things up when people are trying to kill you.) |
| Yeah well the whole dimple thing is way blown out of proportion then. My AMD has dimples and I still get mag wobble depending on what metal mag I stick in there, some wobble some don't. The metal plates on the wasr don't seem to pertrude out far enough to serve as guides like the dimples do. I guess its more of a reinforcement. |
|
If you want to order the GP75, JGsales has them for $429 now.
http://www.jgsales.com/product_info.php/rifles/ak-47-and-rpk-rifles/p/romanian-ak-47-gp75-7-62x39-american-made-receiver-barrel/cPath/209_214/products_id/2128 |
|
Quoted:
Yeah well the whole dimple thing is way blown out of proportion then. My AMD has dimples and I still get mag wobble depending on what metal mag I stick in there, some wobble some don't. The metal plates on the wasr don't seem to pertrude out far enough to serve as guides like the dimples do. I guess its more of a reinforcement. The metal plates on a WASR were put there to locate the top of the narrow 10 shot magazines. Before the conversion, the plates extencec past the locator tabs. During the conversion, they were machined away to allow the use of standard magazines. They may reinforce the receiver, depending on how firmly they are attached. I have not been able to determine how many spot welds were used. The reason the "dimples" don't have any effect on the amount of "wobble" on your AMD is the distance between the inside of the "dimples" is greater than the distance between the inside of the locator tabs and is greater than the distance between the sides of the magazine well. |
|
Quoted:
If you want to order the GP75, JGsales has them for $429 now. http://www.jgsales.com/product_info.php/rifles/ak-47-and-rpk-rifles/p/romanian-ak-47-gp75-7-62x39-american-made-receiver-barrel/cPath/209_214/products_id/2128 Thats a great deal, problem around here is most all the ffl dealers around here either won't do the paperwork or they want 20% to do it. Add shipping and insurance and your better off dealing locally. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah well the whole dimple thing is way blown out of proportion then. My AMD has dimples and I still get mag wobble depending on what metal mag I stick in there, some wobble some don't. The metal plates on the wasr don't seem to pertrude out far enough to serve as guides like the dimples do. I guess its more of a reinforcement. The metal plates on a WASR were put there to locate the top of the narrow 10 shot magazines. Before the conversion, the plates extencec past the locator tabs. During the conversion, they were machined away to allow the use of standard magazines. They may reinforce the receiver, depending on how firmly they are attached. I have not been able to determine how many spot welds were used. The reason the "dimples" don't have any effect on the amount of "wobble" on your AMD is the distance between the inside of the "dimples" is greater than the distance between the inside of the locator tabs and is greater than the distance between the sides of the magazine well. Exellent info, the plastic mags in the wasr I looked at had little if any wobble at all. Im going to take a metal mag up there with me to see how it fits. With regards to the strength of the reciever the scope rail on the side of the wasr's i would think would aid in the strength of the reciever. Your thoughts? |
|
If the rail is properly riveted it will increase the rigidity of the receiver.
Truthfully, it's probably rigid enough without it even without "dimples". The stress on the receiver isn't that great, especially in a semiauto only rifle. In addition, I suspect that the 'dimples' were added more as a belt and suspenders thing than from any real need. The first stamped receiver AK was not a success. I think MK and the design bureau wanted to make very certain that didn't happen a second time. People had spent time in the Gulag for less. |
AK Sponsor