The stamped reciever are junk, that is why no majoe military has ever used them, no decent firearm ever built has used a sheetmetal reciever for good reason, milled is better in every way.

A stamped sheet metal reciever will lst a very long time, they have been in service with the Red Army for around four decades as I recall. They are lighter and the Russians claim stronger and more durable than the milled recievers. They are lighter and less expensive to produce as well.

Edited to add: I have seen AKs that have had thier barrels shot out, and been subjected to things that destroyed them, but i have never seen a properly built stamped reciever wear out, others may have though.

your great grand children will be shooting the kalashnikovs that you pass on to them.

the original ak...1949 thru 1951 or 1952 or 1953 (depending upon which 'expert source is being quoted) was stamped and riveted. even the lower rails were riveted on to the receiver shell.

well guess what? our soldiers found them in afghanistan...still functioning in a perfectly deadly fashion after 50 years of service...some of that time was spent in the hands of morons that still wipe their asses with their left hands.