AK Rifles banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
the Soviets found that stampings were not only more efficient to produce but resulted in longer receiver life and better accuracy than the milled receivers.
I find these claims to be very ridiclous. First off milled recievers are much stronger then the stamped AKM recievers, everybody knows that. I don't know for sure if milled recievers are more accurate then stamped but it's just plain bs to say the stamped ones are more accurate. Another thing they claim is that the RPK reciever is more accurate but the RPKs accuracy comes from the longer barrel NOT from the thicker reciever, the reciever is thicker so it can take the stresses of automatic fire better then the AK47 and AKM. Any other quality AKs will probably shoot just as good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
Stamped receivers flex whereas milled receivers are rigid - hence the increased service life of stamped.

I'm not sure about the accuracy thing, but when you combine the heavy barrel on a VEPR with the heavy receiver you get an accurate AK indeed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Thekatar said:
Stamped receivers flex whereas milled receivers are rigid - hence the increased service life of stamped.
Out of curiosity, has anyone seen a milled AK47 receiver fail?

What is the expected service life of a milled and of a stamped receiver (round count per)?

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,340 Posts
Veprs

Just to add,,,, accuracy is not increased by a barrel being longer, it is increased by the barrel being larger in diameter, hence, more rigid. Veprs have chunky barrels compared to other AK's. That has more to do with their reputed accuracy that whether the receiver is stamped or milled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,437 Posts
The RPK has a 1.5/1.6mm receiver vs. the standard 1.0mm, so yes, that does help with accuracy... harmonics.

The longer RPK barrel does help with accuracy because it allows for a more complete powder burn. More complete burn= less powder burning around the bullet as it leaves the muzzle (the uncontrolled burn outside of the barrel is inconsistent and thus has a negative effect on accuracy). The thicker barrel also helps with harmonics, you are right there.


But then again, a lot of things affect accuracy. Cleaning rod in or out, handguards loose or too tight or touching the barrel, buttstock screws loose, etc...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,723 Posts
Well, here we go.

Supposedly, milled receivers are more prone to fatal flaws introduced during the manufacturing process, hence the "properly" made ones are inspected for cracks (preferably magnetic particle inspection or similar).

That said, before dropping off the internet entirely, Jimmy Jimenez, aka SSR99 (Original-SSR on Gunsnet) allegedly got someone from Arsenal to admit that the milled receivers do last longer.

As for personal experiences, a friend of mine who has no bias one way or the other claims that his stamped AK recoils less than his milled one and is more accurate. He ended up selling his milled SLR95 in favor of a MAK-90 style Polytech 762 AK.

I personally shoot smaller groups on paper with my stamped SLR107 than one of my milled SA M7R's. This could be due to a bunch of other factors, however.

Milled AK's are harder to accessorize. I used to be all about the milled receiver until I handled a stamped gun with the triangle folding stock.

The bottom line: buy whichever one you really want and be happy with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
Q-gunner2 said:
The longer RPK barrel does help with accuracy because it allows for a more complete powder burn. More complete burn= less powder burning around the bullet as it leaves the muzzle (the uncontrolled burn outside of the barrel is inconsistent and thus has a negative effect on accuracy).
I disagree. Barrel length has no effect on accuracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
So far this is all conjecture and theory...
The Russians did the testing and you guys don't believe it.

KyAKGuy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
KyAKGuy said:
So far this is all conjecture and theory...
The Russians did the testing and you guys don't believe it.

KyAKGuy
What are you talking about?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
barrel length has no effect on accuracy. a solid frame,proper headspace and a tight lockup do. i don't personally own a vepr, but i've never heard anything bad about them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
Here is the original statement: "The Soviets found that stampings were not only more efficient to produce but resulted in longer receiver life and better accuracy than the milled receivers."

Apparently the Soviets did the testing and came up with the conclusion that the stamped receivers were better than the milled.
Seems that nobody here wants to accept that, but does nothing to
back their theories with data supporting them, i.e. their own testing.

Does anyone have hard data on any tests that were done to show the
alleged superiority of the milled receiver that everyone talks about??

KyAKguy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
KyAKGuy said:
Here is the original statement: "The Soviets found that stampings were not only more efficient to produce but resulted in longer receiver life and better accuracy than the milled receivers."

Apparently the Soviets did the testing and came up with the conclusion that the stamped receivers were better than the milled.
Seems that nobody here wants to accept that, but does nothing to
back their theories with data supporting them, i.e. their own testing.


Does anyone have hard data on any tests that were done to show the
alleged superiority of the milled receiver that everyone talks about??
WTF are you talking about?

Thekatar said:
Stamped receivers flex whereas milled receivers are rigid - hence the increased service life of stamped.
This is all being completely blown out of proportion anyway (imagine that) - we are talking service lives of 50,000 to 80,000 firing a large number of rounds full auto. Supposedly the milled receivers started to get some cracks or stress fractures but this was at huge round counts that would have already wiped the barrel. No one on this board is going to fire a round count close to these, so why worry about it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,220 Posts
Seriously, who gives a flying fuck? Shoot what you like - life is far too short to piss and moan about things like this. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,840 Posts
It has been my observation in general that milled receivers compared to the standard stamped (1mm) receivers are more rigid and accurate as a whole; but not by that much (apples and oranges IMHO in this regard), I am not sure about the heavier stamped receivers but it would make sense that they would be a little more accurate.(I have not tested this thicker stamped receiver theory yet (I have to wait until I get back to the USA).

In some ways it is difficult to judge accuracy with anything short of a mechanical rest when you start getting into the longer barrels-one reason the longer barrels seem more accurate (at least with iron sights) is because of a longer sight radius which helps decrease the margin for aiming error: Now add optics to the picture it becomes a different story.

But, it would seem to me that putting one of the heavier type optic sights on the thinner recievers could pose a problem as it might cause some problems with flexing and repeatability? (but this is only a supposition; I could be wrong-I have no proof to back it up).

A heavier barrel does not hurt, especially when you are shooting and getting the barrel somewhat warm: Its' added rigidity also probably helps with fighting barrel whip and heat distortion.

Also, with an AK as has been mentioned above fit of handguards, cleaning rods and other accesories probably have an additional effect on accuracy or lack therof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
968 Posts
Thekatar said:
I disagree. Barrel length has no effect on accuracy.
Barrel length does effect accuracy. Try cutting the same barrel to different lengths. You will get different barrel harmonics with those different lengths. But the statement that a longer barrel is always more accurate is false.

A longer barrel does help with better shooting in other ways though. A longer barrel with a longer sight radius makes shooting accurate easier. A longer barrel usually means the bullet reaches a higher velocity. That higher velocity means the bullet is effected by wind or gravity less, which usually equates to better shooting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
Thekatar said:
Stamped receivers flex whereas milled receivers are rigid - hence the increased service life of stamped.

This is all being completely blown out of proportion anyway (imagine that) - we are talking service lives of 50,000 to 80,000 firing a large number of rounds full auto. Supposedly the milled receivers started to get some cracks or stress fractures but this was at huge round counts that would have already wiped the barrel. No one on this board is going to fire a round count close to these, so why worry about it?
Exactly, I agree with you...i dont worry about it.
I won't be around long enough to shoot one to receiver failure.

KyAKGuy
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
234 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
mriddick said:
The Russians tested the rifles and came up with these claims, you've done what to prove your point?... ;)
I've never seen any results of these tests posted anywhere probably because they are classified. And as for milled recievers cracking, I never had one crack on me and if it does crack then your gun is poorly made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
WarBaby said:
Seriously, who gives a flying fuck? Shoot what you like - life is far too short to piss and moan about things like this. :roll:
I thought that this was a "discussion" fourm?
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top