AK Rifles banner

one inch worth 200 dollars to you?

  • "oh hell yes!,.. build it mo'fugger!"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • "oh hell no!,..what the F are you thinking?"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
well that is the question,......

i am building,. or at least getting ready to build a AK-104 clone,..ive been slowly collecting new parts for this so the only number anywhere on this is going to be the random serial# global put on the reciver,..im going down to the sheffifs office tomorrow to have him sign off on my NFA paperwork,....i have my answer already,...

but if this was your gun,.. your build,..would you pay the extra 200 bucks to have the only AK-104 on your block?

here it is shown next to the rest of the family,..both in the butt stock extended and folded positions.





i just slid the parts into the reciver as to get the best measurements i could,..and have not assembled anything yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
762BODYDROPPER said:
I guess, I would. But if I was gonna build an SBR. it would be a krink.
i have a Bulgy AKS-74U (Krinkov) that is paciently waiting in the corrner for the piggy bank to fill up,. so i can purchase and build on a milled reciver.

or i could build one now on a stamped global,..but im thinking the milled reciver would just be nicer for this soon to be little monster.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Six reason why you should.


definately a 10 on the cool factor

add value to your rifle

an excellent addition to what you already have

your having fun building it

pride in your work

and then getting to shoot it!



I've seen $200 go to a lot of bullshit. (I know, i've seen me do it.) :oops:


Your next build would logically have to be a Krink. The photo requires one more weapon to complete the set. :smile: :grin:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,759 Posts
Starivojnik said:
Six reason why you should.


definately a 10 on the cool factor

add value to your rifle

an excellent addition to what you already have

your having fun building it

pride in your work

and then getting to shoot it!



I've seen $200 go to a lot of bullshit. (I know, i've seen me do it.) :oops:
Seventh reason:
It pisses off the liberal gun grabbers. That alone is reason enough to do it ... :bh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,256 Posts
Build it and take the pics down (that is if the holes are drilled. As far as I know its still illegal if the stock is slipped in place with the holes drilled (too easy to put a couple of screws in and go). I'm not sure, and I'm not trying to piss you off I just don't want to see you catch shit for something like that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
StreetTrends said:
Build it and take the pics down (that is if the holes are drilled. As far as I know its still illegal if the stock is slipped in place with the holes drilled (too easy to put a couple of screws in and go). I'm not sure, and I'm not trying to piss you off I just don't want to see you catch shit for something like that.
i see where your going,...but the butt stock cant even seat into the reciver because or the rear tang hinges prevent it,..anyone who has built a side folding 74/100 knows what i am talking about,....nothing has been drilled,.cut or affixed to the reciver,.. not even the trigger guard...and if i where to pick up the parts by the barrel,....everything falls down in a big pile on the floor (ask me how i learned that little nugget of info :evil: )

besides,...it is already back in its little box,.. the only reason the parts where assed together was to measure for the ATF form 1 in blocks 4e and particularly 4f.

good looking out though :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,256 Posts
No problem, I couldnt tell if it was seated or not. I just would hate to see an ass hat knock on your door becuase of an inch. Good luck with it and do the sbr.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,285 Posts
I would go NFA all the way. I wish Michigan allowed SBR's. Look at it this way, its a 200 dollar tax stamp but you can use original parts and not have to worry about compliance parts. So if you think about it that way the tax stamp is only 150-100 bucks depending on what compliance parts u usually install. McM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
Not meaning to be a terd, but the fact that the shortened barrel in pressed into the trunnion in the receiver constitutes and SBR already does it not? The receiver is the firearm, and it currently has less than 16" barrel in it. Personally I would remove the barrel until the paper work is approved.

Looks really cool though:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
I'm about to do it for an AK105 so what do you think MY answer is......... :grin:

and for the record...........you can't build the rifle until the paperwork is approved or you're breaking the Federal law. :hail:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,049 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
magnus392 said:
Not meaning to be a terd, but the fact that the shortened barrel in pressed into the trunnion in the receiver constitutes and SBR already does it not? The receiver is the firearm, and it currently has less than 16" barrel in it. Personally I would remove the barrel until the paper work is approved.

Looks really cool though:D

then if thats the case everyone with a AKS-74U Krinkov kit that has been chopped up from a working firearm is breaking the law,..and if it is that picky,.. everyone that bought a kit with the FA FCG is breaking the law as well

yes the barrel is in the trunnion,.. i had to order about 4 diffrent trunnions to find the right one,(romy-47)...the trunnion is new,.. undrilled for either the barrel pin or trunnion rivits,......nothing is attached to the reciver at all,.. the reciver still looks the same as the day i got it from global.

if you where to tilt this forward,.. the barrel assembly would fall out onto the floor,.. tilt it back and it does a back flip out of the reciver

tomorrow i get the paperwork signed (hope my LEO is good about this) and from there i have one year to send in the paper work with the 200 dollar payment.

and until i get it back from the alaphabet boys,...i cant cut, drill, file, or assemble anything onto the reciver,.. and i have no intention to break any of there federal laws,...if they want to push it,..i guess ill need a lawyer

this is a nessary step to fill out there fucking paperwork, so i can at least get a fairly accurate idea of what the finished rifle will be like.


Tomovich Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:59 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm about to do it for an AK105 so what do you think MY answer is.........
i thought about a 105,....but i figured if i was getting a SBR in 5.45,,. it would have to be a krink,...but i would love to have all of the 100 series

in fact if i cant find a krink kit chambered for 5.56/.223 im going to look into building a AK-103

105=5.45
104=7.62
103=5.56

what where 102 and 101?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
then if thats the case everyone with a AKS-74U Krinkov kit that has been chopped up from a working firearm is breaking the law,..and if it is that picky,.. everyone that bought a kit with the FA FCG is breaking the law as well
No, sir that is not correct. The stubbs left intact do not constitute a receiver.


yes the barrel is in the trunnion,.. i had to order about 4 diffrent trunnions to find the right one,(romy-47)...the trunnion is new,.. undrilled for either the barrel pin or trunnion rivits,......nothing is attached to the reciver at all,.. the reciver still looks the same as the day i got it from global.
if you where to tilt this forward,.. the barrel assembly would fall out onto the floor,.. tilt it back and it does a back flip out of the reciver

tomorrow i get the paperwork signed (hope my LEO is good about this) and from there i have one year to send in the paper work with the 200 dollar payment.

and until i get it back from the alaphabet boys,...i cant cut, drill, file, or assemble anything onto the reciver,.. and i have no intention to break any of there federal laws,...if they want to push it,..i guess ill need a lawyer

this is a nessary step to fill out there fucking paperwork, so i can at least get a fairly accurate idea of what the finished rifle will be like
The bolded statement is what keeps you off the hook. I was not aware of this fact. Just looking at the pic, based on past experiences of the way builders run to get stuff together, I drew a possible conclusion. I haven't read back through all of the post it is entirely possible that I missed you stating that nothing was put together. Anyway, I apoligize your project looks like a worthwhile endeavor and good luck.

The AK-101 was basically an AK-74M in 5.56
http://www.world.guns.ru/assault/as04-e.htm

The AK-102 is also in 5.56 and is the SBR styled 100 series
http://www.enemyforces.com/firearms/ak102.htm

Some information begs to differ with your caliber assignment of the 100 series:

7.62x39
Correct;)
7.62x39

AK-101
5.56 x 45

AK-102
5.56 x 45

AK-103
7.62x39

AK-104
7.62x39

Ak-105
5.45x39

As seen here:

http://www.enemyforces.com/firearms/ak100.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Yes, it's worth it.

Don't think of it as 1", think of it as 4".

I don't know about you, but I don't ever want to own a rifle with a permanent muzzle attachment ever again.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
It's up to you if you want to pay the 200 dollars just so can have a barrel that is one inch short of the minium length. Me persoonally, it's not worth paying that much money for just one inch. I had a AKS-74U built with a 8.5 inch barrel, that to me is worth spending the tax on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
I don't think a 104 barrel is 1 inch shorter than the law allows, based on my research the correct barrel lenght for a 104 (or 105, which I intend to build) is 12.3 inches (314mm), right? So think of it as 50 bucks an inch, which is a great deal!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
Motorcityman said:
I would go NFA all the way. I wish Michigan allowed SBR's. Look at it this way, its a 200 dollar tax stamp but you can use original parts and not have to worry about compliance parts. So if you think about it that way the tax stamp is only 150-100 bucks depending on what compliance parts u usually install. McM
I thought the new opinion of your attorney general or whatever changed that?
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top