How good are Asenal Ak-47s?

[awkelly]

I acquired an Arsenal SA-M7S through a trade a few months ago ($50 and a Remington 870 w/ a few tactical type mods). It's a Bulgarian style AK, milled receiver, according to the ser no it's an 02 model, scope mount on the side, collapsible CAR stock, complete synthetic furniture and a grizzly looking shark gill compensator/flash hider.

Anyway, from what I've read about this particular rifle it's held in very high regard in the AK community and goes for $600 - $1200. I've put about 1500 rounds through it so far and I like it.

My question is how does my AK stack up to what's currently on the market?

[rgitzlaff]

They are top notch as far as I'm concerned. I have owned one for about 12 years. After thousands of rounds I can't recall having a jam. It is reasonably accurate as well, at least as far as an AK goes, even took two deer with it one year. I have heard that the bulgarian ones with milled recievers are the best as well, so I say hold on to it, you have a good one.

[nalioth]

"Best" is highly subjective.

The Kalashnikov was designed to be a cheap commodity gun.

They are all produced in factories and cost less than $100 to produce (this includes WASRs to Arsenals to Russian models).

With Arsenal, you're paying for the name. Their marketing department figured out that by only releasing a few thousand of each model, they could keep their prices up, because everyone knows that "out of production" items are "rare and good".

The Russians dumped the milled receiver in 1959 because it was heavy and no more reliable than the newer stamped models they introduced then.

To the OP, I think you got a very good deal on your Arsenal. I'm glad you didn't pay $1200 for it, due to it's 'rarity'.

[chris in va]

My friend has a milled and stamped Arsenal. Both are nice, the milled being pretty heavy. The latter had defective sights though and had to be sent back.

Honestly I just don't see where the extra $4-500 comes in compared to my new Saiga I converted.

[mellow_c]

I've heard that Arsenal AK's are basically the best. And the Milled receivers and consistant manufacturing makes them a little more accurate. But All around, it seams they are not worth the extra money. But if you get a good deal, thats another story.

I'd rather pay $1000 for 2 Nice Yugo AK's than $1200 for one nice Arsenal AK.

[HorseSoldier]

There have been some threads in the last year or so (?) about current production Arsenal AKs having issues with front sights being off (but not visibly canted, I suppose) and requiring serious adjusting to get them on paper, etc. I know the one I have ('07 production) did require adjusting it almost all the way to the left to get it zeroed but it runs just fine now.

I think an '02 production rifle predates any of that by years, though.

[nalioth]

And the Milled receivers and consistant manufacturing makes them a little more accurateIf you put both stamped and milled receiver guns in a mechanical rest, the accuracy is the same.

What you're speaking of is based on the subjective perception of "accuracy" based on the heavier milled receiver absorbing more recoil.

Less recoil = quicker back to target = "better perceived accuracy"

[awkelly]

I've heard that Arsenal AK's are basically the best. And the Milled receivers and consistant manufacturing makes them a little more accurate. But All around, it seams they are not worth the extra money. But if you get a good deal, thats another story.

I'd rather pay $1000 for 2 Nice Yugo AK's than $1200 for one nice Arsenal AK.

A buddy of mine has a Yugo that he is turining into a tactical assault rifle (ie rail system and such). I think the quality there is pretty good compared to the Norinco once I've shot, but I heard they are a bit different that other AKs on the market in that a standard AK stock won't fit, it's two tang.

[TPAW]

My question is how does my AK stack up to what's currently on the market?

Top shelf.

[mellow_c]

Ak's are all great... You pay a little more, you get a little more. A milled receiver is better for the life of the gun, although stamped is lighter. But an AK is an AK. If your mags fit, and you dont have malfunctions, Your in business. I went with Yugo, because the stamped receiver is thicker and stronger. yet it's not as expensive or as heavy as a milled receiver. Sure it doesnt have a chrome lined barrel. But I'm not shooting corrosive ammo. and I clean my riffle after every trip to the range. Not that it would matter TOO much... there are people all around the world shooting AK's that havent had a good cleaning in decades.


I have yet to realize how much I love my AK's.....

[JustDreadful]

You can't get a better AK. You may be able to get one as good (and possibly for less $$), but you can't get a better one.

Well, maybe a Tromix-converted Saiga...

[HorseSoldier]

Or from Krebs or the other custom shops out there (though I guess Tromix falls in that category).

[TPAW]

I have yet to realize how much I love my AK's.....

Me too, but that could change in two months.

[ConfuseUs]

They are all produced in factories and cost less than $100 to produce (this includes WASRs to Arsenals to Russian models).

With Arsenal, you're paying for the name. Their marketing department figured out that by only releasing a few thousand of each model, they could keep their prices up, because everyone knows that "out of production" items are "rare and good".

I have a Romanian WASR-10 which is OK in terms of the quality of machining and fitting of parts. The finish on the parts is OK and it works without hassle.

I have a Romy G kit in which the parts are, well, good enough for government work in terms of machining quality. They aren't as well made as the WASR-10 parts and since these are surplus parts I know this is the quality that was issued in the Romanian army. For example, there are deep tool marks on the bolt.

I looked at an Arsenal 5.56 mm AK at a shop the other day. I field stripped it, checked out the internals, folded the stock, etc. The machining quality is excellent (no tool marks on milled parts, etc), the trigger group appears to be very well made, and the furniture is well made and (in the case of the folding stock) very well designed. It's not just marketing that makes an Arsenal AK sell for a premium.

[nalioth]

I looked at an Arsenal 5.56 mm AK at a shop the other day. I field stripped it, checked out the internals, folded the stock, etc. The machining quality is excellent (no tool marks on milled parts, etc), the trigger group appears to be very well made, and the furniture is well made and (in the case of the folding stock) very well designed. It's not just marketing that makes an Arsenal AK sell for a premium. In my opinion, the expected result is a reliable BANG every time you pull the trigger. The Romanian guns conform to that expectation, as does Arsenal and FEG and all the other makers. "Extra hand polishing" doesn't increase the BANG quotient any.

If you want an objet d'art, I don't think a Kalashnikov is where to look. Think antique "Weatherby" or "Purdey" for that.

[mellow_c]

If you want a fancy looking AK... why not get one of those cool Chrome plated ones!:D

[AutoPistola]

I'd consider buying a bulgarian ssr-85c2, but not an $900+ arsenal, IMHO.

[nalioth]

I'd consider buying a bulgarian ssr-85c2, When you get closer to buying one than "considering", keep in mind to 'treat it like a WASR'.

The quality control has not just slipped since Armory USA / Global Trades went out of business, it looks like it's fallen off the cliff...


Review of the new SSR-85c - AR15.com (http://www.ar15.com/FORUMS/topic.html?b=4&f=76&t=106706&page=1)

Not everything out of Bulgaria is the same quality.

This thread also has some enlightening info on the new SSR-85c rifles: Buying first AK - AKFiles.com (http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41867&highlight=ssr-85)