AK47 Tech sights

[RedneckFur]

I just recently noticed that Tech Sights has their AK47 sights out and in production. I really like the concept, and it seems like a very sturdy way to mount one.

http://www.tech-sights.com/

Before I spend the money, I'd like to know if any of you have used the Tech Sights for the AK47, and what you like/dislike about them, and any issues you've had.

[KLRANGL]

I have them and I like them, for the most part...

Sight mounts very secure, but required a bit of filing to fit my Arsenal receiver. The sights themselves also seem really nice, but I do not have enough recent experience with an AR to compare them to AR sights... They work for me though, and is a huge improvement over the stock sights...

The thing I don't like about it is the replacement dust cover. It really sucks, and the fitment is loose and rattles a lot. It also has huge gaps in some places that will let all sorts of environmental unfriendlies get in there... They also thought it would be cute to put a little protrusion on the dust cover right over where the end of the fire selector rests, which has to be filed off if you run a Galil bolt carrier like I do... Just another unpleasant hole to look at... And finally, it makes take-down more complicated than it should be for an AK...

I have thought about taking another Bulgarian dust cover and cutting it to fit with the sights. Hopefully that will take care of the rattling and gap problems...

[bamaranger]

I've thought about the Tech sights too. The other option I've considered are the Big Dot sights. I like the idea of increasing the sight radius on the AK, which should help with some degree of accuracy improvement.

Can anybody post pics of the odd dust cover issues that KL mentions, gaps and funny bump?????

[noyes]

[bamaranger]

Ask, and ......someone will post. Thanks Noyes.

Yeah that's a goofy bump, what do you suppose that's all about? Ejection issue? Guard the safety? Go figure.

Otherwise, the gaps seem like normal AK stuff to me.

[KLRANGL]

Well the gaps are certainly going to be AK dependent, since it is designed to be used on many types of AKs. I'll post some pics up of the gaps when I get some time at home, but the big one that comes to mind is right by the front trunnion on the non-ejecting side of the receiver right above where the serial number would be on the Arsenal AKs...

[DMK]

I like the sights. I had it on my Romanian for a while, but I put that rifle back to its original condition and I plan to put the Tech-Sight on my Saiga now.

I love aperture sights. Some folks don't like them for some reason. I find it a huge improvement for the AK. It allows for faster sight acquisition, better sight alignment and since the Tech-Sight uses standard AR15 rear apertures, you can swap it out for something more precise or a bigger ghost ring. I put an XS Sight Systems "Same Plane" aperture in mine so I only need to worry about one zero for both the ghost ring and the smaller 'peep'.

The sight fits tight, holds it zero. Both rear and front sight are now windage adjustable so front sight cant is less of an issue (a big help with my SAR1).

Cleaning the rifle is slightly more involved. Instead of pushing one button on the rear of the cover, you now have two smaller buttons on the sides. You need to use the tip of a bullet or a punch to press these buttons while pushing the cover down and back, then you can tilt it out and remove it. Awkward at first and many complain about this, but it's easy when you get the hang of it.

I have thought about taking another Bulgarian dust cover and cutting it to fit with the sights.

I agree about the cover being loose and having gaps. It actually fit tight on my Romanian, but is loose on my Saiga. I guess it must be hard to get one product to fit many variations of AK.

I have also considered modifying the original Saiga cover for a better fit and for close up some gaps.

[KLRANGL]

DMK, I really like the XS sights idea. Maybe their AK tritium front sight, and same plane AR tritium rear sight can be one more tacticool feature of the Galil that I can add to my Galil-ikov...

[Bart Noir]

Noyes, thanks for the pics.

I looks like one cover will fit both the Yugo and non-Yugo guns. Is that right?

Bart Noir

[DMK]

DMK, I really like the XS sights idea. Maybe their AK tritium front sight, and same plane AR tritium rear sight can be one more tacticool feature...

Or use an AR15 front sight also:

http://riflestocks.com/catalog/produ...286643437b27ac

[SatCong]

If your dust cover moves, then the sight mounted on it will move...
Getting the idea?
I replaced the OEM on my SAR-1 with a mojo. It "works".

SatCong

[DMK]

If your dust cover moves, then the sight mounted on it will move...
Getting the idea?

Obviously you don't get the idea.
The Tech-Sight is not mounted on the dust cover. It is mounted on the rear trunnion. You can shoot the rifle with a Tech-Sight and no dust cover attached.

I replaced the OEM on my SAR-1 with a mojo. It "works".

Actually, the Mojo doesn't work that well. It is mounted too far away from the eye to be efficient as an aperture sight.

I've used both. I was disappointed with and sold the Mojo but I kept the Tech-Sight

[94bluerat]

I haven't used the AK set up, but I did meet the couple that owns the company at an Appleseed shoot in SC. They are good folks who have done lots of homework to put behind their products.

I feel confident that you will be pleased with your purchase.

Cheers!

[bamaranger]

Yeah, the Mojo seems like the proverbial answer to the question nobody asked.Way to far forward to gain the benefits of a real aperture. But in truth, I have never owned or shot one.

The Techs are sounding better and better. I've got to do something, as the std AK sights are giving me fits.

How does the cost compare to the XS big dots for the AK??

[KLRANGL]

So here is some of the gaps I was talking about, and there is a vid at the end showing how loose it is from side to side. Not really a big deal for a range gun, but I think reliability suffers some... AKs can still jam too you know, and the bigger the gabs, the bigger the stuff that can get in to make it stop working. And since you loose the quick access to the fire control group, it makes unjamming a bit more of an issue...


Right at the fire selector, since the Bulgarian selectors have a slight curve in it. Plus you can see where I had to cut off the notch so the galil bolt carrier assembly will cycle...


by the sight. Nothing major, but still there...


By far the biggest gap... Not happy about this one...

[Balog]

The dog leg rail with built in peep from http://www.texasweaponsystems.com is another option. No need to replace the dustcover and you can mount a RD low enough to co-witness if you're into that kind of thing. Runs about $160 iirc.

[SatCong]

Well I stand corrected, that trunion mount should eliminate any displacement of the sight were it, as I mistakenly thought, mounted to the dust cover.
When I stated my mojo "works", I thought it to be understood that it works for me, but I'm a pretty good shot (he stated, modestly!).
However, as much as I admire a longer sight radius, I believe no amount of sight radius can address the platform's inherent barrel instability as the gun is fired. High speed photography shows the harmonic flex of the barrel as the weapon is fired - this characteristic is even more pronounced in automatic fire.
For a gun whose design, as excellent a mission specific design as there is, so far, intended that weapon to sweep the battlefield at relatively short ranges, it seems to be expecting a lot of it to perform up to a fine sight's potential. It's an attempt to make a "silk purse from a sow's ear".
Your experience may difer.

SatCong

[Balog]

I don't understand your point SatCong. All rifle barrels have "harmonic flex" it's unavoidable. Are you saying Ak's exhibit it to such an extreme degree as to render them incapable of acceptable accuracy? And what do you consider acceptable accuracy?

Given decent ammunition and a good quality rifle ~2moa is a fairly easily mechanically achievable goal, but many people are not able to fire that accurately (or not consistently) with the poor iron sights that come standard on AK pattern rifles. Further, most people find large aperture peep sights to be significantly faster and easier to use than notch und blade.

[DMK]

The dog leg rail with built in peep from http://www.texasweaponsystems.com is another option. No need to replace the dustcover and you can mount a RD low enough to co-witness if you're into that kind of thing. Runs about $160 iirc.

Have you tried one?

The TWS rail is nice and a good option for a magnified optic. I have one on my Saiga .308 (can't use an Ultimak on it due to the thicker barrel). It's a quality piece and has a nifty flip up rear BUIS.

However, I cannot get any red dot I have to co-witness with it. I tried an Aimpoint CompC3 and even a Bushnell TRS-25 (that was specifically recommended to co-witness with the rail). The rail just sits too high in relation to the sights, it has to clear the top cover after all. A lot of people on the Interweb are saying that you can co-witness a TWS rail and a red dot. I don't know if they are just repeating bad info, or there is a LOT of variation in sight heights, but it ended up wasting a bunch of money for me.


Now I did find that on a Saiga .223, a Tech-sights rear aperture and original front sight will co-witness very nicely with an Aimpoint CompC3 on an Ultimak.

[Balog]

Don't even have an AK yet, I'm just in my "obsessive pre-purchase research" phase. I seem to recall some pics on arfcom of a co-witnessed TWS rail with the Bushnell iirc. I must admit tho, I have no interest whatsoever in co-witnessing so it isn't something I've looked into o'er much.

[SatCong]

Balog,

Please don't get me wrong, I own and shoot a SAR-1. It is fun, and I enjoy it.
Yes the flexing of the AK/AKM barrel is excessive compared to some other military pattern rifles. But it's accuracy is adequate for it's intended mission.
My point, "not fer nothin", is; that looks like a fine sight, it is undoubtedly capable of much finer accuracy than that of which the platform is capable.
I get consistent 9-10 ring hits at 100 yards with my set-up (mojo rear/KN reticle front), but THAT'S about my gun's limit for "called shot" accuracy. A Kreb's or other high end weapon could do better, I'm sure. But for that kind of expense, there are better options for a rifleman. "Cool factor" of the platform
(I, too, believe the AK/AKM have a distinct panache), not withstanding!
My SAR currently mounts an Ultimak rail, should I choose to mount an optic. I used to run it with a Hakko holographic, or EO-Tech, but opted to remove both and use the current irons set-up. That suits my grab n' go intended use for this particular rifle.
I guess my history with the platform probably prejudices my point of view.
When I first was introduced to this weapon, as a young sailor, in the early '70's,
it was, when field expediency required, used as a suppresive fire weapon. More "spray and pray" than "one shot, one kill"!
I came home in one piece, so... It's all good!

SatCong

[Balog]

/shrug

I think the AK platform is capable of far more mechanical accuracy than you give it credit for. I also think most people are far less capable of a high level of accuracy with poor sights than you seem to think. But since this is a gun board and not an Ordnance meeting to decide on procurement I suppose it's all academic. It does seem rather odd to interject in a thread where a fellow is asking for help with the sights on his AK, that better sights are a waste because AK's are so hopelessly inaccurate.

[KLRANGL]

Does anyone know if it is possible to switch out the windage adjustment on the Tech-Sights with an A2 style finger adjustable knob?

[SatCong]

Better sights are always a good idea, they can only impove accuracy.
The words "waste" and "hopelessly inaccurate" are YOUR words, brother, not mine.

SatCong

[DMK]

I think the AK platform is capable of far more mechanical accuracy than you give it credit for.

I agree. There are good ones and bad ones like any other rifle, but my experience has shown that the decent ones are just as accurate as an M1A, FAL, Garand, etc. It's the short sight radius and antique style sights that handicap the shooter.

Does anyone know if it is possible to switch out the windage adjustment on the Tech-Sights with an A2 style finger adjustable knob?

It's an A1 style sight. You can't just use an A2 windage knob because the A1 has the detents on the wheel, the A2 has the detents on the receiver with the ball and spring in the knob.

There used to be a finger adjustable windage knobs available for A1 style AR15s/SP1s. Those would work. I haven't seen one in a while, but then again, I haven't been looking. Ask over at AR15.com or something like that. Someone there probably knows where to get one.