I've had Army instructors, armorers, and combat vets tell me that if you don't stagger the gaps in the gas rings, the M16 won't operate. So...ya know, take that for what it's worth.
-
If you are having trouble changng your password please click here for help.
So the AK-47 is pre-historic and outdated for battle?
- Thread starter CCW
- Start date
I've had Army instructors, armorers, and combat vets tell me that if you don't stagger the gaps in the gas rings, the M16 won't operate. So...ya know, take that for what it's worth.
Mechanical Engineering degree with an emphasis on manufacturing. The stamped receiver shaved a whole 2 lbs of metal from it. Plus stampings are much much quicker to produce than having to mill a solid block of steel. Any benefits of accuracy (slim to none) or anything were not the original intention. Soviet engineers did not sit around going "Hmmmm, how can we make it more accurate? I know, we can make stamped receivers!" No, they said "Hmmmm, how can we make the manufacturing process of the AK-47 more efficient?"
The Soviets said a lot of silly things, such as that it was possible to have a classless society.
Last edited:
In other words, no source, but your own ideas?
Soviets made all their weapons stamped, if they could. PPsh, PPS were all stamped. Kalashnikov's background was in mechanical engineering. Stalin demanded low-cost, high speed, high-volume production. If stamped receiver could have worked in 1945-47, it would have been AKM from the beginning
If I were to speculate, I'd say Kalashnikov was concerned that stamped receiver could not be made strong enough, so he decided to go with milled. Use in conflicts showed a few weaknesses that needed to be addressed, thus AKM. By the time AKMs rolled out in 1950s, stamping processes and alloys were developed enough to allow stamped receiver, and the "not being able to handle auto fire on consistent basis" was floated as a cover story to protect the design bureau from purges/labor camps. Again, it is nothing, but speculation.
In my original post I passed on what people, with experience using AK-style weapons, told me.
Last edited:
Stamped or milled, they're both communist tin can pieces of ****. sorry.
From Wikipedia:
"Compared to the AK-47, the AKM features detail improvements and enhancements that optimized the rifle for mass production; some parts and assemblies were conceived using simplified manufacturing methods. Notably, the AK-47's milled steel receiver was replaced by a U-shaped steel stamping."
I also found this:
"Originally AK was designed to be made on stamped receiver; however, at that time the Izhevsk factory that was awarded production of the AK rifles did not have the capacity for a mass production using deep stamping (deep drawing) method. So out of necessity, the AK type II was created based on machined receivers. "
Poverty rifles.
Yeah, yeah.
If I need to accurately relieve a target at 300 yards, I will use a .308 with an optic. The .223 at 300 yards is for groundhogs.Do you even understand the term "civilian battle rifle"? I don't know one single professional that trains at even 150 yards with a civilian grade battle rifle, much less 300. Ya ever think there might be a reason behind that?
