View Full Version : Ak or FAL?
rubberneck
09-11-07, 14:34
Just looking for some opinions here. I just finished my most recent M-4 build and an now looking for something different to sink my teeth into. I am trying to decide between buying a AK or having a FAL built.
I want both but I have laid out way too much money on guns over the last 6 months, and right now my "fun" funds are running low. So buying both right now is out of the question. Hopefully later next year I can follow on with the other one. Any one have any thoughts on which way they would go if they were in the same position?
Jay Cunningham
09-11-07, 14:45
As always, it depends upon the application.
I will say that .308 ammo is very expensive right now.
rubberneck
09-11-07, 14:50
As always, it depends upon the application.
I will say that .308 ammo is very expensive right now.
Right now the application will be nothing more than fun and hopefully a Vickers class next year.
Except for price, and that is only as important as it is for you, the FAL trumps the AK in every way.
Cameron
Jay Cunningham
09-11-07, 15:05
Except for price, and that is only as important as it is for you, the FAL trumps the AK in every way.
Cameron
Well, it depends on the application, of course.
The AK is much handier because it is a true carbine. Follow up shots are faster, it is lighter and had a larger capacity standard magazine.
The FAL is a battle rifle, has much longer practical range etc.
I would not want to take a FAL in to clear a structure, and I would not want to shoot 200 m with an AK. Both great guns, just figure out which application is more important to you right now.
Thats a tough one.
Having various versions of both its a hard call. The AKs are very fun and ammo is cheaper at this time. The FALs are very reliable and will shoot distance well with a stronger round.
Don't shoot my FALs much right now because of ammo prices but ain't getting ride of'm either.
I'd say see about getting or saving for a good FAL kit and reciever and sitting on it and go ahead and buy an AK for shooting now. When you have more funds get the FAL built. At least you'll have the parts for when your ready.
Think the FAL kits are going to be getting harder to come by and pricier down the road.
Where as AKs, especially kits like the Romanian G kits are in good supply and in good condition. AKs aren't costing that much right now so the time is good for a kit to have built or buying a complete rifle. But the time of good FAL kits at good prices is fading so I'd buy and sit on it.
Course you could buy a DSA FAL but its going to cost you.
oldcrusty72
09-21-07, 10:16
I'm currently living and working in a land full of AK's, they're cheap and there's heaps of ammo everywhere. But i would never use one by choice, I've been working in a close environment and using an 11" barreled FAL. Now i'm working in more rural areas so have swapped that rifle out for a 16" barrel.
A loaded FAL (even with only 20 rnd mag) is heavier than an AK with 30 rnds but more usable in my opinion.
Ak's are a great "fun" rifle because they are cheap and ammo is cheap. There are now heaps of aftermarket stuff for them too. But being cheap and redily available doesn't make them a good rifle.
I know there are heaps of die hard AK lovers on the forum here, don't be upset this is only my opinion.
An AK will do the job, but if given the choice i'll go the FAL every time.
Tim
The Dumb Gun Collector
09-21-07, 10:40
I think the AK is potentially more useful and interesting.
1. The AK is the most common rifle in the world. As a gun lover, you should have and be proficient with one.
2. The ammo is still fairly cheap. It is damn near dirt cheap if you build an AK-74.
3. Getting to know the Ak well can have other benefits too. Lets face it, most gun owners are not good shots. I have found that a better than average shooter like myself with an AK can easily outshoot average or worse shooters with ARs with all manner of tactical doo-dadery. I went to a service rifle match with my Hungarian AK and basically got laughed at. The laughing stopped when I came in third. Granted, I would have done better with a 20 inch AR with A2 sights, but that isn't the point.
4. The AK is one of those guns that you could imagine being useful in a true emergency. Not to sound paranoid, but when some jerk finally sets a nuke off in NY or whatever, the government is very likely to collapse, at least temporarily. Depending on where you live, you could see pandaemonium in the streets that will make Katrina look like a Arbor day festival. An AK and about 1000 rounds of ammo would be a nice tool for the kit. I know a FAL would be great too, but the AK would be, ultimately, more robust and much easier to keep fed. Plus, 1000 rounds of .308 ammo is now 1 million dollars.
Utterly agree with Tim, even though his 11" OSW DSA FN rattled my teeth when he'd touch it off from the 'car'.
I'm not an AK fan at the best of times - I train with them to be familiar for battlefield pickup - but given a choice I'd take the FN. I have 3 here (2 thanks to Tim) what can I say its a gunowners paradise.
I dont have an Ak :D
Ergonomic wise, and accuracy wise the FN has it all over the Ak.
It's hard to beat, sub MOA at 100 yaerds from a 16" fluted stainless barrel:
http://dsarms.com/images/SA58ELITE.gif
That said, you can save nearly $3,000 and get an AK...get a Noveske AR and Remington 700 with the change...AK's have their place, reliable, cheapo to manufacture. Accurate (maybe a few), but not in same class. I still want one though, before the Dems ban everything one again!
I think my earlier reply was far too diplomatic...
There is no way an AK beats an FAL!
OldCrusty72 got it right on every point.
As technology and technique have developed since the 1950s we now know the FAL or other MBRs like the M1A don't have to be 45" long and weigh 11lbs to retain more than 95% of its capability on the long range end, and actually increase its utility on the CQB end of the envelope. My shorty 16" para FAL weighs only 8.25lbs and is easily as quick at close ranges as an M4 or AK.
Cameron
I've owned a couple of AKs and now have an FAL and I'm not going back. My 16" barreled Fal has it all over the 20" AK I had, and punches right through pretty much everything. It's pretty much just as robust as the AK also, and has much better ergonomics.
Canonshooter
09-23-07, 09:03
Never had a FAL, but have a real nice AK - a Krebs Custom AK103k (http://www.krebscustom.com/KalashnikovRifles.shtml). A well-built AK - especially if fitted with a good optic - is something to take quite seriously from both ends of the barrel;
http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/ak103k-3.jpg
Though Marc Krebs builds them one at a time, with $895 and a few months wait you can have a rifle that is utterly reliable and shoots far better than the typical commercially-made models. With the Aimpoint/BP-02 mounted, it weighs in at 8 lbs./8 ounces and measures 35" OAL.
BTW, a long time ago before the AWB, I bought a brand new HK91 (.308) for $500, along with the HK bipod and a supply of HK 20 round mags. Needless to say, I'm still kicking myself for selling it (in retrospect, what a dumbass for not holding onto that rifle!).
That PAra would probably solve the one insurmountable problem my DSA carbine had
The LOP was too long for a carbine
Other than that it was a great rifle
rubberneck
09-25-07, 10:23
Thanks for the input. I have decided to wait a little longer and order an STG58 from DSA. Hopefully I'll be able to get an AK before the next Klinton AWB.
I'd definately go for the FAL. I have a few and am not sorry. I've had deep respect for the FAL going back to the mid 70s when I was first introduced to them. I've never quite warmed-up to the AK. The only AK or variant that ever grabbed my attention was a 7.62 Galil.
Canonshooter
09-27-07, 11:29
As a few have already stated, it really depends on what you're looking to do. There's no way an AK will compete with a .308 FAL over 200 meters, and though the FAL owners will no doubt disagree, there's no way you will fire a .308 SA as quickly and accurately at close range as a less powerful round. Regardless of how skilled or strong you are, recoil is recoil and muzzle blast from a short barrel .308 is IMO excessive for short-range use. I once used my SA M1A in a 3-gun match and it was DEFINITELY a handicap at the shorter ranges. Even on the 100 meter targets, the AR/AK guys were getting their hits faster than I could.
The FAL is one rifle I have yet to own and would welcome one into my collection. But based on my past shooting experience with the M1A and the HK91, there's no way I'd reach for it instead of my AR or AK if the action was close and fast. It's really a matter of using the best tool for the job at hand.
Just my 2 cents, YMMV.
JaketheSnake
09-27-07, 22:07
Too bad you couldn't get a Galil in .308 .
That PAra would probably solve the one insurmountable problem my DSA carbine had
The LOP was too long for a carbine
Other than that it was a great rifle
The Para stock can sometimes still be too long...
Magpul CTR stock on DSA Para, adjustable LOP.
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Rifles/DSA%20SA58%20Para/DSASA58MagpulCTR01-1.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Rifles/DSA%20SA58%20Para/DSASA58MagpulCTR02-1.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Rifles/DSA%20SA58%20Para/DSASA58ParaTacCarbineIORScope01.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Rifles/DSA%20SA58%20Para/DSASA58ParaTacCarbineIORScope02.jpg
there's no way you will fire a .308 SA as quickly and accurately at close range as a less powerful round. Regardless of how skilled or strong you are, recoil is recoil and muzzle blast from a short barrel .308 is IMO excessive for short-range use....
It may be so close that the target wont know the difference...
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Videos/Shooting/th_FALQuads.jpg (http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Videos/Shooting/?action=view¤t=FALQuads.flv)
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Videos/Shooting/th_M4Quads.jpg (http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb25/tacticallyspeaking/Videos/Shooting/?action=view¤t=M4Quads.flv)
Cameron
Given the vids above you can see the FAL & AR carbines will shoot fast, so close work is just as good as an AK. Actually I think the AK jumps around a bit more due to the design.
We all know the typical AK comes up short in longer range capability when compared to the typical AR or FAL.
So if you want an all round gun the AK is not for you. If you're happy with a gun that's a 100 yard-er then go with the AK or a shotgun for that matter.
Jay Cunningham
09-28-07, 06:24
A wise man once said, "It's the singer, not the song."
Both rifles will do what is required of them if the shooter does their part. As to which is preferable, mission requirements dictate whether an intermediate cartridge or full size cartridge is preferable, and also the logistics of getting one's hands on enough/correct ammo.
oldcrusty72
09-28-07, 07:16
Nice Vids Cameron,
:)
Nathan_Bell
09-28-07, 10:59
Too bad you couldn't get a Galil in .308 .
You can, but you will PAY
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=81589424
A wise man once said, "It's the singer, not the song."
Both rifles will do what is required of them if the shooter does their part. As to which is preferable, mission requirements dictate whether an intermediate cartridge or full size cartridge is preferable, and also the logistics of getting one's hands on enough/correct ammo.
Exactly.
The answer is, of course, both. If I had to get one before the other, probably the FAL, but that's a tough call. A quality AK will suprise you as far as accuracy, but if you're only experiences have been with shot to shit and beat to shit AK's in the sandbox (and the operators thereof), then I can understand someone's dismissal of the system.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/G3%20and%20R1/DSC00240.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/G3%20and%20R1/DSC00243.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Range%209-16-07/Reduced/DSC00268.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Range%209-16-07/Reduced/DSC00267.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Arsenal%20Classic/Classic6.jpg
Canonshooter
09-29-07, 06:06
A quality AK will suprise you as far as accuracy, but if you're only experiences have been with shot to shit and beat to shit AK's in the sandbox (and the operators thereof), then I can understand someone's dismissal of the system.
Exactly! And in that regard, I came from the same set of beliefs before owning the Krebs rifle - I too considered the AK as "inferior" in every way.
Having owned ARs, a M1A, a HK91 and now a quality AK, I in no way feel "undergunned" in terms of accuracy with the AK within the limitations of its intended purpose. I consider the AK a short-to-medium range weapon, where the M1A and HK91 had better reach by virture of the cartridge they fire.
After having dabbled in high power rifle with the M1A years ago, I can say without reservation that for any kind of unsupported shooting (off hand, kneeling and prone) out to 100-150 yards on an IDPA target, I'm just as accurate with my Aimpoint-equipped AK - but quite a bit faster. Just like I practice defensive shooting with my Glock 17, I do the same with the AK as that is its intended role - something I have come to realize it can do extraordinarily well.
Exactly! And in that regard, I came from the same set of beliefs before owning the Krebs rifle - I too considered the AK as "inferior" in every way.
Having owned ARs, a M1A, a HK91 and now a quality AK, I in no way feel "undergunned" in terms of accuracy with the AK within the limitations of its intended purpose. I consider the AK a short-to-medium range weapon, where the M1A and HK91 had better reach by virture of the cartridge they fire.
After having dabbled in high power rifle with the M1A years ago, I can say without reservation that for any kind of unsupported shooting (off hand, kneeling and prone) out to 100-150 yards on an IDPA target, I'm just as accurate with my Aimpoint-equipped AK - but quite a bit faster. Just like I practice defensive shooting with my Glock 17, I do the same with the AK as that is its intended role - something I have come to realize it can do extraordinarily well.
What group sizes have you been able to get with the AK at 200 or more yards?
As far as accuracy out to 200 yards, I don't see a lot of difference between my Arsenal A1R shooting Golden Tiger or Iraqi surplus and my 1/7 14.5" LMT AR shooting Winchester/LC M855 62gr.
Now I'm no accomplished sniper, and my vision isn't what it used to be.
The AK with a PKA sight, the LMT with a M3 Aimpoint, a valid comparison, and both are combat weapons.
Chest hits on silhouette targets are no problem with either from a prone firing position. The AR may seem to group a little tighter, but not a lot. Add magnified optics and the difference would be more apparent I'm sure.
But to describe the AK as a 100 yard gun insults it's capabilities, and the comparison to a shotgun is laughable.
As far as accuracy out to 200 yards, I don't see a lot of difference between my Arsenal A1R shooting Golden Tiger or Iraqi surplus and my 1/7 14.5" LMT AR shooting Winchester/LC M855 62gr.
Now I'm no accomplished sniper, and my vision isn't what it used to be.
The AK with a PKA sight, the LMT with a M3 Aimpoint, a valid comparison, and both are combat weapons.
Chest hits on silhouette targets are no problem with either from a prone firing position. The AR may seem to group a little tighter, but not a lot. Add magnified optics and the difference would be more apparent I'm sure.
But to describe the AK as a 100 yard gun insults it's capabilities, and the comparison to a shotgun is laughable.
So open sights at 200 yards and you're getting about 4" - 6" or so groups?
So open sights at 200 yards and you're getting about 4" - 6" or so groups?
Alot of that is caliber and cartridge dependent.
Comparing an AR shooting Winchester, Federal, Black Hills, etc. to an AK shooting Russian or Chinese FMJ military ammo isn't really fair. Yugoslav FMJ tends to be more accurate, and the US commercial 7.62x39mm is usually even better.
The small bore Kalashnikovs tend to be more accurate, the 5.45mm is more accurate than the 7.62x39mm, and the 5.56x45mm, well, was designed from the ground up as a varmint cartridge vs. a military cartridge, so AK's chambered in 5.56mm can actually hang pretty well in practical, off hand accuracy with an AR similary set up.
I've been shooting AK's for a lot of years, and I actually do better with an AK sight set up over an apeture set up like the AR, ymmv.
I can consistently hit a 9"x12" steel silhouette off hand out to about 150 yards. Any more than that and I'd rather go prone.
The AK is generally a 200 yard weapon with irons, put a decent optic on that and you can extend that, caliber dependent. After 300 yards, the 123 gr. 7.62x39mm does start to drop significantly.
JaketheSnake
09-29-07, 14:01
You can, but you will PAY
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=81589424
I don't think that's a bad deal, yes it's alot of money but all factory DSA para fals I've seen push the 2K limit. The Galil is a true collectors gun it will continue to go up in value even if shot.
Magazines would be a downside though.
Wish I had one... :(
Alot of that is caliber and cartridge dependent.
Comparing an AR shooting Winchester, Federal, Black Hills, etc. to an AK shooting Russian or Chinese FMJ military ammo isn't really fair. Yugoslav FMJ tends to be more accurate, and the US commercial 7.62x39mm is usually even better.
The small bore Kalashnikovs tend to be more accurate, the 5.45mm is more accurate than the 7.62x39mm, and the 5.56x45mm, well, was designed from the ground up as a varmint cartridge vs. a military cartridge, so AK's chambered in 5.56mm can actually hang pretty well in practical, off hand accuracy with an AR similary set up.
I've been shooting AK's for a lot of years, and I actually do better with an AK sight set up over an apeture set up like the AR, ymmv.
I can consistently hit a 9"x12" steel silhouette off hand out to about 150 yards. Any more than that and I'd rather go prone.
The AK is generally a 200 yard weapon with irons, put a decent optic on that and you can extend that, caliber dependent. After 300 yards, the 123 gr. 7.62x39mm does start to drop significantly.
Just wondering what group size he was able to archive with his AK/ammo combo.
Low Drag, I would love 4 to 6" groups at 200 yards with my AKs, but it's more like 6.5 to 9" and that's with the PKA red dot, prone off the magazine, slow fire. There is no way an AK is going to compete with a .308, not even my .308 AK, for group size at that distance, especially with the stated ammo.
With the iron sights (Mojo rear, standard front), my eyesight only sometimes lets me duplicate the red dot performance.
The only times I have even approached 2.5 MOA at even 100 yards with an AK was with the Iraqi surplus which, from what I'm told, is essentially Polish ammo (Saddam purchased the equipment from the Poles?).
But none of this means the AK isn't combat effective at 200+ yards. Maybe an exceedingly poor choice for a sniper platform.
Here is a target from an AK at 50 yards, rapid fire, prone, all 30 rounds in 20-22 seconds.
http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/Target-T1.jpg
A 10" barrelled Krinkov with Aimpoint.
I'll have to try 200, but I'm not optimistic.
Low Drag, I would love 4 to 6" groups at 200 yards with my AKs, but it's more like 6.5 to 9" and that's with the PKA red dot, prone off the magazine, slow fire. There is no way an AK is going to compete with a .308, not even my .308 AK, for group size at that distance, especially with the stated ammo.
With the iron sights (Mojo rear, standard front), my eyesight only sometimes lets me duplicate the red dot performance.
The only times I have even approached 2.5 MOA at even 100 yards with an AK was with the Iraqi surplus which, from what I'm told, is essentially Polish ammo (Saddam purchased the equipment from the Poles?).
But none of this means the AK isn't combat effective at 200+ yards. Maybe an exceedingly poor choice for a sniper platform.
Here is a target from an AK at 50 yards, rapid fire, prone, all 30 rounds in 20-22 seconds.
http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/Target-T1.jpg
A 10" barrelled Krinkov with Aimpoint.
I'll have to try 200, but I'm not optimistic.
Thanks for the info. That's not bad performance. As Templar stated ammo is huge when it comes to group size. My Dad has an SKS & AK, he gets pretty good groups with quality "hunting" grade ammo. The surplus stuff ensures a large group.
But from what you said about your 200 yard groups that's pretty good. My eyes are doing the same thing to me. So I put a 1.1-4X IOR on my AR, it really helps.
Thanks for the info. That's not bad performance. As Templar stated ammo is huge when it comes to group size. My Dad has an SKS & AK, he gets pretty good groups with quality "hunting" grade ammo. The surplus stuff ensures a large group.
But from what you said about your 200 yard groups that's pretty good. My eyes are doing the same thing to me. So I put a 1.1-4X IOR on my AR, it really helps.
I'm actually pretty lucky with my eyes, or is it my brain, or both, as the BAC concept of the ACOGs works really good for me and I run them on several of my ARs.
It's sometimes amazing at the long range effectiveness with just the 3.5X of the TA11C on my Recon.
On the others, a Leupold 3-9 MR/T, Aimpoint & 3X, a NSX 3.5-15, even the big old TA55A, but I'm not convinced that adding a magnified optic to the AK really would increase it's utility as much as it hurts it.
With the AR or a .308 battle rifle, you shift it's effective range envelope further out, not as good up close, much better downrange, compared to the Aimpoint, but it really not as true for the AK in 7.62X39.
Thanks for the tip, I've have to run a couple of groups with some of the expensive hunting ammo in 7.62X39, never even thought of it.
Canonshooter
09-29-07, 20:45
I have not shot the AK "off the bench" any further than 100 yards. With Brown Bear bi-metallic FMJ ammo it is under 3 MOA using an Aimpoint. However, that is the ONLY ammo I have tried so far! I will be trying some Igman brass-case ammo this week, which many have reported excellent accuracy with. Federal American Eagle is on my list to try as well. I believe with the right ammo, my rifle should get down into the 2 MOA range. I will certainly post my reports here.
In the mean time, I'm not complaining with sub-3 MOA performance from inexpensive (17 cents a round) Russian steel-case military ammo. The accuracy is good enough and the price is cheap enough for me to spend the range time to get "in tune" and make the most of the platform. Typical 5-shot group at 100 yards using the Brown Bear stuff shown below;
http://www.canonshooter.com/photos2/aktarget-1.jpg
I I believe with the right ammo, my rifle should get down into the 2 MOA range. I will certainly post my reports here.
In the mean time, I'm not complaining with sub-3 MOA performance from inexpensive (17 cents a round) Russian steel-case military ammo. The accuracy is good enough and the price is cheap enough for me to spend the range time to get "in tune" and make the most of the platform.
No complaints here either, Canonshooter.
It's amazing how fast you can put accurate fire downrange with an AK.
Multiple targets from 50-100+ yards dispatched quickly are great fun.
Your AK103K with the low over the bore mounted Aimpoint must be ideal for this work.
Somebody should market modified mounts like yours if Mark LaRue doesn't come out with his AK mount.
I'd sure buy one, but I guess I'll make my own.
I've got a M3 Aimpoint here with nowhere to go.
Canonshooter
09-30-07, 08:38
Somebody should market modified mounts like yours if Mark LaRue doesn't come out with his AK mount. I'd sure buy one, but I guess I'll make my own. I've got a M3 Aimpoint here with nowhere to go.
Edwin, I have been shown an Aimpoint ring that should lower it even further;
http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/productdetail.aspx?p=17463&st=817-000-003&s=30128
This ring looks to be slightly lower, plus it's a bit cleaner looking without the thumbscrew. I have one on the way and will be giving it a try this week.
It's amazing how fast you can put accurate fire downrange with an AK. Multiple targets from 50-100+ yards dispatched quickly are great fun. Your AK103K with the low over the bore mounted Aimpoint must be ideal for this work.
This, IMO, is the ideal role for the AK platform. Even with my 50-something eyes, the Aimpoint really helps tremendously for that kind of shooting. Krebs custom-makes and installs a '74 style muzzle brake on these rifles, which helps too.
I just installed the Tapco "SAW grip" which I find much better (though the storage compartment is useless do to a very flimsy cover latch) and with the addition of the lower ring, the rifle will be pretty much "optimized" for this role; quick, sufficiently accurate and utterly reliable. Should be great fun in next year's carbine matches!
The next project is to determine the fate of my BM M4gery. I recently saw a photo of a SPR that has inspired me to give this some thought;
http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/SPRb.jpg
Edwin, can you tell me about this one? ;) Building a SPR this winter may be a good project to undertake!
Edwin, I have been shown an Aimpoint ring that should lower it even further;
http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/productdetail.aspx?p=17463&st=817-000-003&s=30128
This ring looks to be slightly lower, plus it's a bit cleaner looking without the thumbscrew. I have one on the way and will be giving it a try this week.
This, IMO, is the ideal role for the AK platform. Even with my 50-something eyes, the Aimpoint really helps tremendously for that kind of shooting. Krebs custom-makes and installs a '74 style muzzle brake on these rifles, which helps too.
I just installed the Tapco "SAW grip" which I find much better (though the storage compartment is useless do to a very flimsy cover latch) and with the addition of the lower ring, the rifle will be pretty much "optimized" for this role; quick, sufficiently accurate and utterly reliable. Should be great fun in next year's carbine matches!
The next project is to determine the fate of my BM M4gery. I recently saw a photo of a SPR that has inspired me to give this some thought;
http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z238/edwin907/SPRb.jpg
Edwin, can you tell me about this one? ;) Building a SPR this winter may be a good project to undertake!
Message sent.
Also, let me know about the ring setup, is it really lower?
I agree that it looks cleaner and there is certainly no reason to need to detach the Aimpoint from the BP-02 rail.
I've got one of the rails on the way,I may message you about your conversion in the near future although I'm working the next 9 days in a row!
I may have to try one of the AK-74 style brakes, my A1R has the very effective Bulgarian flash hider on it but the AK74 style brake on my Norinco is very effective. However, I like low light capability on my rifles, I'm still looking at the IWAL2 IR laser mounting possibilities on this rifle. Already added a tritium front sight to go with the Mojo rear.
Canonshooter
09-30-07, 10:04
Message received - thanks!
I will take some measurements and photos of the Aimpoint X low ring vs. the SA version and will post results.
I'm using a tritium front post as well and waiting for Krebs to have their aperture rear back in stock. Evidently the rifle they built for me takes the 1000 meter version which they do not currently have in stock.
For brakes, these are also supposedly superb though not "authentic looking" (if that is important to you);
http://www.primaryweapons.com/store/pc/viewCategories.asp?idCategory=6
If you need any help with the BP-02 conversion, please feel free to contact me! PM me if you want my phone #.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.