manu2014  |
Can our gunsmiths please school me on the pros and cons of milled vs. stamped? I would assume a milled receiver would have tighter tolerances. Catfish's SGL20 has prompted this question as I may join the club as well. I was standardizing my toys on 308 caliber but haven't seen an AK variant chambered for this. Thanks. |
runawaygun762
But I have seen both also. Stamped is cheaper and faster to produce in mass quantitiy, but I've always found milled to have fewer sharp edges and they just feel better. I know it's not really possible to "feel" quality (except boobies), but the milled AKs and SKSs I've handled just felt more solid than the stamped.
Reaper308
like runaway said, stamped and cheaper and faster to produce in mass. Milled are generally heavier and stronger.
runawaygun762
I GOT A MODERATOR BACKING ME!!!! BRING IT, BITCHES!!! I really wish I could find my pills.
Nitris
The milled is more accurate than the stamped, and has better stability. the stamp lacks this and is cheaper to build. Having said this even the 1.5mm stamped receivers are not as strong as the 1.6mm milled. But for the avid shooter it doesn't really matter.
Reaper308
they make saigas in .308... I'm sure someone could convert one to an AK (like catfish's 7.62x39). I'm not sure about the mag though
Reaper308
greasypaws
I like the looks and the strength of the milled receiver as far that goes.the sheetmetal receivers are alot easier for the home AK builder to work with since no welding is needed.I have a friend who builds sheetmetal receivers out of .065 thick sheet steel for that little extra rigidity.but with the thicker receiver comes the need for longer pins which require a welder and a lathe.as for a .308 AK variant Saiga makes a real nice one!