TX-Zen

Not really that at all. I have a ton of experience with their optics so my perception isn't blinded by the American bias that we do everything better than they do. Another thing that makes the discussion silly is the assumption that because someone like me will argue the pro's of the Russian system that somehow I think it's better than everything else. I don't actually say things like that but it's a common label I get...always by people who have limited experience with the subject or have been told that the US method is universally better. Many times it is, many times it isn't. As I

You obviously don't understand the system and make it a point to prove that you don't. Not much to be said in that case.

Warranty issues aside, the always on etched dot is exactly the point of the optic. No matter how you slice it the PK-AS has some usability with or without batteries. Again if an aimpoint battery dies you have nothing to fall back on at all. I'm not sure why that is never considered when people discuss aimpoints but it's a simple fact...no power = no sight at all. Somehow that is not any kind of disadvantage for the aimpoint, but god fordbid PK-AS loses its battery. Then it's a paper weight even though the dot is still usable in daylight, but the aimpoint is ok because it doesn't interfere with

This is always the argument with Aimpoints...cost and warranty work. Truth is Aimpoints almost always cost more than combloc optics and this argument somehow assumes that the Aimpoint and the PK-AS are both red dots....but they aren't the same at all. Remember that PK-AS is actually a scope with an objective and an occular and specifically benefits from that design. PK-AS is superior in low light because it actually increases light transmission compared to a plain jane tubular red dot. Try it at dusk sometime and see which of the two has a better view. PK-AS is about the same weight

http://russianoptics.net/PK-AS.html The black dot is etched into the glass and is always on, unless the illumination is on in which case it's red. The large oval is always black regardless of the illumination setting. IMO the offset version is the best for the reasons you've stated, and I have never seen any version of PK-AS that is yellowish, though at the extreme edges it is distorted somewhat. I have never seen this to be an issue during shooting personally, but there are always a number of detractors of combloc optics that like to point out any kind of perceived flaw. Truth is many W

The TWS gen 2 has a notched rear sight that is built into the mount that inserts where the rear sight leaf used to be. It's actually about the same size the original rear sight. The AKARS also has a notched sight but it's so wide that the only thing I can see it being good for is CQB. It's as wide as the front sight ears. AKARS Z

Actually 1PN58 is good to 400-500 yards or farther with the right lighting. I have tracked hogs at 600 yards with my Gen 1 1PN34 under a decent moon, 1PN34 is gen 1, 1PN58 is gen 1+ with an upgraded image intensifier. No, definitely will not fold with an optic mounted. I used a surplus Bulgarian, there are milling differences between those and the modern 74M barrel of the SGL

My Molot mags do not fit my Saiga-12 magwell, they won't seat deep enough to let the mag release catch them. Z

Remember the mounting system is designed as a complex built to work together...the clamp, the rail and the way the optics are designed to mount was all done at the same time. The side rail has changed over the years but for the longest time now I can't see a difference in the clamping mechanism. It seems odd to have such a honkin huge optic on there, but it was actually designed specifically for those large NV optics. Later as collimators and magnified optics become more popular the optics were much smaller, but the rail was originally designed for night vision. Z

My Izhmash mags fit my Vepr 12. I just ordered a couple Vepr mags for the collection, should be here in a few days. .

Due to an insane work schedule this year I haven't had time to do much of anything AK related and haven't been posting much, but a couple weeks ago I was able to dedicate a morning to a couple of rifles that came back from Piece of History Firearms. Inspired by AR15.com member Stizout in his thread here, last September I decided to get off my ass and send my 1988 Izhmash kit to Mario at PoHF. I'd had the kit for a long time but waffled for a over a year to build it or not. Eventually the plum furniture was irresistible, and after seeing the work that Mario did for Stiz I made up my mind.

I will not argue with you, the grid as shown in your photo is counted under the ballistics of the cartridge 9 * 39 VSS ( PSO 1-1/1M2-1) exactly the usual same as the grid sight PSO-1 works correctly only on the SVD 87171736.jpg No argument here either, but it's also considered common knowledge that the POSP 4x24V is calibrated for 7.62x39. I think it's reasonable to assume they would have might have used the simpler 400m range finder of the VSS, but I still can't see why they would calibrate the optic for 9x39 then market it to be used on 7.62 rifles. POSP 4x24V PSO-1

According to a couple of Russians I know, yes they did for a time. In the US the common term for the 7.62x39 calibrated reticule is Simonov. The POSP 4x24V is manufactured in Belarus as a civilian grade optic with an AK mount, I'm not sure why they would have manufactured them with the wrong mount and calibrated for a round that we can't get in the US, or that presumably isn't in use anywhere outside Russia, especially when the VSS has it's own PSO built by NPZ.

I use a variety, but lean heavily on Obzor, Rakurs and Kashtan PK1 Obzor Rakurs 1P78 Kashtan 2.8x