bigsal 757 Posted January 8, 2010 Report Share Posted January 8, 2010 I think the Chinese ones are the best. I think they are even beter then the Russian made ones. The Finnish and Yugoslovian are the only ones that rival it in quality. The Finns even buy Chinese AK's for their second line troops. By the way, this looks like a great forum! *Nicer Finish *Thicker reciever *thicker barrel *better trigger. I disagree with the factual accuracy of your post. Dispute it then. I'll dispute it. *Nicer Finish - Bluing is not better than park and paint. *Thicker receiver - This is arguable, but I take the opposite position. I want my rifle to be as light as possible, and a 1mm receiver has proven to be more than sufficient. Upping that to 1.5mm or 1.6mm adds a lot of unnecessary weight to the weapon. *thicker barrel - See my response to "*Thicker receiver". *better trigger - This is a completely moot point since there are several excellent and inexpensive US-made trigger groups than one can easily install in any AK-pattern rifle. You hit the nail on the head. The Chinese stuff is essentially AKM parts. The Chinese factories are not producing stuff up to the 100-series quality yet. Thicker receivers is not what I was disputing (Post-A is correct that doesn't make a difference, if it were so, than the Russian Milled Type 2 stuff would be considered the "Best AK"). What I was disputing was that the Fins are buying Chinese rifles in mass. I have not seen any pictures of Finnish Infantry units outfitted with Chinese weapons. As for the barrel, Ermac do you know the machinery used by Izhmash and how it differentiates from Polytech? There are no AKM parts on Chinese AK's. The Chinese AK's are quite literaly stamped AK-47's. They have the heavier barrel of an AK-47,vented gas tube,double hooked disconnector,smooth AK-47 dust cover, and the sights adjust to 800m's, opposed to 1000 of the AKM. If you think I'm full of bullshit, read this http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/kalustoesittely/00042_en.dsp Define "100-series quality" Really the only differentiating feature between the AKM and the Chinese type 56 knock off was the fully-enclosed hooded front sight, the fact that it weighted more due to the heavy barrel and 1.5mm receive, its lack of a side scope mount, its blued finish (the Russians used black oxide or park) and its 800m rear sight leaf (the russians used a 1000m unit). The chinese were basically copying the AKM save for those parts they couldn't figure out how to make. Those parts were replaced by type 2 and type 3 copies (in other words, when they couldn't figure out how to copy current generation russian parts, they copied PREVIOUS GENERATION russian parts...) Ermac, do you have access to google? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ermac 8 Posted January 8, 2010 Report Share Posted January 8, 2010 I think the Chinese ones are the best. I think they are even beter then the Russian made ones. The Finnish and Yugoslovian are the only ones that rival it in quality. The Finns even buy Chinese AK's for their second line troops. By the way, this looks like a great forum! *Nicer Finish *Thicker reciever *thicker barrel *better trigger. I disagree with the factual accuracy of your post. Dispute it then. I'll dispute it. *Nicer Finish - Bluing is not better than park and paint. *Thicker receiver - This is arguable, but I take the opposite position. I want my rifle to be as light as possible, and a 1mm receiver has proven to be more than sufficient. Upping that to 1.5mm or 1.6mm adds a lot of unnecessary weight to the weapon. *thicker barrel - See my response to "*Thicker receiver". *better trigger - This is a completely moot point since there are several excellent and inexpensive US-made trigger groups than one can easily install in any AK-pattern rifle. You hit the nail on the head. The Chinese stuff is essentially AKM parts. The Chinese factories are not producing stuff up to the 100-series quality yet. Thicker receivers is not what I was disputing (Post-A is correct that doesn't make a difference, if it were so, than the Russian Milled Type 2 stuff would be considered the "Best AK"). What I was disputing was that the Fins are buying Chinese rifles in mass. I have not seen any pictures of Finnish Infantry units outfitted with Chinese weapons. As for the barrel, Ermac do you know the machinery used by Izhmash and how it differentiates from Polytech? There are no AKM parts on Chinese AK's. The Chinese AK's are quite literaly stamped AK-47's. They have the heavier barrel of an AK-47,vented gas tube,double hooked disconnector,smooth AK-47 dust cover, and the sights adjust to 800m's, opposed to 1000 of the AKM. If you think I'm full of bullshit, read this http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/kalustoesittely/00042_en.dsp Define "100-series quality" Really the only differentiating feature between the AKM and the Chinese type 56 knock off was the fully-enclosed hooded front sight, the fact that it weighted more due to the heavy barrel and 1.5mm receive, its lack of a side scope mount, its blued finish (the Russians used black oxide or park) and its 800m rear sight leaf (the russians used a 1000m unit). The chinese were basically copying the AKM save for those parts they couldn't figure out how to make. Those parts were replaced by type 2 and type 3 copies (in other words, when they couldn't figure out how to copy current generation russian parts, they copied PREVIOUS GENERATION russian parts...) Ermac, do you have access to google? I would say those are significant changes that dosen't make it exactly the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CornCod 1 Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 I wish I could give a citation, but about a year ago I did see a news item somewhere about the Finns buying 50,000 plus Chinese Type 56 for rear area troops. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.