Mounting a night vision scope on my Saiga

[mikein 0]

Newbie to the Saiga world here. Just bought my first at a gun show this weekend, new in the box. I'd like to be able to mount a night vision scope on it, but need a picatinny rail up close to the bolt cover area in order to get the eye relief I need. I spoke to the very helpful guy at Mississippi Auto Arms, and his best idea was the Ulitmax gas tube replacement. Unfortunately, that puts the NV scope too far forward. Anyone out there have any suggestions?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[nalioth 405]

Use the side rail mount?

 

It's designed to mount optics.

 

 

They make mounts that are very close to the dust cover, also.

[BullShark012 1]

Here's the one I use (when I put the scope on, haha!)

 

QD AK Side Rail Scope Mount

[mikein 0]

Use the side rail mount?

 

It's designed to mount optics.

 

 

They make mounts that are very close to the dust cover, also.

 

nalioth,

 

Thanks for the comeback. The pic you included is a side mount on an AK; as a newbie to the world of Saiga, I must ask: will it work on my Saiga? I figure that it will, or you would not have offered it up as a solution, but I had to ask.

 

Thanks again for the guidance!

 

mike

[mikein 0]

Here's the one I use (when I put the scope on, haha!)

 

QD AK Side Rail Scope Mount

 

Thanks, Bull Shark! Is this side mount a gunsmith install type of thing, or can a newbie to the world of Saigas install it without having to drill/tap/or do any other serious smithy type activity?

 

Mike

[nalioth 405]

All Saigas come with a side rail mount.

 

 

You can use almost any commie optic mount on it.

[jamesavery22 54]

mikein,

what NV optic are you planning to use?

[mikein 0]

mikein,

what NV optic are you planning to use?

 

James,

 

I have the Yukon Optics NVRS Titanium 2.5X50 Varmint Hunter Model. It currently is installed on a Ruger Ranch Rifle. We have major feral hog problems here in Central Texas, and I want to use the Saiga for "hog population control" on our property.

 

Mike

[mikein 0]

All Saigas come with a side rail mount.

 

 

You can use almost any commie optic mount on it.

 

nalioth,

 

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understand you. My Saiga did not come with a side rail mount, as near as I can tell. Would the mount have been separate from the firearm? And I don't know what you mean by "almost any commie optic mount" on it. What is a commie optic mount?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[jamesavery22 54]

All saiga's come with the mounting plate on the side of the rifle. What BullShark linked was a mounting bracket:

http://tantal.kalashnikov.guns.ru/bstmounts.html

 

PSO and POSP scopes(commie optics) all use that mounting plate/scope mount to attach to the rifle.

[mikein 0]

All saiga's come with the mounting plate on the side of the rifle. What BullShark linked was a mounting bracket:

http://tantal.kalashnikov.guns.ru/bstmounts.html

 

PSO and POSP scopes(commie optics) all use that mounting plate/scope mount to attach to the rifle.

 

Thanks, James. The clouds are beginning to clear just a bit. I am not familiar with the Saiga/AK jargon (or the firearms!). What does PSO and POSP stand for?

 

Looking at the Tantal site, it appears that the BP02 comes the closest to fitting my requirements. It also appears that there are no gunsmithing requirements to mount it; am I correct in that?

 

I really appreciate your help and your patience!

 

Mike

[Vultite 57]

check out the beryl type mounts at gilbert's

[mikein 0]

check out the beryl type mounts at gilbert's

 

Will do, Vultite; thanks!

 

Mike

[nalioth 405]

All Saigas come with a side rail mount.

 

 

You can use almost any commie optic mount on it.

 

nalioth,

 

I'm sorry, but I don't think I understand you. My Saiga did not come with a side rail mount, as near as I can tell. Would the mount have been separate from the firearm? And I don't know what you mean by "almost any commie optic mount" on it. What is a commie optic mount?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

All Saigas come with a side rail mount.

 

to which you can attach almost any commie optic. . .

 

 

This rail system is the Warsaw Pact standard for attaching optics. All of the member countries make optics accessories for this rail.

[nalioth 405]

I am not familiar with the Saiga/AK jargon (or the firearms!). What does PSO and POSP stand for?

PSO and PSOP are acronyms for 3 and 4 word Russian phrases that mean "scope, rifle, whatever".

 

 

Sorry, I don't have the exact Russian names for them.

[mikein 0]

I am not familiar with the Saiga/AK jargon (or the firearms!). What does PSO and POSP stand for?

PSO and PSOP are acronyms for 3 and 4 word Russian phrases that mean "scope, rifle, whatever".

 

 

Sorry, I don't have the exact Russian names for them.

 

Thanks, nalioth. As you can tell, I'm the very STEEP part of the learning curve on these rifles, and I appreciate your help.

 

Mike

[b2673ad 0]

Hello

 

I am removing mine & going with just the iron sights.

 

Send me an email & I will make a deal.

[getitat 609]

Hello, mikein

I think either type of mount might work for you.

But if you need to be very low to the dust cover (receiver), as far back (close to the eye) as possible, as much room on the rail, and as stable with a heavy optic as possible, and you don't intend to use your gun with iron sights, then as Vultite mentioned, the Beryl rail might be what you need.

It fits into the rear sight base in front, and screws into the stock mount in the receiver tang. It's very sturdy, and centrally anchored.

It would seem a better choice for something large and heavy than a side-mount that's cantilevered from one side only.

 

Worth a look, anyway.....

 

guido2 in Houston

[mikein 0]

Hello, mikein

I think either type of mount might work for you.

But if you need to be very low to the dust cover (receiver), as far back (close to the eye) as possible, as much room on the rail, and as stable with a heavy optic as possible, and you don't intend to use your gun with iron sights, then as Vultite mentioned, the Beryl rail might be what you need.

It fits into the rear sight base in front, and screws into the stock mount in the receiver tang. It's very sturdy, and centrally anchored.

It would seem a better choice for something large and heavy than a side-mount that's cantilevered from one side only.

 

Worth a look, anyway.....

 

guido2 in Houston

 

Thanks, guido2. With all the help you all have supplied, I just may get this thing figured out!

 

Mike

[getitat 609]

Hello, mikein

I think either type of mount might work for you.

But if you need to be very low to the dust cover (receiver), as far back (close to the eye) as possible, as much room on the rail, and as stable with a heavy optic as possible, and you don't intend to use your gun with iron sights, then as Vultite mentioned, the Beryl rail might be what you need.

It fits into the rear sight base in front, and screws into the stock mount in the receiver tang. It's very sturdy, and centrally anchored.

It would seem a better choice for something large and heavy than a side-mount that's cantilevered from one side only.

 

Worth a look, anyway.....

 

guido2 in Houston

 

Thanks, guido2. With all the help you all have supplied, I just may get this thing figured out!

 

Mike

 

If you're interested, I can post a pic when I get home this evening.

 

guido2 in Houston

[mikein 0]

Hello, mikein

I think either type of mount might work for you.

But if you need to be very low to the dust cover (receiver), as far back (close to the eye) as possible, as much room on the rail, and as stable with a heavy optic as possible, and you don't intend to use your gun with iron sights, then as Vultite mentioned, the Beryl rail might be what you need.

It fits into the rear sight base in front, and screws into the stock mount in the receiver tang. It's very sturdy, and centrally anchored.

It would seem a better choice for something large and heavy than a side-mount that's cantilevered from one side only.

 

Worth a look, anyway.....

 

guido2 in Houston

 

Thanks, guido2. With all the help you all have supplied, I just may get this thing figured out!

 

Mike

 

If you're interested, I can post a pic when I get home this evening.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

I would like to see it, guido2, if it's not too much trouble for you to post a pic.

 

Thanks!

 

Mike

[getitat 609]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

[mikein 0]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

guido2,

 

That is most excellent! It looks like it will fit the requirements for mounting my NV scope just perfectly: plenty of room to move the NV scope fore and aft to give me the exact eye relief that I need. All the other options I have looked at provide a fairly small base on the picatinny rail, which really limits the options for this scope on eye relief.

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

Mike

[mikein 0]

check out the beryl type mounts at gilbert's

 

Vultite,

 

Of all the options I've looked at, the Beryl type mount appears to be the one that fits the needs of my NV scope the best! I'm getting one.

 

Thanks so much for your help!!

 

Mike

[getitat 609]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

guido2,

 

That is most excellent! It looks like it will fit the requirements for mounting my NV scope just perfectly: plenty of room to move the NV scope fore and aft to give me the exact eye relief that I need. All the other options I have looked at provide a fairly small base on the picatinny rail, which really limits the options for this scope on eye relief.

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Actually, it was Vultite who suggested this mount, I only seconded the choice. But I do agree that it might best meet your needs!

 

guido2 in Houston

[Berzerker 0]

Sorry duplicated this

Edited August 8, 2008 by Berzerker

[Berzerker 0]

 

Eotech 551 & PVS-18 NVG with a Pentagon light mounted forward w/IR filter

[mikein 0]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

guido2,

 

That is most excellent! It looks like it will fit the requirements for mounting my NV scope just perfectly: plenty of room to move the NV scope fore and aft to give me the exact eye relief that I need. All the other options I have looked at provide a fairly small base on the picatinny rail, which really limits the options for this scope on eye relief.

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Actually, it was Vultite who suggested this mount, I only seconded the choice. But I do agree that it might best meet your needs!

 

guido2 in Houston

guido2,

 

I realize that your seconded the vote, but I still appreciate it. Now I've got a new problem! Miss.AutoArms has a new product that looks exactly like the Beryl rail that Gilbert's is offering, but the MAA rail is made of polymer, and is made by SureFire. The Gilbert's rail is aluminum, the SureFire is polymer, so which one is best for my application? The rigidity of the all aluminum rail makes me lean that way, but the way they're making polymer products today, it may very well be a more stable and lighter solution. The cost differential between the two products is negligible.

 

I went from "no apparent solutions," to 2 possibles? Any feedback from any of you on this?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[getitat 609]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

guido2,

 

That is most excellent! It looks like it will fit the requirements for mounting my NV scope just perfectly: plenty of room to move the NV scope fore and aft to give me the exact eye relief that I need. All the other options I have looked at provide a fairly small base on the picatinny rail, which really limits the options for this scope on eye relief.

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Actually, it was Vultite who suggested this mount, I only seconded the choice. But I do agree that it might best meet your needs!

 

guido2 in Houston

guido2,

 

I realize that your seconded the vote, but I still appreciate it. Now I've got a new problem! Miss.AutoArms has a new product that looks exactly like the Beryl rail that Gilbert's is offering, but the MAA rail is made of polymer, and is made by SureFire. The Gilbert's rail is aluminum, the SureFire is polymer, so which one is best for my application? The rigidity of the all aluminum rail makes me lean that way, but the way they're making polymer products today, it may very well be a more stable and lighter solution. The cost differential between the two products is negligible.

 

I went from "no apparent solutions," to 2 possibles? Any feedback from any of you on this?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Personally, I would lean toward the aluminum for any weaver or picatinney rail. The beveled "edges" that you will be clamping to will actually be seeing a fair bit of force. The rail itself may be fairly ridgid from polymer, but those little bits sticking out won't be as sturdy, I'm thinking....

 

just my opinion, your mileage may vary....

 

guido2 in Houston

[mikein 0]

Here's the Beryl on a .39

 

 

Here is how it sits in relation to the receiver

 

 

 

 

 

This shows the solid "compression" type attachment for the base to the receiver.

The front is not quite as rigid, since it sits in the rear sight base, but it has a set screw to adjust to take up any spring slack, and it's pretty robust. I imagine the rear would bear most of the weight of your installation.

 

Hope this helps you decide.

 

Oh, by removing the set screw in the rear of the base the front "hinges" in the sight base and lifts up, allowing the dust cover to be removed for cleaning or whatever. A thumbscrew could be substituted, I suppose.

 

guido2 in Houston

 

guido2,

 

That is most excellent! It looks like it will fit the requirements for mounting my NV scope just perfectly: plenty of room to move the NV scope fore and aft to give me the exact eye relief that I need. All the other options I have looked at provide a fairly small base on the picatinny rail, which really limits the options for this scope on eye relief.

 

Thanks so much for your help!

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Actually, it was Vultite who suggested this mount, I only seconded the choice. But I do agree that it might best meet your needs!

 

guido2 in Houston

guido2,

 

I realize that your seconded the vote, but I still appreciate it. Now I've got a new problem! Miss.AutoArms has a new product that looks exactly like the Beryl rail that Gilbert's is offering, but the MAA rail is made of polymer, and is made by SureFire. The Gilbert's rail is aluminum, the SureFire is polymer, so which one is best for my application? The rigidity of the all aluminum rail makes me lean that way, but the way they're making polymer products today, it may very well be a more stable and lighter solution. The cost differential between the two products is negligible.

 

I went from "no apparent solutions," to 2 possibles? Any feedback from any of you on this?

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

 

Hello, Mike

Personally, I would lean toward the aluminum for any weaver or picatinney rail. The beveled "edges" that you will be clamping to will actually be seeing a fair bit of force. The rail itself may be fairly ridgid from polymer, but those little bits sticking out won't be as sturdy, I'm thinking....

 

just my opinion, your mileage may vary....

 

guido2 in Houston

 

I appreciate the input, guido2; I hadn't really thought about that aspect of the rail. I was caught up in the possible flex over a long, unsupported length; didn't even think about the beveled edges and the forces to which they'll be exposed.

 

Mike