EZ of cycling charging handle

[porschechris 0]

I have noticed that every UNCONVERTED Saiga 12 is very EASY to cycle the charging handle.

 

Every CONVERTED Saiga 12, even high end conversions, is very DIFFICULT to cycle the charging handle.

 

Is this due to the FCG being moved forward on the conversions, or the hammer profile on the aftermarket hammer sits TOO high?

 

Any thoughts on this?

Edited November 30, 2010 by porschechris

[Jdhonda810 29]

I have noticed that every UNCONVERTED Saiga 12 is very EASY to cycle the charging handle.

 

Every CONVERTED Saiga 12, even high end conversions, is very DIFFICULT to cycle the charging handle.

 

Is this due to the FCG being moved forward on the conversions, or the hammer profile on the aftermarket hammer sits TOO high?

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

I've never noticed any difference. The "resistance" of your charging handle which obviously pulls back the bolt carrier, is because of the guide rod spring which I never upgraded or down graded for lighter loads. I don't believe the conversion of FCG has anything to do with it the resistance neither do I believe that AFTER my conversion was there ANY difference or ANY DIFFICULTY.... hmmm....

Edited November 30, 2010 by Jdhonda810

[porschechris 0]

The recoil spring is the same in pre and post conversions. Some go to a lighter recoil spring if the have trouble cycling lighter loads.

 

In most conversions the recoil spring stays the same, so why would this change the felt resistance?

 

chris

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Chris is correct. There is a big difference in the amount of resistance encountered after replacing the factory hammer with an unmodded US made hammer. Every S-12 will have this issue. JdHonda you just didn't realize it obviously. You should try one side by side with the other. Then try one that's been reprofiled and polished on the hammer AND the bolt carrier.

World of difference again.

 

[porschechris 0]

Cobra

 

Does the location of the FCG ( more rearward ), and therefore hammer position in the unmodified Saiga 12 have anything to due with felt resistance?

 

chris

Edited December 2, 2010 by porschechris

[evlblkwpnz 3,418]

I have noticed that every UNCONVERTED Saiga 12 is very EASY to cycle the charging handle.

 

Every CONVERTED Saiga 12, even high end conversions, is very DIFFICULT to cycle the charging handle.

 

Is this due to the FCG being moved forward on the conversions, or the hammer profile on the aftermarket hammer sits TOO high?

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

You haven't fondled mine yet

 

It is a smooth machine. I have smoothed or reprofiled the carrier, bolt, extractor, locking lugs, rails, gas block, BHO, hammer, and trigger hook. Every rotating or sliding surface in the weapon has been addressed. Hammer, lockup, bolt, extractor, and carrier are the main sources of resistance or friction.

 

I hear Lonestar Arms puts out some well refined smooth running machines.

 

Oh yeah, when my S12 was new and unconverted, the action felt horrible. It feels like a different weapon now.

Edited December 2, 2010 by evlblkwpnz

[PYRO 44]

Cobra

 

Does the location of the FCG ( more rearward ), and therefore hammer position in the unmodified Saiga 12 have anything to due with felt resistance?

 

chris

 

The hammer is in the same position in both, just a different hammer for the conversion to work with the moved trigger,,,,,,,if this is what you are saying.

[porschechris 0]

So it is the hammer profile causing the increased resisitance.

 

Thanks

 

Chris

[G O B 3,516]

An S-12 bolt is larger in diameter than a standard AK bolt. Therefor the profile of the hammer face changed, instead of a round bulge, the face was ground flat. Copy the factory profile. Make sure the flat is square to the bolt in the fired position.

[evlblkwpnz 3,418]

Actually, the factory profile can be improved upon. See the middle hammer....

Edited December 4, 2010 by evlblkwpnz