Conversionless US made Saiga 223 mag

[BattleRifleG3 16]

After misplacing my factory Saiga 223 magazine, I, the great master of magazine conversions, figured it would be a shame to have a magless S-223. So I'm working on a high capacity US made magazine for the Saiga 223 requiring NO mods to the gun, including feedramp and such.

 

As I'm sure many of you are thinking "Oh my, here we go again...", the real story is that a Mini-14 mag will fit and probably function in the mag well as is, it simply needs to have material added to let it fit snugly and latch in. Basically plates on the sides, a notch in the front, and a catch on the back. I got it to feed a round or two simply holding it in the mag well. I'm sure with it actually locked in it should do much better.

 

So if I do get a simple conversion nailed down for Mini-14 mags, would anyone go for them if I sold them for say $25 a piece ready to go? These would work without feedramp or mag catch mods. They may require US parts compliance to be legal, but three US parts are already taken care of. You'd only need a US made stock and grip OR FCG, not all of the above. Or other options too.

[topmaul 42]

yes, the fact is I only bought an AR because I was unsure of how the .223 would work with after market mags.

[cvasqu03 21]

From my calculations, if you wanted to keep your saiga in standard configuration, you could just put in a US made gas piston and you'd be legal with such mags. Sounds good. Wish I had an S223.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

It would be if the saiga trigger group was only three pieces like the standard AK. Unfortunately, the Saiga FCG has a separate sear and trigger whereas the standard AKM has the sear integrated with the trigger.

 

But, if folks wanted to buy a matching US made wooden forend and buttstock that I hope to offer, that would take care of parts compliance

[avatar 4]

If you can make 'em reliable, I'll take 4 of them. Are you sure Mini 14 mags are reliable? I've heard that many after market mags don't feed worth a damn in the Mini and that only factory Ruger mags make the things reliable. I guess that doesn't really matter in the Saiga so my real Q is what quality level are we talking in the donor Mag. I know not a Ruger one but what kind? Anyway, like I said up front if they work I'd take at least 4 @ 25 a pop.

Edited June 24, 2005 by avatar

[cvasqu03 21]

It would be if the saiga trigger group was only three pieces like the standard AK.  Unfortunately, the Saiga FCG has a separate sear and trigger whereas the standard AKM has the sear integrated with the trigger.

 

But, if folks wanted to buy a matching US made wooden forend and buttstock that I hope to offer, that would take care of parts compliance

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't think the hook part of the trigger counts as a sear, but even if it did, you could use a standard US made trigger along with the gas piston and you'd be ok.

 

I think.

[Tokageko 8]

Well... On the issue of compliance parts, I'm not so sure it matters. The law only affects those who "Assemble" a rifle. As far as I know, the legal definition regarding the assembly of any "thing" doesn't apply to adding or replacing parts. The assumption I'm working off of here is that "assembly" consititutes building an item from scratch, no parts of it having been assembled before-hand. The way the gun-laws read, if I'm not mistaken, "once a rifle, always a rifle". As long as you didn't take it apart down to the rivets, you should be fine. Even if you did strip everything off down to the receiver, I'm pretty sure that it would count as a re-build of an already existing, American made item. Since you aren't the one assembling the item from pieces for sale, you don't have to worry about it.

 

Of course, the compliance parts are still necessary for a "from scratch" build (you bought a parts kit and a receiver and put one together).

 

Bring on the flame. I feel like barbeque tonight.

 

Edited: Mostly for grammar.

Edited June 25, 2005 by Tokageko

[Tokageko 8]

On a less abrasive note, I would be interested in "no mod" magazines for the 223.

 

Probably only one or two.

[cvasqu03 21]

Well... On the issue of compliance parts, I'm not so sure it matters.  The law only affects those who "Assemble" a rifle.  As far as I know, the legal definition regarding the assembly of any "thing" doesn't apply to adding or replacing parts.  The assumption I'm working off of here is that "assembly" consititutes building an item from scratch, no parts of it having been assembled before-hand.  The way the gun-laws read, if I'm not mistaken, "once a rifle, always a rifle".  As long as you didn't take it apart down to the rivets, you should be fine.  Even if you did strip everything off down to the receiver, I'm pretty sure that it would count as a re-build of an already existing, American made item.  Since you aren't the one assembling the item from pieces for sale, you don't have to worry about it.

 

Of course, the compliance parts are still necessary for a "from scratch" build (you bought a parts kit and a receiver and put one together). 

 

Bring on the flame.  I feel like barbeque tonight.

 

Edited:  Mostly for grammar.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

When you take a gun from it's stock configuration and change it around, you're considered to have assembled a new gun as far as ATF is concerned. There would be a strange situation if all you're doing is sticking an extended magazine in a gun that was made to take only 10 rounders. I don't think they'd consider inserting a magazine "assembling" a new gun, but you'd end up with an unimportable gun with too many imported parts. Sounds like we'd need clarification at some point, but let's not put the cart before the horse. Let's see how this project turns out.

 

sigh.........just thought of something,

 

Please no criticism over how this is going to make all Saigas illegal or any other crap like that. If you're a lawyer wannabe and don't like this mag idea, don't buy one, and maybe try ignoring this thread.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

[Tokageko 8]

Just for the record, I think the mags are a great idea. I'm just not sure that inserting a high-cap magazine (without making any other changes) warrants the replacement of other parts.

 

I would also like to point out that "possesion" of an unsporting rifle is not illegal.

 

I didn't know the ATF had written a formal oppinion on changing out the FCG. I'm just curious, but do you have a link or something? I'll be doing some looking on my own also. Thanks for your time.

 

Oh, and as far as the "bar-be-que" thing goes, I was just expecting to get flamed. Saying that: "one doesn't need US made parts", seemed to me to be tantamount to the dreaded "High-Capacity-Non-Linear-Feed-Device" subject on the 12 gauge forum.

 

If there's no flame forthcoming, that' great!

[PM2790 0]

If you are using actual Ruger mags it might be worth it. The aftermarket Mini-14 mags have proven themselves untrustworthy.

[jsf 0]

I've used many brands of mini 14 mags 0 problems, how these stories get started amaze me.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

Remember that we're talking about an AK action here, not a Mini. Much greater margins for error.

 

The only way it would be cost effective is to use the cheapest Mini-mags and be thankful for the utter reliability of the AK action to feed from them. Unlike X39 mags, regular 223 AK mags cost $20ish, so $25 isn't a far cry. If regular 223 mags cost $8-12 a piece, I'd just convert the rifle instead of the mags.

 

In any case I'll keep you guys posted on how it works out.

[uzitiger 193]

If you can make 'em reliable, I'll take 4 of them. Are you sure Mini 14 mags are reliable? I've heard that many after market mags don't feed worth a damn in the Mini and that only factory Ruger mags make the things reliable. I guess that doesn't  really matter in the Saiga so my real Q is what quality level are we talking in the donor Mag. I know not a Ruger one but what kind? Anyway, like I said up front if they work I'd take at least 4 @ 25 a pop.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I've  used many brands of mini 14 mags 0 problems, how these stories get started amaze me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I used some good aftermarket magazines and some worthless ones but magazines made by Ruger and Pro Mag are always reliable.

[PM2790 0]

The last Mini I had was a 179 or 180 series about 20 years ago. I could only ever get it to feed well with Ruger mags.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

Update - Found one way that didn't work. Thankfully everything easily came off the mag and I can try it again. Come to think of it, it might be easier to develop a no-gunsmithing conversion to make the S-223 use unmodified Mini mags. But I'll try a few more things too.

 

In any case, I'm paying more attention to the no-gunsmithing handguards.

[Tokageko 8]

Thanks for the update.

 

I personally like the idea of being able to use unmodified magazines (of any type). If that ends up looking like a better option, I'd be in for it. Still in for 2 "no-mod" mags if that's the way you go though.

 

 

EDIT:

 

I'd like to take this opportunity say that I stand corrected. I just found an ATF letter from the head of the Tech branch ('98) stating that it would be illegal to put a standard buttstock and pistol grip on a MAK 90. If replacing parts that require no modification to the rifle constitutes "assembly" then pretty much anything does I geuss.

 

I still maintain that this ruling is stupid. The rest, I'll just keep to myself.

 

 

Link In case anyone is interested. The specific letter is at the bottom of the page.

Edited June 28, 2005 by Tokageko

[roscoe 0]

I don't know how your work on this is progressing, but I am defintely interested in any magazine that does not require me to modify the rifle itself. Mini-14 mags, whatever. I would buy four or so.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

That project is slightly on the back burner while I put more efforts into no-gunsmithing handguards and G3 mag adaptors. I'm also leaning more towards a snap-in adaptor to use regular Mini-mags than trying to make a zillion modified ones. The metal of these mags has a way of resisting epoxy and polyeurethane alike.

Edited July 5, 2005 by BattleRifleG3

[ponykilr 0]

Thanks for the update.

 

I personally like the idea of being able to use unmodified magazines (of any type).  If that ends up looking like a better option, I'd be in for it.  Still in for 2 "no-mod" mags if that's the way you go though.

 

 

EDIT:

 

I'd like to take this opportunity say that I stand corrected.  I just found an ATF letter from the head of the Tech branch ('98) stating that it would be illegal to put a standard buttstock and pistol grip on a MAK 90.  If replacing parts that require no modification to the rifle constitutes "assembly" then pretty much anything does I geuss.

 

I still maintain that this ruling is stupid.  The rest, I'll just keep to myself.

 

 

Link In case anyone

is interested.  The specific letter is at the bottom of the page.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

this is due to the ban on chinese weapons, not ak type weapons in general.

[Tokageko 8]

Ponykilr: I consider it a dead subject. It's been dropped, at least on this thread.

 

BRG3: An adapter to use unmodified magazines would be even better. I would much rather buy from you than take chances with Vulcan.

[BattleRifleG3 16]

Using Mini mags would be a whole different ballgame than AR mags. Mini mags are shaped much more similarly to the AK mags, and have recesses right where they'd need to clear parts of the trunion. In order to make AR mags fit as well as the original AK mags, it looked to me as though they would need a conversion similar to my G3 mag conversion to the S-308. Stronger and with much more space left, but still an aggressive and pretty much permanent conversion. I can only imagine that the plug in adaptors for AR mags don't aim the mags the way they need to be.

 

Mini mags, being closer in shape to AK mags, could much more effectively use a plug-and-play adaptor. Basically, the way G3 mags need to be mildly taken in at the front to fit in my adaptor for the S-308, the Mini mags are already that way by design. This might be a good use for all those cheap Mini mags that an AK can probably feed from more aggressively.

Edited July 6, 2005 by BattleRifleG3

[Tokageko 8]

Originally I was thinking of grinding on the protrusions that would get in the way until the AR15 mags would fit, but it's a very expensive gamble that I'd rather not take. Given the ready availability of Mini-14 mags, I would consider them to be a great alternative. Besides, grinding on the trunion doesn't sound fun to me.

 

I also considered doing the same, as per advice from another member, to get 223 AK mags to fit. Unfortunately, anyplace I've found that claims to have 223 AK mags either: has exorbitant pricing, little information available, and/or crappy customer service.

 

I'd just like to be able to use magazines that can be found relatively easily/cheaply.

[Aethelbert 1]

If you are using actual Ruger mags it might be worth it.  The aftermarket Mini-14 mags have proven themselves untrustworthy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This has been a very informative exchange. I have to confess, though, that I have had little experience with the S-223 and none at tall with the Mini-14 but had read some years ago that the Mini would function with M-16 mags. True? Or just something else that some gun journalist or someone from the Ruger PR dept wrote up?

[BattleRifleG3 16]

I looked at a Mini closely to see if it could be modded for AR mags. It would be no small thing and I wouldn't try it unless I had a Mini to burn. The mod would involve work to critical areas that could affect safe function. This would be another project I'd want to see a stress and strain plot before trying.

[txn 0]

I don't have a dog in this hunt (no .223), but how about something along this line:

Edited July 11, 2005 by txn

[BattleRifleG3 16]

I've read of limited reliability of such things. Trying to stick an AR mag in my S-223, many things were in the way of it going in as far as it should. I did have in mind to do a more serious conversion similar to my G3 mag conversion on the S-308, but have since gotten out of the Ar and AR mags. Maybe, someday...