223 Saiga bolt information request

[su16a 84]

Let me start by saying I own the S308, S762 and S223, my intent is only seek info and not start a caliber debate. I couldn't decide so I got them all, or almost … Just for fun I was googling this morning and I came across this post. The poster says “A standard AK/Tapco hammer can beat up and damage the rear of the 223 Saiga bolt and the firing pin doesn't seem to last as long as the standard one in the 7.62x39 model”, just wondering if there is any truth to that? That post could be found here.

 

Or could it be that I'm misunderstanding it completely and he means any rifle converted with the Tapco trigger group is effected or does he just mean the S233 specifically? In my short time here in the S12 forum and in our local state forum I never seen this mentioned. If fact when I first got into the Saiga(s) I asked if it was a good idea to buy some spare parts and pretty much got laughed at stating these are good for a few hundred thousand rounds. Thanks in advance for any feedback

[jerry52 893]

Any firing pin will wear if you shoot 1000s of rounds . So you must be the guy hording all the 223 ha ha just kidding.

I have no problems with my conversion which has a Tapco trigger. I would not worry about it, just pull the trigger it will go boom. Its a great gun.

[su16a 84]

You're correct, Tapco is selling thousands of trigger group upgrades and if there were any issues this board would be flooded. just because one guy post something negative doesn't mean I should buy into it... Now if you factor in the ammo storage and no worries at all, we would all just be stuck with a bunch of safe queens LOL. Thanks for the reply back

[mancat 2,368]

Two things to point out about the Tapco FCG that are applicable to your question:

 

1. This affects all AKs: the Tapco hammer face is rounded, not flat. The Tapco hammer is the only AK hammer that's made like this, and I have no idea why. This can lead to concave peening of the contact surface of the bolt tail, which seems to be more pronounced with the small-diameter AK-74 bolt tail as seen in all Saiga and VEPR models.

 

2. This is unique to the .223: the .223 bolt is slightly longer than the other bolts, but by less than a milimeter. There's really no reason why that I can think of; all of the internal differences to accomodate the spring and spring retainer don't require any additional length, and the firing pin has the same overall length as a standard AK pin. However this extra small amount of length seems to be enough to make the Tapco hammer contact the bolt tail at a very slight angle, leading to possible additional peening.

 

So far as I know, any peening of the bolt tail is a purely cosmetic issue, and shouldn't affect function. The firing pin can only protrude a set amount from the bolt face based on the contour of the pin cone, so pierced primers aren't a risk. It's possible that a heavily peened bolt tail, thereby allowing the hammer to press further forward on the firing pin, could eventually wear the pin cone to the point where pierced primers begin to occur - this is just a guess, though. AK firing pins are pretty tough, unless they're made in China.

 

Any flat-faced hammer will strike the bolt/pin true and flat, and in addition will create less drag on the carrier (Tapco hammer face protrudes HIGH), giving the gun smoother operation overall.

 

In my opinion, the Tapco hammer casting is not ideal, but it works well enough for a generic universal FCG.

Edited April 24, 2013 by mancat

[su16a 84]

Any flat-faced hammer will strike the bolt/pin true and flat, and in addition will create less drag on the carrier (Tapco hammer face protrudes HIGH), giving the gun smoother operation overall.

 

In my opinion, the Tapco hammer casting is not ideal, but it works well enough for a generic universal FCG.

 

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I guess one could make the argument that Tapco should have produced a separate .223 only G2 trigger/hammer. Now I guess the question is are there other alternatives to the Tapco? In my case I just finished the TAKD BASTARD install and had to re-profile G2 hammer to accommodate the LRBHO, see image below of my Tapco G2 hammer mod and standard G2 without mod. Do you think it would be worth trying to grind it down the point of contact so she hits square, or are we beyond that angle? Thank you in advance

[jerry52 893]

I see no peaning of the boat tail on my rifle

[jdub23 21]

I had hear of this but checked mine and it was fine. popped the Tapco out and compared it to the Saiga. The Saiga was square when it hits the bolt and the Tapco was hitting it more on the upper part of the bolt. I just swpped them out, got plenty of US parts on it.

[mancat 2,368]

The easiest thing to do is find another 922r part to add, and use the factory hammer.

 

When we're talking about the peening, we're talking many thousands of rounds.

 

Really, the best reason to use the original hammer, is that the rifle's action is a lot smoother when using it.

Edited April 24, 2013 by mancat

[su16a 84]

The easiest thing to do is find another 922r part to add, and use the factory hammer.

 

When we're talking about the peening, we're talking many thousands of rounds.

 

Really, the best reason to use the original hammer, is that the rifle's action is a lot smoother when using it.

Thank you again ManCat for the detailed explanation, it is very much appreciated and thanks to ALL that replied.

 

I checked it and I have no abnormal wear at this point. That could be because of a few reasons, low mileage and I always avoid dry firing it. I’ll pop the top and slowly release the hammer by hand before I allow it to dry fire but that’s is just me. I avoid dry firing ANY of my firearms. That said I could see a difference between my S762 &S223 G2 hammers as to how they square-up on the bolt. I took the advice of jdub23 (this morning) and yourself and dug out the original hammer and modified it for my TAK LRBHO and went to the range and no issues whatsoever. Actually today was the first time I tested the LRBHO so need to report back on that as well. I had to take a few swipes off original hammer with the grinder for hammer to clear the LRBHO but nothing like I had to do on the Tapco.Over the winter I had upgraded my single hook to a double hook and to my surprise the stock hammer works perfectly with the Tacpo double hook trigger, I’d wondered if that was going to turn into a deal but got lucky there too. I checked the 922R compliance wizard and I have parts to spare....

 

One word about 922, now in my case since I have the AR adapter it would be impossible to ever return to the factory 223 mag therefore I’ll always be in compliance. Not that I would do this but if for some reason I wanted to put the factory hammer back in my S762 and then wanted to use the factory mag then there would be a compliance issue however that would be pointless because I have the Bullet guide so I could use the Tapco mags. So all is good again in 223 land, thank you again!

[jdub23 21]

The easiest thing to do is find another 922r part to add, and use the factory hammer.

 

When we're talking about the peening, we're talking many thousands of rounds.

 

Really, the best reason to use the original hammer, is that the rifle's action is a lot smoother when using it.

Yeah got a striaghter cut no upper bevel when in cocked position.