Tapco/Bulagarian Trigger Hammer Problems

[lsxevo 9]

I have just recently converted two saiga 7.62 rifles back to the standard AK configuration and had problems with the hammers fitting in the receivers along with retaining plate and BHO lever on both rifles.  The first rifle I used a Tapco G2 hammer and ended up cutting a bunch of material off one side of the hammer in order to make room for the retainer and BHO.  I originally thought it was a quality control problem from Tapco so on the second rifle I used a Bulgarian hammer.  I encountered the same damn problem!  This time everything was so tight that I could not get the pin seated even after grinding material off of the hammer.  I ended up removing the BHO lever all together to make things fit and internally function.

 

My question is, are all the hammers designed to work without a BHO lever?  Is modifying the hammer width a typical issue to make things fit or did I just have bad luck twice?

[LuPiN8oR 333]

All ak hammers have to be modified to utilize the BHO feature found on saiga rifles as original aks never had a BHO.

[308SAIGA 55]

All ak hammers have to be modified to utilize the BHO feature found on saiga rifles as original aks never had a BHO.

 

 

I did not understand this sry, he has 2 Saiga rifles, 1 hammer is a Tapco (made for the Saiga) should have worked, now the Bulgy I have no idea. Maybe I am missing something here...

 

Thx

[Mullet Man 2,114]

 

All ak hammers have to be modified to utilize the BHO feature found on saiga rifles as original aks never had a BHO.

 

 

I did not understand this sry, he has 2 Saiga rifles, 1 hammer is a Tapco (made for the Saiga) should have worked, now the Bulgy I have no idea. Maybe I am missing something here...

 

Thx

 

Tapco hammers are not specifically made for Saigas. What the OP experienced is normal.

[Constantine 2]

Tapco warns not to use a G2 in a saiga on their site...

 

 *Note: INTRAFUSE G2 Trigger Groups are not compatible with the Saiga platform. INTRAFUSE G2 Trigger Groups are also not compatible with NoDak Spud NDS-3 and NDS-65 "economy" receivers. In some cases, the use of these two products together can create accidental double firing of the firearm.

http://www.tapco.com/products/ak/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=57

[308SAIGA 55]

Thx for the info, I had no idea, it is funny how I read countless posts about conversions and no one stated they had to alter the hammer.

 

Thax again

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

Width of the hammer axis is a common problem and not the only one with Saigas. The thickness front to back at the highest part is much more than a factory Saiga hammer. It causes a lot of excess drag / resistance / friction that slows down the action of the bolt carrier. This is especially a big problem in Saiga shotguns as they are already operating on far less than ideal conditions. Lower gas pressures, larger heavier bolt and carrier mass, a bolt that rides lower in the receiver than the rifle bolts, causing an even bigger problem having to fit over that fat ass hammer, then the hammer profile itself is all different... with that large bulkhead at the top for the carrier to jam right smack into and stop unless it hits with full power there on the return pass....which is impossible because the power has already been robbed from the cycle by this time.

 That is why a re-profiled and polished hammer vastly out performs any other hammer in the Saiga and even other AK rifles, but especially the 12 ga and 20 ga shotguns. same thing is true with the Veprs.

 These fire control groups were all made to work in AK rifles....only.

[gunfun 3,931]

All the above is true.

 

I actually consider it an advantage, since it allows you to custom fit the hammer for a not quite snug fit with the BHO. This keeps the BHO pinned to the side so it can't get into trouble. The generically modified G2 drop in kits remove lots of material from the axis of the hammer and often allow enough slop that the BHO can work sideways and bind. Custom fitted > one-size-fits-all. Saigas are stamped and have some tolerance in that dimension.

 

There are pictures of how to profile the face of the  hammer in my signature line link about trigger work below. (As well as many redundant other threads on related topics.) Hammer profiling is also included in Cobra's bolt profiling service (and others too) as the interaction between the two parts must be addressed together for best results.

[Constantine 2]

Thx for the info, I had no idea, it is funny how I read countless posts about conversions and no one stated they had to alter the hammer.

 

Thax again

 

I took an armorers course with Owen from Snake Hound Machine and have been doing some work on the G2s. The best two pieces of advice I can give are

1. There are lots of tools you can use to shape the hammer, but if you have nothing else you can do wonders with a straight file, and

2. If you're gonna shave the hammer down make sure you have a spare in case you mess one up.

 

I've actually been having a lot of fun doing my own trigger smithing. There's a trick to making the hammer reset incredibly fast/smooth/crisp and I'm curious if the more experienced members here have used it...

 

 

Question for Cobra, GunFun, or any members who have experience working with AK internals:

How much contact should the hammer make with the bolt carrier when it is moving forward to chamber a round while the trigger is held down prior to reset? I removed some material from the striking surface of the hammer to reduce friction, the thought being that I want minimal contact while the bolt moves forward thereby making the action of the gun run smoother. When I hold the trigger while the bolt moves forward contact is minimal but I could still reduce it by taking more material from the hammer or from the bottom of the bolt carrier.

 

Is minor contact between the hammer and bolt carrier while it moves forward something I should work to eliminate entirely in order to smooth the action of the rifle, or is some contact unavoidable or of minimal concern? 

 

 

I gave one of my hammers a sick reset and I want it's fit in my Arsenal 21-61 so that it runs as smooth as possible, but I'm worried I'll take too much material and it will no longer strike the firing pin. I know I can take more without that happening but I don't know if it's worth the risk.  I can also take material from the bottom of the bolt carrier but I don't think it's a good idea... Owen is taking his sweet time answering my email, so I thought maybe one of you guys could help a brother, since we're already talking about modifying the G2 and everything...

[Cobra 76 two 2,677]

You have to be very careful removing material from the hammer's face, or where it strikes the firing pin. For one you obviously want to keep the surface on a profile that doesn't strike the tail of the bolt unevenly, or you won't get solid strikes on the firing pin.

 

 It's very important though that you don't remove too much in total thickness between the hammer's highest spot and the bottom of the bolt carrier. If you go too far your disconnect will fail to grab the hammer when the trigger is held back. It's a fine line between least possible resistance and making it unsafe or unreliable. That's why I like to get an FCG with every bolt & carrier I work on, so I can match and test them together in a weapon, before sending them back to the customer. That allows me to measure the amount removed and keep it at a safe, reliable amount while removing as much of that friction as possible.

[gunfun 3,931]

+1. It isn't too hard if you take the time to thoroughly understand what happens with each step of the cycle as the trigger is held and released. Go slow and use the file. It should be obvious when you are getting near the limits of safety or function. I have done a small fraction of the many that guys like Cobra do, but I did not find it to be as difficult as some make it sound. 

 

Make sure the hammer "wing" is pressed a goodly bit below the disconnector. I am reluctant to give measurements, as this requires judgement.  The hammer strike face is malleable and will wear a bit, so you need to leave a bit of meat for that too.

 

your first goal is to make sure the hammer wing goes below the disconnector when the carrier resets the hammer.

 

your second goal is to reduce drag.

 

There are a couple angle changes on the hammer face that can be smoothed to reduce drag in both directions of bolt carrier travel. Extra movement up and down is wasted energy. Corners don't help either. 

 

Your third goal is to correct the angle of the strike face so that when it hits the firing pin, it does so square instead of at an angle. The "trigger job" thread I have linked in my signature shows all these things. 

 

A useful tip is to put a pin through the axis and compare it to your factory hammer. You will notice that the G2 sticks up way higher than factory in a lot of places when the wings are flush at the engagement surface. That will give you a fairly close idea of how far you can go.

Edited September 24, 2013 by GunFun

[Bigtwin 219]

 

Tapco warns not to use a G2 in a saiga on their site...

 

 *Note: INTRAFUSE G2 Trigger Groups are not compatible with the Saiga platform. INTRAFUSE G2 Trigger Groups are also not compatible with NoDak Spud NDS-3 and NDS-65 "economy" receivers. In some cases, the use of these two products together can create accidental double firing of the firearm.

http://www.tapco.com/products/ak/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=57

 

I guess I was just lucky with my G2 in my Saiga 7.62x39! This warning was not on there when I did mine! I also eliminated the BHO(I found no need for it) but my G2 works perfectly and I am very happy with it after thousands of rounds!

[308SAIGA 55]

I hear you all, and thx again... I had a Red Star Arms 2 stage in mine, it too had an alignment issue with the FP, but since it fired ok with no issues I left it alone....

[Matthew Hopkins 1,065]

You have to be very careful removing material from the hammer's face, or where it strikes the firing pin. For one you obviously want to keep the surface on a profile that doesn't strike the tail of the bolt unevenly, or you won't get solid strikes on the firing pin.

 

 

 

 

wow, that brings back memories .   you had to do the same thing, profiling the face of the hammer, to the SAR3 hammers, those also hit the tail of the bolt at a angle.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Matthew Hopkins

[Constantine 2]

Cobra,Gunfun, thanks for answering my questions. I think my hammer is just about perfect now.