Discussion in 'Vintage Topic Archive (Sept - 2009)' started by Evil Ernie, Mar 5, 2008.

  1. Couldn't resist...had to get a Rommy WASR-10 just in case of zombie attack... This one came with 2 30 rnd mags, magbag, cleaning kit, bayo/scabbard/frog, oil can, but no BFA or sling :x . I ordered another kit from CTD that had an original leather sling and BFA, so now I have two bayos and magbags.
    Usual wood finish on a WASR is comparable to dragging a 2x4 behind a truck for 20 miles. I sweated out cosmo with a heat gun, sanded it lightly to take the roughness out, but not enough to make it slippery. Applied three coats of Minwax Pecan Satin Polyurethane, de-blued and polished the charging handle for that Soviet look. Also blasted the cosmo out of the nooks and crannies and applied a light coat of CLP.

    Got 2K rounds for the year, and should be ready when those smelly brain eating zombies come shuffling up the driveway...
  2. DRoCk

    DRoCk Guest

    Looks just like mine. Mine is a decent shooter, I've put around 300 rounds through mine give or take a few mags worth. I've toyed with the idea of a Tapco t6 kit for it, but pretty much changed my mind and I will keep it the way it came.

  3. Uraijit

    Uraijit Guest

    If it accepts the 30 round mags, it's not a WASR-10...
  4. Sniper 995

    Sniper 995 Guest

  5. It's stamped out as a WASR-10/63. True, the mag well has been machined out as they are on most of them to accept 30 rnd mags by our "friends" at Century Arms, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a WASR.
    One of the cool things about this particular unit is that when CAI did the conversion to meet 922r, they put a Tapco G2 FCG in!! The cant is almost unnoticable (thankfully), and everything seems to be in order. Now if I can just get the snow to hold off, I'll get it out and break it in...
  6. Nice, looks a lot like mine, except I have the folding TAPCO stock. I also have the TAPCO G2 FCG on mine, which makes shooting it a lot nicer.....I need to go and get a case of 7.62x39, since the 20 rd box doesn't really last longer than 2 seconds........
  7. Uraijit

    Uraijit Guest

    True, I was just saying, the "10" was because it was limited to 10 round mags during the ban, so once it's milled, the 10 no longer applies :wink:.

    Anyway, fine looking machine. The 10/63 is a better weapon. Unfortunately, it's still a Century product. :cry:

    Chin up and all that, it's still gonna be a fun toy! Have you bump-fired it yet? Too much fun!
  8. elguapo

    elguapo Guest

    That is a nice looking piece!!
  9. And expensive too!! Gotta love a good bump fire. Nice looking AK ya got there.
  10. GrOuNd_ZeRo

    GrOuNd_ZeRo Gun Fanatic Member

    you guys are killing me, I want one so bad, I just don't know when I'll be able to afford one.

    I hope classicarms still has some available.
  11. Very nice looking new toy. Best of luck with her.
  12. I'm really happy with my WASR too! I've only had it since December and it's a gas to play with. Read the AK blogs and they go on and on about the WASR being the bottom of the barrel and all the others being better.

    Then, read on some more, and they admit the WASR is dependable, quality is 'adequate' but they're cheap; cheap as in 'my cool AK cost a lot more'

    So, I bought the WASR. I was able to look it over and got one I'm very pleased with. Does it look as good as a $600+ one? Get REAL, an AK is not going to win a beauty contest--I can't see any way I'd be better off with a more expensive rifle. I'm putting the difference into ammo!

    I hope you enjoy yours as much as I'm enjoying mine. It's the first SKS / AK type rifle I've ever had I don't think I'll get bored with and sell off soon.

    :mrgreen: :wink: :lol:

  13. I am sorry, but I have to disagree very strongly. Just because you cannot see the difference in no way means that there isn't some major differences.

    It is pretty arrogant to tell people to "get real" when you obviously have no idea what those differences are. It is just that you do not know what to look for. That is why you can't see the difference. With all due respect, I am not trying to degrade you at all, but I don't think you should be telling people who have seen, handled, comprehend, researched, and written about the major differences to "get real."

    The issues that the WASR presents are certainly not cosmetic, so it has nothing to do with a beauty contest as you try to suggest.

    There are many differences between what you purchased and a higher quality AK. If you are satisfied with these differences and you are happy with your gun, then thats all that matters. Please refrain from telling people to get real when you don't know what you are talking about.
  14. Digger, if you're gonna throw down that hard against another forum member, might I recomend that you back it up with at least SOME evidence? Like "The WASR's bolt is sure to fly off hit you in the groin after 2000 rounds, and here's the evidence to prove it."

    Mind you, I'm not saying that you're right or wrong (don't know enough about the WASR or AK's to say one way or another) simply that I think it's bad form to talk that way to somebody without backing your point of view up at all
  15. Sniper 995

    Sniper 995 Guest

    Digger obviously thinks a bulgarian is better than a romanian. In some case that is true. Some "cosmetic" things are better on higher grade AK's. If you look at the internal, tool marks are not as present in some of the bulgarians and polish ak's out there. Do these better "tooled" surfaces translate to a higher quality AK, if you concerned with finish and looks, YES. But the very nature of the AK is that it don't matter for function or effectiveness. Will all bulgarians group better than romanian WASR's, hell no. Some WASR's will out shoot the best bulgarian anyday,everyday. Does the machining that goes into the internals make or brake an AK for accuracy, NO. That has more to do with the barrel than any other part. And the romanian's rifling/barrels are on par with the bulgarians or polish variants. Do the bulgarian and polish look prettier than a off the rack WASR, hands down YES. And they should for the price jump. The fact is an AK is a crude weapon designed to flex and fire, nomatter how "tooled"/worn/mistreated it is. You can't biuld a "quality" rifle into an AK nomatter how good your machining/tolerances. If you were to try to build a "quality" AK and replace all the parts that give/flex/slop around in the end you would end up with something like an .....AR. I own several AK's and love em all. I have a couple wasr's, a bulgarian, a polish tantal, a hungarian, along with a couple yugo's. My personal favorite is the Yugo's but again that is personal preferance and my wasr's will hold their own to any/all of them.
  16. I am totally correct and can easily back it up. And by the way, telling people to get real when they prefer quality is not particularly good form either.

    1. The WASR has a very cheap stamped receiver that is 1mm thick. Under heavy duress this receiver can fail. I have seen it personally. Fortunately, the owner was not injured. A Yugo receiver is 1.5mm thick and is still stamped but will not fail in most circumstances. The WASR receiver was only made to be cheap. Nothing more. So based upon technicality, yes the WASR receiver could fail after 2000 rounds and blow up in your face. Most won't, but I have seen and worked on a number of WASR's that need new receivers because they wore out quickly under heavy usage.

    The ideal is a milled receiver, but we are now in the price range of $800+. If you want a quality AK receiver that is heavy duty and cheaper, go with a Yugo for $100-$150 more than the WASR.

    2. Just by looking at the WASR pics of the original poster, a trained AK eye can see that the barrel is not in line with the stamped line on the receiver. This causes excessive barrel wear and a lack of accuracy. Granted, the AK isn't known to be an accurate rifle, but the I have seen some pretty accurate AKs because of the quality of the craftsmanship. If you look at a WASR for the side angle, the many have a visible bow. This is poor craftsmanship of parts that do not line up perfectly. They will still go bang, but it takes its toll in time.

    3. A typical WASR does not have properly matched seems. Look at the pics above. Where the stock meets the receiver has gaps in several places. Some are even at very weird angles. This still effects the overall functionality of the gun because the cheap receiver does not match up perfectly on many seems. I have also seen a cheap receiver do a number on the gas pistol. If things are not in alignment, the wear shows up in a few places like this.

    4. Not pictured above is the mag well stamp. On the WASR it is vague and not crisp whatsoever. In time (sometimes very short) this leads to loose, rattle-prone mags. I have seen some fall out with a hard jerk.

    5. The barrel on a WASR is also rather flimsy compared to other AKs. It obviously heat up quickly as is the nature of any AK, but I have also see a WASR barrel melt into a banana at a range after a kid was firing it for a while without much rest.

    6. The WASR is also known for coming with a bent sight (canted sight) as well as a gas tube known as a "canted gas block". While the majority do not, it isn't wise to pick one up if you don't know what to look for.

    7. The WASR is known to have a poor trigger group. This is noticeable when the trigger feels very slack and can actually double feed. Another sign is that the firing pin isn't striking hard enough. It can lead to slam firing which can explode. Century Arms is know for this crappy stuff.

    8. Trigger slap can me an annoying issue that some people cannot tolerate. A new trigger can be purchased for about for $40.

    9. Some WASRs are built with a dimpless receiver with "not so perfect" Romanian parts that didn't make inspection, not so good. Because of the need, they were assembled as sent out anyway. I havn't seen many of these but they are out there.

    This is just a few things I can think of off the top of my head. There are more technical issues that could be documented with more research.

    A WASR can be a fun toy. For someone to take it out a few times a month and play is great, but it just isn't a high quality weapon. I have no problem with someone owning one, but for someone to tell others that they are great and if your opinion differs you need to "get real" was my issue.

    There is a reason that the majority claim the WASR is the bottom of the barrel AK. It is because they are. They are dependable and reliable up to a point, but certainly not compared to a better firearm.

    It wasn't my purpose to throw down on a member, and I am sorry if it came across that way, but someone who is uninformed should not be telling people to "get real".
  17. Digger didn't say a single thing about Bulgarian AKs and doesn't hold any such opinion. Nothing that I said makes what you claim obvious. Your understanding of the quality of the mechanics of the AK is flawed from an operational perspective regardless of how many you own. Could you please explain to me how a 1mm stamped receiver is on pare with a 1.5mm stamped or a 1.6mm milled? Your logic makes no sense whatsoever.
  18. Sniper 995

    Sniper 995 Guest

    MOST AK's come with 1.0mm recievers. Is a 1.5 mm reciever going to outlast a 1.0 mm reciever, YES. but a milled reciever will outlast a 1.5 mm reciever. And a titanium plutoniam core reciever will outlast a milled reciever, and so on, and so on. Most of your points of the WASR are purely cosmetic. The triggerslap issue is more of a mild annoyance. So you go ahead and pride your 1.5mm battle recievered perfectly fit and flush, prim and trim AK that you adore and for everyone else we will just get what we want and rest ussured it will function every bit as good as your MALTESE AK in any way that counts. For god's sake it's an AK, you know, the crudest firearm known to assault rifles. They pound these out in bagaledesh with stones. As for wearing out A 1.0 mm stamped reciever, it is doubtfull that anyone can do it without running literally tens of thousands of rounds through it. REMEMBER 1.0 mm stamped reciever IS warsaw spec. Your point about mag dimples clearly shows you have very little knowledge about firearms in general, let alone AK's. Mag dimples are for side to side support. The mag is held in by a groove in the front truinion and the mag release in the rear. ANY side to side movemnet cannot cause the mag to fall out. for a mag to fall out there must be something wrong with the front trunion or the mag release lever. Again AK's were design to function flawlessly regardless of any ammount of side to side slop. And as for a WASR likely to blow up in your face, well.... we heard all that too about hi-points, it's called .........gun-snobbery.

    Attention AK EXPERT digger is in the house, wisdom floweth down from the mountain like an avalanche :wink:
  19. What??? Most AK's come with 1mm stamped receivers? What in the world are you talking about? That is not true whatsoever. All cheap AKs come with 1mm stamped receivers because they are cheap to produce the stamped USA receiver to add to an imported parts kit. To claim that most come with a 1mm is foolishness. Wow that is ridiculous. Next you are going to claim that most are semi auto because that is all you have been exposed to with the parts kits imported into the USA. Do you even know what 922r is? Do you even realize that most AKs are not even in the USA? Wow your comprehension is sad.

    There is so much lack if AK understanding in this post it isn't even worth addressing further. It has nothing to do with gun snobbery and the last time I checked I own multiple HPs and am posting on a HP forum.

    How about simply reading the multi-issue post above and get some understanding.

    Best of luck to you and no hard feeling but what you just posted is just as accurate as what you claimed I said about Bulgarian AKs. Zippo, Zero, Zilch.

    I am no expert by any means, and never claimed to be. I simply have collected many firearms through the years, sold many, repaired many, built many, and studied many. What I posted comes from actual experience, and hard work instead of some yahoo that doesn't know a receiver from his elbow and has proven that by his ridiculous claims.
  20. Digger, I can't speak to the accuracy of your claims directly (due to my aforementioned lack of expertise in this area), but you did try and back up your earlier statements, so I have no beef with you, for whatever that's worth :)

    *gets on soap box*

    Let's just all try and remember that we will each have different opinions on all topics such as this. It's OK not to agree with each other, and there's no need to feel personally offended or to try and offend somebody simply because they don’t agree with you. I'm not directing this at any one person, as this is something we have ALL been guilty of at one point or another :)

    *gets off soap box*

    Ok, now continue laying down the knowledge as you all see fit. :D