You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
milled vs. stamped AK
- Thread starter kcub
- Start date
Both are true, and both are false, depending on what individual AK are being discussed, when it was made, from what kind of steel and by who.
Here is a basic overview:
In many cases the pressed AKs really can be stronger than many milled ones but it is not the process of manufacture that is the issue. It's the steel used and the heat-treatments.
The very first ones made in Russia were NOT milled but stamped.
However they were not done from the correct type of steel and they had cracks developing. So the Russians went to a mild steel and milled the receivers.
They were good but had a tendency to batter over time and were not as resistant to denting as they wanted.
So next they went to a high grade of steel that was properly heat treated. These were the guns of legend, but were costly to make.
Next they went to a spring steel stock and pressed the receivers from sheets. These were also done correctly and were the full equal of the later milled guns, and in fact better then the earliest milled guns. These are the AKMs we see mostly today.
BUT... some other nations used the AKM pattern to make their own AKs and some of them went through problems with their first attempts too, because of wrong heat treatments for the alloys they were using.
And in the USA today with so many people making AKs from sheet steel some are not up to standards because people don't understand the process that must be done and how to do it, or some people understand but lack the proper equipment to do it right.
So is stamped better?
Yes, ------ unless its not.
Here is a basic overview:
In many cases the pressed AKs really can be stronger than many milled ones but it is not the process of manufacture that is the issue. It's the steel used and the heat-treatments.
The very first ones made in Russia were NOT milled but stamped.
However they were not done from the correct type of steel and they had cracks developing. So the Russians went to a mild steel and milled the receivers.
They were good but had a tendency to batter over time and were not as resistant to denting as they wanted.
So next they went to a high grade of steel that was properly heat treated. These were the guns of legend, but were costly to make.
Next they went to a spring steel stock and pressed the receivers from sheets. These were also done correctly and were the full equal of the later milled guns, and in fact better then the earliest milled guns. These are the AKMs we see mostly today.
BUT... some other nations used the AKM pattern to make their own AKs and some of them went through problems with their first attempts too, because of wrong heat treatments for the alloys they were using.
And in the USA today with so many people making AKs from sheet steel some are not up to standards because people don't understand the process that must be done and how to do it, or some people understand but lack the proper equipment to do it right.
So is stamped better?
Yes, ------ unless its not.
Last edited:
runningbear
New member
Only item i notice is the milled AKs have a lot more weight, and their prices are much higher.
Myself having three stamped metal AKs, they shoot well and have a lot less weight to deal with.
Myself having three stamped metal AKs, they shoot well and have a lot less weight to deal with.
I have one of each and to be honest I prefer the stamped model for weight reduction if nothing else. If you can find a Norinco MAK-90 or similar, ,they are made with stamped steel that is about half a millimeter thicker than many other builds, so you get more strength without much extra weight.
I believe the Russian rpk uses a 1.3 or 1.5mm sheet steel receiver, and also a larger "bulged" front trunnion. I have heard that all Yugoslavian/Serbian AKs are built on a thicker sheet steel receiver similar to an rpk, but their barrels and parts are not chromed. Apparently Molot Vepr rifles are Also built on thicker receivers, but I don't think they uses reinforced trunnions, maybe on the larger calibers like .308, 7.62x54r and 30-06
Model12Win
Moderator
Just bought a DDI stamped AK. Seems good.
My Norinco NHM-91 is stamped 1.5mm, and I've shot the hell out of it and it's GTG. I've also shot the hell out of my milled .223 and .308 Galil's. (not Golani) GTG. Do some research and pick. Don't fall into the 'paralysis from analysis' trap. My God, they are AKMs or AK-47. Headspace is more important than milled/stamped.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Toecutter 7n6
New member
Kalashnikov's original design was stamped. The Soviets could not mass produce it with the necessary reliability at the time so they opted for a milled receiver. As soon as their tech caught up they began to stamp and never looked back.
A quality stamped AK will outlive your grandchildren. There is absolutely no benefit to a milled receiver.
A quality stamped AK will outlive your grandchildren. There is absolutely no benefit to a milled receiver.
Model12Win
Moderator
I like my DDI stamped so far, but it's got a TIGHT magazine release. Too tight.
I'm going to talk to the factory tomorrow.
I'm going to talk to the factory tomorrow.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
I have a Century C39 V2 with the milled receiver. Shoots well with Hornady 123 grain in front of H335. I guess its a bit heavier than the stamped models, but with the weight between my hands, its really no bother. One thing nice about the weight is that it doesn't kick much more than a 22 Mag lol
Dfariswheel
New member
Many people claim that a quality milled receiver rifle is "usually" more accurate then a quality stamped rifle.
US military personnel who've spent time in Africa have reported seeing stamped AK rifles in use by teenage soldiers that have been fired so much the rifling is pretty much just gone, leaving essentially a smooth bore, but the rifles are still working.
They have about zero accuracy but are still serving as bullet hoses which is about all the kids are able to do anyway.
US military personnel who've spent time in Africa have reported seeing stamped AK rifles in use by teenage soldiers that have been fired so much the rifling is pretty much just gone, leaving essentially a smooth bore, but the rifles are still working.
They have about zero accuracy but are still serving as bullet hoses which is about all the kids are able to do anyway.
Model12Win
Moderator
From all of my readings, it appears the stamped guns are the way to go if one is concerned with SAWC (size and weight considerations).
Every bit as good durability, accuracy is right in line with a milled, and the guns are lighter. One can put a side mount and micro dot on a stamped AK for the weight made up over a milled gun.
Every bit as good durability, accuracy is right in line with a milled, and the guns are lighter. One can put a side mount and micro dot on a stamped AK for the weight made up over a milled gun.
http://www.akfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7114
See post #1, Arsenal guy says milled is better other than weight which is pretty Apple's to Apple's being as how they make both (or did at the time).
See post #1, Arsenal guy says milled is better other than weight which is pretty Apple's to Apple's being as how they make both (or did at the time).