N pap vs WASR

SpookBoy

New member
Title says it all, I have the opportunity to buy one or the other, the only difference price wise is $10. So let's hear it, pro's & con's for both? Also, I'm not worried about finding the "yugo" furniture for the pap like everyone seems to make a big deal of. So thanks in advance.
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
NPAP will be harder on your cheek because of the higher stock angle when using just iron sights.
It's set up for use with an optic.
Denis
 

SpookBoy

New member
I'm either planning on buying a 6 pos stock or an ace folder, so no worries there. But what about accuracy, durability, etc?
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
I got pretty good accuracy with two NPAPs, I wouldn't worry about durability.


You know it doesn't take standard AK stocks, right?
Denis
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
See Post #2, Mo.
It's built for an optic & many find it uncomfortable when using iron sights.

I had a bruise that lasted two days on my cheek after shooting the first with irons.
No problems with the second using an optic.
Denis
 

Mosin-Marauder

New member
I picked one up when I went to the LGS and it was rather uncomfortable on the cheek (first thing I noticed).

It seemed like a very well built rifle. The action was actually decently smooth for not being fired.

I've not seen a WASR 10/63 so I don't know about that one.
 

DPris

Member Emeritus
You have to shoot one to really appreciate the ouch.

Higher stock angle means you have to scrunch your face lower to get to the sights.
Left the stock resting directly against my cheekbone instead of below it, and even in the mild 7.62x39, that adds up.
Denis
 

Ryu825

New member
Just hold the npap properly with your nose up to the receiver and poof! Cheek slap is gone! :eek: but since that doesn't matter, the wasr has interchangeable furniture and gas block whereas the npap will need npap specific parts. If that's not a deal breaker, the npap def has the better finish though the newer wasrs are nicer looking than the older ones and since you're looking for accuracy the npaps non chrome barrel will do better than the chromed wasr barrel, just stay away from corrosive ammo.
 

Quentin2

New member
It's hard to beat a good WASR for a lowest common denominator AK. Which is comparable in quality to 50+ million AK-47s in the world! :D

AKs aren't known for 1MOA accuracy so I'd prefer getting the chrome lined barrel which Yugos don't have. I will admit I'm biased, I handpicked my WASR 10/63 at a gun show 8 years ago and it's never been any trouble. It's bone stock except I cut off the welded muzzle nut, screwed on a flash hider and rubbed Tung oil in the stock. And bought a better sling.

On the other hand I hear good things about the NPAP. Even though I have little first hand experience with them I doubt you'd go too wrong with one.
 

Brotherbadger

New member
AKs aren't known for 1MOA accuracy so I'd prefer getting the chrome lined barrel which Yugos don't have.

That's the exact reason why I would go with a Yugo. I prefer my rifles be as accurate as possible. If that means it takes an extra 3 or 4 minutes cleaning it, so be it. The odds of finding corrosive ammo nowadays is slim anyways, so the need for chrome lining isn't really there.

That rant aside, both are solid rifles. As long as you stay away from early WASR imports, you shouldn't have any problems.
 

shep854

New member
I have a WASR, and at just over a thousand rounds, it's right, tight and steel-plate-at-100yd-accurate right from the box. Chrome CHF barrel, too!
I have read lots of good thinks about the N-PAPs also, though.
Just for fun, a video of WASR out-of-box accuracy:
This is not me, BTW...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSuAPjw2Jgw
 

TxFlyFish

New member
As ridiculous as this sounds the WASR is slightly more desirable than NPAP...maybe it's the CL barrel. Rob Ski from akoul managed to break an NPAP during one of his crazy torture tests, granted several other AKs have failed but NPAP failed a little sooner


If you want to get an arsenal slr 107 or 104ur now it's a good time as arsenals dried up (again)
 

smee78

New member
I was in a simular position a few years ago and went went with the WASR, I havent had any problems with it and am still happy with it. The only think I'm looking at changing is the trigger to a G2 to stop the trigger slap on my finger.:eek:
 

shep854

New member
Smee78; what year is your WASR? Mine came with the G2 trigger, as a compliance part. I'm not sure when it became standard.
 

Quentin2

New member
... That's the exact reason why I would go with a Yugo. I prefer my rifles be as accurate as possible. If that means it takes an extra 3 or 4 minutes cleaning it, so be it. The odds of finding corrosive ammo nowadays is slim anyways, so the need for chrome lining isn't really there...

My reasoning was if you have typical 4-5MOA AKs, chrome lining won't have much impact on accuracy compared to all the other accuracy robbing things going on. Now if you have rifles around 1MOA then you might see a difference. Look at all those sewer pipe barrels in old Yugo SKSes - then chrome lining looks real desirable!
 

Fishbed77

New member
For a while, I would have chosen the N-PAP over the WASR, but lately a good many reports have been showing up on the internet of egging of the fire control group holes on the N-PAP receiver and mushrooming of the BCG tail due to soft steel.

It may be worth doing some research on.
 

Brotherbadger

New member
My reasoning was if you have typical 4-5MOA AKs, chrome lining won't have much impact on accuracy compared to all the other accuracy robbing things going on.

The difference between a chrome lined barrel and the other things that impede accuracy is that you can control what type of barrel you have. You can eliminate that impact all together.

Look at all those sewer pipe barrels in old Yugo SKSes - then chrome lining looks real desirable

If you plan on shooting corrosive ammo and never cleaning it? Definitely. The days of finding/shooting cheap corrosive ammo are gone. This eliminates the main benefit of a chrome lined barrel. For me, the pros no longer out weigh the cons.
 
Top