Eh theres other complaints to be had. PSA cuts a lot of corners to get to the price point they do. Sometimes they cut corners in places and it burns them.
I’ve seen the nitride barrel droop.
The 100 series they sell isn’t a 100 series, rather it’s just AKM dressed different. Almost none of the parts are correct, and the major components are not swappable. I find that a bit deceitful.
As the other post went over they don’t dimple the trunnion correctly, which I don’t think is a big issue but is a clear corner cut.
Their gas blocks aren’t chromed.
I don’t really buy that. I think they’re just trying to streamline production. I wouldn’t even consider it an issue if they sold it under a different name. It’s not like every other country doesn’t have their own slight deviations (although usually they don’t mess with parts that are important). The akms are built pretty much to the standard, no law suits over those.
Have you seen where there is litigation between PSA and Shield Arms over the dagger micro mag? SA issued them a cease and desist even though the PSA mag is a combo of metal and polymer and SA’s is all metal.
Yes, lawsuits do happen, even if you put your own spin on it.
From the Palmetto Blog. Their AK’s at Battlefield Vegas. Please not that Nitrided barrels are not a good choice for full auto use. Chrome plated barrels are the standard for that duty.
“AK-1 has performed flawlessly now through 17,025rds. AK-1 is still functioning, but the barrel just started keyholing at 17,025 rounds. AK-1 was the GF3 with a nitride barrel and Magpul Furniture that was put into service on 11/19. BFV pulled it from service on 2/3, as a customer had 6 out of 25rds keyhole, and BFV did not want customers targets to show keyholing.”
So the riveting anal retention is just that.
BFV modified them to full auto, which your usual customer is not doing. The guys that run BFV are great guys that keep all this data and help the rest of the industry.
I’ve been thinking about building an AK-103, but for the price PSAK’s seem to be good enough for range toys. In general those of you who have a PSA made AK, are you guys pretty happy with them overall?
I have had a 104 for about a year and a half, plus a recent gf3 after I moved out of a ban state. I have my own range at my new house, and shoot very regularly. These 2 are on my most frequent “grab-n-goes” list now. Absolutely love them. I know plenty of gun snobs that hated on psa anything. After quite a few outings using my stuff, they ate crow.
5.45s future almost exclusively relies on PSA. Therefore I on a personal level want them to succeed, however that doesnt make them immune to all criticism. Someone has to be heel. Having feedback from people who only ever say how good they are, and how theyre perfect and just as good! is not helping anyone.
like how Marcel_01 pointed out, BFV got 17k out of a gf3, which is absolutely not made for FA because it is a nitride barrel. This sounds like a lot…
Right up until you see the WASR lasted over two and a half years with 80-100k rounds.
We have yet to shoot out a factory WASR barrel.
We have WASR’s on the line that have lasted OVER two and half years and the barrels are NOT shot out and they continue to run. We installed new bolts to bring headspace back up to spec but they keep running.
This may sound crazy but it’s fair to say that they finally suffer a catastrophic failure (cracked trunion) at 80,000-100,000 rounds. Also, we have WASR’s that have suffered a catastrophic failure and we just pull out the old trunion and barrel, grab one from a parts kit, re-rivet, re-barrel and get them up and running.
kind of the WASR of Theseus at that point, because rebarreling, and replacing the trunnion is pretty much just building the gun…but the point is, theres absolutely room for improvement.
Thank you for making my point about anybody who’s looking to put $100-200k worth of ammo through their AK in the next 2-3 years probably isn’t looking for a PSA, However 17-20K rounds in PSA will still stand behind their warranty and might put it in their museum.
PSA has issues unrelated to round count (like the bolt). In theory i would take a GF5 above the wasr. PSA build quality is far better than the WASR has ever been, and youre getting equal components quality wise (albeit at a different price point). But the WASR has a long history of reliability. PSA is still working on things, and throwing more money for a higher sku isnt going to fix the issues present. PSA is still new to this game.
Century WASR? I may or may not have one, honestly, it’s no better than any of my friends GF3s and certainly worse than their 4 or 5s with the ALG trigger. Trigger slap forced me to upgrade triggers. Which none of theirs had.
Part of being a “heel” is realizing what “tests” matter and what ones don’t.
The amount of AK owners who are going to make their weapons full auto is a tiny, tiny, fraction. Like, it’s such a small number (1 in 10,000, if that) it’s completely irrelevant in discussing the real-world reliability of them, especially on a weapon that isn’t designed with full-auto capabilities in mind. The fact that it can handle that kind of use speaks volumes for the weapon, not against it.
Past that, of those guys that do make the weapon full auto, now we have an even tinier subset with the guys that are going to brutally test them to the point of failure. It’s such an insanely small data point that it’s completely irrelevant for any normal real-world shooter.
80-100k rounds of 7.62x39 is roughly $40-50k in ammo. There might be people out there shooting that much out of a single $700-$1000 AK, but they are an EXTREME minority, such a small number that it’s irrelevant to the real world. I’d say I shoot a lot compared to your average person, and I doubt I have 100k rounds total downrange in the past decade across all my weapons. That’s 800 rounds a month, 200 a week, for a decade straight. Now you’re talking about that many rounds in 2.5 years out of ONE rifle like it’s relevant and noteworthy? Even the people that do shoot that much absolutely expect multiple issues (as well they should,) no matter the brand.
Part of being critical is being logical with said criticisms.
To your average every day buyer, the build quality difference (which you just gloss over) between a WASR and a PSA AK is much more relevant than the rifle’s ability to hold together for 20k+ rounds of full-auto fire. If you told me “well your AK’s barrel won’t hold up to 100,000 rounds of full auto fire”, my response would be “so?”
You also have to remember- for that test, there were only problems with the barrel, which is to be expected (also likely due to people not properly using the GF3 in full auto…ie, not giving it sufficient time to cool down). BFV pointed out that there were no issues with the internals.
But the issues occurring that are the primary concern are related to the bolt design, and firing pin issues. Not the barrel. Those issues are appearing in people who are not shooting high round counts. The barrel is just outright better on any combloc barrel (or WBP). You say it doesnt matter, but the WASR is the price point comparison, and it is just objectively better in the case of the barrel, but also of the core components.
It’s almost like a red herring, theres minor complaints about the barrel, because it isnt as good. Not as big of an issue as the firing pins peening, and popping holes in primers though.
To your average every day buyer, the build quality difference (which you just gloss over)
Idk i thought i was pretty clear.
PSA build quality is far better than the WASR has ever been,
Build quality means absolutely nothing if the gun doesnt work. Pioneer, and Century both have better looking rifles than a WASR, but you wont see many people singing their praise because the rifles are ya know… dangerous to shoot.