Arsenal SGL-21-94 7.62x39 VS Arsenal SLR107-21

Discussion in 'The Kalashnikov Klub' started by TABB56, Jun 2, 2012.


  1. Besides the SGL-21-94 being Russian and the SLR107-21 is Bulgarian both are Arsenals other than that could someone tell me the differences between the two. Both are Folding stocks Thanks...
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads Forum Date
    Need holster suggestions for Arsenal Strike One General Firearms Forum Jun 28, 2015
    Blue Ridge Arsenal coming to Hanover/Ashland. Glockers of the Old Dominion May 10, 2015
    WTS: Arsenal SLR-106f 5.56 Firearms Listings May 4, 2015
    WTT Arsenal SGL21 Firearms Listings Apr 2, 2015
    Franklin Arsenal Corn Cob Media Reloading Mar 26, 2015

  3. This thread on Arfcom should pretty much cover the differences.

    Also, I believe the SGL comes with an optics side rail whereas the SLR does not. I could be wrong on that though.
     

  4. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    I have both and I give a slight nod to the SLR-107. About the only thing going for the SGL (aside from the fact that it's Russian) is the optics rail. If you have no need for it, I feel the SLR is better built. For one, the SLR does not seem to share the same conversion process that the SGL goes through here in the US - meaning that they come in to the US pretty much configured as you see. The SGLs come in as sporter rifles that Arsenal of Nevada converts to side folders.

    A few other things going for the SLR are:

    - pistol grip reinforcement (SGLs don't have it)
    - dimpled ejector on the inside rails (more robust)
    - shares most parts with surplus AK parts currently in the US
    - stock is US made, so you can swap the muzzle brake with an original chrome-lined brake and still be in compliance with 922r.

    Regardless of choice, finish still is crappy for a high end rifle. They look good initially but can easily get scratched or flake.
     
  5. WayaX

    Lifetime Member

    2,498
    3
    I agree with everything except saying that the SLR does not come in as a sporter. If it doesn't come as a sporter, how is it legally imported? Also, I'm pretty sure that Arsenal does not convert EAA import style sporter Saigas, as there are quite a few differences between a basement hack-job and an SGL. My thought (for both rifles) is they come in with a sporter stock, but with the trigger already moved forward (thus the lack of extra holes), with real hand-guards installed. Remember that SGL's are Izmash-Legion rifles and Saiga sporters are just Izmash sporting rifles.

    I also have both, and prefer the SLR-107 myself.
     
  6. This is a discussion on another board from some time back.
    I noticed my SGL 21 did not have weld marks where the sporters have holes for the rear trigger linkage pins and parkerizing with original factory paint was still there when I scrubbed off the paint and observed.
    I have to assume that Arsenal DID NOT WELD up any holes.
    This would make sense provided that they can legally import partially completed rifles. For example, a trigger forward ready rifle with no pistol grip, no trigger group, no stock, and perhaps a factory spot welded muzzle thread cap like Atlantic Arms now currently sells on a certain Saiga model.
    So, if this is the case, it minimizes the amount of work involved and isn't really a conversion but a last minute completion. All they would have to do is install a buttstock, pistol grip, handguard, trigger group, grind the spot weld on the muzzle cap, install a brake, and touch up lightly with paint. 10 minutes of work at the most.
    The real question is would the government allow partially completed rifles without obvious restricted features to pass customs? I'm not sure, but considering that parts kits pass through fine I can't imagine that it would be unreasonable to consider the possibility of this. I seem to vaguely recall that SAR series rifles were imported as partially completed and not as sporters. Is this still possible? Perhaps.
    Sometime back, I also vaguely recall that the SLR sporters are imported in a single stack configuration, unlike saigas which are double stack from the factory. This would mean that the magwell has to be cut wider. Both are very well built regardless. Someone on this forum a few years ago stated that the reason the SLR does not use a true 100 series bolt like the SGL is based on a patent issue. By using a non-100 series bolt, the patent issue is resolved. In defense of the SGL's newer design (74) bolt/carrier, the weight ratio of bolt to carrier is optimized to a higher carrier weight ratio for better feeding and extraction. This is the only significant change I can see other than the 74 style extractor claw which is also different.
     
  7. WayaX

    Lifetime Member

    2,498
    3
    As to allowing them to be imported, I believe that they're essentially a working rifle, but only useable if you had a really long trigger finger. From my understanding, importation of a firearm does not rest on how ergonomic it is, and therefore there would be no difference between importing them in such a configuration versus in the EAA sporter configuration. This makes the most since, and why I always argue that an SGL-21 is not just a converted Saiga, regardless of how much a lot of bubba gun-smiths think the two are equal.

    Arsenal just changes the furniture and fire control group to make them 922r compliant, and adds a few finishing touches and then sells them.

    I did see the Atlantic Arms half-convert Saiga. You're right, this is close to how I pictured them coming in. Of course, these are a good deal, because they can be converted to something similar to an SGL with a lot less work and money than a typical sporter Saiga.
     
  8. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    I don't have definitive proof on how the elves at Arsenal really do their conversions. I can only look at the fitting of my SLR and SGL and the SLR have better cuts for the side folder. I can swap metal and poly side folder stock on SLRs without issue. On the SGL, it's a crapshoot, particularly if it's the -84 series. The front latch is not always in the same spot and/or the rear trunion angle is off the correct angle. Minor variations but sometime enough to not allow putting an AK-100 poly stock.

    They are still great rifles and I own a few of them and you cant go wrong with either.
     
  9. I have had multiple SLR and multiple SGL rifles. Both are excellent rifles, but there are differences. My opinion is that the quality of fitting is slightly better on the SLR, but not in any way that affects performance.

    Most of the other differences have already been covered, save one. The SLR has a firing pin return spring. That makes it impossible to get a slam fire when using ammo with softer than mil-spec primers. One of my best friends had a slam fire with an AK in his kitchen, while loading his home defense AK with Federal soft points. That isn't a huge issue as long as you choose ammo accordingly, but it is something to consider.
     
  10. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    Ah yes, forgot about that. Although my SLR-105 is not spring loaded nor any Bulgarian 5.45 for that matter. My SLR-107 and SLR-106 rifles do have them.
     
    #9 CGP, Jun 3, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2012
  11. I have a new SLR107F, and I've had a few SGLs. The magazine well and the safety seem smoother on the Bulgarian, especially the mag well when using Bulgarian polymer mags.
     
  12. The SLR and SGL's are both high quality builds. Like previously stated the finishes are not the greatest.

    They are put together nicely and in my opinion the SLR has a slightly nicer "fit and finish"...in the hands it just feels like a more solid rifle.

    You can't go wrong either way! :cool:
     
  13. TedG

    TedG Infidel USA

    1,613
    0
    Russian is the way to go. Just because.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Can you post a picture of the dimpled ejector and the bolt for the SLR 107?

    The SGL has a full US made stock set.
     
  15. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    But of course :cool:

    FYI, the SLR also has a full US made stock set, including the stock. The SGL has a Russian stock with US made handguards and grip.

    [​IMG]
     
    #14 CGP, Jun 6, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2012
  16. Louisville Glocker

    Louisville Glocker Urban Redneck

    2,257
    8
    Really, no idea about the 107, but I have to say that I really really love my SGL-21-94 . I just call it my 762, even though I have several guns in that caliber.

    Very accurate. A pleasure to shoot. I've left it stock as received from Arsenal/KVar.
     

  17. Sorry I crossed model numbers.
    The regular non-folding SGL21 has a US made polymer stock.

    Mine has US printed on the left side.

    Your picture confirms the use of a typical AKM bolt for the 7.62x39 model.

    Now you got me wondering if the 5.45x39 slr 105 uses an AKM style bolt rather than the thin stem 74 type bolt.
     
    #16 my762buzz, Jun 6, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2012
  18. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    The SLR-105 uses the thin stem bolt and the firing pin is not spring loaded.
     
  19. So, a 74 type bolt then.

    So by this and much prior info,

    SGL 7.62x39 uses an AK103 bolt 74 type redesigned to fit 7.62x39
    SGL 5.45 uses an AK74 type bolt

    SLR 7.62x39 uses an AKM bolt (spring loaded)
    SLR 5.45 uses an 74 type bolt
     
  20. CGP

    CGP

    184
    0
    That's about right. The SLR-106 (5.56 caliber) also uses the thick bolt stem and IS spring loaded (both my SLR-106UR and SLR-106FR have them)
     
  21. Not to hijack, but can anyone tell me is the folding stock as strong as the fixed?

    I'm trying to find a SGL21--have given up; and will now get the SLR but never really wanted/considered a folding stock.

    Does it generally lock up tight both ways?
     

Share This Page

Duty Gear at CopsPlus