Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Reason #1
  • Reason #2
  • Reason #3

Site Description

Receivers - Milled vs Stamped?

Discussion in 'The Kalashnikov Klub' started by barth, Feb 24, 2013.

  1. barth

    barth six barrels

    Oct 7, 2011
    The Free Zone
    I've got a stamped receiver Arsenal SLR-106U 5.56 AK that I totally love.
    Part of me is getting the itch for a 7.62 AK.
    Are milled receivers really worth it?
    I read somewhere that the actual new military Russian AKs are stamped?

    I do really like the light weigh of my stamped receiver.
    But was thinking the extra weight of milled might be an advantage with the additional recoil of a 7.62.

    Thoughts, Comments?
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2013
  2. Inebriated


    Feb 20, 2012
    The original AK-47 was designed to be stamped, but manufacturing problems made it unreliable. They switched to milled, until manufacturing caught up, and then they went to stamped... At least that's my understanding.

    Stamped is generally better, in my opinion. If properly heat treated and riveted, there's no durability loss. You save weight, as well as cost. People say milled receivers are more accurate, and can crack due to it being too rigid, but I've never seen any hard evidence of either claim. I would like to have a nice milled AK at some point, but I've yet to see any justification for the difference in price, other than "just wanting it".

    As for the "recoil" of 7.62x39... Well, your form and stance will do a lot more for you than a heavier receiver.
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2013

  3. HWI


    Jun 7, 2012
    Stamped receivers weigh less with no loss in durability. 7.62x39 doesn't recoil much, adding a pound onto the rifle isn't going to have much of an affect on that.

    Some people say milled receivers are more accurate, but I have never found this to be true and there is no documented evidence of it to my knowledge.

    Stamped receivers also have the benefit of having more accessories available if that is your sort of thing.

    The main benefit of the milled receiver is looks imo. They look really sharp with some nicely finished wood furniture.
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2013
  4. adamg01


    Jul 10, 2007
    I have had two Sgl's for awhile now and decided to nab the 101s recently. The $1,000 price tag and my curiosity to see what the milled fuss was about was all the reason I needed.

    It does have a better trigger and smoother action out of the box. That is where the advantages end. I would grab my plum Sgl anyday over the 101s. If their is a $200 difference between the models, I will go stamped every time.
  5. HWI


    Jun 7, 2012
    The smoother action may be attributable to being a Bulgarian Rifle and not necessarily a milled receiver. For instance, my SLR106's action is smoother than my SGL21's action.

    Unfortunately I have never had the opportunity to shoot an SLR101, I have heard they have nice triggers. Do you know which one they use? I assume it's one of Arsenal's US made offerings, but am unsure.


    Sep 30, 2010
    PHX AZ
    I love my slr101. It came with a double hook trigger, maybe that adds to the smooth pull. One option (what I did) is to look for a slr101-s and had it milled out to accept standard mags. So I got my milled slr for just under 600$...

  7. fnfalman

    fnfalman Chicks Dig It

    Oct 23, 2000
    California & New Mexico, US
    I like my milled Bulgarian SLR95MB just fine, and I also like my stamped NORINCO MAK-90 just fine too.

    It's a freakin' AK and not a Mattel Toy.
  8. toshbar

    toshbar Timber Baron

    Oct 20, 2009
    Eastern NC
    I printed my last AK receiver. :rollsmiley:

    Just kidding! My stamped 5.45 saiga does 6-7" groups(5 shots) at 500 yards. I couldn't ask for better. (Not kidding)
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2013
  9. vettely


    Nov 28, 2006
    Another vote for stamped.