AK-47s, Milled or Stamped?

[MT2008]

Milled are more durable, yes, but it's kind of ridiculous to care, because even if it's true, stamped AK receivers will still last longer than any of us. Most of the AKs ever produced are stamped - when you look at pictures of wars today, you're seeing the combatants carrying Soviet-era AKMs and Type 56s with stamped receivers, right? Most of those guns are probably decades old and look beat to hell, but how many of them look like they have serious receiver issues, even after endless abuse by illiterate peasant conscripts?

The weight difference is probably the thing you should care about most, even though you won't have to worry about carrying your AK for long periods of time, and for that reason, I say stamped. I own a stamped receiver Poly Tech AK that's almost as old as I am (the date code is for 1987), and it's still in beautiful condition and shoots flawlessly.

Of course, I'm also of the opinion that nobody in their right mind should buy any of the crappy Romanian or Bulgarian AKs, stamped or milled, that are sold in the U.S. today. If you're gonna buy an AK, save your money and buy a good stamped receiver Egyptian, Chinese, or Hungarian-made AK imported before 1989. I don't think any of the AK clones made in the U.S. today are as good as those.