What is the difference between stamped and milled rifles

Distinguishing the two can be a task for someone who does not know the specific differences. The following tips should help you learn those differences so you can identify your type of receiver. The first AKs had milled receivers. Manufacturers machined each from a solid block of steel, which made them very sturdy, but also very heavy. One of the easiest ways to visually differentiate a milled receiver is the large, rectangular-shaped cutout, which is nearly five inches long, above and in front of the magazine well.

The trigger guard is stamped and riveted on to the bottom of the receiver in a similar way as a stamped receiver. The pistol grip nut is riveted in place on the receiver just behind the trigger guard.

The magazine well and magazine front latch slot are machined into the receiver. You should also notice that some of the sharp edges above the trigger and magazine were milled off chamfered.

Visually, you can easily differentiate stamped receivers from milled ones by noticing the small, shallow indentation — about one-inch long — on each side of the receiver, directly above the magazine well. You also can differentiate the two by the many external rivet heads on the sides of a stamped receiver. The trigger guard is stamped, just like milled, and riveted on to the bottom of the receiver. The grip screw nut, however, is a separate piece that fits down from inside the receiver through a square hole behind the trigger guard.

Pistol grips usually are interchangeable between receiver types. Some authorities also believe they are more inherently accurate, but there are some who dismiss that difference as negligible or deny it altogether. Despite the differing opinions, according to Soviet manuals, stamped receivers generally have a longer life expectancy in terms of rounds fired. There are many countries making both types of receivers, so please do not assume that your receiver is milled or stamped based on its country of origin.

Which AK receiver do you prefer? Have you experienced an accuracy difference between a stamped or milled receiver? Tell us in the comment section. It is not true that the first AKs had milled receivers. The AK type 1 had a stamped receiver and was produced for around 3 years beginning in Unfortunately, Russian stamping technology and quality control at that time was not sufficient to ensure reliable function.

Milled receivers are created out of solid chunks of steel. All the internal guide rails, magazine well and latch surfaces, bolt locking surfaces, bolt carrier stop and the barrel and buttstock receiving sockets are cut from a single piece of metal.

As the name implies, stamped receivers are stamped from a sheet of steel and shaped in a series of bending processes that make them more cost-effective to produce.

The original AK, called a Type 1, was stamped but this process was discontinued, as the stamping and assembly technology at the time had unacceptably high rejection rates. As a result, the Soviet manufacturers went to milled receivers. The milled version was solid, but machining is a labor-intensive and, more expensive process. Hence, this line was terminated as well. The Soviets eventually perfected the manufacturing methodology for stamped receivers which are lighter than the milled versions and are still produced today.

The differences between milled and stamped receivers are elucidated on the UltiMAK website. Thanks for a great read OP. My c39 pistol kept having the single spring malfunction. If it where double I doubt it would. Less than rounds. Happened 3 x. I just purchased my first AK47 after watching a lot of your videos comparing stamped and milled being put to the torture test and I ended up buying the Century Arms AK63D….

One of the reasons I chose this AK was because I started looking for a used AK to be my first but then I watched one of your videos and you said something about making sure to have someone inspect an AK, however I did not know what you meant by that and what does someone look for when buying a AK new or used that is stamped receiver? Your answer might help me in the future if I were to buy another AK. One reason I would prefer a milled over a stamped receiver, is there are no rivets.

I have seen some pictures of them being installed improperly in the stamped receiver. That may only be a cosmetic problem, but if the rivet is weaker because of it, I would prefer a milled receiver. The other reason is that the milled looks better than the stamped. However, if the milled has sharp corners instead of rounded corners, that would be a place more apt to tearing.

I have notice this type of thing happening on torque converters in some cars. The notches that have sharp corners, like 90 degrees, can split, but if the corners are rounded, it is less likely to tear. If the material on the stamped one is made like a samurai sword, basically laminated, then it should be stronger than a milled one, provided that it is the same material and density. But bending steel weakens it.

Milled is not bent. For now, it is six of one, half a dozen of the other. Pingback: Creating Skins for 3d Guns. The article started very even and ended even however the middle was a little stamp sided.. In my mind, and this is fully emotional, the robustic milled receiver gives me better feeling during the excersizes. However, there are tens of thousands aftermarket parts and accessories for the stamped receiver AK, unlike for the milled kind. One thing I have noticed between the Yugo M70 ABM and the M70 AB2 milled vs stamped is the action of the milled is a hell of a lot smoother than the stamped, still both super nice guns and the weight difference was minimal.