Category Archives: Russia and also USSR

The History, Chemistry, and Strategic Imperative of Soviet Corrosive Ammunition

The decision by any military to adopt a particular ammunition technology is never made in a vacuum. It is the result of a complex interplay between historical experience, technological capability, strategic doctrine, and fundamental chemistry. The Soviet Union’s long-standing reliance on corrosive-primed ammunition is a quintessential example of this process. To comprehend this choice, one must first understand the chemical problem that Soviet ordnance experts, and their counterparts worldwide, were trying to solve. The story of corrosive ammunition does not begin with a choice for corrosion, but a choice against the critical failures of the preceding technology: mercuric primers.

1.1 A Brief History of Primer Evolution: From Mercury to Chlorate

The evolution of the firearm primer is a direct line from the unreliable external ignition of flintlocks to the self-contained, instantaneous reliability of the modern cartridge.1 The first major leap towards modern primers was the percussion cap, developed in the early 19th century. These small copper cups contained a shock-sensitive compound, almost universally mercury fulminate (Hg(CNO)2​), which provided a far more reliable ignition source than flint and steel.1 Inventors like Hiram Berdan and Edward Boxer further refined this concept by integrating the primer into a metallic cartridge case, creating the centerfire systems still in use today.1

However, as military technology transitioned from black powder to more powerful and less-fouling smokeless propellants in the late 19th century, two catastrophic flaws with mercury fulminate became apparent. The first was chemical instability. Fulminate of mercury was discovered to degrade over time, especially when stored in warm climates. While it could reliably ignite forgiving black powder even when partially degraded, it often failed to provide a powerful enough flash to consistently ignite the more stable smokeless powders. This led to an unacceptable rate of misfires and dangerous hang-fires (a delay between the firing pin strike and the cartridge firing).5 For a military, ammunition that cannot be trusted to fire after long-term storage is a logistical nightmare.

The second flaw was metallurgical. Upon detonation, the mercury in the primer would vaporize and, under immense pressure and heat, amalgamate with the zinc component of the brass cartridge case. This mercury-brass amalgam rendered the case extremely brittle and prone to cracking, making it unsafe and unsuitable for reloading.2 At a time when many armies, including the U.S. Army, reloaded spent cartridges for training and to conserve resources, this was a significant economic and logistical drawback.6

Faced with these mission-critical failures, ordnance departments worldwide sought a replacement. The solution was found in chlorate-based compounds. In 1898, the U.S. Army’s Frankford Arsenal, after experiencing the unreliability of mercuric primers, adopted a new non-mercuric formula based on potassium chlorate (KClO3​) as the primary oxidizer.5 This new primer composition, exemplified by the famous FA-70 primer, was exceptionally stable in long-term storage and provided a powerful, reliable ignition flash for smokeless powders.6 It solved the problems of the mercuric era, but in doing so, it introduced a new, well-understood, and—in the eyes of military planners—manageable problem: corrosive residue.

1.2 The Reaction and its Residue: The Science of Salt-Induced Rust

The term “corrosive ammunition” is technically a misnomer. The unfired cartridge is inert and harmless to a firearm.8 The corrosive potential is created only after ignition, as a direct byproduct of the primer’s chemical reaction. A typical chlorate-based primer consists of three main components: a shock-sensitive explosive initiator (like lead styphnate), a fuel (like antimony sulfide), and a powerful oxidizer to provide the oxygen for the intense, rapid burn.4 In corrosive primers, this oxidizer is potassium chlorate (KClO3​) or, in some formulations, sodium perchlorate (NaClO4​).9

When the firing pin strikes the primer, it crushes the compound and initiates detonation. The potassium chlorate decomposes in a violent exothermic reaction, releasing its abundant oxygen atoms to fuel the flash that ignites the main powder charge. The chemical equation for this decomposition is:

2KClO3​(s)→2KCl(s)+3O2​(g)

The critical byproduct of this reaction is potassium chloride (KCl), a stable salt left behind as a fine, crystalline residue.9 This salt is chemically very similar to sodium chloride (NaCl), or common table salt, and it is the sole agent of corrosion.5

The mechanism of corrosion is often misunderstood. The potassium chloride salt is not, in itself, an acid that “eats” the steel of the firearm.11 Instead, its destructive power comes from its hygroscopic nature. Like table salt, KCl is extremely effective at attracting and holding water molecules from the surrounding atmosphere.5 This property means that even in environments not perceived as overtly damp, the salt residue will pull moisture from the air and create a thin, invisible film of highly concentrated salt water on the steel surfaces of the barrel, chamber, bolt face, and gas system—anywhere the propellant gases have touched.

This salt water film acts as a powerful electrolyte, dramatically accelerating the electrochemical process of oxidation (rusting). Steel is primarily iron (Fe), and in the presence of an electrolyte and oxygen, the iron atoms readily give up electrons, forming iron oxides. The salt solution does not participate in the final rust product, but its ions make the water far more electrically conductive, speeding up the electron transfer and thus the rate of corrosion by orders of magnitude. The result is rapid and severe pitting and rusting, which can begin to form in a matter of hours in humid conditions and can permanently damage a firearm’s bore and critical components if left unattended.12 This was the trade-off: in exchange for long-term stability and reliable ignition, militaries accepted the burden of dealing with this aggressive, salt-based residue.

Section 2: The Strategic Imperative: Why the Soviets Chose and Retained Corrosive Primers

The Soviet Union’s adherence to corrosive-primed ammunition, long after Western powers had transitioned away from it, is often cited by casual observers as evidence of a lagging technological base. This interpretation is fundamentally flawed. The Soviet choice was not a sign of backwardness but a deliberate and deeply logical decision rooted in the unique pillars of their military doctrine, geography, industrial philosophy, and the hard-won lessons of 20th-century warfare. It was a calculated risk, deemed not only acceptable but optimal for the specific challenges the Soviet military expected to face.

2.1 The Doctrine of Mass and Longevity: “Store and Forget”

At the heart of Soviet military planning was the concept of a massive, continent-spanning war against NATO. This doctrine required the prepositioning of colossal quantities of war materiel, especially ammunition, sufficient to sustain high-intensity combat for a prolonged period.17 The Soviet logistical model was not based on a “just-in-time” supply chain but on a “store and forget” principle. Ammunition was produced in vast numbers, hermetically sealed in iconic tin “spam cans,” and stored in depots stretching from Eastern Europe to the Pacific. These stockpiles were expected to remain viable for decades, ready for immediate issue in a crisis.17

For this grand strategy to work, the absolute, unquestionable reliability of the ammunition after decades in storage was paramount. Here, the chemical properties of the primers were the deciding factor. Corrosive primers, based on the chemically stable salt potassium chlorate, offered unparalleled long-term stability.12 In contrast, the early non-corrosive primer formulations developed in the West were known to be less stable. They were prone to chemical degradation over long storage periods, which could lead to a loss of sensitivity and result in the very misfires and hang-fires that chlorate primers were designed to prevent.5 The U.S. military itself experienced these failures with early non-corrosive lots, which failed to meet stringent storage requirements, validating the Soviet concern and delaying their own full transition.5 For the Soviets, the theoretical risk of a conscript failing to clean his rifle was far more acceptable than the strategic risk of entire ammunition dumps becoming unreliable over time.

2.2 Reliability in Extremis: The “General Winter” Factor

Soviet military doctrine was forged in the crucible of the Eastern Front of World War II, where “General Winter” was as formidable an adversary as any army. The vast expanses of the Soviet Union and its potential European battlefields are subject to extreme cold, with temperatures regularly dropping to levels where the performance of mechanical and chemical systems can be severely degraded.

A critical and often overlooked advantage of chlorate-based corrosive primers was their superior performance in these frigid conditions.12 The ignition of smokeless powder charges becomes significantly more difficult as temperatures plummet. Corrosive primer compositions were known to produce a hotter, more energetic, and more voluminous ignition flash compared to their early non-corrosive counterparts.4 This ensured positive and consistent ignition of the main propellant charge, even in the depths of a Russian winter. This was not a minor benefit; it was a mission-critical operational requirement for an army that expected to fight and win in any weather. The potential for sluggish or failed ignition from non-corrosive primers in sub-zero temperatures was a risk the Red Army was unwilling to take.19 The reliability of the soldier’s rifle in the most extreme cold was a non-negotiable priority that directly favored the proven performance of corrosive primers.

2.3 The Economics of Scale and Simplicity

The Soviet military was an enterprise of unprecedented scale, comprising a massive standing army and the forces of the entire Warsaw Pact. Arming this colossal force required the production of ammunition on a scale of billions of rounds per year. This reality placed a premium on cost-effectiveness and manufacturing simplicity.17

Corrosive primer compounds based on potassium chlorate were chemically simpler and therefore cheaper and easier to manufacture in bulk than the more complex non-corrosive formulas available at the time.21 The Soviets utilized the Berdan priming system, where the anvil is part of the cartridge case itself, which is highly efficient for mass production but difficult for individuals to reload.1 This choice was perfectly aligned with a military doctrine that did not envision reloading by individual soldiers.

This philosophy of prioritizing proven, economical, large-scale production was evident in other aspects of their ammunition design. The decision to standardize on steel-cased cartridges for rounds like the 7.62x39mm was driven by the lower cost of steel compared to brass and the ability to repurpose some of the industrial machinery already producing the 7.62x25mm Tokarev cartridge.22 This industrial inertia and focus on cost-effective mass production naturally extended to the primer, the heart of the cartridge. Changing the primer formulation would have required significant retooling and investment for a perceived benefit (reduced maintenance) that was seen as secondary to the primary requirements of cost, storage life, and all-weather reliability.

2.4 A Divergent Path: A Comparative Timeline of Primer Transition

The Soviet decision-making process is thrown into sharp relief when compared to the timelines of other major military powers. Each nation’s path was dictated by its own unique set of priorities, experiences, and industrial capabilities, demonstrating that the Soviet choice was not an anomaly but one of several rational, albeit different, solutions to the same technological challenge.

CountryKey Transition PeriodRepresentative Corrosive AmmoRepresentative Early Non-Corrosive AmmoStrategic Rationale & Notes
Soviet Union / Russia~1990s – Present7.62x54R, 7.62x39mm (M43), 5.45x39mm (7N6)5.45x39mm (7N10, 7N22, 7N24), Modern Commercial ExportsPriority: Extreme long-term storage stability and cold-weather performance. Transition driven by post-Cold War modernization, not replacement of existing stockpiles.17
United States1950 – 1956WWII-era.30-06 Springfield,.45 ACP.30 Carbine (from inception, WWII), Post-1952/54.30-06 &.45 ACP, 7.62mm NATOPriority: Reduce field maintenance burden. Transition was delayed until non-corrosive primer stability could meet military storage requirements.5
GermanyMixed use, WWI–WWIISome WWI/WWII era 7.92x57mm MauserMany WWI/WWII era 7.92x57mm MauserPriority: Early technological innovation. Patented a non-corrosive formula in 1928. Early versions suffered from short shelf life, leading to mixed use during wartime.6
United Kingdom~Early 1960s.303 British (Cordite loads).303 British MkVIIZ (NC loads), 7.62mm NATOPriority: Gradual transition aligned with shift from Cordite to Nitrocellulose propellants. Evidence suggests a later transition than the US.26

This comparative analysis reveals that there was no single “correct” time to transition. The United States, with its global logistics chain and less extreme climate concerns, prioritized reducing the maintenance burden on its soldiers once the technology was mature enough.5 Germany was a clear technological pioneer but faced early reliability challenges that forced a pragmatic, mixed approach.6 The Soviet Union, facing the unique demands of its geography and grand strategy, made a perfectly rational decision to prioritize absolute reliability and shelf-life over maintenance convenience, retaining a proven technology that perfectly suited its needs.

Section 3: A System of Mitigation: People, Processes, and Technology

The Soviet leadership and ordnance corps were not naive about the risks posed by their ammunition. They understood the chemistry of chlorate primers and the destructive potential of the resulting salt residue. Their decision to retain this ammunition was viable only because they simultaneously engineered and implemented a comprehensive, multi-layered system of mitigation. This system treated the firearm, the soldier, the cleaning tools, and the chemical solvents as a single, integrated whole, designed to systematically manage and neutralize the risk of corrosion. The corrosive primer was never intended to be used in a vacuum; it was one component of a complete and robust risk-management strategy.

3.1 The Soldier and the Manual (The Human Factor & Processes)

The first line of defense in the Soviet system was the soldier himself, forged by rigid discipline and unwavering doctrine. The official Soviet military manuals, known as the Наставление по стрелковому делу (Manual on Small Arms), were unequivocal. Weapon cleaning was not a suggestion to be followed when convenient; it was a mandatory, immediate-action drill.27

According to doctrine, a soldier’s rifle was to be cleaned immediately after any firing session. In a combat environment, this meant cleaning during any lull in the fighting.20 Even if a weapon was not fired, it was to be cleaned at least once a week.27 This relentless discipline was instilled in every conscript as a fundamental tenet of military life, on par with marksmanship itself. A clean, functional weapon was a prerequisite for survival, and the manuals provided a clear, step-by-step process: disassemble the weapon, thoroughly clean all parts exposed to propellant gases (barrel, chamber, gas piston, gas tube, bolt), lubricate, and reassemble.27

The Soviet manuals also contained instructions that demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the corrosion process, details often overlooked in Western analyses. One such instruction concerned bringing a weapon from a cold environment into a warm one. The manual specified that the weapon should be allowed to “sweat”—that is, to have condensation form on its cold metal surfaces—and then be cleaned before this condensation could evaporate.29 This procedure cleverly used the ambient moisture to begin the process of dissolving the hygroscopic salts, making them easier to remove.

Furthermore, some procedures described leaving the barrel “under alkali” for a period of two to four hours.29 This was intended to allow time for the occluded gases and salt residues trapped within the microscopic pores of the steel to leach out and be neutralized by the cleaning solution. This goes far beyond a simple surface wipe, indicating a deep appreciation for the pervasive nature of the corrosive salts and the need for a thorough chemical neutralization process.

3.2 The Solution in the Bottle (Chemical Technology)

The second layer of the mitigation system was chemical. Soviet soldiers were not merely issued “soap and water.” They were provided with a specifically formulated alkaline cleaning solution known as РЧС (RCHS), an acronym for Раствор для чистки стволов (Solution for Cleaning Barrels).27 This was a purpose-built chemical countermeasure.

The official composition of RCHS, to be mixed fresh for use within a 24-hour period, was 30:

  • Water (Вода): 1 liter. The universal solvent, essential for dissolving the primary corrosive agent, potassium chloride (KCl).
  • Ammonium Carbonate (Углекислый аммоний): 200 grams. This compound forms a weak alkaline solution that effectively neutralizes any acidic residues left by the combustion of the smokeless powder.
  • Potassium Dichromate (Двухромовокислый калий / хромпик): 3-5 grams. This is the most sophisticated component. Potassium dichromate is a powerful oxidizing agent that acts as a corrosion inhibitor. It works by passivating the surface of the steel, forming a microscopic, non-reactive oxide layer that provides temporary protection against rust after the salts have been washed away and before the final layer of oil is applied.

The RCHS solution was a far more advanced formulation than the simple water-based cleaners often assumed. It addressed the problem from multiple angles: dissolving the salt, neutralizing acidic powder fouling, and chemically protecting the bare steel. This debunks the common Western shooter’s myth that Windex with ammonia is an ideal cleaner for corrosive residue.11 While the water in Windex does the primary work of dissolving the salts, the small amount of ammonia does little to neutralize the stable KCl salt and primarily serves to speed evaporation.8 The Soviet RCHS was a true, multi-component chemical weapon cleaning solvent.

In the field, when RCHS was unavailable, soldiers were trained to use effective expedients. The most common and effective was hot water, which dissolves salts more quickly than cold water and evaporates faster, minimizing the time the metal is wet.8 In its absence, soapy water, solutions of wood ash (which is alkaline), or even saliva were understood to provide a weak alkaline wash that could help neutralize acidic residue and begin dissolving salts.35

3.3 The Tool for the Job (Mechanical Technology)

The third layer of the system was the provision of standardized, purpose-built tools. Every Soviet infantryman was issued a compact cleaning kit, known colloquially as the Пенал (“Pencil Case”), which was ingeniously stored in a compartment within the rifle’s buttstock.36 This ensured that the means to perform the mandatory cleaning ritual were always with the soldier and the weapon.

The standard kit for rifles like the AKM and AK-74 was a model of utilitarian design, containing all the essential tools 37:

  • Container/Handle: The cylindrical metal case itself featured holes and slots, allowing it to be used as a T-handle for the cleaning rod, providing better leverage.
  • Sectional Cleaning Rod: A multi-piece steel rod that was typically clipped onto the rifle’s barrel, ready for assembly and use.
  • Jag/Wiper (Протирка): A slotted tip that screwed onto the end of the rod, designed to securely hold a patch of cleaning cloth (ветошь) or a wad of tow (пакля).
  • Bore Brush (Ершик): A nylon bristle brush to scrub fouling from the bore and chamber.
  • Combination Tool: A brilliant piece of multi-purpose engineering, this flat tool served as a screwdriver, a wrench for the gas system, and a key for adjusting the elevation of the front sight post.
  • Punch (Выколотка): A simple pin punch used to drift out the various pins required for detailed disassembly of the rifle.

Complementing the Пенал was the iconic two-chambered metal oiler, the Масленка.38 This bottle was not a design quirk; it was a physical manifestation of the two-step cleaning doctrine. One compartment was filled with the alkaline RCHS solution for cleaning and neutralization, while the other held a neutral gun oil or grease for lubrication and final preservation.39 The soldier had everything required: the tools to disassemble, the chemicals to clean and neutralize, and the lubricant to protect.

3.4 The Armor Within (Firearms Technology)

The final, and arguably most critical, layer of the Soviet mitigation strategy was technological and built directly into the firearms themselves: hard chrome plating. From the World War II-era PPSh-41 submachine gun and well into the modern era, the vast majority of Soviet-designed military small arms—including the SKS carbine, the entire Kalashnikov family of rifles (AK-47, AKM, AK-74), the RPD and PK machine guns, and the SVD designated marksman rifle—featured barrels and gas system components that were hard chrome lined.41

This was not a cosmetic feature or a mere convenience. It was an essential engineering decision that made the long-term use of corrosive ammunition feasible. The process involves electrolytic deposition, where the barrel is placed in a galvanic bath and a thin, uniform layer of hard chromium is plated onto the interior surfaces of the bore, chamber, and often the gas piston.45

This layer of hard chrome acts as a suit of armor for the vulnerable steel underneath. Chromium is significantly harder, slicker, and more corrosion-resistant than the carbon steel of the barrel.44 It is also far less porous.45 This provides two crucial protective functions. First, it creates a robust physical barrier, preventing the hygroscopic salt particles and acidic propellant gases from making direct contact with the steel and initiating the electrochemical process of rust.45 Second, the extremely smooth, non-porous surface of the chrome makes cleaning far more effective and efficient. Fouling and salt residue have less to adhere to and are more easily swabbed out, ensuring that the mandatory cleaning process is successful.44

While it is true that the process of applying a plated layer can, in theory, slightly degrade the maximum potential accuracy of a high-precision match-grade barrel, this is an irrelevant concern for a standard-issue military service rifle.46 The immense gains in barrel life, resistance to erosion, and, most importantly, protection from corrosive ammunition far outweighed any marginal loss in theoretical precision. The chrome lining was the ultimate technological safeguard, the passive defense that underpinned the entire system and allowed the Soviet Union to confidently field a reliable weapons system based on corrosive-primed ammunition.

Section 4: The Legacy and the Modern Transition

The Soviet doctrine of producing and stockpiling vast quantities of corrosive-primed ammunition had profound and lasting consequences that extended far beyond the Cold War. The collapse of the Soviet Union created a legacy in the form of a global surplus market, while the evolution of the Russian military in the post-Soviet era has driven a fundamental shift away from the very doctrine that made corrosive ammunition the logical choice for so long.

4.1 The Enduring Stockpile: A Flood of Surplus

The dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the subsequent downsizing of former Soviet bloc armies in the 1990s unleashed a torrent of military surplus onto the international civilian firearms market. Central to this flood were the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of rounds of corrosive ammunition that had been sealed in their airtight “spam cans” and stored for decades in preparation for a war that never came.5

This surplus ammunition became immensely popular with civilian shooters in the West, particularly in the United States, for one primary reason: it was incredibly inexpensive.13 Shooters could purchase cases of 1,000 or more rounds for a fraction of the cost of newly manufactured commercial ammunition. This surplus is most commonly found in classic Soviet-era calibers, including 7.62x54R for the Mosin-Nagant rifle, 7.62x39mm (from sources like Yugoslavia, China, and Russia), and 5.45x39mm (primarily the Russian 7N6 variant).5

The availability of this cheap ammunition fueled the popularity of the corresponding surplus rifles, like the SKS and AK variants. However, it also created a new imperative for civilian owners: they had to learn and diligently apply the same cleaning regimen that was drilled into every Soviet conscript. Failure to do so would result in the rapid and destructive rusting of their firearms.10 This has led to the creation of a vast body of community knowledge—and misinformation—about proper cleaning techniques. While methods using hot water, water-based solvents, or oil-water emulsions like Ballistol are effective at dissolving the salts, myths such as using Windex to “neutralize” the corrosive residue persist, a testament to the enduring legacy of this ammunition in the civilian world.8

4.2 The Shift to Non-Corrosive in Modern Russia

The modern Russian Federation’s military is a different entity from its Soviet predecessor. The strategic emphasis has shifted from maintaining a massive, conscript-based force for a continental war to fielding a more professional, modern, and rapidly deployable army. This doctrinal shift has been accompanied by a corresponding evolution in ammunition technology.17

While Russia undoubtedly still possesses vast stockpiles of older corrosive ammunition, evidence strongly indicates that newly developed and manufactured military cartridges are non-corrosive. This transition appears to have begun in the early 1990s with the development of enhanced 5.45x39mm rounds. The 7N10 “Improved Penetration” variant, developed around 1991-1992, and subsequent armor-piercing versions like the 7N22 (“BP”) and 7N24 (“BS”) are widely understood to use modern, non-corrosive Berdan primers.17

The drivers for this change are multifaceted. First, primer chemistry has advanced significantly. Modern non-corrosive primer compounds can now meet or exceed the stringent military requirements for long-term storage stability and all-weather performance that previously gave corrosive primers the edge.17 Second, for a more professional military force, reducing the maintenance burden and the risk of equipment damage from neglect becomes a higher priority. Finally, the reduced need to supply the entire Warsaw Pact alliance has lessened the extreme cost pressures that favored the older, cheaper technology.17

This capability is further proven by the Russian commercial ammunition industry. Major manufacturers like the Tula Cartridge Works, Barnaul Cartridge Plant (brand names like Bear and Monarch), and Vympel (brand name Red Army Standard) have for years produced steel-cased, Berdan-primed ammunition for the lucrative Western export market that is explicitly and reliably non-corrosive.17 This confirms that the technology and manufacturing capability have long been in place; its application to military production was simply awaiting a shift in doctrinal priorities. The transition away from corrosive primers in new-production Russian military ammunition is not merely a technological update; it is a direct reflection of a fundamental evolution in Russia’s military strategy and posture in the post-Cold War world.

Section 5: Conclusion: A System, Not a Flaw

The enduring image of Soviet-era ammunition in the West has often been one of “cheap, dirty, and corrosive,” a stereotype that implies a technological and qualitative inferiority. This analysis, drawing upon technical specifications, historical context, and an understanding of Soviet military doctrine, demonstrates that this perception is a fundamental misinterpretation. The Soviet Union’s decades-long reliance on corrosive-primed ammunition was not a technological deficiency, an economic necessity born of desperation, or a careless oversight. It was a deliberate, pragmatic, and highly successful engineering choice that was part of a holistic and intelligently designed system.

The core thesis of this report is that the corrosive primer was merely one component in a fully integrated, multi-layered risk mitigation strategy. Its selection was viable only because of the simultaneous and mandatory implementation of the other elements of the system.

  1. Passive Defense (Technology): The near-universal application of hard chrome lining in the bores, chambers, and gas systems of their small arms provided a robust, permanent barrier against corrosive attack.
  2. Active Defense (Chemistry): The standard-issue RCHS alkaline cleaning solution was a chemically sophisticated countermeasure, specifically formulated to dissolve the harmful salt residue, neutralize acidic fouling, and passivate the steel surface.
  3. Human Factor (Discipline): The rigid, uncompromising training of the Soviet soldier ensured that the correct cleaning procedures were applied immediately and thoroughly, providing the final, crucial layer of defense.

To analyze the primer in isolation from the chrome-lined barrel, the specialized cleaning solution, and the soldier’s doctrinal manual is to miss the point entirely. The Soviets did not simply accept corrosion; they actively managed it through a defense-in-depth approach. They made a calculated trade-off, prioritizing the absolute certainty of ammunition performance after decades of storage and in the most extreme climates over the convenience of reduced field maintenance. For their specific strategic context—preparing for a massive, prolonged, all-weather war across the Eurasian landmass—this was not just a logical choice, but arguably the optimal one.

The legacy of this decision is still felt today in the millions of rounds of surplus ammunition enjoyed by civilian shooters, who must replicate a portion of the Soviet cleaning doctrine to protect their firearms. The modern Russian military’s transition to non-corrosive ammunition for its newer cartridges does not invalidate the old system; rather, it reflects a shift in that same strategic context. By leveraging both English and Russian-language technical and historical sources, this report has aimed to replace the myth of “commie ammo” with an evidence-based appreciation for a pragmatic and effective engineering and logistical solution. The Soviet system worked as intended for over half a century, arming one of the largest military forces in history and proving that, within its intended context, it was a system, not a flaw.


If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


Works cited

  1. Berdan vs Boxer Primer: A History of the Modern Primer -, accessed July 29, 2025, https://gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/berdan-vs-boxer-primer-a-history-of-the-modern-primer/
  2. Origin of A Primer Ballistic | PDF | Technology & Engineering – Scribd, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/322943425/Origin-of-a-primer-Ballistic-docx
  3. A Bit Of History On Primers – Tactical Ordnance – TACTICOR LLC, accessed July 29, 2025, https://tacticor.com/blog/a-bit-of-history-on-primers/
  4. Primers – A Quick Study – Top Brass Reloading Supplies, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.topbrass-inc.com/blogs/news/primers-a-quick-study
  5. Corrosive Ammunition: Don’t Ruin a Good Gun – The Shooter’s Log, accessed July 29, 2025, https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/corrosive-ammunition-dont-ruin-good-gun/
  6. Corrosive Ammo – Milsurps, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=54129
  7. Corrosive Mil-surplus ammo and Mercury – Milsurps, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=45477
  8. Corrosive Ammunition Guide (Learn About Pros and Cons), accessed July 29, 2025, https://ammo.com/primer-type/corrosive-ammo
  9. Corrosive Ammo Explained – Calibre Magazine, accessed July 29, 2025, https://calibremag.ca/corrosive-ammunition-what-it-is-how-to-spot-it-how-to-clean-it-and-what-to-expect-if-you-dont/
  10. What Are Corrosive Ammo Primers? – SSP Firearms, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.sspfirearms.com/2023/12/08/what-are-corrosive-ammo-primers/
  11. Shooting Corrosive Ammo? Learn How to Protect Your Guns – Accurate Shooter Bulletin, accessed July 29, 2025, https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2024/10/shooting-corrosive-ammo-learn-how-to-protect-your-guns/
  12. How or where can I tell if a certain ammunition is corrosive? – Quora, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.quora.com/How-or-where-can-I-tell-if-a-certain-ammunition-is-corrosive
  13. How to Clean Corrosive Ammo – Pew Pew Tactical, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.pewpewtactical.com/clean-corrosive-ammunition/
  14. Tech Tip: Corrosive Ammo – YouTube, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqwdtBVFs-o
  15. All About Corrosive Ammunition – The Shooter’s Log, accessed July 29, 2025, https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/corrosive-ammunition/
  16. Corrosive ammo : r/SKS – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/SKS/comments/18opnzx/corrosive_ammo/
  17. Russian military still using newly made corrosive ammo? – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ammo/comments/8i2erm/russian_military_still_using_newly_made_corrosive/
  18. When did they stop making corrosive ammo? – Quora, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.quora.com/When-did-they-stop-making-corrosive-ammo
  19. What was the purpose of making corrosive ammo? : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/2kn23u/what_was_the_purpose_of_making_corrosive_ammo/
  20. Corrosive Ammo: Why? : r/milsurp – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/milsurp/comments/u1um73/corrosive_ammo_why/
  21. Corrosive/Non-Corrosive Ammunition | USCCA, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/terminology/decoding%20ammunition%20boxes/corrosive-non-corrosive/
  22. 7.62×39mm – Wikipedia, accessed July 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9739mm
  23. Why do some gun ranges forbid the use of Russian ammo? – The Gun Club, accessed July 29, 2025, https://thegunclub.quora.com/Why-do-some-gun-ranges-forbid-the-use-of-Russian-ammo
  24. U.S. GI Non-Corrosive Primers, accessed July 29, 2025, http://www.odcmp.org/1101/usgi.pdf
  25. Primer Composition and Gunshot Residue – Office of Justice Programs, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/primer-composition-and-gunshot-residue
  26. .303 Corrosive/Non-Corrosive Database? – Milsurps, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=77765
  27. Чистка и смазка автомата, задержки при стрельбе, accessed July 29, 2025, https://bezpekavip.com/chistka-i-smazka-avtomata-zaderzhki-pri-strelbe
  28. Чистка АК-74М. Начальная военная подготовка. – YouTube, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz3_Zmt8mnA
  29. Техническое обслуживание стволов стрелкового оружия Текст научной статьи по специальности «Науки об образовании – КиберЛенинка, accessed July 29, 2025, https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/tehnicheskoe-obsluzhivanie-stvolov-strelkovogo-oruzhiya
  30. Раствор чистки стволов (РЧС, ТРЧС). Наша компания выпускает ряд средств для чистки оружия. Это средства для.. 2025 | ВКонтакте, accessed July 29, 2025, https://vk.com/wall-72413978_696
  31. Как ухаживать за оружием: правильная чистка Оружие чистят так …, accessed July 29, 2025, https://vk.com/wall-36540424_18244
  32. A Case for Corrosive Ammo | An Official Journal Of The NRA – Shooting Illustrated, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.shootingillustrated.com/content/a-case-for-corrosive-ammo/
  33. Ammonia & Corrosive Ammo. : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/2hjg0n/ammonia_corrosive_ammo/
  34. What’s the deal with corrosive primers in ammo, and why do they make immediate cleaning so important? – Quora, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-s-the-deal-with-corrosive-primers-in-ammo-and-why-do-they-make-immediate-cleaning-so-important
  35. Правильная чистка оружия – методы, средства, правила – Guns.Club, accessed July 29, 2025, https://guns.club/lib/oruzhie/chistka-ognestrelnogo-oruzhiya/
  36. Чистка карабина Тигр и винтовки СВД с помощью штатной принадлежности, accessed July 29, 2025, https://zastava-izhevsk.ru/3/ispolzovanie-shtatnoy-prinadlezhnosti-dlya-obsluzhivaniya-tigra/
  37. Набор для чистки АК 47, калибр.7.62 в пенале: продажа, цена в …, accessed July 29, 2025, https://sportmarathon.com.ua/p984081101-nabor-dlya-chistki.html
  38. Масленка для ухода за оружием однокамерная (СССР, армейская). – Pnevmat.by, accessed July 29, 2025, https://pnevmat.by/p61019546-maslenka-dlya-uhoda.html
  39. Масленка оружейная купить на OZON по низкой цене, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.ozon.ru/category/maslenka-oruzheynaya/
  40. Нейтральное и щелочное масло – НПФ АКСИОМА – Средства по уходу за оружием, accessed July 29, 2025, https://npfaxioma.ru/page/neytralnoe_i_schelochnoe_maslo.html
  41. RPD machine gun – Wikipedia, accessed July 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPD_machine_gun
  42. Soviet Weapons in World War II | RANGER PRAGUE, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.pragueranger.cz/blog/Soviet-weapons-in-world-war2/
  43. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed July 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
  44. What’s the deal with chrome-lining and chrome-plating? – GunTweaks.com, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.guntweaks.com/whats-the-deal-with-chrome-lining-and-chrome-plating.html
  45. Хромирование ствола – что это и зачем нужно | библиотека …, accessed July 29, 2025, https://guns.club/lib/oruzhie/khromirovanie-stvola-chto-eto-i-zachem-nuzhno/
  46. CHROME LINED BARRELS – TargetTalk, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?t=59196
  47. Behind The Shine Of Chrome-Lined Barrels – Gun Digest, accessed July 29, 2025, https://gundigest.com/rifles/chrome-lined-barrels
  48. About Red Army Standard | True Shot Ammo, accessed July 29, 2025, https://trueshotammo.com/academy/about-red-army-standard/
  49. Corrosive Ammo vs. Non-Corrosive Ammo: Understanding the Difference | True Shot Ammo, accessed July 29, 2025, https://trueshotammo.com/academy/corrosive-ammo-vs-non-corrosive-ammo-understanding-the-difference/
  50. RUSSIAN SURPLUS 5.45x39mm 7N6 FMJ STEEL CORE 100rd BAG, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.308ammo.com/RUSSIAN-SURPLUS-5-45x39mm-7N6-FMJ-STEEL-CORE-p/7n6loose.htm
  51. Corrosive Ammo – YouTube, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo2cFiyobY8
  52. 5.45×39mm – Wikipedia, accessed July 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.45%C3%9739mm
  53. What is the shell of 7N6M and 7N10 5.45×39 cartridges made of?? : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/jt5wgi/what_is_the_shell_of_7n6m_and_7n10_545x39/
  54. Decided to do a little digging on all the different types of 7n ammo out there. : r/EscapefromTarkov – Reddit, accessed July 29, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/EscapefromTarkov/comments/fd9yzr/decided_to_do_a_little_digging_on_all_the/

Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanny: An Engineering and Historical Analysis of the Iconic AKM Ri

The conclusion of the Second World War left the Soviet Union as a victorious global superpower, but its military doctrine and infantry armament were at a critical crossroads. The brutal fighting on the Eastern Front had provided a wealth of hard-won experience, revealing both the strengths and weaknesses of the Red Army’s equipment. While massed infantry assaults, heavily supported by submachine guns like the PPSh-41, had proven tactically effective in close-quarters combat, the pistol-caliber weapon was severely limited in range and lethality beyond 100-200 meters.1 At the other end of the spectrum, the venerable Mosin-Nagant bolt-action rifle, chambered in the powerful 7.62x54mm Rimmed cartridge, offered excellent range and power but was slow-firing and ill-suited for the fluid, high-volume firefights that had come to define modern infantry combat. A significant gap existed between the submachine gun and the full-power battle rifle.

This doctrinal gap was brought into sharp focus by the German introduction of the Sturmgewehr 44 (StG 44). Widely considered the world’s first true assault rifle, the StG 44 combined a detachable 30-round magazine and selective-fire capability with an intermediate cartridge, the 7.92x33mm Kurz. This weapon provided the German soldier with a controllable volume of fire far exceeding that of a bolt-action rifle, while offering significantly more range and power than a submachine gun.2 For Soviet planners, the StG 44 was a powerful proof-of-concept that validated a path they were already exploring.

Indeed, the development of a Soviet intermediate cartridge was not purely a reaction to German efforts. As early as 1943, Soviet ordnance engineers N.M. Elizarov and B.V. Semin had developed the 7.62x41mm cartridge, which would soon be refined into the now-famous 7.62x39mm M43 round.4 This new cartridge was the foundational element upon which an entire generation of post-war Soviet weapons would be built, including the SKS carbine and, most importantly, the new automatic rifle designed by a young, wounded tank sergeant named Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov.4

Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov is reporting to the officers of the inventions department of the Main Artillery Directorate of the Ministry of Armed Forces of the USSR about the new layout of the assault rifle. 1949. Image Source: Mil.ru via Wikimedia

Kalashnikov’s design philosophy, forged in the crucible of war and aligned with the overarching principles of Soviet military doctrine, was one of uncompromising pragmatism. The new rifle had to be simple enough to be manufactured, maintained, and operated by a vast army of conscripts with minimal training. It needed to be legendarily reliable, capable of functioning in the arctic cold of Siberia, the dust of Central Asia, and the mud of Eastern Europe.3 Above all, it had to be suitable for cheap and rapid mass production in the millions to equip not only the Red Army but also the armies of the newly formed Warsaw Pact.8

The post-war Soviet industrial base was a colossus, having produced staggering quantities of tanks, artillery, and aircraft during the conflict.1 This industrial might, however, was heavily geared towards traditional, brute-force manufacturing techniques like the heavy forging and milling of large steel components. It was less developed in more nuanced, high-precision technologies like the advanced sheet metal stamping required for modern, lightweight firearm construction.10 While the Lend-Lease program had introduced more sophisticated Western machine tools and processes, mastering these on a mass scale would prove to be a formidable challenge.12 This technological disparity between ambition and capability would define the early, troubled history of the Kalashnikov rifle and set the stage for the eventual development of its most refined and iconic form: the AKM.

II. The Original Vision and a Costly Setback: The AK-47 Type 1 Stamped Receiver

Mikhail Kalashnikov’s original design concept, which won the 1947 assault rifle trials, was not the heavy, milled weapon that many associate with the early “AK-47.” His vision, embodied in the prototypes (AK-46) and the initial production model, the AK-47 Type 1, was for a lightweight, modern rifle built around a receiver pressed from sheet steel.4 This approach was heavily influenced by the manufacturing efficiencies observed in wartime designs like the German MP 40 submachine gun and the Soviets’ own PPSh-41, both of which made extensive use of stampings to reduce cost, speed up production, and minimize weight.14 The goal from the very beginning was to create a weapon for the masses, and stamping was the key to achieving that goal.

Production was officially ordered and assigned to Plant #74, the Izhevsk Machine-Building Plant, which would later become the famed Izhmash and eventually the Kalashnikov Concern.19 Despite its long history of arms manufacture dating back to the Napoleonic era, the plant’s existing machinery and the skill set of its workforce were not immediately suited to the unique challenges of the new rifle.19

The critical point of failure in the Type 1’s production was not the stamping of the main U-shaped receiver shell itself, a process the Soviets had some experience with. The insurmountable difficulty lay in the subsequent, high-precision assembly operations—specifically, the welding of the internal bolt guide rails and the ejector spur to the thin receiver walls.6 These components are critical to the rifle’s function, guiding the bolt carrier’s movement and ensuring reliable ejection of spent casings. The process required extremely precise jigs to hold the parts in alignment and sophisticated welding and heat-treatment protocols to secure them without warping or weakening the thin receiver shell.

The state of Soviet sheet metal stamping and welding technology in the late 1940s was simply not mature enough to perform these delicate operations with the consistency required for mass production.11 The result was a disastrously high rejection rate, with a large percentage of receivers failing quality control inspections due to warping, improper alignment of the rails, or structural failure during test firing.4 This was not just a minor hiccup; it was a fundamental failure of the production concept, demonstrating a critical gap between the ambition of Kalashnikov’s design and the practical capabilities of the Soviet arms industry at that moment. The original vision of a lightweight, stamped rifle had to be abandoned, forcing a major and strategically undesirable redesign that would set the program back for years.

III. The Type 2 and Type 3 AK-47s Were Milled

Faced with a production crisis that threatened to leave the Red Army without its new standard-issue rifle, Soviet engineers, with Kalashnikov’s guidance, made a pragmatic but strategically backward decision. They abandoned the troubled stamped receiver and reverted to a manufacturing process they had mastered over decades of producing weapons like the Mosin-Nagant rifle: milling the receiver from a solid block of steel.4 This was a costly retreat from a technological standpoint, but it was a necessary one. It leveraged the vast existing infrastructure of milling machines and the deep well of expertise in metal-cutting within the Soviet arsenal system, allowing production to accelerate almost immediately.10

This decision gave birth to the first milled-receiver Kalashnikov, the AK-47 Type 2, which entered production in 1951. Machined from a heavy steel forging, the Type 2 receiver was immensely strong and robust, a stark contrast to the failed Type 1.4 The milling process inherently solved the previous manufacturing problems by integrating the critical guide rails and trunnion features directly into the receiver body, eliminating the need for complex welding and alignment.24 The Type 2 is easily distinguished by its slab-sided appearance, with straight, parallel lightening cuts milled into the sides to remove some excess weight, and a unique “boot” style socket for attaching the wooden buttstock.23

Even as the Type 2 was being produced, work continued to refine and streamline the costly milling process. This led to the introduction of the AK-47 Type 3 in 1954, which would become the most common and “classic” version of the milled-receiver AK-47.4 The Type 3 was machined from steel bar stock rather than a forging, which simplified the initial stages of production.10 It was marginally lighter than the Type 2 and featured a more secure and simplified stock attachment method using two tangs that extended from the rear of the receiver, a design that would carry over to the later AKM.23 The lightening cuts on the Type 3 were also reshaped, appearing as large, angled scallops that paralleled the bottom edge of the receiver, a key visual differentiator from the Type 2.23

While the milled receiver approach successfully solved the production impasse, it came at a tremendous cost that ran directly counter to the original design philosophy. The process was incredibly labor-intensive, requiring over 120 separate machining operations to turn a block of steel into a finished receiver.23 It was slow, wasted a significant amount of material, and was far more expensive than stamping.23 Most critically for the soldier, it resulted in a heavy rifle. A fully loaded Type 3 AK-47 tipped the scales at over 4.3 kg (9.5 lbs), with the empty rifle itself weighing 3.47 kg—a full kilogram (2.2 lbs) heavier than the later AKM.6 This entire period, from 1951 to 1959, can be seen as a necessary but undesirable detour, a stopgap measure to arm the military while engineers worked tirelessly in the background to finally perfect the stamping technology that would fulfill Kalashnikov’s original vision.

Table 1: Evolution of the Soviet 7.62x39mm Rifle Receiver (1949-1959)

Receiver TypeProduction YearsManufacturing MethodKey Identifying FeaturesRifle Weight (Empty)Primary AdvantagePrimary Disadvantage
Type 11949–1951Stamped 1.3mm Sheet SteelFolded sheet metal body, dimple for selector switch, separate trunnions 10~2.9 kg (6.4 lb)Lightweight, low theoretical costHigh rejection rates, technologically immature 10
Type 21951–1954Milled from ForgingSolid steel body, straight lightening cuts, “boot” stock socket 23~3.8 kg (8.4 lb)Producible with existing technology, robustHeavy, expensive, slow to manufacture 4
Type 31954–1959Milled from Bar StockSolid steel body, angled lightening cuts, two-tang stock mount 43.47 kg (7.7 lb)More efficient to mill than Type 2Still heavy, expensive, and slow to produce 6
AKM (Type 4)1959–PresentStamped 1.0mm Sheet SteelRibbed top cover, magazine well dimples, rivets 173.1 kg (6.8 lb)Lightweight, cheap, ideal for mass productionRequires advanced stamping/welding technology 4

IV. The Modernizirovanny Program: Fulfilling the Promise of Mass Production

By the late 1950s, nearly a decade of focused effort had borne fruit. Soviet industry, particularly at the Izhmash arsenal, had finally mastered the complex technologies of deep-drawing steel, precision spot-welding, and consistent heat treatment of thin-walled components.4 The technological gap that had forced the adoption of heavy milled receivers had been closed. This breakthrough paved the way for a comprehensive redesign of the Kalashnikov rifle, officially introduced in 1959 as the

Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanny—the Modernized Kalashnikov Automatic Rifle, or AKM.4

The AKM program was not merely an incremental update; it was a fundamental “reboot” of the entire production philosophy, explicitly intended to rectify the strategic compromises of the milled-receiver era and realize the weapon’s full potential.8 The primary mandates from the Soviet military leadership were clear and ambitious:

  1. Drastic Weight Reduction: The chief complaint against the Type 3 AK-47 was its weight. The AKM program’s primary objective was to create a significantly lighter weapon to reduce the burden on the individual soldier and improve mobility. By returning to the stamped receiver concept and lightening other components, the AKM achieved a remarkable empty weight of approximately 3.1 kg (6.8 lbs), shedding nearly a full kilogram (over 2 lbs) compared to its milled predecessor.4
  2. Simplified Manufacturing and Reduced Cost: The cornerstone of the modernization effort was the return to a stamped sheet metal receiver. This single change dramatically cut down on machine time, skilled labor requirements, material waste, and overall production cost. It transformed the rifle from a relatively complex machined object into a product that could be truly mass-produced on a scale previously unimaginable, allowing the Soviet Union to affordably arm its own vast forces and those of its many Warsaw Pact and client states.3
  3. Improved Controllability and Enhanced Features: While making the rifle lighter and cheaper, the design team was also tasked with making it a more effective fighting tool. This involved introducing new features to improve its handling and controllability, particularly during full-automatic fire, which would have been exacerbated by the reduced weight.8

The result of this program was so successful that the AKM, not the original milled AK-47, became the definitive version of the rifle. It is the AKM and its direct derivatives that were produced in the greatest numbers and proliferated across the globe, forever cementing the Kalashnikov’s visual and functional identity.25 For the vast majority of users and observers worldwide, the rifle they know colloquially as the “AK-47” is, in fact, an AKM. It represents the successful culmination of a decade of trial and error, a weapon where the original design intent was finally and fully matched by industrial capability.

V. The Heart of the AKM: A Deep Dive into the Stamped Steel Receiver

The single most defining feature of the AKM is its receiver. It stands as an excellent example of the Kalashnikov design team’s pragmatic engineering, achieving the necessary strength and durability through intelligent design and geometry rather than sheer mass. This component is the key to the rifle’s light weight and suitability for mass production.

A. From Steel Sheet to Rifle Body: The Stamping Process Perfected

The journey of an AKM receiver begins not as a solid block of steel, but as a flat blank of 1.0mm (0.04 inch) thick carbon steel sheet.24 This blank is fed into a series of massive industrial stamping presses. In a few powerful, high-speed operations, a set of precisely shaped dies cuts, bends, and forms the flat sheet into the iconic U-shape of the receiver body.14 This method is orders of magnitude faster and more efficient in its use of material than the subtractive process of milling, which laboriously carves away metal from a solid billet.18

The true breakthrough that enabled the AKM was the perfection of the post-stamping processes. After being formed, the receivers undergo a carefully controlled heat-treatment cycle. This crucial step hardens the steel, giving the thin-walled structure the strength and resilience needed to withstand the rigors of combat and the stresses of firing thousands of rounds. Achieving this without causing the receiver to warp or become brittle was the primary hurdle that had doomed the Type 1 a decade earlier.18 By 1959, Soviet metallurgists and engineers had developed the quality controls and repeatable processes necessary to make it a success.

B. Engineering Strength into Simplicity: Reinforcing Ribs and Geometry

A simple, thin-walled steel box would be unacceptably flexible and prone to damage. To overcome this without adding significant weight, Soviet designers ingeniously pressed a series of strengthening features directly into the receiver and its associated parts.

  • Magazine Well Dimples: On each side of the receiver, just above the magazine well, are two prominent, pressed-in dimples. These serve a critical dual function. Structurally, they act as reinforcing ribs, significantly increasing the lateral rigidity of the receiver in its widest, most open section. Functionally, they provide a precise, non-slip guide surface for the magazine, preventing the excessive side-to-side “magazine wobble” that can plague stamped receiver designs and lead to feeding issues.17
  • Receiver Cover Ribs: The top dust cover of the AKM, also made from thin stamped steel, is distinguished from the smooth cover of the milled AK-47 by a series of prominent reinforcing ribs pressed into its surface. Both longitudinal and latitudinal ribs are used to give the cover the strength to resist dents, bending, and damage in the field, all while using a thinner gauge of steel than its predecessor.17
  • Internal Cross-Section Support: Less visible but equally important, the receiver housing is internally reinforced with a rigid, tubular cross-section support. This piece, fastened inside via a rivet, adds significant torsional strength to the entire stamped assembly, preventing it from twisting under stress.27

C. The Welded Core: Guide Rails and the Ejector

This was the Achilles’ heel of the Type 1. For the AKM, Izhmash developed robust jigs, fixtures, and spot-welding techniques that allowed for the reliable and repeatable installation of the rifle’s internal action components. The two guide rails, upon which the heavy bolt carrier assembly reciprocates, are precisely positioned and then permanently affixed to the inner walls of the receiver shell using a series of strong spot welds.27 The ejector, a small but absolutely essential spur that impacts the base of the spent cartridge to kick it out of the action, is integrated as a solid part of the left-side guide rail assembly.27 The ability to execute these welds with precision on a mass scale was the final technological key that unlocked the potential of the stamped receiver design.

VI. The Bedrock of the System: The Design and Manufacture of AKM Trunnions

The genius of the AKM’s stamped receiver lies not just in what it is, but in what it is not. The thin steel shell is merely a housing; it is not designed to directly contain the immense pressures generated by the firing of a cartridge. That critical task falls to two small, strong blocks of forged steel known as “trunnions”.

A. Why the Trunnions are Critical

The trunnions are the high-stress, load-bearing core of the weapon, around which the rest of the rifle is built.32 This design represents a brilliant engineering compromise, separating the rifle’s structure into a low-stress housing (the receiver) and a high-stress core (the trunnions). This allowed designers to use cheap, lightweight manufacturing for the bulk of the rifle while concentrating high-strength materials and processes only where absolutely necessary.

  • The Front Trunnion: Sometimes called the “heart and soul” of the Kalashnikov, this is the single most critical component in the rifle.34 It is a precisely machined block of steel that performs three non-negotiable functions. First, it provides the socket into which the barrel is pressed and secured with a transverse pin.27 Second, and most importantly, it contains the helical locking recesses. The two lugs on the rotating bolt lock into these recesses upon chambering a round, creating a secure breech that safely contains the 45,000+ PSI of pressure generated during firing.32 Third, it serves as the forward anchor for the entire assembly, riveted securely into the front of the stamped receiver shell to provide a solid foundation for the barrel and action.32 For a post with more details about the front trunnion, click here.
  • The Rear Trunnion: This second block of steel is riveted into the rear of the receiver. Its primary role is to provide a robust and solid mounting point for the buttstock, transferring the force of recoil into the shooter’s shoulder.14 It also serves as the rear stopping point for the reciprocating bolt carrier and the anchor for the recoil spring guide rod. For folding stock variants like the AKMS, a specially designed rear trunnion incorporates the entire folding mechanism.36 For a post with more details about the rear trunnion, click here.

B. From Fire and Force: The Die-Forging and Machining Process

Given their role in containing explosive forces, trunnions for a military rifle cannot be made from simple bar stock or, most critically, from cast steel, which is brittle and prone to catastrophic failure under pressure.32 At the state arsenals of Izhmash and Molot, a robust two-step manufacturing process was employed to ensure maximum strength and durability.34

  1. Step 1: Die Forging: The process begins with a blank of high-grade ordnance steel. The blank is heated to a plastic state and placed into a die that has the negative impression of the trunnion’s shape. A massive mechanical or hydraulic hammer press then strikes the blank with immense force, causing the hot metal to flow and conform to the shape of the die.34 This is not simply a shaping process; it fundamentally improves the metal’s properties. The forging process aligns the internal grain structure of the steel to follow the contours of the part. This creates a continuous grain flow that makes the finished component vastly stronger and more resistant to shock and fracture than a part machined from a billet (which has a unidirectional grain) or a cast part (which has a random, crystalline grain structure).37
  2. Step 2: Finish Machining: The rough-forged trunnion blank, with its superior internal structure, is then transferred to milling machines. Here, skilled machinists perform the final, high-precision machining operations. Critical surfaces such as the bolt locking lugs, the barrel bore, rivet holes, and guide rail contact points are machined to exact tolerances to ensure proper headspacing, smooth action cycling, and a secure fit within the receiver.34

This hybrid manufacturing approach—forging for strength followed by machining for precision—ensured that the heart of the AKM was functionally indestructible, providing a safe and solid foundation for the more economically produced stamped components around it.

VII. The Deliberate Choice of Rivet Assembly

In an age of advancing manufacturing, the use of simple rivets to assemble a modern assault rifle might seem archaic. Yet, for the specific design philosophy and production environment of the AKM, rivets were not a compromise but the optimal engineering choice for joining the trunnions to the stamped receiver shell.

The alternatives were fundamentally flawed when viewed through the Soviet lens of mass production. Screws, while simple to install with minimal tooling, are unsuitable for a military firearm as the intense vibration of sustained automatic fire can cause them to loosen over time, leading to a catastrophic failure of the action.38 Welding the trunnions directly to the receiver, a method used successfully on German H&K rifles, is a viable high-strength solution. However, it is a more complex, time-consuming process that requires more highly skilled labor and specialized equipment, which would slow down production rates and complicate depot-level repairs.38

Rivets, by contrast, offered a perfect synthesis of the required attributes 38:

  1. Permanence and Strength: When properly set using a hydraulic press, rivets form a permanent, high-strength mechanical bond. They are exceptionally strong in shear, which is the primary force they must resist as they hold the trunnions in place against the recoil of the bolt carrier and the torque of the rotating bolt.33
  2. Speed and Simplicity: In a factory setting equipped with the proper jigs and presses, riveting is an incredibly fast and straightforward operation. It requires less skilled labor than precision welding and can be performed in seconds, making it ideal for an assembly line producing thousands of rifles per day.38
  3. Low Cost: Rivets are among the cheapest possible fasteners to manufacture, perfectly aligning with the goal of minimizing the cost of each rifle.
  4. Inherent Flexibility: The softer steel used for AK rivets allows for a microscopic degree of flex within the assembled receiver during the violent cycling of the action. This elasticity allows the entire structure to absorb the torque of the bolt’s rotation and the shock of the carrier’s impact without concentrating stress at a single point, which could lead to fracture. This inherent “give” in the system is a contributing factor to the Kalashnikov’s legendary ability to function reliably even when fouled with dirt, mud, or carbon, as it prevents parts from binding rigidly.18

The selection of rivets was therefore not a sign of low technology, but rather a deliberate and intelligent choice that perfectly complemented the overall design. It was a low-tech solution that provided a high-performance result within the specific context of the AKM’s materials and manufacturing doctrine. For more details on the engineering of the rivets, click here.

VIII. Further Refinements of the AKM Platform

The transition to a stamped receiver was the centerpiece of the modernization program, but it was accompanied by a suite of other significant improvements. These were not isolated changes but part of a holistic engineering effort to create a lighter, more controllable, and more durable weapon system. Each refinement addressed a specific need, often one created by the primary change in weight and construction.

Table 2: Key Modernization Features of the AKM vs. the Type 3 AK-47

FeatureType 3 AK-47AKM (Type 4)Purpose of Change
ReceiverMilled from solid steelStamped from 1.0mm sheet steelWeight reduction, cost savings, ease of mass production 27
Weight (Empty)3.47 kg (7.7 lb)3.1 kg (6.8 lb)Reduce soldier load, improve mobility 6
Muzzle DeviceSimple threaded muzzle nutSlant-cut compensatorImprove controllability in automatic fire by countering muzzle rise 8
Fire Control GroupStandard trigger, disconnector, auto-searAdded hammer retarder/rate reducerEnhance safety by preventing bolt bounce; secondary effect of rate reduction 27
FurnitureSolid wood (stock, pistol grip, handguards)Laminated plywood, Bakelite grip (later)Increased durability, resistance to warping, reduced cost 23
Bolt/CarrierHeavy, smooth-sided carrierLightened carrier with milled cut, fluted bolt stemWeight reduction 27
Recoil SpringTelescoping guide rodDual U-shaped wire guideSimplification of manufacturing, weight reduction 27

A. Taming the Beast: The Slant Compensator

One of the most visually distinctive features of the AKM is its iconic slant-cut muzzle device.27 While often called a “muzzle brake,” it is technically a compensator, as its primary function is to counteract muzzle climb rather than to reduce the linear recoil impulse.42

The lighter weight of the AKM would naturally make it more difficult to control during full-automatic fire compared to its heavier milled predecessor. The slant compensator was the elegant solution to this problem. It is designed with a single, angled face that redirects a portion of the high-pressure propellant gases escaping the muzzle. The angle is specifically calculated to vent these gases primarily upward and to the right. This creates a downward and leftward thrust at the muzzle, which directly counteracts the natural tendency of the rifle to pivot up and to the right (for a right-handed shooter) under recoil.8 This simple piece of steel significantly mitigates muzzle rise, allowing the soldier to keep more shots on target during an automatic burst. The compensator attaches to the standard 14x1mm left-hand threads on the muzzle and is locked in the correct orientation by a spring-loaded detent pin housed in the front sight block.43 To learn more about the slant compensator, click here.

B. Ensuring Reliability: The Function of the Hammer Retarder

The introduction of the hammer retarder is one of the most critical but frequently misunderstood upgrades in the AKM. Often referred to simply as a “rate reducer,” its primary purpose is far more important: it is a safety device designed to prevent a dangerous condition known as “bolt bounce”.27

The new, lighter bolt carrier and more flexible stamped receiver of the AKM had less inertia and mass than the heavy components of the milled AK-47. This created a potential problem where the bolt carrier could slam forward into battery with such force that it would “bounce” slightly back off the trunnion, unlocking the bolt for a few milliseconds before the recoil spring reseated it.40 If the auto-sear were to release the hammer during this momentary bounce, the rifle could fire with the bolt not fully locked—an “out-of-battery detonation” that could cause a catastrophic failure, destroying the weapon and severely injuring the shooter.

The hammer retarder solves this problem with mechanical simplicity. It is a small, spring-loaded, L-shaped hook that shares an axis pin with the trigger and disconnector. During full-automatic fire, as the hammer is released by the auto-sear and begins to fall, a small protrusion on the hammer catches on the retarder’s hook. This action momentarily delays the hammer’s fall by a few critical milliseconds. This tiny delay is just long enough to ensure that the bolt carrier has fully settled into its locked position in the front trunnion, eliminating the possibility of an out-of-battery firing.40 As a secondary benefit, this slight delay in the firing sequence reduces the overall cyclic rate of fire from around 650-700 rounds per minute to a more controllable 600 RPM, which helps conserve ammunition and reduces the dispersion of shots in a burst.8

C. Strength in Layers: The Adoption of Laminated Wood Furniture

The final major upgrade of the AKM was the switch from solid wood furniture to components made from laminated birch plywood.23 This change applied to the buttstock, upper handguard, and lower handguard, and while seemingly cosmetic, it offered significant practical and logistical advantages.

Laminated wood, or plywood, is an engineered material created by gluing multiple thin layers (laminates) of wood veneer together. The key to its strength is that the grain of each successive layer is oriented at an angle to the previous one.47 This cross-grained construction makes the final product vastly more stable and resistant to the environmental stresses that can plague solid wood. It is far less likely to warp, crack, swell, or shrink when exposed to the extreme changes in temperature and humidity a military rifle might encounter in global service, from the frozen steppes to a humid jungle.47

From a production standpoint, lamination was also superior. It allowed the use of lower-grade wood veneers that would be unsuitable for a solid stock, and it eliminated the need for the lengthy and costly process of curing and stabilizing large blocks of solid wood.27 The AKM’s laminated buttstock was also designed to be longer and straighter than the AK-47’s to improve the shooter’s cheek weld and was hollowed out to store the standard cleaning kit and to further reduce the rifle’s overall weight.23

IX. Conclusion: The AKM as the Apex of Soviet Small Arms Philosophy

The Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanny is more than just a variant of the AK-47; it is the ultimate and most successful expression of the Soviet Union’s post-war small arms philosophy. While the milled-receiver AK-47 was a functional and robust weapon, it was a compromise born of industrial necessity—a heavy, expensive, and slow-to-produce rifle that failed to meet the original design goals of light weight and low cost. The AKM, by contrast, represents the triumphant culmination of a decade-long effort to align an advanced design concept with the realities of mass production. It is the weapon the Kalashnikov was always meant to be.

The AKM. Image Source: Swedish Army Museum via Wikimedia.

The AKM perfectly balanced the critical “iron triangle” of firearm design: unwavering reliability, low manufacturing cost, and decisive combat effectiveness. Its stamped-steel receiver, forged trunnions, and riveted assembly created a weapon that was both incredibly durable and remarkably inexpensive to produce in vast quantities. Its reduced weight, laminated furniture, and ingenious mechanical refinements like the slant compensator and hammer retarder made it a lighter and more controllable weapon for the common soldier.

Border guard at the entrance to Svetogorsk. It is an AKM but with a wood grip and muzzle nut cover vs. a slant compensator. Image Source: Wikimedia.

This rifle was the physical embodiment of Soviet military doctrine. It was the ideal tool to equip a massive, conscript-based army that prioritized simplicity, ruggedness, and overwhelming numbers over the high-tech precision or traditional marksmanship emphasized by its Western counterparts like the M14 and M16.3 The AKM was designed to be “good enough” for any task and to function flawlessly in any environment on earth, from the arctic circle to the equator.49

It was this combination of low cost, simplicity, and effectiveness that made the AKM the most widely produced and proliferated assault rifle in history. It became the true icon of the Kalashnikov family, defining the image of the “AK-47” for generations and arming armies, revolutionaries, and insurgents across the globe.7 The story of its development—from the ambitious but failed Type 1, through the pragmatic but flawed milled interregnum, to the final modernized design—is a powerful lesson in military-industrial engineering, demonstrating how a nation’s doctrine, industrial capacity, and design philosophy must converge to create a truly legendary weapon.


If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


Works cited

  1. List of Soviet Union military equipment of World War II – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soviet_Union_military_equipment_of_World_War_II
  2. An Eternal Warrior — The M14 – The Armory Life, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.thearmorylife.com/an-eternal-warrior-the-m14/
  3. Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16
  4. AK History – Thinline Weapons Wiki, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/AK_History
  5. AK rivet / receiver patterns : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/1ctk473/ak_rivet_receiver_patterns/
  6. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
  7. Ak 47 Akm Technical Drawings Russian, accessed June 20, 2025, https://dbs.oeducat.org/HomePages/Resources/Z69779/Ak_47_Akm_Technical_Drawings_Russian.pdf
  8. Evolution Of The AKM | An Official Journal Of The NRA, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/evolution-of-the-akm/
  9. In WW2, who had greater industrial capacity, the Americans or the Soviets? : r/AskHistorians, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3ku09p/in_ww2_who_had_greater_industrial_capacity_the/
  10. AK-47 – Survival, accessed June 20, 2025, http://landsurvival.com/schools-wikipedia/wp/a/AK-47.htm
  11. Why weren’t more WW2 firearms converted to use a stamped construction? : r/WarCollege, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/100jfct/why_werent_more_ww2_firearms_converted_to_use_a/
  12. Lend-Lease to the Eastern Front | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/lend-lease-eastern-front
  13. How Soviet Union Managed to Mass-Produce Weapons During WW2 and Can russia Repeat This | Defense Express, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.defence-ua.com/analysis/how_soviet_union_managed_to_mass_produce_weapons_during_ww2_and_can_russia_repeat_this-5311.html
  14. The Type 1 Stamped Receiver AK Rifle – Small Arms Review, accessed June 20, 2025, https://smallarmsreview.com/the-type-1-stamped-receiver-ak-rifle/
  15. Milled vs Stamped AK Receivers – The Mag Life – GunMag Warehouse, accessed June 20, 2025, https://gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/milled-vs-stamped-ak-receivers/
  16. AK Wars – Stamped vs Milled! | Ak Operators Union, Local 47-74 – WordPress.com, accessed June 20, 2025, https://akoperatorsunionlocal4774.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/ak-wars-stamped-vs-milled/
  17. AKM vs. AK-47: What’s the Difference? – The Armory Life, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.thearmorylife.com/akm-vs-ak-47/
  18. Can someone explain “milled” and “stamped” receivers please? : r/guns – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/gmvji/can_someone_explain_milled_and_stamped_receivers/
  19. The AK47 – A Unique History – Athlon Outdoors, accessed June 20, 2025, https://athlonoutdoors.com/article/the-ak47/
  20. Kalashnikov Concern – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalashnikov_Concern
  21. AK History | The Kalash Connection, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thekalashconnection.com/ak-history/
  22. AK-47, accessed June 20, 2025, https://dlab.epfl.ch/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/a/AK-47.htm
  23. [A Look Inside] AK-47/AKM/Type 56-1 – The Icon of Warfare (Description in Comments) : r/girlsfrontline – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/girlsfrontline/comments/99zqps/a_look_inside_ak47akmtype_561_the_icon_of_warfare/
  24. AK Variants: A Closer Look – The Primary Source On PrimaryArms.com, accessed June 20, 2025, https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/ak-variants-explored/
  25. What Are the Different Types of AKs? – Guns.com, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.guns.com/news/what-are-ak-variants
  26. The differences Between Milled and Stamped Receivers – Dagger Defense, accessed June 20, 2025, https://daggerdefense.com/blogs/news/the-differences-between-milled-and-stamped-receivers
  27. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  28. Kalashnikov AKM | Weaponsystems.net, accessed June 20, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/606-Kalashnikov+AKM
  29. Milled vs. stamped – The Firing Line Forums, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174474
  30. Metal Stamping Companies, accessed June 20, 2025, https://metalstampingcompanies.com/2017/09/30/metal-stamping-2/
  31. AK recievers, forged? – The Firing Line Forums, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=576767
  32. What’s a trunnion on an AK? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/evh4yj/whats_a_trunnion_on_an_ak/
  33. AKM Build Project: From Poland With Love – Recoil Magazine, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.recoilweb.com/preview-build-your-own-akm-rifle-101413.html
  34. Kalashnikov and Molot made AK trunnions – AK Operators Union …, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.akoperatorsunionlocal4774.com/2017/03/kalashnikov-made-ak-trunnions/
  35. CNC Machining the AK-50 TRUNNION for Brandon Herrera – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGKeUF2PDt0
  36. Riley Defense AKM Triangle Side-Folding Stock w/Trunnion, Parts – Centerfire Systems, accessed June 20, 2025, https://centerfiresystems.com/riley-defense-akm-triangle-side-folding-stock-w-trunnion-parts/
  37. I have heard argument about forged vs cast AK trunnions and some other parts, Is milling not an option at all? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/a6kfew/i_have_heard_argument_about_forged_vs_cast_ak/
  38. Why are rivets used in AK’s instead of screws and bolts? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/1xl5ro/why_are_rivets_used_in_aks_instead_of_screws_and/
  39. Selecting your first AKM – Wade’s Eastside Guns, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.wadesguns.com/blog/blog/quick-tips/selecting-your-first-akm
  40. Trigger Humps, accessed June 20, 2025, https://akresources.childersguns.com/2017/09/trigger-humps.html
  41. Kalashnikov AKM(& close derivatives) – Small Arms Survey, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/SAS-weapons-assault-rifles-Kalashnikov-AKM.pdf
  42. Why is the AKM’s Muzzle Brake Canted? – The Firearm Blog, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/03/26/why-is-the-akms-muzzle-brake-canted/
  43. AK SLANT MUZZLE BRAKE – Centerfire Systems, accessed June 20, 2025, https://centerfiresystems.com/ak-slant-muzzle-brake/
  44. AK-Builder Slant Brake, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29810
  45. What is this part and what’s its function? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/1cixsy3/what_is_this_part_and_whats_its_function/
  46. what does the retarder actually do? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/1l7kjuw/what_does_the_retarder_actually_do/
  47. Benefits of laminated wood furniture – Envun, accessed June 20, 2025, https://envun.com/furniture-from-glued-wood-laminated-timber-in-the-furniture-industry/
  48. What Are the Advantages of Laminate Furniture? – FC Dadson, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.fcdadson.com/en-us/blog/advantagesoflaminates
  49. AK-47 Kalashnikov (Izhmash Factory Video) – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY_znK5f3_E

An Analysis of the Differences Between a Russian Dragunov and a Romanian PSL: They Are Not The Same

I guess we all have our pet peves. One of my many irks is when people call a Romanian PSL rifle a “Dragunov”. I see it all the time on Facebook and GunBroker. Honestly, it bugs the hell out of me. The PSL is an oversized AK for all intents and purposes. On the other hand, the Dragunov is a brilliant Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR) that is it’s own creature. One is a work of inspired beauty and the other is… well… an oversized AK made in Romania. With that out of my system, let’s take an objective look at the two.

I. Executive Summary

The Russian SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL are both iconic semi-automatic rifles chambered in the 7.62x54mm Rimmed Russian cartridge, designed to serve as Designated Marksman Rifles (DMRs) within Eastern Bloc military doctrines. A common misconception persists that the PSL is merely a direct clone or licensed variant of the SVD. However, a detailed examination reveals that while they share a similar operational role and external appearance, they are fundamentally distinct in their mechanical design and underlying philosophical approaches to firearms development.1

Figure 1. This is a Russian Dragunov. Note the sleek lines, long handguard, milled receiver, and lack of a protruding rear sight block compared to a PSL. (Obtained from Wikimedia)

The SVD, or Snayperskaya Vintovka Dragunova, emerged from a dedicated design competition in the Soviet Union, resulting in a purpose-built platform featuring a short-stroke gas piston system and a precisely machined (milled) steel receiver.3 This design reflects a focus on refinement, optimized performance, and a balance between accuracy and battlefield mobility for a squad-level marksman.7 In contrast, the Romanian PSL, or Puşcă Semiautomată cu Lunetă, was developed independently due to geopolitical tensions and Romania’s desire for self-sufficiency in arms production.1 It is essentially a scaled-up and reinforced adaptation of the Kalashnikov/RPK light machine gun platform, utilizing a long-stroke gas piston and a stamped steel receiver.1 This approach prioritized ruggedness, reliability, and cost-effective mass production over the SVD’s more complex and expensive manufacturing processes.9

Figure 2. This is a PSL. Note the different flash hider, gas block, hand guards, rear sight block, stamped steel magazine, magazine stampong and buttstock design compared to the Dragunov. (Obtained from Wikimedia)

These fundamental differences in design philosophy and mechanical execution lead to varied performance characteristics, particularly in terms of inherent accuracy and sustained fire capability. While both rifles are designed for engaging man-sized targets at extended ranges, the SVD generally exhibits a higher standard of quality control and consistent accuracy, whereas the PSL, though robust and reliable, may require aftermarket modifications to maximize its precision potential.10 The distinction between these two rifles is not merely academic; it highlights how military doctrine, political autonomy, and industrial capabilities shape the development of firearms, leading to distinct solutions for similar operational requirements.

II. Introduction: The Role of Designated Marksman Rifles

The evolution of infantry combat in the mid-20th century revealed a critical gap in the capabilities of standard small arms. While assault rifles, such as the ubiquitous AKM, proved highly effective for close-to-medium range engagements, typically up to 300-400 meters, targets appearing beyond this distance often remained unengaged or required specialized, slower-firing bolt-action sniper rifles.1 This tactical void necessitated an intermediate class of firearm: the Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR).

DMRs provide infantry squads or platoons with a capability for increased effective range and precision without resorting to highly specialized sniper teams. Their primary function is to enable engagement of targets beyond the capabilities of standard issue assault rifles, typically out to 600-800 meters, while maintaining a semi-automatic rate of fire to support dynamic battlefield scenarios.1 This role emphasizes “combat accuracy”—the ability to consistently hit man-sized targets quickly and effectively—rather than the extreme sub-Minute of Angle (MOA) precision often associated with Western sniper rifles.8

The SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL stand as two prominent and historically significant examples of this DMR concept, both emerging from the Cold War era to fulfill similar roles within their respective military doctrines. Their development paths, however, diverged significantly, offering a compelling study in firearm design and geopolitical influence.

III. Historical Development and Design Philosophy

A. The SVD Dragunov: Soviet Precision and Doctrine

The SVD Dragunov’s genesis lies in a Soviet military requirement for a new self-loading sniper rifle, initiated through competitive trials spanning from 1958 to 1963.6 This was the third significant attempt to equip Soviet infantry with such a weapon, following earlier efforts like the SVT-40.20 The competition ultimately saw the design by Yevgeny Dragunov emerge victorious, leading to its official adoption on July 3, 1963.6 Dragunov’s background as a factory machinist, senior armorer, and a competitive shooter with extensive experience in sports and target rifle design proved instrumental.20 His unique perspective, honed from years of working with and competing in precision shooting, allowed him to approach the challenge with a fundamentally different philosophy than his competitors, who were more rooted in automatic combat weapon design.20

The core design philosophy behind the SVD was not to create a Western-style, extreme-precision sniper rifle, but rather a Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR) optimized for “combat accuracy”.8 This meant prioritizing the ability to score effective hits on man-sized targets rapidly, even against moving targets in dynamic battle scenarios, rather than achieving the absolute maximum possible accuracy.18 This doctrinal approach had a profound impact on the SVD’s design choices. For instance, the rifle was initially designed with a relatively thin, “pencil-profile” barrel to save weight, enhancing the marksman’s maneuverability and ability to keep pace with an infantry squad.6 While this design choice compromised some inherent accuracy, it aligned with the Soviet emphasis on a lightweight weapon system for squad support.8 Later, the modernized SVDM variant would feature a heavier barrel to enhance rigidity and harmonics, thereby improving accuracy, indicating a continuous refinement process.7

Another significant design decision reflecting this doctrine was the change in rifling twist rate. Originally, the SVD featured a 320 mm (1:12.6 in) twist, optimized for heavier civilian ammunition.6 However, in 1975, this was increased to a standard 240 mm (1:9.4 in) twist. This modification, while reducing precision with the dedicated 7N1 sniper cartridge by approximately 19%, was a deliberate choice to allow for acceptable accuracy when using standard “light” ball steel core LPS Gzh ammunition, which was more readily available for general issue and machine guns.6 This adjustment underscores the Soviet emphasis on logistical commonality and battlefield practicality over achieving peak theoretical precision with specialized ammunition. The SVD’s design, therefore, represents a sophisticated balance of precision, reliability, and battlefield utility, tailored to a specific military doctrine that valued effective fire support at the squad level.

B. The Romanian PSL: An Independent AK-Derived Solution

The development of the Romanian PSL (Puşcă Semiautomată 7,62 mm cu Lunetă) was born out of a unique geopolitical context that diverged from the unified Warsaw Pact arms development strategy. In August 1968, Romania’s President Nicolae Ceaușescu publicly condemned the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, a move that significantly strained relations with the Soviet Union and solidified Romania’s independent foreign policy.1 This political rift directly influenced Romania’s military industrial complex. To reduce its reliance on Soviet military equipment and foster national self-sufficiency, Romania accelerated the development of its own small-arms production capabilities.1

When the Soviets proved hesitant to share the detailed specifications for their SVD Dragunov, Romania embarked on an independent project to develop its own semi-automatic designated marksman rifle.9 The PSL was officially launched in 1974, leveraging Romania’s existing and well-established small-arms manufacturing infrastructure.1 Critically, instead of attempting to reverse-engineer or replicate the SVD’s complex, purpose-built design, Romanian engineers opted for a pragmatic approach: adapting a proven domestic platform. The PSL’s design is fundamentally based on the PM md. 64 light machine gun, which itself was a licensed copy of the Soviet RPK, an enlarged variant of the AKM.1 This means the PSL belongs to the Kalashnikov family of weapons, sharing many of its core operational principles.17

The Romanian design priorities for the PSL emphasized ruggedness, reliability, and cost-effective mass production.9 Unlike the SVD’s milled receiver, the PSL utilizes a stamped sheet steel receiver, similar to the RPK, but reinforced with a “bulged” front trunnion to accommodate the more powerful 7.62x54mmR cartridge.1 This choice of stamped construction made the PSL cheaper and easier to mass-produce compared to the SVD’s more labor-intensive milled design.9 The internal mechanism, being familiar to troops trained on AK-pattern rifles, also meant a shorter training period for designated marksmen.17 The PSL’s development therefore stands as a compelling illustration of how political autonomy and economic realities can drive distinct military hardware solutions, even when fulfilling a similar operational role and sharing a common cartridge type. The result is a robust, reliable, and widely distributed rifle that, while cosmetically similar to the SVD, is mechanically a different weapon system.

IV. Technical Specifications and Mechanical Differences

Despite their superficial resemblance and shared 7.62x54mmR cartridge, the SVD Dragunov and Romanian PSL exhibit profound mechanical differences that stem from their distinct design philosophies and manufacturing approaches. These divergences impact everything from their internal operation to their accuracy potential and logistical considerations.

A. Operating Mechanism and Receiver Design

The most fundamental mechanical distinction between the SVD and PSL lies in their operating mechanisms and receiver construction. The SVD employs a short-stroke gas piston system.3 In this design, a separate gas piston impacts a pusher, which in turn drives the bolt carrier rearward, but the piston itself does not travel the full length of the receiver with the bolt carrier.3 This approach minimizes the mass of reciprocating parts, contributing to reduced felt recoil and potentially better accuracy by reducing the disturbance to the rifle’s harmonics during the firing cycle.3 The SVD’s receiver is precisely machined from a solid block of steel (milled), providing a rigid and stable platform for the barrel and operating components.2 This manufacturing method, while more costly and time-consuming, enhances the rifle’s inherent precision and durability.

In stark contrast, the PSL utilizes a long-stroke gas piston system, a hallmark of the Kalashnikov family of weapons.1 In this system, the gas piston is permanently attached to the bolt carrier, and the entire assembly travels the full length of the receiver during the operating cycle. While this design is renowned for its exceptional reliability and robustness, it involves a larger and heavier mass of reciprocating parts, which can introduce more vibration and impact accuracy, particularly during rapid fire.10 The PSL’s receiver is constructed from stamped sheet steel, similar to the RPK light machine gun, but it is “beefed up” and reinforced, particularly at the front trunnion, to handle the more powerful 7.62x54mmR cartridge.1 This stamped construction is significantly less expensive and faster to produce than a milled receiver, aligning with Romania’s emphasis on mass production and cost-effectiveness. The choice of these differing core mechanical architectures highlights the distinct design philosophies: the SVD as a purpose-built precision instrument, and the PSL as a pragmatic, robust adaptation of an existing, reliable platform.

B. Barrel Characteristics

Both rifles feature chrome-lined bores, a common practice in Eastern Bloc firearms to enhance corrosion resistance and extend barrel life, especially when using corrosive surplus ammunition.6 However, their barrel profiles and rifling twist rates present notable differences impacting accuracy.

The original SVD was designed with a relatively thin, “pencil-profile” barrel to minimize overall weight, a crucial consideration for a rifle intended for squad-level mobility.6 While this contributed to a lighter weapon, it inherently limited the barrel’s rigidity and its ability to dissipate heat effectively during sustained firing, which can negatively affect accuracy. Recognizing this, later modernized variants like the SVDM incorporated a heavier barrel profile to enhance rigidity and improve barrel harmonics, thereby boosting accuracy.7 The SVD’s rifling twist rate also saw an evolution. Initially, it was 320 mm (1:12.6 in), optimized for heavier civilian ammunition.6 However, in 1975, the twist rate was standardized to 240 mm (1:9.4 in). This change, while reportedly reducing precision with the dedicated 7N1 sniper cartridge by 19%, allowed for acceptable accuracy with standard “light” ball steel core LPS Gzh ammunition, reflecting a pragmatic compromise for logistical commonality.6

The PSL also features a chrome-lined barrel, typically with a 1:10 twist rate.9 However, a significant characteristic of the PSL’s barrel is its relatively thin profile.10 This design choice, likely influenced by weight considerations and manufacturing simplicity, has a direct and pronounced impact on its sustained accuracy. Reports indicate that the PSL’s thin barrel heats up rapidly, causing groups to widen considerably after firing as few as 3 to 5 rounds.13 This makes the PSL less suitable for prolonged rapid-fire engagements where consistent precision is paramount, highlighting a practical limitation of its design when compared to the SVD’s more robust barrel characteristics, especially in later variants.

C. Magazine Design and Interchangeability

Both the SVD and PSL are chambered for the same powerful 7.62x54mm Russian rimmed cartridge and are fed from 10-round detachable box magazines.1 This shared ammunition and capacity often leads to the mistaken assumption that their magazines are interchangeable. However, this is a critical point of divergence: the magazines are not interchangeable between the Dragunov and PSL without significant modification.1

This incompatibility stems directly from their fundamentally different receiver designs and internal dimensions. The SVD, being a purpose-built design with a milled receiver, has a magazine well precisely machined to fit its specific magazines. In contrast, the PSL, as an enlarged AK/RPK variant, adapted its magazine well to accommodate its scaled-up Kalashnikov-style internals. Visually, PSL magazines are distinguishable by a characteristic X-shaped pattern stamped on their sides, whereas Russian and Chinese SVD magazines typically feature a waffle-style stamp.1 This seemingly minor detail carries significant logistical implications for military forces or civilian users who might operate both rifle types, as it necessitates separate supply chains for magazines despite the shared ammunition. The non-interchangeability of magazines serves as a tangible illustration of the deep mechanical differences between the two platforms, reinforcing that the PSL is not simply a “Romanian Dragunov” but a distinct weapon system.

D. Optics and Mounting Systems

Both the SVD and PSL were designed to be used primarily with optical sights, reflecting their role as designated marksman rifles. They share a common philosophy of side-mounted optics, a characteristic of Eastern Bloc firearms, which allows for the use of iron sights even when the optic is mounted.18

The SVD is typically issued with the PSO-1 (or later PSO-1M2) optical sight.3 This 4x magnification scope features a distinctive reticle that includes a stadiametric rangefinder for estimating target distance, chevrons for bullet drop compensation (BDC) at various ranges, and horizontal marks for windage adjustments.22 The PSO-1 is designed to mount to a Warsaw Pact rail on the left side of the SVD’s receiver. This mounting system is engineered to allow for the optic’s removal and reattachment without a significant loss of zero, a crucial feature for field maintenance and transport.18 The SVD’s milled receiver provides a robust and stable base for this rail, contributing to consistent optic performance.

The PSL is typically equipped with the LPS 4×6° TIP2 scope (Lunetă Pușcă Semiautomată Tip 2).1 This optic is a simplified version of the Russian PSO-1, sharing a similar basic design, 4x magnification, and the distinctive stadiametric rangefinder and BDC reticle features.1 It also mounts to a riveted side rail on the left side of the PSL’s stamped receiver.1 While the shared design philosophy of integrated rangefinding and BDC aims for rapid target engagement without complex calculations, there can be differences in optical quality and consistency. Some reports indicate that the LPS optics found on PSLs may be “dim and hazy” compared to the PSO-1.4 The PSL’s riveted rail on a stamped receiver, while functional, may not offer the same inherent rigidity and stability as the SVD’s integrated rail on a milled receiver, potentially impacting the consistency of zero retention over time, though the side rail concept itself is designed for repeatable mounting.18 The differences in optical quality and mounting stability reflect the differing manufacturing standards and the overall refinement levels of each nation’s arms industry.

E. Other Key Distinctions

Beyond the major differences in operating mechanisms, receivers, barrels, and magazines, several other mechanical distinctions contribute to the overall character and performance of the SVD and PSL:

  • Trigger Groups: The SVD features a more refined and easily removable trigger mechanism.3 This design contributes to a smoother and lighter trigger pull, which is beneficial for precision shooting. In contrast, the PSL, being derived from the AK platform, utilizes a fire control group that is more akin to the standard Kalashnikov design.3 While robust and reliable, these triggers are often characterized by a military-grade coarseness, with some creep and grittiness, which can be less conducive to achieving maximum accuracy.10
  • Gas Regulation: The SVD incorporates a two-position adjustable gas regulator.6 This feature allows the operator to fine-tune the gas system to compensate for varying environmental conditions (such as fouling in the gas port, extreme cold, or high altitude) or to optimize performance with different ammunition types. This adjustability helps maintain consistent recoil impulse and reliability. The PSL, however, typically has a non-adjustable gas system.1 This lack of adjustability can lead to issues, particularly when using heavier ammunition (147 grain or greater) or silencers, as the increased gas pressure can cause excessive wear, including bolt carrier cracking.1 To mitigate these issues, aftermarket adjustable gas pistons are a common and recommended modification for PSL owners.1 This difference underscores the SVD’s more optimized design for its cartridge compared to the PSL’s adaptation of an existing platform.
  • Bolt Hold-Open: The SVD features a last-round bolt hold-open mechanism, which keeps the bolt open after the last cartridge in the magazine has been fired.6 This is a valuable feature for military applications as it provides immediate feedback to the operator that the rifle is empty and facilitates faster reloads. While military-specification PSLs generally incorporate this feature, some civilian import versions may lack it due to modifications made to comply with import laws.1

These cumulative differences highlight the engineering trade-offs inherent in each design. The SVD’s features reflect a commitment to optimizing performance and adaptability for its specific role, while the PSL’s design reflects a pragmatic approach of adapting existing, proven technology, even if it means some inherent limitations or the need for user-level modifications to achieve optimal performance.

V. Performance Analysis: Accuracy and Operational Range

The performance of the SVD Dragunov and Romanian PSL is best understood within the context of their intended role as Designated Marksman Rifles, rather than traditional precision sniper rifles. Both were designed for “combat accuracy”—the ability to consistently hit man-sized targets in dynamic battlefield conditions—rather than achieving minute-of-angle (MOA) groups typically expected from dedicated Western sniper platforms.9

A. Accuracy at 500 meters and 1,000 meters

Evaluating the accuracy of these rifles at 500 and 1,000 meters requires distinguishing between factory specifications, optimal conditions with match-grade ammunition, and practical performance with standard military ball ammunition.

SVD Dragunov Accuracy:

Factory inspection requirements for the SVD were stringent for its class, mandating a median deviation of no more than 0.7 MOA in three 10-shot groups when using the dedicated 7N1 sniper ammunition.6 This translates to an approximate overall accuracy of 3 MOA under factory test conditions.6 More specifically, with 7N1 sniper cartridges, the extreme vertical spread was required to be no more than 1.24 MOA (with a 240 mm twist rate barrel) or 1.04 MOA (with a 320 mm twist rate barrel) in 5-shot groups.22 However, when using standard 57-N-323S cartridges (light ball), the precision of the SVD is notably reduced to approximately 2.21 MOA extreme vertical spread.22 U.S. military tests and Soviet technical bulletins further indicate a requirement for the SVD to hold a 14.7-inch group at 600 meters (approximately 2.3 MOA) with standard ball ammunition.19 This level of accuracy is considered acceptable for engaging man-sized targets at these distances. While the SVD can achieve hits at 1,000 meters, its design is not optimized for consistent precision at such extreme ranges. An experimental prototype, the SVK, chambered in 6x49mm, was developed to offer nearly a fourfold accuracy improvement over the SVD at 1,000 meters, underscoring the SVD’s inherent limitations at that distance.7

Romanian PSL Accuracy:

The PSL is often cited as being capable of 1 Minute of Angle (MOA) or less under ideal conditions.1 However, this potential is frequently hampered by practical limitations. A significant issue is the PSL’s relatively thin barrel, which heats up quickly, causing groups to widen considerably after only 3 to 5 rounds.13 This makes sustained precision fire challenging. Furthermore, the lack of an adjustable gas system can lead to issues like bolt carriers cracking when using heavier ball (147 grain or greater) ammunition or suppressors, due to excessive gas pressure.1 Despite these challenges, with proper tuning, such as the installation of an aftermarket adjustable gas piston (like the KNS piston), and selection of specific ammunition (e.g., 150-grain or 180+ grain loads), the PSL has demonstrated the capability to make 500-yard shots with ease, with some reports indicating its accuracy can be “on par with the Drag”.12 It is consistently emphasized that the PSL, like the SVD, is a DMR intended for hitting man-sized targets, not a precision competition rifle.9 For example, tests at 300 yards showed the PSL capable of a 10-shot rapid-fire group, and with specific match ammunition, it could achieve groups near 1.5 MOA.11

Comparative Assessment:

At 500 meters, both rifles are capable of engaging man-sized targets. The SVD, particularly with 7N1 sniper ammunition, is generally more consistently accurate out of the box due to its higher quality control and more refined design.10 Its factory specifications and military requirements suggest a reliable capability for hits within 2-3 MOA at this range.19 The PSL, while capable of similar or even better initial accuracy with optimal ammunition and tuning, suffers from rapid barrel heating, which significantly degrades its sustained accuracy after a few shots.13 Therefore, for a single, well-aimed shot at 500 meters, both can perform, but the SVD offers greater consistency across multiple shots and varying ammunition types without modifications.

At 1,000 meters, neither rifle is considered a true precision sniper rifle in the Western sense. While their optical sights (PSO-1/LPS) have bullet drop compensation markings up to 1,000 meters or beyond, and their cartridges possess the ballistic energy to reach these distances, achieving consistent, precise hits on man-sized targets becomes significantly more challenging.1 The SVD’s limitations at 1,000 meters are acknowledged by the development of the SVK prototype, which aimed for a fourfold accuracy improvement at this range.7 For the PSL, its thin barrel and inherent design limitations make consistent accuracy at 1,000 meters highly improbable without extensive modifications and specialized ammunition, even then it would be considered an extreme shot.10 In practical terms, neither rifle is reliably accurate for precision work at 1,000 meters, though engaging area targets or suppressing fire might be possible.

B. Realistic Operational Range

The realistic operational range for a designated marksman rifle is the distance at which a trained operator can consistently achieve effective hits on typical battlefield targets (e.g., a man-sized silhouette) under combat conditions.

SVD Dragunov:

The SVD’s sighting systems are graduated for considerable distances: 1,300 meters with the optical sight and 1,200 meters with the iron sights.27 However, its maximum effective range is widely cited as 800 meters.19 This 800-meter range aligns with Soviet sniping doctrine, which focused on accurate engagement of multiple high-profile targets within this distance.19 The SVD is designed for a muzzle velocity of 830 m/s with standard ammunition.27 The rifle’s “killing range” is theoretically listed at 3,800 meters, but this refers to the maximum projectile flight distance, not effective accuracy.15 For direct fire, the SVD has a direct fire range of 350m for a 30cm head figure, 430m for a 50cm chest figure, and 640m for a 150cm running figure.32

Romanian PSL:

The PSL’s effective firing range is generally stated to be between 800 and 1,000 meters.30 Its LPS 4×6° TIP2 optical sight features bullet drop compensation out to 1,000 meters.1 Similar to the SVD, the PSL has a theoretical maximum firing range (killing effect) of approximately 3,000 to 3,800 meters.15 With a muzzle velocity of 830 m/s using a 10-gram projectile (7N14) 30, its ballistic performance is comparable to the SVD. Romanian military doctrine for the PSL, like the SVD, focused on its role as a squad-level DMR to engage targets beyond the capabilities of standard assault rifles, typically between 400 and 800 meters.15

Conclusion on Operational Range:

Both the SVD and PSL are realistically effective at engaging man-sized targets out to approximately 800 meters under typical battlefield conditions. While their optics and ammunition allow for shots at greater distances, consistent hits on individual targets become increasingly difficult beyond this range due to ballistic limitations, rifle characteristics (like barrel heating in the PSL), and the inherent precision requirements for such shots. Their design and doctrinal role align with providing extended-range fire support within the capabilities of a standard infantry squad, rather than engaging targets at extreme “sniper” distances.

VI. Design Superiority and Practicality

Assessing the “superior design” between the SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL is nuanced, as each rifle represents a different set of design priorities and compromises. The determination of superiority often depends on the specific criteria being evaluated: refinement, reliability, manufacturing cost, and maintenance.

Refinement:

The SVD is widely considered the more refined design.2 Its purpose-built nature, featuring a precisely milled receiver and a short-stroke gas piston system, contributes to a smoother operation, reduced reciprocating mass, and better inherent accuracy potential.3 The SVD’s trigger mechanism is also noted for being more refined and easily removable.3 This level of engineering and manufacturing precision typically results in a weapon that feels more “tight” and consistent. The PSL, being an adaptation of the RPK/AKM platform, exhibits a “military-grade coarseness” in its construction.9 While robust, its stamped receiver and long-stroke gas system, though beefed up, operate closer to their mechanical limits when firing the powerful 7.62x54mmR cartridge, leading to less inherent refinement in its action.10

Reliability:

Both rifles are renowned for their reliability, a hallmark of Eastern Bloc small arms designs. The PSL, benefiting from its Kalashnikov heritage, has a well-earned reputation for ruggedness and reliability, performing well even in extreme field environments.10 Its simpler, more robust long-stroke gas system is inherently forgiving of fouling and harsh conditions. The SVD also boasts legendary reliability, having undergone rigorous torture testing in various climatic conditions to ensure flawless performance.42 While the PSL’s non-adjustable gas system can lead to issues with heavy ammunition or suppressors, requiring aftermarket modifications 1, its basic operating reliability remains high. In terms of sheer ability to function under adverse conditions, both are highly dependable, though the PSL’s simplicity might give it a slight edge in raw field ruggedness for the average soldier.

Manufacturing Cost:

The PSL is significantly less expensive to produce than the SVD.9 This cost difference is a direct result of their differing manufacturing methods. The SVD’s milled receiver and more complex, purpose-built components require more machining time and higher material costs.2 In contrast, the PSL’s stamped receiver and adaptation of existing AK/RPK tooling allowed for more cost-effective mass production, a key Romanian design priority.9 This cost advantage made the PSL a more accessible option for many nations and for civilian markets, especially when compared to the scarcity and high price of genuine SVDs.2

Maintenance:

Both rifles are designed for relatively easy field maintenance, a common characteristic of Soviet and Warsaw Pact firearms, often described as “Ivan-proof”.16 Disassembly and reassembly procedures for both are straightforward, allowing for routine cleaning and lubrication in the field.17 The PSL’s AK-derived design means its maintenance procedures are familiar to anyone accustomed to Kalashnikov-pattern rifles.9 The SVD’s trigger group is notably easy to remove for maintenance.3 The adjustable gas system on the SVD also simplifies maintenance by allowing the operator to compensate for fouling or extreme cold.6 While both are robust, the PSL’s inherent simplicity, being an enlarged AK, might be perceived as marginally easier to maintain for a general infantryman without specialized training.

Overall Assessment of Superiority:

There is no single “superior” design; rather, each excels in different areas based on its original intent.

  • The SVD Dragunov is generally considered the superior design in terms of inherent precision, refinement, and optimized performance for its designated role.2 Its purpose-built architecture and higher manufacturing standards contribute to more consistent accuracy and a more refined shooting experience. It represents a dedicated engineering solution to the DMR problem.
  • The Romanian PSL is superior in terms of cost-effectiveness, ease of mass production, and raw rugged reliability.9 It is a highly successful pragmatic adaptation of an existing, proven platform, making it a robust and widely available solution for forces requiring an extended-range semi-automatic rifle without the higher investment of the SVD.

Therefore, if the priority is maximum inherent accuracy and refinement, the SVD is the superior design. If the priority is widespread issuance, cost-effectiveness, and robust reliability under demanding conditions, the PSL presents a highly effective and practical solution.

VII. Global Adoption and Variants

Both the SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL have seen extensive military service globally, particularly within the former Eastern Bloc and among nations that received Soviet or Romanian military aid. Their widespread use underscores their effectiveness in the designated marksman role.

A. SVD Dragunov: Military Users and Variants

The SVD Dragunov, having entered service with the Soviet Army in 1963, quickly became the standard squad support weapon for numerous countries, especially those of the former Warsaw Pact.6 Its robust design and effective performance ensured its continued relevance across decades of conflict.

Current and Former Military Users:

The SVD has been widely adopted by state forces across various regions.28 Notable users include:

  • Russia: Continues to use and upgrade the SVD, with newer SVDM variants being issued.45
  • Former Soviet Republics: Including Kazakhstan 46, Ukraine 45, and Moldova.
  • Eastern Europe: Hungary 46, East Germany (issued as SWD) 6, Czechoslovakia (entered service in the 1970s).6
  • Middle East & North Africa: Iraq 2, Syria 46, Egypt.
  • Asia: China (produced under license as Type 79 and 85) 6, Vietnam.
  • Other: Afghanistan.47

The SVD has been used in numerous conflicts, including the Vietnam War, Soviet-Afghan War, Iran-Iraq War, Iraq War, Syrian Civil War, and the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War.6 Non-state actors, such as the Islamic State and Lord’s Resistance Army, have also utilized SVDs.6

Figure 3. Nigerien soldier calling himself “Romeo” poses for VOA Africa at Camp Assaga, Diffa, Niger with his SVD rifle. Photo by the Voice of America and obtained via Wikimedia.

Notable Variants:

  • SVD (Original, Russia): The foundational model, characterized by its skeletal stock and long, narrow profile.28
  • SVDS (Russia): A variant featuring a tubular, folding stock, designed for paratroopers.28
  • SVDK (Russia): Resembles the SVDS but is rechambered to fire a larger 9.3x64mm cartridge, intended for targets in heavy body armor or behind cover.28
  • SVU (Russia): A ‘bullpup’ version of the SVD, reconfigured with the magazine behind the trigger assembly to reduce overall length.22
  • Type 79 / NDM-86 (China): Chinese copies of the SVD, visually identical to the original; differentiation often requires checking manufacturer markings.2 The NDM-86 was also produced in 7.62x51mm NATO for export.3
  • Al-Kadesih (Iraq): An Iraqi variant distinguishable by a palm tree embossed on the magazine.28

B. Romanian PSL: Military Users and Variants

The PSL, introduced into Romanian military service in 1974, has also achieved significant global distribution due to its robust design and cost-effectiveness.1

Current and Former Military Users:

The PSL was adopted by all branches of the Romanian Army, internal troops, and police units.1 Its export success led to widespread use in various regions:

  • Romania: Primary user since 1974.1
  • Middle East & North Africa: Iraq (5,000 delivered to Republican Guards in 1978) 1, Iran 17, Libya (including Anti-Gaddafi forces) 1, Syria 17, Egypt.1
  • Africa: Eritrea 1, Ethiopia 1, Angola 17, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda.17
  • Asia: Afghanistan 1, Bangladesh 1, North Korea 17, Pakistan 17, Vietnam.17
  • Europe: East Germany 1, Republic of Moldova.17
  • Central America: Nicaragua.17 The PSL has been employed in numerous conflicts, including the Angolan Civil War, Iran-Iraq War, Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, Syrian Civil War, and the ongoing conflict in Donbas.17
Figure 4, An Afghan National Army soldier uses a PSL rifle during a demonstration to display weaponry and communicatons capabilities at Camp Joyce, Afghanistan, Feb. 12, 2008. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Jordan Carter) (Released). (Photo from Wikimedia)

Notable Variants:

  • PSL 54 (Romania): The standard semi-automatic military version, chambered in 7.62x54R.1
  • PSL 51 (Romania): A semi-automatic version chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO, primarily for export.15
  • PL (Romania): A repeating (bolt-action) version chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO.15
  • PSL-54C / Romak III / FPK / FPK Dragunov / SSG-97 (Export): These are sporting versions intended for the export market, particularly the United States. They are largely identical to the military version but feature modifications to comply with import laws, such as the removal of the bayonet lug and receiver modifications (e.g., two trigger mechanism axis pin holes instead of three).1 The “FPK Dragunov” designation is purely commercial and does not imply mechanical commonality with the SVD.1

VIII. Summary Table of Major Features

The following table provides a concise comparison of the key features of the SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL, highlighting their similarities and fundamental differences.

FeatureSVD Dragunov (Russia)Romanian PSL (Puşcă Semiautomată cu Lunetă)
TypeDesignated Marksman Rifle (DMR), Sniper RifleDesignated Marksman Rifle (DMR)
Place of OriginSoviet Union (Russia)Romania
In Service1963–present 61974–present 30
DesignerYevgeny Dragunov 21Romania – Cugir 31
Operating MechanismGas-operated, Short-Stroke Gas Piston, Rotating Bolt 3Gas-operated, Long-Stroke Gas Piston, Rotating Bolt 1
Receiver TypeMilled Steel 2Stamped Sheet Steel (RPK-type, reinforced) 1
Caliber7.62x54mmR (original), 9.3x64mm (SVDK variant) 287.62x54mmR (original), 7.62x51mm NATO (export variant) 1
Muzzle Velocity830 m/s 27830 m/s 30
Weight (unloaded, with optical sight)4.3 kg 274.31 kg 30 (4.9 kg with mag & scope, no bayonet 15)
Length (without bayonet)1220 mm 271150 mm 30
Barrel Length620 mm 28620 mm 24
Barrel ProfileOriginally thin, later heavier (SVDM) 6Relatively thin 10
Barrel Rifling Twist240 mm (1:9.4 in) (since 1975) 61:10″ (254 mm) 24 (some sources 320mm 31)
Magazine Capacity10 rounds, detachable box 2710 rounds, detachable box 1
Magazine InterchangeabilityNot interchangeable with PSL magazines 1Not interchangeable with SVD magazines 1
Standard OpticPSO-1 / PSO-1M2 (4x) 22LPS 4×6° TIP2 (4x) 1
Gas SystemAdjustable (two-position) 6Non-adjustable 1
Bolt Hold-OpenYes (last round) 6Yes (military spec), some civilian imports lack it 1
Factory Accuracy (7N1 ammo)~1.04-1.24 MOA (5-shot groups, extreme vertical spread) 22Capable of 1 MOA or less (but with caveats) 1
Effective Firing Range800 m 29800–1,000 m 30
Max Sighting Range (optic)1300 m 271300 m 15
Notable VariantsSVDS, SVDK, SVU, Type 79, Al-Kadesih 28PSL-54C, Romak III, FPK, SSG-97 (export) 1
Countries Used In (Examples)Russia, Ukraine, Iraq, China, Hungary, Syria 6Romania, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Libya, Eritrea 1
Manufacturing CostHigher (milled receiver) 43Lower (stamped receiver) 9

IX. Conclusion

The comparative analysis of the Russian SVD Dragunov and the Romanian PSL reveals two distinct yet functionally similar Designated Marksman Rifles, each a product of unique design philosophies and geopolitical circumstances. The common perception of the PSL as a mere “Romanian Dragunov” is a misnomer, as the rifles are mechanically dissimilar, sharing only their ammunition, optical philosophy, and a general aesthetic.1

The SVD Dragunov stands as a testament to Soviet engineering, purpose-built from the ground up to fulfill a specific doctrinal role: providing squad-level marksmen with rapid, effective fire at extended ranges. Its short-stroke gas piston system and precisely milled receiver reflect a commitment to refinement and inherent accuracy, balancing these qualities with the need for battlefield mobility.3 The evolution of its barrel profile and twist rate further illustrates a pragmatic approach to optimizing performance across various ammunition types and operational conditions.6

In contrast, the Romanian PSL emerged from a different set of imperatives. Driven by political autonomy and a desire to reduce reliance on Soviet military hardware, Romania leveraged its existing Kalashnikov/RPK manufacturing capabilities to create an indigenous DMR.1 The PSL’s long-stroke gas piston system and reinforced stamped receiver, while less refined than the SVD, embody ruggedness, reliability, and cost-effective mass production.1 This approach made the PSL a highly practical and widely distributed solution, demonstrating how economic and political factors can lead to distinct, yet effective, designs for similar military requirements.

In terms of performance, both rifles are effective within their designated roles for engaging man-sized targets out to approximately 800 meters. While the SVD generally offers more consistent out-of-the-box accuracy due to higher quality control and a more stable design, the PSL, with proper ammunition and potential aftermarket modifications, can achieve comparable initial precision.10 However, the PSL’s thin barrel and non-adjustable gas system present limitations for sustained fire and use with heavier ammunition or suppressors, highlighting areas where its adapted design reaches its practical limits.1

Ultimately, the SVD Dragunov represents a dedicated, optimized design for a designated marksman rifle, emphasizing a balance of precision and battlefield utility. The Romanian PSL, while often overshadowed by its Russian counterpart, is a highly successful and reliable adaptation, prioritizing affordability and robust performance through a pragmatic application of existing technology. Both rifles have proven their worth in numerous conflicts worldwide, solidifying their legacy as iconic examples of Eastern Bloc DMRs.

In short, please don’t refer to a PSL as a Dragunov!


If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


Image Sources

Main Image is “SVD and SVDS sniper rifles at Engineering Technologies 2012” Obtained from Wikimedia. Author is Mike1979 Russia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SVD_and_SVDS_sniper_rifles_at_Engineering_Technologies_2012.jpg

Figure 1 is from Wikimedia and the authors is Hokos. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SVD_Dragunov.jpg

Figure 2 is from Wikimedia and the author is Verein der Freunde und Förderer der Wehrtechnischen Studiensammlung Koblenz e. V. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dragunow_sniper_rifle_at_Wehrtechnische_Studiensammlung_Koblenz.jpg

Figure 3 is a Nigerien solider calling himself “Romeo” poses for VOA Africa at Camp Assaga, Diffa, Niger. Photo by the Voice of America and obtained via Wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nigerian_sniper.jpg

Figure 4 an Afghan National Army soldier uses a PSL rifle during a demonstration to display weaponry and communicatons capabilities at Camp Joyce, Afghanistan, Feb. 12, 2008. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Jordan Carter) (Released). Photo from Wikimedia.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Afghan_National_Army_soldier_with_PSL_rifle.jpg

Works Cited

  1. PSL (rifle) – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSL_(rifle)
  2. PSL: Don’t Call This Dangerous Gun a ‘Sniper Rifle’ – The National Interest, accessed May 26, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/psl-dont-call-dangerous-gun-sniper-rifle-163637/
  3. Dragunov – The Firing Line Forums, accessed May 26, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=478192
  4. Opinions On The Dragunov – The Firing Line Forums, accessed May 26, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=299050
  5. Gun Review: Romanian PSL-54C Rifle in 7.62x54R – Athlon Outdoors, accessed May 26, 2025, https://athlonoutdoors.com/article/romanian-psl-54c-7-62x54r/
  6. SVD (rifle) – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVD_(rifle)
  7. Dragunov V-70, The Automatic SVD | thefirearmblog.com, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/dragunov-v-70-the-automatic-svd-44819068
  8. All the variants of the SVD Dragunov [686 × 888] : r/MilitaryPorn – Reddit, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/comments/dx7c75/all_the_variants_of_the_svd_dragunov_686_888/
  9. Review: Century Arms PSL 54 | An Official Journal Of The NRA, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/review-century-arms-psl-54/
  10. Rifle Dynamics PSL – SWAT Survival | Weapons | Tactics, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.swatmag.com/article/rifle-dynamics-psl/
  11. Taking the PSL to the Next Level – Small Arms Review, accessed May 26, 2025, https://archive.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=1449
  12. Which to get : Romanian PSL or a Russian Tigr? – Other AK Rifles – forum.Saiga-12.com, accessed May 26, 2025, http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/64742-which-to-get-romanian-psl-or-a-russian-tigr/
  13. Opinion on the PSL? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/1elizx6/opinion_on_the_psl/
  14. PSL – Drive A Tank, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.driveatank.com/armory/psl/
  15. Pușcă Semiautomată Cu Lunetă | PDF – Scribd, accessed May 26, 2025, https://ro.scribd.com/document/365735386/Pu%C8%99c%C4%83-Semiautomat%C4%83-Cu-Lunet%C4%83
  16. Opinions on Dragunov rifle ? [Archive] – The Firing Line Forums, accessed May 26, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-185694.html
  17. Pușcă semiautomată cu lunetă – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pu%C8%99c%C4%83_semiautomat%C4%83_cu_lunet%C4%83
  18. Concepts – RussianOptics, accessed May 26, 2025, https://russianoptics.net/Concepts.html
  19. Terrorist Snipers: What Are They Really Capable Of? – SWAT Survival | Weapons | Tactics, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.swatmag.com/article/terrorist-snipers-really-capable/
  20. Первая в мире. Снайперская винтовка Драгунова | Оружейный …, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.kalashnikov.ru/pervaya-v-mire-snajperskaya-vintovka-dragunova/
  21. Yevgeny Dragunov – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeny_Dragunov
  22. SVD (rifle) – Wikiwand, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/SVD_(rifle)
  23. PSL /svd clone prices ever coming down, should I buy now? : r/guns – Reddit, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/1aoek8c/psl_svd_clone_prices_ever_coming_down_should_i/
  24. ROMANIAN PSL 7.62X54R 7.62 x 54r-RI035-N – mahindra arms, accessed May 26, 2025, https://mahindra-arms.com/romanian-psl-762x54r-762-x-54r.html
  25. Century Arms PSL 54 Rifle – Shark Coast Tactical, accessed May 26, 2025, https://sharkcoasttactical.com/product/century-arms-psl-54-rifle/
  26. PSL-54c First Shots: Testing Accuracy – YouTube, accessed May 26, 2025, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JovqDsQQAY0&pp=ygUFI2w1NGM%3D
  27. 7.62-mm SVD DRAGUNOV SNIPER RIFLE. TECHNICAL …, accessed May 26, 2025, http://club.guns.ru/manual/svd/
  28. www.smallarmssurvey.org, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/SAS_weapons-sniper-rifles-DragunovSVD.pdf
  29. Dragunov SVDS | Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 26, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/487-Dragunov+SVDS
  30. PSL (rifle) – Wikiwand, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/PSL_(rifle)
  31. PSL | Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 26, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/488-PSL
  32. Снайперская винтовка Драгунова – Википедия, accessed May 26, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%94%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0
  33. Снайперская винтовка Драгунова СВД – Стрелковое оружие, accessed May 26, 2025, https://jollyroger666.narod.ru/vintovki/svd.html
  34. PSL (винтовка) – Википедия, accessed May 26, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSL_(%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BA%D0%B0)
  35. Ranging the SVD Sniper. Incase you already didn’t know. : r/ArmaReforger – Reddit, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ArmaReforger/comments/1icw0tn/ranging_the_svd_sniper_incase_you_already_didnt/
  36. DRAGUNOV SVD – Military world – WordPress.com, accessed May 26, 2025, https://mysnipersworld.wordpress.com/2019/10/24/dragunov-svd/
  37. Getting a PSL, anything I should know besides it being century arms? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/zkq3sd/getting_a_psl_anything_i_should_know_besides_it/
  38. PSL 7.62x54r – The Firing Line Forums, accessed May 26, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=465996
  39. SVD-63 – Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVD-63
  40. СВД – Sinopa.com, accessed May 26, 2025, http://www.sinopa.ee/sor/bo001/bo05sv/bo05sv01/svd001.htm
  41. Снайперские винтовки | Страница 127 | Форумы RusArmy.com, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.rusarmy.com/forum/threads/snajperskie-vintovki.246/page-127
  42. SVD Rifle Factory Torture Testing | thefirearmblog.com, accessed May 26, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/02/07/svd-rifle-factory-torture-testing/
  43. Why no American SVD’s/PSL’s – Shooters’ Forum, accessed May 26, 2025, https://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/why-no-american-svds-psls.4141703/
  44. Prezentare pusca semiautomana Sadu (cunoscuta si sub numele de WUM) – arme vechi, accessed May 26, 2025, https://armevechi.com/2023/01/02/prezentare-pusca-semiautomana-sadu-cunoscuta-si-sub-numele-de-wum/
  45. Russian Military Snipers to Receive Upgraded Dragunov Rifle – The Defense Post, accessed May 26, 2025, https://thedefensepost.com/2021/11/12/russian-snipers-upgraded-rifle/
  46. SVD – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 26, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/SVD
  47. PSL sniper rifle – Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSL_sniper_rifle
  48. SVDK – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVDK
  49. Category:PSL rifle – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 26, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PSL_rifle
  50. Arms industry in Romania – Wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry_in_Romania

Pragmatism at Work: An Analysis of the Soviet AK-47 Slant Compensator

The introduction of the iconic slant-faced muzzle device on the Kalashnikov rifle was not an incidental aesthetic choice nor was it part of the weapon’s original design. Instead, its development and eventual adoption represent a case study in iterative, problem-driven Soviet small arms engineering. The device emerged as a direct and necessary response to a specific physics problem created by the comprehensive modernization program that transformed the AK-47 into the AKM. Understanding this context is crucial to appreciating the elegant pragmatism of the final design.

From Milled to Stamped: The 1959 AKM Modernization Program

The Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanny (AKM), or “Kalashnikov’s Modernized Automatic Rifle,” was officially adopted by the Soviet Army in 1959, a decade after its predecessor, the AK-47.1 While retaining the fundamental long-stroke gas piston operating system and rotating bolt of the original Kalashnikov, the AKM was a significant re-engineering effort driven by a critical strategic need to facilitate true mass production on a scale required for the Warsaw Pact.5

The central and most transformative change was the shift from the AK-47 Type III’s receiver, which was machined from a solid forging of steel, to a receiver formed from a U-shaped stamping of 1.0 mm sheet steel.2 This single change dramatically reduced manufacturing time, cost, and the need for specialized heavy machinery, making it possible for a wider range of factories to produce the rifle.6 This stamped receiver was reinforced with rivets fastening it to milled steel front and rear trunnions, a design that proved both durable and economical.2

This manufacturing philosophy extended to numerous other components. The AKM featured a lighter, thinner barrel profile; a stamped and ribbed dust cover in place of the heavier milled version; and a simplified recoil spring assembly using a dual U-shaped wire guide instead of a telescoping rod.2 Lightening cuts were milled into the bolt carrier to reduce its mass.2 Even the furniture was optimized for production, with laminated birch plywood replacing solid wood for the stock and handguards, as it was cheaper, more dimensionally stable, and less prone to warping.2

The cumulative effect of these modifications was a substantial reduction in the rifle’s overall weight. An empty AKM weighed approximately 3.3 kg, a full kilogram (about 2.2 lbs) lighter than its 4.3 kg milled-receiver predecessor.2 This made the AKM a handier and more portable weapon for the individual soldier, a clear improvement in ergonomics.

The Physics of the Problem: Lighter Rifle, Same Cartridge

The successful weight reduction of the AKM created a direct and predictable consequence rooted in fundamental physics. According to Newton’s laws of motion, recoil momentum is conserved. By decreasing the mass of the rifle while keeping the mass  and velocity of the projectile and propellant gases constant, the free recoil velocity of the firearm must necessarily increase.

This increased recoil impulse amplified the Kalashnikov design’s inherent tendency for muzzle rise. The rifle’s architecture places the bore axis above the shooter’s shoulder and grip, which serve as the primary pivot points. This offset creates a moment arm, causing the recoil force to generate a rotational torque that pivots the muzzle upward with each shot.8 For the relatively powerful 7.62x39mm cartridge, this effect was already significant. In the lighter AKM, it became a more pronounced problem, degrading controllability, particularly during sustained automatic fire.6

While the AKM did incorporate a hammer-release delaying device into the trigger group, often called a “rate reducer,” its primary function was to ensure the bolt was fully locked before the hammer could fall, acting as a safety feature. While it did have a secondary effect of slightly slowing the cyclic rate of fire, this was not enough to overcome the increased felt recoil and muzzle climb of the lighter platform.2

The timeline of the AKM’s development reveals that this controllability issue was addressed not as part of the initial 1959 design, but as a subsequent product improvement. For the first several years of its service life, from 1959 until approximately 1966, the AKM was issued with a simple threaded muzzle nut, identical to that used on late-model AK-47s, which served only to protect the barrel threads.2 This seven-year gap indicates that the need for a compensatory muzzle device was identified through extensive field trials and feedback from troops using the new, lighter rifle. The existence of formal, high-level testing of advanced muzzle device prototypes in 1963-1964 confirms that Soviet engineers were engaged in a methodical, multi-year research and development effort to solve this specific, field-identified operational deficiency.10 The slant compensator was therefore not an afterthought, but a calculated and retrofitted solution born from empirical data and a responsive engineering culture.

The Search for a Solution: Soviet Muzzle Device Experimentation (1949-1966)

The effort to manage the Kalashnikov’s recoil and muzzle climb was not a new challenge that arose with the AKM. Soviet engineers had been exploring the concept of muzzle devices since the earliest days of the AK-47’s development, providing a crucial foundation of knowledge and experience that would later inform the design of the AKM’s iconic compensator.

Early Attempts and Foundational Lessons (1949-1950)

As early as 1949 and 1950, trials were conducted at the Shchurovsky Polygon to assess methods for improving the accuracy of the original AK-47. These tests involved the evaluation of approximately twenty different experimental muzzle devices, including various active muzzle brakes and compensators.10

The results of these early experiments established a critical design constraint that would shape Soviet small arms development for decades. While testing confirmed that many of these devices were effective at improving accuracy and reducing muzzle climb, they were universally rejected for one overriding reason: their severe acoustic impact on the shooter. The redirected muzzle blast was so intense that it was reported to “deafen the shooter” and cause painful auditory sensations.10 The conclusion was that the negative physiological effect on the soldier outweighed the performance benefits, rendering such devices operationally impractical for a standard-issue infantry rifle. This early lesson underscored a core tenet of Soviet design philosophy: a weapon’s technical performance could not come at the expense of the soldier’s fundamental ability to fight effectively.

The NII-61 Prototype: A Case Study in the Perils of Complexity (1963-1964)

By the early 1960s, with the lighter AKM in service and its controllability issues becoming apparent, the search for a viable muzzle device was renewed with greater urgency. The most sophisticated and well-documented effort from this period was the testing of an advanced muzzle brake-compensator designed by NII-61 (Scientific Research Institute-61), conducted at the Rzhevsky Polygon between late 1963 and early 1964.10

The NII-61 device was a relatively complex, single-chamber design featuring five inclined windows. These were meticulously arranged to generate a corrective impulse vector directed from right-down to left-up at a 30° angle from the vertical firing plane. This was a highly engineered attempt to simultaneously counteract both the vertical muzzle climb and the rightward drift characteristic of the weapon when fired by a right-handed shooter.10

In controlled testing, the prototype demonstrated significant technical merit. It absorbed 21% of the recoil energy and, most impressively, improved the accuracy of the AKM when firing from a standing position by a factor of four, dramatically reducing the area of dispersion.10 On paper, these were exceptional results.

However, the NII-61 device was a categorical failure from a practical military standpoint, repeating the very mistakes identified a decade earlier and introducing new problems. The key failures were:

  1. Acoustic Trauma: The device caused “painful sensations in the shooter’s left ear.” Instrumented testing revealed that it more than doubled (a 2.1x increase) the sound wave pressure at the shooter’s head compared to firing without a device.10 In an era before widespread use of hearing protection, this was not merely a comfort issue but a tactical liability that could degrade situational awareness and cause permanent injury.
  2. Lack of Interchangeability: The test report noted with evident surprise that the prototypes could not be properly mounted on standard service rifles out of the box. They exhibited significant wobble and misalignment with the barrel axis, requiring individual hand-fitting by an armorer—filing the rear face and reaming the internal diameter—to be installed securely. This complete absence of interchangeability was anathema to the principles of Soviet mass production and field maintenance.10
  3. Interference with Standard Procedures: The device’s design compromised basic weapon handling and maintenance. Its length partially obstructed the blade of a mounted bayonet. More critically, it made it impossible to attach the standard muzzle cap used for cleaning the bore from the muzzle end. This forced the use of the cleaning rod in a manner that would inevitably cause abrasion and damage to the barrel’s crown over time, jeopardizing the weapon’s long-term accuracy and reliability.10

The Rzhevsky Polygon’s test commission, while acknowledging the device’s accuracy-enhancing potential, ultimately recommended against its adoption due to these severe operational drawbacks. The final verdict was that further comparative testing was needed to find a design that offered a more optimal balance between performance and practicality.10 This rejection of a technically “superior” device in favor of holistic operational effectiveness is telling. It demonstrates a sophisticated, user-centric design philosophy where the needs of the conscript soldier and the realities of large-scale warfare took precedence over maximizing a single performance statistic.

The Slant Compensator: An Elegant, Pragmatic Solution

Following the rejection of complex prototypes like the NII-61 device, Soviet engineers settled on a design that stands as a testament to the principle of pragmatic simplicity. The slant compensator, introduced around 1966, was not the most powerful device tested, but it was the optimal solution for the AKM weapon system as a whole, perfectly balancing performance with the overriding imperatives of mass production, reliability, and usability.6

Design, Function, and Physics of Operation

It is critical to apply the correct engineering terminology: the device is a compensator, not a muzzle brake.12 A muzzle brake’s primary function is to reduce the rearward force of recoil by venting gases backward or sideways. A compensator’s primary function is to apply a directional force to counteract muzzle movement—specifically, the upward and sideways “climb” or “drift” during firing.

The device itself is a marvel of simplicity: a short cylinder of steel with a diagonal cut at its forward end.15 This cut creates a single, angled baffle surface. When threaded onto the rifle of a right-handed shooter, this surface is oriented to face generally upward and to the right.2 The physics of its operation are a direct application of Newton’s Third Law of Motion. As the high-pressure propellant gases exit the muzzle behind the bullet, they expand rapidly and impinge upon this angled surface. The gas, being deflected up and to the right, creates an equal and opposite reactive force vector that pushes the muzzle of the rifle down and to the left.14 This thrust vector was precisely calculated to counteract the AKM’s natural tendency to climb and drift to the right during automatic fire.

As a secondary benefit, the downward-vectored portion of the gas blast also helps to suppress the dust and debris kicked up when firing from the prone position, a minor but tactically relevant advantage that reduces the shooter’s signature.17

Manufacturing, Materials, and Integration

The genius of the slant compensator lies not only in its function but also in its manufacturability. The design’s extreme simplicity meant it could be produced in vast quantities with minimal machining operations, likely starting from basic steel bar stock. After machining, the parts would undergo heat treatment for durability and be given a simple, corrosion-resistant black oxide or phosphate finish.15 This low-cost, high-volume production methodology was perfectly aligned with the Soviet military-industrial complex’s focus on equipping a massive conscript army for a potential continent-spanning conflict.19

The compensator attaches to the standard M14x1mm left-hand (LH) threads present on the AKM’s muzzle.15 The choice of a left-hand thread is a deliberate engineering detail; the torque imparted by the bullet’s right-hand spin through the rifling tends to tighten a left-hand threaded device, preventing it from loosening under the vibration of sustained fire.

The device is correctly oriented, or “timed,” and secured by a spring-loaded detent pin housed in the front sight block (FSB). A small notch is machined into the rear face of the compensator, which engages this pin and locks the device in the correct rotational position. This system is robust, reliable, and crucially, allows for tool-less removal and reinstallation by the soldier in the field for cleaning and maintenance.22

The Rationale for Adoption (circa 1966): The “Good Enough” Doctrine in Practice

The final decision to adopt the slant compensator was a clear victory for pragmatism over theoretical perfection. It was not the most effective compensator the Soviets tested, but it was the best solution for their specific requirements. It provided a tangible and immediately noticeable improvement in the AKM’s controllability during automatic fire, which was the core problem it was designed to solve.23

Crucially, it achieved this improvement without introducing any of the crippling operational flaws that doomed the NII-61 prototype. Its acoustic signature, while slightly louder than a bare muzzle, was not painfully so.12 It was fully interchangeable between rifles. It did not interfere with the use of the bayonet or standard cleaning procedures. And it was exceptionally cheap and easy to manufacture.

This is a Romanian slanted compensator. Image Souce: Author.

Perhaps the most decisive advantage, as noted in the archival analysis of the muzzle device trials, was its minimal effect on the bullet’s flight path.10 More powerful and complex muzzle devices often induce a significant and sometimes unpredictable shift in the weapon’s point of impact (POI) relative to its point of aim.26 The slant compensator’s effect on the bullet’s exit angle was small enough that any resulting POI shift could be easily and fully corrected by a simple elevation adjustment of the standard front sight post. This eliminated the need for new sighting components, specialized armorer tools, or complex re-zeroing procedures—a massive logistical and training benefit when dealing with an army of millions of conscripts.

The device’s perceived “imperfection” in terms of raw recoil reduction was, in fact, its greatest strength. Its mediocrity in that single performance metric was a direct and deliberate trade-off for excellence in every other relevant engineering and logistical category: cost, manufacturability, reliability, interchangeability, and user-friendliness. It solved the core problem to a degree that was “good enough” for the intended user and doctrine, without creating new, more severe problems. This is a masterclass in pragmatic military engineering, where the goal was not to create the “best compensator” in isolation, but to improve the “AKM weapon system” as a whole.

Comparative Analysis and Legacy

The AKM’s slant compensator did not exist in a vacuum. Its design and adoption can be better understood by comparing it both to what came after it in the Soviet system—the AK-74’s muzzle brake—and to the devices used by its contemporaries in the West. This comparative context reveals the unique path of Soviet small arms philosophy and the enduring influence of this simple piece of steel.

An Evolutionary Stepping Stone: AKM vs. AK-74 Muzzle Devices

The adoption of the AK-74 in 1974, chambered for the new, small-caliber, high-velocity 5.45x39mm cartridge, marked a major evolution in Soviet small arms design, and its muzzle device is a prime example of this technological leap.3

The AK-74 was fitted with a large, highly complex, and exceptionally effective true muzzle brake-compensator.12 Its sophisticated design features a large initial expansion chamber to allow gases to begin slowing, two large vertical ports on the sides to vent gas sideways and provide a powerful braking (recoil-reducing) force, and two smaller, asymmetrically drilled ports on the top front face to provide downward compensation.12 A half-moon cut on the right side of the device vents a small amount of gas to counteract lateral drift. This multi-function device was the result of a dedicated engineering effort and was necessary to tame the sharp recoil impulse of the new 5.45mm round, making an already light rifle remarkably controllable in automatic fire.17 It is vastly more effective at reducing both felt recoil and muzzle movement than the AKM’s simple slant compensator.12

AK-74 Rifle. Image Source: Wikimedia.

The dramatic increase in complexity and cost from the AKM’s device to the AK-74’s reflects a significant shift in Soviet ballistic science and resource allocation. The 7.62x39mm cartridge of the AKM produces a large volume of propellant gas at a relatively moderate pressure. The 5.45x39mm cartridge, by contrast, produces a smaller gas volume but at a much higher pressure and exit velocity.17 The physics of the problem had changed, demanding a more advanced solution. For the AKM, a simple compensator was sufficient. For the AK-74, maximizing the performance of the revolutionary new cartridge was a primary design goal, justifying the investment in a more complex and expensive component. This evolution shows that by the 1970s, Soviet small arms science had advanced, and the muzzle device was elevated from a simple accessory to a critical, performance-defining component of the weapon system.

FeatureAKM Slant CompensatorAK-74 Muzzle Brake
Primary FunctionCompensation (muzzle rise/drift)True Muzzle Brake & Compensator
Design PrincipleSingle angled baffleMulti-chamber (expansion, braking) with tuned ports
Complexity/CostVery LowHigh
Recoil ReductionMinimalSignificant
Muzzle Climb ReductionModerateVery High
Acoustic SignatureModerate increaseSignificant increase with pronounced side blast
Associated Cartridge7.62x39mm5.45x39mm

Context in Cold War Small Arms Design

A comparison with contemporary Western 7.62x51mm NATO battle rifles further highlights the uniqueness of the Soviet approach. The FN FAL, Heckler & Koch G3, and U.S. M14 all fired the more powerful 7.62x51mm rifle cartridge, which made controllable automatic fire from a shoulder-fired weapon nearly impossible.30 Consequently, their standard-issue muzzle devices were not designed for compensation. They were typically long, slotted flash hiders whose primary purpose was to reduce the weapon’s visible muzzle flash, not to mitigate recoil or muzzle climb.31 The Soviet Union’s early and firm commitment to the 7.62x39mm cartridge created a more manageable recoil problem to begin with, which in turn allowed for a much simpler and cheaper solution in the form of the slant compensator.

The Enduring Benchmark and Legacy

The AKM slant compensator is arguably the most recognizable and widely produced muzzle device in history, an aesthetic feature that is synonymous with the Kalashnikov rifle.15 Its functional legacy is just as significant. In the world of AK performance and aftermarket parts, the simple slant compensator remains the universal baseline against which all modern designs are measured. Performance tests conducted by engineers and enthusiasts invariably include the “standard slant brake” as the control group to quantify the improvements offered by more modern, and more expensive, devices.24

Its core principle—using a simple, asymmetric surface to deflect gas and create a corrective force—continues to influence modern muzzle device design. Many contemporary compensators, while employing more complex geometries, additional ports, and advanced baffles, are ultimately sophisticated expressions of the same fundamental concept pioneered by this elegantly simple piece of Soviet engineering.8

Conclusion: Pragmatic Engineering

The design and evolution of the AKM’s slant compensator provide a definitive case study in pragmatic Soviet military engineering. Its creation was not a singular flash of brilliance but the logical outcome of a deliberate, iterative, and data-driven development process that spanned years. Faced with a tangible degradation in the controllability of the new, lighter AKM rifle, Soviet designers methodically explored a range of solutions. They tested complex, high-performance prototypes that, while effective in a narrow sense, failed to meet the holistic operational requirements of a conscript army. The severe acoustic signature, lack of interchangeability, and interference with basic maintenance made these advanced designs impractical for real-world military service.

The ultimate selection of the simple slant compensator was a triumph of systems-level thinking. It perfectly balanced a tangible performance gain against the non-negotiable imperatives of mass production, low cost, logistical simplicity, and the capabilities of the end-user. It solved the immediate problem of muzzle climb to a degree deemed “good enough” for the established combat doctrine, and it did so without introducing new, more intractable problems. The AKM slant compensator is the physical manifestation of the doctrine that, in the unforgiving calculus of warfare, the optimal solution is often the simplest one that works reliably.


If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


Works cited

  1. Kalashnikov AKM: One of the most produced versions of the AK – Combat Operators, accessed July 13, 2025, https://combatoperators.com/firearms/rifles/kalashnikov-akm/
  2. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  3. 65 лет назад на вооружение были приняты АКМ и РПК, accessed July 13, 2025, https://kalashnikovgroup.ru/news/65_let_nazad_na_vooruzhenie_byli_prinyaty_akm_i_rpk
  4. Автомат Калашникова модернизированный – Википедия, accessed July 13, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82_%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9
  5. AKM shooting in Prague, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.pragueranger.cz/guns/akm/
  6. Evolution Of The AKM | An Official Journal Of The NRA – American Rifleman, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/evolution-of-the-akm/
  7. The AKM Assault Rifle | PDF | Personal Weapons – Scribd, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/137559756/The-AKM-Assault-Rifle
  8. Muzzle brake – Wikipedia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_brake
  9. Modernized AKM & AKMS – AK History Part II – YouTube, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xkws8j6WGc
  10. Полигонные испытания опытного дульного тормоза …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://gunsforum.com/topic/2398-poligonnye-ispytaniya-opytnogo-dulnogo-tormoza-kompensatora-konstruktsii-nii-61-dlya-akm-v-1964-g/
  11. Experimental AK Muzzle Brakes – Forgotten Weapons, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.forgottenweapons.com/experimental-ak-muzzle-brakes/
  12. Best Muzzle Brakes for the AK-47 Rifle Platform – Firearms News, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.firearmsnews.com/editorial/best-ak47-muzzlebrakes/471378
  13. i wish the Compensator attachment for the AK looked like the typical slanted AKM muzzle device, just me? : r/modernwarfare – Reddit, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/modernwarfare/comments/sr53ae/i_wish_the_compensator_attachment_for_the_ak/
  14. The Angled AK Muzzle Brake Explained – YouTube, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DliTcpUhGVo
  15. AK SLANT MUZZLE BRAKE – Centerfire Systems, accessed July 13, 2025, https://centerfiresystems.com/ak-slant-muzzle-brake/
  16. AK47 muzzle brake slant – YouTube, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ksDNWb4qSkY
  17. Why is the slant muzzle brake so common among AK variants and rarely if at all used with other firearms? – Quora, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-slant-muzzle-brake-so-common-among-AK-variants-and-rarely-if-at-all-used-with-other-firearms
  18. AK-Builder Slant Brake, accessed July 13, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29810
  19. TRANSFER OF AUSTRIAN GUN-BARREL FORGING TECHNOLOGY TO THE USSR – CIA, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/05508656
  20. 3. Conventional arms transfers during the Soviet period – SIPRI, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/files/books/SIPRI98An/SIPRI98An03.pdf
  21. Slant Muzzle Brake M14x1 LH Thread AK-47, AK-74, AKM Steel Matte Black, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.combathunting.com/AK_47_Accessories_-_AK_47_Parts-AK_Slant_Muzzle_Brake_14x1_LH_Thread_7_62_39mm.html
  22. Need help how do i remove the muzzle brake detent pin – Palmetto State Armory, accessed July 13, 2025, https://palmettostatearmory.com/forum/t/need-help-how-do-i-remove-the-muzzle-brake-detent-pin/35699
  23. AK-47 muzzle question : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/129mcm1/ak47_muzzle_question/
  24. Take Some Recoil Out Of Your AK With a Muzzle Brake! – YouTube, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoH0jjrdqtw
  25. AK47 Muzzle Barrel’s Front End Where The Bullet Exits – GunCreed, accessed July 13, 2025, https://guncreed.com/2024/10/01/ak47-muzzle-barrels-front-end-where-the-bullet-exits/
  26. Different Point of Impact with Different Brakes – The Original CZ Forum, accessed July 13, 2025, https://czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=65272.0
  27. The AK-74: From Soviet Small Arm To Resistance Symbol | An Official Journal Of The NRA, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-ak-74-from-soviet-small-arm-to-resistance-symbol/
  28. Эволюция автомата Калашникова: АК, АКМ, АК74, АК, АК12, АК47, accessed July 13, 2025, https://kalashnikov.media/gunsmith/
  29. Anyone have experience with AR-15/AK-47/AK-74 compensators? I’ve got a question for you. : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/e686t/anyone_have_experience_with_ar15ak47ak74/
  30. A Soviet Look at Cold War Small Arms Development – Forgotten Weapons, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.forgottenweapons.com/a-soviet-look-at-cold-war-small-arms-development/
  31. SMITH ENTERPRISE SPRINGFIELD M14 MUZZLE BRAKE 30 …, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.brownells.com/gun-parts/rifle-parts/rifle-muzzle-devices/springfield-m14-muzzle-brake-30-caliber/
  32. FN FAL – Wikipedia, accessed July 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_FAL
  33. HK G3/91 Flash Hiders / Muzzle Brakes | HKPARTS, accessed July 13, 2025, https://hkparts.net/rifle-smg-parts/hk-g3-91-series/hk-g3-91-flash-hiders-muzzle-brakes/
  34. Jmac Customs RRD-4 AK-47 Muzzle Brake Review – YouTube, accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QedItZPMj8k
  35. Testing various AK 47 Muzzle Devices on a NEDI Chinese Type 56 (Navratil N3 brake), accessed July 13, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O80wrt7XAt4
  36. Flash Hider vs Muzzle Brake | Guntology Guides, accessed July 13, 2025, https://guntology.com/firearms/flash-hiders-muzzle-brakes/

An Analysis of the Soviet AKM Rifle’s Rear Trunnions

The story of the AKM’s front and rear trunnions is inseparable from the larger narrative of the Kalashnikov rifle’s evolution. This evolution was driven less by a desire for radical redesign and more by the dogged pursuit of a manufacturing concept that was ahead of its time. The AKM, introduced in 1959, was not so much a new rifle as it was the successful fulfillment of Mikhail Kalashnikov’s original, unrealized vision: a lightweight, inexpensive, and utterly reliable assault rifle built for unprecedented mass production. The trunnions were the key engineering solution that finally made this vision a reality.

1.1 The Original Vision: The Stamped Type 1 AK (1947-1949)

From its inception, the Kalashnikov rifle was designed to be simple, cheap, and producible on a massive scale using the most advanced methods available to the post-war Soviet Union [1]. The earliest production models, now known to collectors as the “Type 1,” featured a receiver fabricated from a stamped sheet of steel. This receiver body was then joined to a machined front barrel trunnion and a rear buttstock insert [1, 2]. This approach, in theory, offered immense advantages in speed and material efficiency over traditional machining.

However, the design encountered a critical and ultimately fatal obstacle: the state of Soviet welding technology in the late 1940s [1]. The process of attaching the critical internal guide rails and the ejector to the thin, 1.3mm stamped receiver shell proved exceptionally difficult [1, 3]. The available welding techniques of the era could not consistently produce strong, reliable joints without warping the receiver or creating metallurgical weaknesses. This resulted in unacceptably high rejection rates on the production lines, creating a severe bottleneck that threatened the entire program [1, 4]. This was not a flaw in the rifle’s mechanical design, but a failure of the manufacturing technology to keep pace with the design’s ambition. Key industrial welding processes, such as CO2 shielded arc welding and electroslag welding, were only just being invented or put into production in the Soviet Union during the 1950s, a decade after the Type 1’s initial run [5, 6, 7].

1.2 The Pragmatic Retreat: The Milled Receiver AK-47 (Type 2 & Type 3, 1951-1959)

Faced with the inability to mass-produce the stamped receiver, Soviet planners made a pragmatic but costly decision: they substituted a heavy, machined receiver for the stamped body [1, 4, 8]. This was a technological retreat, but a necessary one to get a functional rifle into the hands of the Red Army. This pivot allowed the Soviet arms industry to leverage its vast experience and existing tooling from the production of older weapons like the Mosin-Nagant bolt-action rifle, which were also built around machined receivers [8, 9, 10].

These milled-receiver rifles, known as the Type 2 (1951-1957) and the improved Type 3 (1955-1959), were fundamentally different in their construction. Instead of separate components joined together, the receiver was carved from a single, solid block of forged steel [2, 4, 11]. In this design, the features of the front and rear trunnions—the barrel socket, the bolt locking lugs, the stock attachment points—were not separate parts but were integral to the receiver itself, machined directly into the steel block [2, 11]. This entirely bypassed the problematic welding step. However, the process was incredibly slow, labor-intensive, and generated a tremendous amount of wasted steel, making the rifles significantly heavier and more expensive to produce [11, 12]. The Type 3 was an iterative refinement of the Type 2, featuring different lightening cuts and furniture mounting to reduce weight slightly, but it still adhered to the same costly manufacturing philosophy [1, 2].

1.3 The Vision Realized: The AKM (1959)

By the late 1950s, a decade of focused industrial development had equipped Soviet factories with the technology needed to finally execute the original stamped-receiver concept. The result was the Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniy (AKM), or “Modernized Kalashnikov Automatic Rifle,” which entered production in 1959 [1, 13].

Designated the “Type 4” receiver, the AKM successfully returned to a lightweight body stamped from a 1.0mm sheet of steel [14, 15]. The crucial innovation that made this possible was the abandonment of structural welding in favor of a new assembly method centered on separate front and rear trunnions. These robust, machined blocks were inserted into the stamped receiver shell and permanently fixed in place with a series of high-strength rivets [14]. This system provided the necessary strength for the barrel and stock mounting points while allowing the rest of the receiver to remain light and thin. The trunnion-and-rivet system was the engineering breakthrough that solved the manufacturing puzzle of the Type 1. This new approach was so successful that it resulted in a rifle approximately 1 kg (2.2 lbs) lighter than its milled predecessor, a significant reduction that improved soldier mobility and handling [1, 14, 15]. The milled AK-47, while iconic, was ultimately an expensive and heavy detour from the intended path; the AKM, with its trunnion-based construction, was the rifle the Type 1 was always meant to be.

Table 1: Evolution of the Kalashnikov Receiver (1947-1959)

Model/TypeYears of ProductionReceiver MaterialManufacturing ProcessKey Identifying FeatureTrunnion DesignApprox. Weight
Type 1 AK1948–19491.3mm Stamped SteelStamping, Welding, RivetingStamped receiver with milled trunnion insertSeparate front trunnion, threaded barrel [1, 3]~4.65 kg (10.26 lb) [3]
Type 2 AK-471951–1957Forged SteelForging, MachiningMilled receiver with “boot” stock socket [1, 2]Integral to receiver, screwed-in barrel [2]~4.2 kg (9.3 lb)
Type 3 AK-471955–1959Forged SteelForging, MachiningMilled receiver, direct stock mount [2, 8]Integral to receiver, screwed-in barrel [2]3.47 kg (7.7 lb) [1]
Type 4 AKM1959–Present1.0mm Stamped SteelStamping, Riveting, Spot WeldingStamped receiver with small dimple [1, 4]Separate front/rear trunnions, pinned barrel [14]3.1 kg (6.8 lb) [1]

This next image is a blueprint of the rear trunnion:

This is a Soviet era drawing of the rear trunnion. The author would like to thank T. Mark Graham, of Arizona Response Systems, for sharing this with me.

Section 2: The AKM Rear Trunnion: Context and Manufacturing Doctrine

2.1. Functional Imperatives of the Rear Trunnion in a Stamped-Receiver Design

To comprehend the specific metallurgical requirements for the rear trunnion of the Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovannyj (AKM), one must first appreciate the fundamental design shift it represents from its predecessor, the AK-47. The early production AK-47 (specifically the Type 2 and Type 3 variants) was characterized by a receiver machined from a solid billet of steel.1 This method, while producing an exceptionally robust and durable frame, was labor-intensive, time-consuming, and resulted in significant material wastage. The milled receiver was, in essence, a single, monolithic structure where the critical features—such as the guide rails for the bolt carrier and the anchoring points for the barrel and stock—were integral to the main body of the firearm.

The defining innovation of the AKM, introduced in 1959, was the transition to a receiver fabricated from a stamped 1.0 mm sheet of steel.2 This change was a triumph of Soviet mass-production philosophy, dramatically reducing manufacturing time, cost, and the overall weight of the rifle by approximately 1 kg.3 However, this new design paradigm created a significant engineering challenge. The thin, stamped sheet metal receiver shell, while reinforced with ribs and folds for rigidity, lacked the inherent strength to contain the violent forces generated during the firing cycle or to securely anchor the primary components of the rifle.2

This is where the front and rear trunnions become the absolute linchpins of the design. They are not merely components; they are the structural keystones upon which the integrity of the entire stamped-receiver system rests. The rear trunnion, the focus of this analysis, serves three critical functions that demand a material of exceptional strength, toughness, and fatigue resistance.

First, it is the rearmost point of impact for the bolt carrier assembly. During the firing cycle, the bolt carrier group travels rearward at high velocity, driven by expanding propellant gases. Its travel is arrested by the front face of the rear trunnion. This repeated, high-energy impact subjects the trunnion to immense compressive stress and shock loading. The material must be hard enough to resist deformation or peening from these impacts over tens of thousands of cycles, yet tough enough to absorb the shock without becoming brittle and fracturing.

Second, the rear trunnion serves as the primary interface and anchor for the buttstock. All forces exerted on the stock—the pressure of the shooter’s shoulder, impacts from using the rifle as a brace or in hand-to-hand combat, and the general stresses of field use—are transferred through the trunnion and into the receiver body. For the fixed-stock AKM, the trunnion features a tang that extends rearward, into which the wooden stock is secured.1 This tang must withstand significant bending and torsional moments without failing.

Third, and perhaps most critically, the rear trunnion distributes these concentrated loads into the comparatively fragile 1.0 mm receiver shell. The trunnion is secured in place by several large rivets that pass through it and the sheet metal.1 The steel of the trunnion must be strong enough to provide a rigid, unyielding foundation for these rivets. If the trunnion material were to deform or the rivet holes were to elongate under stress, the rivets would loosen, leading to a catastrophic failure of the receiver’s structural integrity. The trunnion, therefore, acts as a force-distribution block, taking the pinpoint stress of the bolt carrier’s impact and the leverage of the buttstock and spreading that load across a wider area of the receiver sheet metal via the rivet pattern.

Given these functional demands, the selection of steel for the AKM rear trunnion was not a trivial matter. It required a material that could be hardened to resist impact and wear, possess sufficient ductility and toughness to prevent fracture under shock loading, and maintain its dimensional stability over a long service life in the harshest imaginable conditions. The success of the lighter, cheaper, and more mobile AKM platform was directly dependent on the metallurgical quality of this single, critical component.

2.2. Soviet Production Philosophy: The Primacy of Forging (Поковка/Штамповка)

The material selection for the AKM rear trunnion cannot be separated from the Soviet Union’s overarching military-industrial doctrine, which prioritized extreme durability, reliability under adverse conditions, and suitability for massive-scale production.5 This philosophy dictated not only the

type of steel used but, just as importantly, the method by which it was formed. For a critical, high-stress component like a trunnion, the manufacturing process of choice was unequivocally die-forging, known in Russian as поковка (pokovka) or штамповка (shtampovka).

Direct inquiries with contacts at the original Soviet-era manufacturing plants, specifically the Kalashnikov Izhmash plant and the Molot factory, have confirmed that their trunnions were produced by die-forging a steel billet into a near-net shape, which was then machined to its final, precise dimensions.6 This information is further corroborated by a Russian technical manual on AK production printed in 2001, which explicitly specifies “forging” for the trunnion.6

The decision to forge these components was a deliberate engineering choice rooted in the principles of metallurgy. Forging is a process where metal is heated and shaped by compressive forces, typically using a hammer or a press. Unlike casting, where molten metal is poured into a mold, or simple machining from bar stock, forging fundamentally alters the internal grain structure of the steel. The process forces the steel’s crystalline grains to align with the flow of the metal as it fills the die cavity, conforming to the shape of the part. This continuous, aligned grain structure results in a component with dramatically superior mechanical properties compared to other manufacturing methods.

Specifically, a forged trunnion exhibits:

  • Increased Strength and Toughness: The aligned grain flow eliminates the random, potentially weak grain boundaries found in castings and provides strength in the directions where it is most needed. This makes the part highly resistant to both impact and fatigue.
  • Elimination of Porosity: The immense pressure of the forging process closes any internal voids or gas pockets that can occur in cast parts, which act as stress concentrators and potential points of failure.
  • Structural Integrity: Compared to a part machined from bar stock, which has a unidirectional grain flow, a forged part’s grain structure follows its contours. This is particularly important for a component like a trunnion with its complex geometry of holes, bosses, and tangs, ensuring strength is maintained throughout the part.

This doctrinal adherence to forging was not unique to the Soviet Union. High-quality AK-pattern rifles produced by other Warsaw Pact nations under Soviet license followed the same principle. For example, modern Polish WBP trunnions, noted for their high quality, are advertised as being “100% machined from forged steel like the originals”.7 Similarly, military surplus Romanian trunnions are described as being made from “hammer forged carbon steel”.8 This consistency across different national arsenals demonstrates that the use of forged steel for critical components was a core tenet of the original Soviet technical data package supplied to its allies.

Therefore, the fact that the AKM rear trunnion was forged is not a minor manufacturing detail. It is a direct manifestation of a military doctrine that demanded unparalleled ruggedness. The choice of forging ensured that this keystone component could withstand the rigors of combat and abuse far better than a cheaper, cast alternative or a potentially weaker machined part. Any analysis of the specific steel alloy used must be viewed through this lens: the Soviets required a steel that was not only strong but also eminently suitable for the forging process on an industrial scale.

Section 3: Identifying the Soviet Steel Specification (GOST)

3.1. Navigating the GOST Standards: A Process of Deductive Analysis

Pinpointing the exact steel used for the Soviet AKM rear trunnion requires a forensic metallurgical investigation, as no single available document, blueprint, or manual explicitly states, “The AKM rear trunnion is made from steel grade X.” The original technical specifications are closely held state secrets or have been lost to time. Therefore, the identification process must be one of deductive reasoning, systematically analyzing available data from Russian GOST (Государственный стандарт, or State Standard) documents, technical websites, and historical sources to eliminate incorrect candidates and build an evidence-based case for the most probable alloy.

The methodology employed in this report follows three logical steps:

  1. Identify and Eliminate False Leads: The first step is to address and authoritatively debunk common misconceptions or “red herrings” that arise from superficial keyword searches in Russian technical databases. This prevents the analysis from proceeding down an incorrect path.
  2. Determine the Correct Class of Steel: Based on the known functional requirements and manufacturing methods (forging, heat treatment, high-stress application), the next step is to identify the appropriate category of steel within the GOST system. This narrows the field from thousands of potential alloys to a manageable family of materials.
  3. Isolate the Specific Grade: Within the correct class of steel, the final step is to examine the properties and designated applications of individual grades to find the one whose characteristics and intended uses align perfectly with those of a high-strength, forged, critical firearm component like a trunnion.

This process moves from the general to the specific, using the known physical and doctrinal constraints of the AKM’s design to filter the vast landscape of Soviet-era metallurgy down to a single, highly probable specification.

3.2. A Critical Clarification: The “АКМ” Aluminum Alloy Red Herring

A significant potential pitfall in the investigation of the AKM’s materials is the existence of a Soviet-era alloy designated “АКМ” under GOST 1131-76. A direct search for terms like “состав стали АКМ” (composition of steel AKM) often leads directly to technical data sheets for this material, creating the false impression that the rifle and the alloy share a name and are therefore related.9 This is a critical point of confusion that must be clarified and dismissed.

The material designated АКМ under GOST 1131-76 is not a steel alloy. It is a деформируемый алюминиевый сплав (deformable aluminum alloy).12 The full title of the standard itself confirms this: “Сплавы алюминиевые деформируемые в чушках. Технические условия,” which translates to “Strained aluminium alloys in pigs. Technical requirements”.14 The standard’s scope is for aluminum alloys intended for manufacturing ingots or for use in alloying other aluminum products.12

The chemical composition of this АКМ alloy, consisting primarily of aluminum with alloying elements such as silicon, copper, and magnesium, renders it completely unsuitable for a firearm trunnion.9 Aluminum alloys, while lightweight and corrosion-resistant, lack the hardness, shear strength, and high-temperature stability required to withstand the impact of a steel bolt carrier and contain the pressures of the 7.62x39mm cartridge. While aluminum has been used in firearm construction for less-stressed components—such as some early Soviet “waffle” pattern magazines or modern aftermarket stock adapters—its use for a primary, load-bearing component like a trunnion in a military rifle of this era is a mechanical impossibility.16

The shared “АКМ” designation is purely coincidental. The acronym for the rifle stands for Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovannyj, while the designation for the alloy likely derives from its constituent elements or an internal industrial code. Recognizing this distinction is a crucial exercise in expert vetting. A non-expert relying solely on keyword matching would likely fall into this trap, leading to a fundamentally incorrect conclusion. By examining the GOST standard itself and applying basic engineering principles, this aluminum alloy can be confidently dismissed as a red herring, allowing the investigation to focus correctly on ferrous alloys.

3.3. The Prime Candidate: Сталь 40Х (Steel 40Kh) per GOST 4543

With the aluminum alloy red herring dismissed and the requirement for a forged, hardenable steel established, the investigation can focus on the appropriate GOST standards for ferrous alloys. The most relevant standard is GOST 4543, which covers “Стали легированные конструкционные” (Alloyed Structural Steels).19 This class of materials is designed specifically for manufacturing high-strength, load-bearing parts for machinery, vehicles, and, critically, weaponry. Within this standard, one particular grade emerges as the prime candidate for the AKM rear trunnion:

Сталь 40Х (Steel 40Kh).

The evidence supporting 40Х as the correct specification is multi-faceted and compelling:

Designated Application: The most direct piece of evidence comes from a source detailing the applications of various Soviet steels. It explicitly lists “Производство оружия” (Production of weapons) as a primary use for 40Х steel. The source further specifies its suitability for “стволов, клинков и других критических компонентов оружия” (barrels, blades, and other critical weapon components) precisely because of its high strength and hardness after heat treatment.21 This provides a direct and authoritative link between this specific steel grade and the manufacturing of critical firearm parts in the Soviet industrial ecosystem. Its other listed applications—such as axles, high-strength bolts, gears, and shafts—are all components that, like a trunnion, are subjected to high torsional, compressive, and impact stresses, further reinforcing its suitability.22

Material Class and Properties: Steel 40Х is classified as an “улучшаемые стали,” a term that translates to “improvable steel” but is better understood as a quench-and-temper or hardenable steel.19 This means its mechanical properties can be significantly enhanced through heat treatment, a process known to be a key step in trunnion manufacturing. It possesses an excellent balance of strength and plasticity, meaning it can be made very hard to resist wear and impact while retaining enough ductility to prevent it from being brittle.19 Furthermore, it is described as “трудносвариваемая” (difficult to weld), which is entirely consistent with a component designed to be forged and riveted into place, not welded.24

Manufacturing Compatibility: As a structural alloy steel, 40Х is well-suited for pressure-based forming methods, including the die-forging process established as the Soviet standard for trunnions.6 Its chemical composition allows for consistent results in large-scale forging operations, a key requirement for the massive production numbers of the AKM.

The designation “40Х” itself provides insight into its basic composition. In the Soviet/Russian nomenclature, the “40” indicates a nominal carbon content of 0.40%, and the “Х” (the Cyrillic letter Kha, corresponding to “Kh” or “H” in Latin script) signifies that the primary alloying element is Chromium (Хром). This simple, robust chromium steel formulation aligns perfectly with the Soviet preference for effective, non-exotic, and cost-efficient materials.

The specific chemical and mechanical properties, detailed in the tables below, confirm its status as the ideal candidate material.

Table 2: Chemical Composition of Soviet Сталь 40Х (GOST 4543-71)

This table provides the specified elemental composition for Steel 40Х according to the relevant Soviet-era state standard. This chemical fingerprint is the basis for all further comparative analysis.

ElementSymbolMass Fraction (%)Source(s)
CarbonC0.36 – 0.4419
ChromiumCr0.80 – 1.1019
ManganeseMn0.50 – 0.8019
SiliconSi0.17 – 0.3719
NickelNi≤0.3019
CopperCu≤0.3019
SulfurS≤0.03519
PhosphorusP≤0.03519

Table 3: Key Mechanical and Physical Properties of Soviet Сталь 40Х

This table outlines the performance characteristics of Steel 40Х, demonstrating its suitability for the high-stress environment of a firearm’s action. Properties are state-dependent (e.g., annealed vs. hardened).

PropertyValueCondition / NotesSource(s)
Tensile Strength980 MPa (minimum)For a 25mm bar, quenched and tempered.24
Yield Strength785 MPa (minimum)For a 25mm bar, quenched and tempered.24
Hardness, Brinell≤217 HBAnnealed (softened for machining).24
Density≈7820−7850 kg/m³19
Critical Point (Ac1)≈743 °CTemperature at which austenite begins to form during heating.24
Critical Point (Ac3)≈782−815 °CTemperature at which transformation to austenite is complete.24
Spheroidize Annealing820 – 840 °CHeat treatment to prepare the steel for machining.19
Quenching Temperature840 – 860 °CHardening temperature, followed by oil quench.19

The sum of this evidence—the direct link to weapons production, the perfect match in material class and properties, and the compatibility with Soviet manufacturing doctrine—builds an overwhelmingly strong case. The analysis concludes with a high degree of confidence that the steel specified for the original Soviet AKM rear trunnion was Сталь 40Х (Steel 40Kh), manufactured in accordance with GOST 4543.

Section 4: Comparative Analysis and Modern Equivalents

4.1. A Survey of Modern Reproduction and Aftermarket Materials

Understanding the original Soviet specification is only half of the equation for a modern historian, gunsmith, or builder. It is equally important to understand how this historical standard compares to the materials used in the production of contemporary AK-pattern rifles and standalone components, particularly those available in the Western, and specifically the U.S., market. A survey of these modern materials reveals a range of different alloys being used, driven by factors such as domestic availability, cost, and established manufacturing practices.

One of the most frequently cited materials, especially in the context of home-building and receiver flats, is 4130 steel. This is a chromium-molybdenum (“chromoly”) alloy known for its good strength-to-weight ratio and weldability. Several U.S. vendors offer receiver blanks and flats made from 4130 steel, typically in an annealed (softened) state that requires the builder to perform the final heat treatment after the receiver is bent and assembled.28 Some aftermarket trunnions are also advertised as being made from 4130.30

A more common and generally higher-grade material used for modern, commercially produced trunnions is 4140 steel. This is also a chromoly steel but with a higher carbon content than 4130, allowing it to achieve greater hardness and strength after heat treatment. Numerous U.S. manufacturers, such as Occam Defense and Century Arms (for their BFT47 model), explicitly state that their trunnions are milled from solid blocks of 4140 steel.31 This alloy is a popular choice for high-strength machinery parts and is widely available in the U.S. industrial supply chain.

For even more demanding applications, 4150 steel is sometimes used. This alloy has a still higher carbon content and is often specified for barrels due to its excellent wear resistance and strength. At least one U.S. vendor offers a front trunnion machined from a 4150 steel forging, positioning it as a premium component.33

Another high-quality alloy seen in the U.S. market is 4340AQ (Aircraft Quality) steel. This is a nickel-chromium-molybdenum alloy known for its exceptional toughness and fatigue resistance. Prominent component manufacturers like Toolcraft and Palmetto State Armory use forged 4340AQ steel for their front trunnions, indicating its status as a top-tier material for this application.34

It is also noteworthy that many of the highest-quality European-made components, such as those from WBP in Poland, often emphasize the manufacturing process over the specific alloy designation. They are described as being “machined from forged steel” or “made to original Military specifications,” with the understanding that the combination of quality forging and proper heat treatment is what guarantees performance, echoing the original Soviet doctrine.7 This focus on process highlights that the specific alloy name is only one part of the quality equation.

This survey demonstrates that while a variety of high-quality alloy steels are used in modern AK production, there is no single standard. The most common choices in the U.S. market appear to be 4140 and 4130, with premium options like 4150 and 4340 also available. The next logical step is to determine which, if any, of these common modern steels is the true equivalent to the original Soviet 40Х.

4.2. Establishing the True Equivalent: 40Х vs. AISI/SAE Grades

The prevalence of 4130 and 4140 steels in the American AK building community has led to a widespread, albeit often implicit, assumption that one of these alloys is the correct modern substitute for the original Soviet steel. However, a direct, element-for-element comparison of the material chemistries reveals a different and more precise conclusion. While 4140 is a functionally excellent substitute, the closest chemical equivalent to Soviet Сталь 40Х is, in fact, AISI 5140 steel.

This conclusion becomes clear when the official specifications are placed side-by-side. The defining characteristic of Soviet 40Х is that it is a simple chromium-alloy steel. Its primary alloying element, beyond carbon, is chromium, which is added to increase hardness, strength, and wear resistance.19

Let us examine the American counterparts:

  • AISI 41xx series (e.g., 4130, 4140): These are chromium-molybdenum steels. The “41” designation in the AISI/SAE system indicates the presence of both chromium and molybdenum. Molybdenum is a powerful alloying agent that significantly increases a steel’s hardenability (the depth to which it can be hardened), high-temperature strength, and toughness. While this makes 4140 an outstanding material for a trunnion, the presence of molybdenum makes it chemically distinct from the simpler Soviet 40Х alloy.
  • AISI 51xx series (e.g., 5140): These are chromium steels. The “51” designation indicates that chromium is the principal alloying element. AISI 5140 steel was specifically developed to provide deep hardening and high strength through a simple chromium addition, without the need for other strategic elements like molybdenum or nickel.

The table below provides a direct comparison of the chemical compositions, making the equivalence undeniable.

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Chemical Compositions: Soviet 40Х vs. Common AISI Grades

This table juxtaposes the elemental makeup of the identified Soviet steel with its potential American equivalents. The data clearly illustrates the near-identical formulation of 40Х and 5140, and the distinct addition of molybdenum in the 41xx series steels.

ElementSoviet Сталь 40Х (GOST 4543-71)AISI 5140 (The True Equivalent)AISI 4140 (The Common Substitute)AISI 4130 (Another Common Substitute)
Carbon (C)0.36 – 0.44%0.38 – 0.43%0.38 – 0.43%0.28 – 0.33%
Chromium (Cr)0.80 – 1.10%0.70 – 0.90%0.80 – 1.10%0.80 – 1.10%
Manganese (Mn)0.50 – 0.80%0.70 – 0.90%0.75 – 1.00%0.40 – 0.60%
Silicon (Si)0.17 – 0.37%0.15 – 0.35%0.15 – 0.35%0.15 – 0.35%
Molybdenum (Mo)Not specifiedNot specified0.15 – 0.25%0.15 – 0.25%
Phosphorus (P)≤0.035%≤0.035%≤0.035%≤0.035%
Sulfur (S)≤0.035%≤0.040%≤0.040%≤0.040%
19

As the table demonstrates, the composition of 40Х and 5140 are nearly identical across all major elements. Both are medium-carbon (around 0.40% C) steels alloyed with a similar percentage of chromium (around 0.8-1.0% Cr) and manganese. In stark contrast, both 4140 and 4130 contain a significant and deliberate addition of molybdenum, placing them in a different metallurgical family.

The reason for the prevalence of 4140 in the U.S. market is not one of historical fidelity but of industrial practicality. AISI 4140 is one of the most common and widely available through-hardening alloy steels in North America. It is a known quantity for machine shops and manufacturers, with well-understood heat treatment protocols. AISI 5140, while chemically simpler, is less common in the general supply chain. Therefore, manufacturers choose 4140 because it is a cost-effective, readily available material that meets or exceeds all the functional requirements of an AKM trunnion.

This distinction is crucial. For a builder or historian seeking the highest degree of authenticity in a reproduction, AISI 5140 is the technically correct choice as it most faithfully replicates the chemistry of the original Soviet steel. For a practical, functional build, a high-quality trunnion made from forged 4140 is an excellent, robust, and entirely appropriate option. The key is to understand that the common use of 4140 is a modern adaptation based on logistics, not a direct continuation of the original Soviet specification.

Section 5: Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1. Definitive Specification

The comprehensive analysis of Soviet-era state standards (GOST), manufacturing doctrines, and comparative metallurgy leads to a definitive conclusion. The investigation successfully navigated and dismissed a significant red herring related to a similarly named but materially inappropriate aluminum alloy (АКМ per GOST 1131-76). By focusing on the correct class of alloyed structural steels and cross-referencing their designated applications and properties with the known functional demands of the component, this report identifies the material used for the original, Soviet-produced AKM fixed-stock rear trunnion with a high degree of confidence.

The specified material was Сталь 40Х (Steel 40Kh), manufactured in accordance with GOST 4543. This is a medium-carbon, chromium-alloyed structural steel. Furthermore, the component was not machined from simple bar stock but was die-forged to create a superior grain structure, then machined to final dimensions and heat-treated to achieve the required hardness and toughness. This combination of a specific, robust alloy and a strength-enhancing manufacturing process was fundamental to the success and legendary durability of the AKM platform. All available credible evidence points to this specification, and no substantive evidence supports any other.

5.2. Guidance for Historians, Gunsmiths, and Collectors

Based on these findings, the following guidance is offered to individuals engaged in the study, construction, or restoration of AKM-pattern rifles. The choice of material should be dictated by the ultimate goal of the project, whether it be absolute historical accuracy or modern functional performance.

For Historical Accuracy:

For projects where the primary objective is to create a clone, restoration, or museum-quality reproduction that is as faithful as possible to the original Soviet design, the material of choice for the rear trunnion should be forged AISI 5140 steel. As demonstrated by the comparative chemical analysis (Table 3), AISI 5140 is the closest and most direct modern equivalent to the Soviet Сталь 40Х. It replicates the simple, effective chromium-alloy chemistry of the original material without the addition of other alloying elements like molybdenum. Sourcing a trunnion specifically made from forged 5140 and ensuring it is properly heat-treated will result in a component that is metallurgically almost identical to one produced in the Izhmash or Tula arsenals during the Cold War.

For Practical Application and Modern Builds:

For a functional rifle intended for regular use, where absolute historical accuracy is secondary to performance and availability, a high-quality trunnion made from forged and properly heat-treated AISI 4140 or 4340AQ steel is an excellent and entirely suitable choice. These chromium-molybdenum (4140) and nickel-chromium-molybdenum (4340) alloys are staples of the modern U.S. firearms industry for good reason.32 They offer outstanding strength, toughness, and hardenability that meet, and in some cases may exceed, the performance characteristics of the original 40Х steel. The prevalence of these alloys is a function of modern supply chain logistics and cost-effectiveness in the North American market. A builder can be confident that a trunnion from a reputable manufacturer using these materials will provide a safe, durable, and long-lasting foundation for their rifle.

The Importance of Manufacturing Method:

Finally, it must be reiterated that regardless of the specific alloy chosen, the manufacturing method remains a critical factor in the component’s quality. A forged trunnion will always be structurally superior to a cast component for this high-stress application. The forging process, a cornerstone of the original Soviet design philosophy, imparts a level of strength and fatigue resistance that cannot be replicated by casting.6 Therefore, when selecting a rear trunnion, priority should be given to those that are explicitly described as being machined from a forging, as this adheres most closely to the design intent and proven reliability of the Kalashnikov system.


Works cited

  1. Beginners Guide To AK-47 Parts And Function, accessed July 14, 2025, https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/guide-to-ak47-parts/
  2. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  3. AKM Russian 7.62mm Automatic Assault Rifle – ODIN, accessed July 14, 2025, https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/WEG/Asset/81938b91ee77ceadcef64a66bf7c3f23
  4. AKM – I Like to Hear Myself Talk History, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.hearmyselftalkhistory.com/featured-firearm/akm
  5. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
  6. Kalashnikov and Molot made AK trunnions – AK Operators Union …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.akoperatorsunionlocal4774.com/2017/03/kalashnikov-made-ak-trunnions/
  7. 7.62×39 WBP Polish AK47 Forged Front Barrel Trunnion – Arms of America, accessed July 14, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/wbp-front-trunnion-762/
  8. Surplus Romanian Oversized Front Trunnion – Rifle Dynamics, accessed July 14, 2025, https://rifledynamics.com/surplus-romanian-oversized-front-trunnion/
  9. Сталь АКМ: характеристики, расшифровка, химический состав, accessed July 14, 2025, https://metal.place/ru/wiki/akm/337149/
  10. Сплав алюминиевый АКМ – Aloro, accessed July 14, 2025, https://aloro.org/grades/su/gr-akm
  11. Сплав АКМ — расшифровка, хим. состав – Алюминий – Scraptraffic, accessed July 14, 2025, https://scraptraffic.com/splav/akm
  12. АКМ – Алюминиевый деформируемый сплав Марочник стали и …, accessed July 14, 2025, http://www.splav-kharkov.com/mat_start.php?name_id=1613
  13. AKM / АКМ Aluminium wrought alloys, accessed July 14, 2025, http://www.splav-kharkov.com/en/e_mat_start.php?name_id=1613
  14. ГОСТ 1131-76 Сплавы алюминиевые деформируемые в чушках. Технические условия (с Изменениями N 1, 2) – docs.cntd.ru, accessed July 14, 2025, https://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200009669
  15. ГОСТ 1131-76. Сплавы алюминиевые деформируемые в чушках. Технические условия, accessed July 14, 2025, https://internet-law.ru/gosts/gost/34261/
  16. Identifying & Collecting the 7.62×39 AK-47/AKM Magazine – Small Arms Defense Journal, accessed July 14, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/identifying-collecting-the-7-62×39-ak-47akm-magazine/
  17. SAMSON MANUFACTURING CORP REAR TRUNNION FOLDING STOCK ADAPTER FOR AK-47 – Brownells, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.brownells.com/gun-parts/rifle-parts/rifle-stocks-parts/rear-trunnion-folding-stock-adapter-for-ak-47/
  18. AK-47 1913 Rear Trunnion Folding Stock Adapter – Samson Manufacturing, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.samson-mfg.com/ak-47-1913-rear-trunnion.html
  19. Сталь 40Х ГОСТ 4543-2018 характеристики полный обзор, accessed July 14, 2025, https://xn--50-6kct5aad3c.xn--p1ai/stal-40x/
  20. Сталь 40Х: расшифровка, характеристики и механические, accessed July 14, 2025, https://m-investspb.ru/poleznaya-informatsiya/stal-40kh
  21. Купить сталь 40Х калиброванную – Металлопрокат Ярославцев, accessed July 14, 2025, https://yametalloprokat.ru/steel-40h
  22. Сталь марки 40Х в России – характеристики, аналоги, свойства, accessed July 14, 2025, https://metatorg.ru/marki-stali-i-splavy/stal_konstruktcionnaya/stal_konstruktsionnaya_legirovannaya/stal_konstruktsionnaya_legirovannaya_40kh/
  23. расшифровка и характеристики | гост и применение марки стали 40Х – ТД «Ареал, accessed July 14, 2025, https://areal-metal.ru/spravka/marka-stali-40h
  24. 40Х – Сталь конструкционная легированная Марочник стали и сплавов, accessed July 14, 2025, http://www.splav-kharkov.com/mat_start.php?name_id=32
  25. Сталь марки 40Х – Центральный металлический портал, accessed July 14, 2025, https://metallicheckiy-portal.ru/marki_metallov/stk/40X
  26. Сталь 40х: характеристики, применение, таблица с маркировкой и расшифровкой, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.atissteel.ru/stal-40h-harakteristiki
  27. Прокат калиброванный ст. 40Х ГОСТ 4543-71 характеристики, accessed July 14, 2025, https://metizorel.ru/calibr4543.html
  28. AK47 7.62 Flat With Trunnion Holes – AK-Builder.com, accessed July 14, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29823
  29. AK-Builder Non FFL Prebent US AKM 7.62×39 Receiver Blank With Trunnion Holes, accessed July 14, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=31296
  30. AK47 Fixed Stock Rear Trunnion – Carolina Shooters Supply, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.carolinashooterssupply.com/AK47-Fixed-Stock-Rear-Trunnion-p/css-ak47-rear-trunnion.htm
  31. 1913 Rear Trunnion – Occam Defense Solutions, accessed July 14, 2025, https://occamdefense.com/1913-rear-trunnion/
  32. BFT47 – Century Arms, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.centuryarms.com/bft47-ri4317-n.html
  33. AK47 AKM Front Trunnion – Carolina Shooters Supply, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.carolinashooterssupply.com/AK47-AKM-Front-Trunnion-p/css-ak47-front-trunnion.htm
  34. Trunnions | Builders Parts | Parts & Accessories | AK-47 – Palmetto State Armory, accessed July 14, 2025, https://palmettostatearmory.com/ak-47/ak-parts/ak-builders-parts/ak-trunnions.html
  35. Grade 5140 Steel Coil – SAE & AISI 5140 Steel | Siegal Steel Company, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.siegalsteel.com/steel-grades/special-order-products/alloys/grade-5140
  36. AISI 5140 | 41Cr4 | DIN1.7035 steel round bars-Fuhong steel, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.fuhongforge.com/aisi-5140-alloy-steel/

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


An Analysis of the Soviet AKM Rifle’s Front Trunnions

The 1959 introduction of the Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniy (AKM) marked a pivotal moment in the history of Soviet small arms manufacturing and global military doctrine. This modernized rifle represented the culmination of a decade-long effort to refine the original AK-47 design, moving away from the costly and time-consuming milled receivers that characterized the Type 2 and Type 3 variants.1 The AKM’s design was revolutionary in its embrace of a mass-producible 1.0 mm stamped sheet steel receiver, a manufacturing approach that had proven problematic in the earliest Type 1 AK-47s but was now perfected.4 This fundamental shift in construction philosophy, from a solid block of steel to a lightweight folded sheet, necessitated the creation of a new, discrete component to bear the immense stresses of firing: the front trunnion.

Known in Russian technical literature as the передний вкладыш (peredniy vkladysh), or “front insert,” the trunnion is the functional heart of the AKM. While the stamped receiver provides the chassis, the trunnion performs the critical tasks previously handled by the forward section of the heavy milled receiver block. It is the structural hub that rigidly secures the barrel, provides the hardened locking abutments for the rotating bolt, contains the immense chamber pressures generated by the 7.62x39mm cartridge (The CIP maximum chamber pressure for the 7.62x39mm cartridge is 355 MPa, which is equivalent to 51,488 psi ), and transmits the violent recoil forces from the bolt carrier group to the receiver shell.6 The mechanical integrity, material composition, and manufacturing quality of this single component are therefore paramount to the safety, accuracy, and operational longevity of the entire weapon system. Its design and fabrication were not afterthoughts but central to the engineering solution that made the lightweight, ubiquitous AKM possible.

The enduring reliability of the AKM platform under the most adverse conditions is a direct testament to the material science and manufacturing doctrine behind its key components. This report seeks to provide a definitive, evidence-based analysis of the specific type of steel used for the front trunnion of the Soviet-era AKM, also commonly referred to by collectors as the AK-47 Type 4.1 By synthesizing data from Russian-language technical and historical sources, analyzing Soviet-era state material standards (GOST), and drawing comparisons to modern engineering practices, this investigation will forensically identify the specific steel grade, manufacturing process, and heat treatment protocols employed by the Soviet military-industrial complex to create one of the most robust and critical components in modern firearms history.

Section 1: The Engineering of the AKM Trunnion: Function and Fabrication

The journey to the AKM’s stamped receiver was neither simple nor direct. Initial attempts at producing a stamped receiver for the Type 1 AK-47 were plagued by manufacturing difficulties, particularly in welding the critical guide rails, leading to high rejection rates.5 The immense pressure to field a new service rifle forced a pragmatic but costly deviation. Soviet industry reverted to a more traditional and resource-intensive method: milling the entire receiver from a solid block of steel. This resulted in the heavy, durable, but slow-to-produce Type 2 (milled from a forging) and Type 3 (milled from bar stock) AK-47s.1 While effective, these rifles were antithetical to the Soviet doctrine of rapid, large-scale production for a mass-conscript army.

The introduction of the AKM in 1959 signaled that these production hurdles had been overcome.1 The design genius of the AKM was not merely in stamping a piece of steel into a U-shape; it was in the strategic isolation of stresses. The engineers recognized that 90% of the receiver was simply a housing, while all of the critical forces were concentrated at the front, where the barrel joined and the bolt locked. The solution was to concentrate the complex, high-strength requirements into a relatively small, precision-made front trunnion that could then be securely riveted into the simple, inexpensive, and rapidly produced stamped steel shell.3 This modular approach was a masterstroke of production efficiency. It allowed the receiver shell to be made quickly on massive presses, while the more complex trunnion could be manufactured on a separate, specialized line. This component was the enabling technology that made the lightweight, reliable, and globally prolific AKM a reality.

This is a Soviet era drawing of the front trunnion. The author would like to thank T. Mark Graham, of Arizona Response Systems, for sharing this with me.

Subsection 1.1: Anatomy of a Critical Component: Analyzing the Forces on the Front Trunnion

The front trunnion is a marvel of compact, multi-functional engineering, subjected to a brutal cycle of forces with every shot fired. A detailed mechanical analysis reveals its four primary roles:

  1. Barrel Mounting: The trunnion features a precisely machined journal into which the barrel is pressed and secured with a transverse pin.3 This interface is responsible for maintaining the rifle’s critical headspace—the distance from the bolt face to the cartridge seat—and ensuring a rigid, consistent alignment of the barrel with the sighting plane. Any failure or deformation here would be catastrophic.
  2. Bolt Lock-up: Inside the trunnion are two robust, precisely machined locking recesses. As the bolt rotates into battery, its two opposing lugs engage these surfaces. This lock-up must contain the full rearward thrust of the cartridge case upon firing. For the 7.62x39mm M43 cartridge, this involves peak chamber pressures that can exceed 51,000 psi. The trunnion lugs must withstand this force without shearing, deforming, or developing stress fractures over tens of thousands of cycles.
  3. Impact Absorption: The AKM operates on a long-stroke gas piston system, known for its powerful and violent action.5 At the rearmost point of its travel, the bolt carrier assembly slams into the front face of the trunnion to initiate the camming action that unlocks the bolt. The trunnion must absorb this high-energy, repetitive impact without cracking or peening.
  4. Recoil Transmission: As the central structural element, the trunnion serves as the bridge between the barrel/bolt group and the receiver. It transfers the entire recoil impulse from the point of firing into the receiver shell and, ultimately, to the shooter’s shoulder. Its riveted connection to the receiver must be strong enough to handle these shear and tensile loads without loosening over time.
Russian front trunnion. Image provided by Vladimir Onokoy to the author.

Subsection 1.2: The Soviet Manufacturing Doctrine: From “Стальной Поковки” (Steel Forging) to Final Form

The method of manufacturing the trunnion was as critical as the material itself. Russian-language military and historical sources are unambiguous on this point: the AKM front trunnion was fabricated from a “стальной поковки” (stal’noy pokovki), which translates directly to “steel forging”.6 This was not a part cast from molten metal or machined directly from a simple bar of steel. The process began with a block of steel being heated to a plastic state and then hammered into a rough shape using a set of dies, a process known as die forging.10

The metallurgical advantages of this choice are profound and speak to a deep understanding of materials science within the Soviet design bureaus. Forging imparts several key benefits over other methods like casting:

  • Refined Grain Structure: The intense pressure of the forging process breaks down the coarse, random grain structure of the initial steel billet, refining it into a fine, uniform structure.
  • Oriented Grain Flow: Crucially, the forging process forces the metal’s internal grain to flow and align with the contours of the part. This creates continuous grain lines that follow the shape of the locking lugs and barrel journal, drastically increasing the component’s toughness, ductility, and resistance to fatigue and impact. It is analogous to the difference in strength between a piece of wood cut with the grain versus against it.
  • Elimination of Porosity: Forging physically compresses the steel, eliminating the microscopic voids, gas pockets, and inclusions that can be present in castings. These defects act as stress risers and are often the origin points for catastrophic fractures.

The explicit choice of forging over casting—a method used in some modern, lower-quality commercial AK variants which have demonstrated notable failures 11—is a foundational Soviet military principle in action. For a critical, high-load component like a trunnion, where reliability is paramount, the superior toughness and fatigue life of a forging was non-negotiable. After the initial forging process created the basic shape and optimized grain structure, the part was then subjected to precision machining operations to cut the final, critical dimensions of the locking lug surfaces, the barrel journal, and the rivet holes.10 This two-step method combined the raw strength of forging with the high precision of machining, creating a component optimized for its demanding role.

Section 2: Primary Evidence and Interpretation: Decoding Soviet-Era Documentation

Subsection 2.1: Analysis of the Key Descriptor: “Легированная Конструкционная Сталь” (Alloy Structural Steel)

The most significant piece of direct evidence regarding the trunnion’s material comes from the Russian military history publication dogswar.ru. It states that the primary load-bearing insert—the front trunnion—is manufactured from “легированная конструкционная сталь” (legirovannaya konstruktsionnaya stal’).6 A careful deconstruction of this technical term provides the primary vector for our investigation:

  • Сталь (Stal’): “Steel.” The base material is an alloy of iron and carbon.
  • Конструкционная (Konstruktsionnaya): “Structural.” This is a broad but important classification. It designates the steel as being intended for use in construction and machine-building applications where mechanical properties—such as tensile strength, yield strength, toughness, and fatigue resistance—are the primary design considerations. This immediately rules out tool steels (valued for hardness and wear resistance at the expense of toughness) and simple sheet steels.
  • Легированная (Legirovannaya): “Alloyed” or “Alloy.” This is the most critical descriptor. It confirms that the steel is not a simple carbon steel. Elements other than iron and carbon have been deliberately added to the melt in controlled quantities to achieve specific, enhanced properties that cannot be obtained with carbon alone.

This three-word phrase, therefore, narrows the field of potential materials from hundreds of possibilities to a specific class of steels defined under the Soviet standards system: alloyed structural steels. In the context of the Soviet Union’s focus on logistical simplicity and the use of widely available materials for mass production 5, this term does not imply a complex or exotic high-alloy steel (like a modern chrome-moly-vanadium specialty steel). Instead, it points toward a well-defined, economical, and extensively produced family of medium-carbon structural steels that contain key, but common, alloying elements.

Subsection 2.2: Contextual Clues from the Soviet Military-Industrial Complex

To further refine the search, it is instructive to examine the material specifications for other related components produced within the Soviet sphere of influence. This establishes a pattern of material selection and demonstrates the specificity of Soviet engineering.

For instance, analysis of the 5.45x39mm 7N6 cartridge, which replaced the 7.62x39mm, reveals that its mild steel penetrator core was made from Steel 10 (Сталь 10), a plain low-carbon steel.13 This shows that specific, numbered grades of steel were indeed called out in technical packages.

More directly relevant is the material used for Warsaw Pact AK magazines. High-quality Bulgarian steel magazines, produced to Soviet-era specifications, are explicitly documented as being manufactured from heat-treated, high-grade carbon steel compliant with GOST 1050-88.14 This provides a direct and powerful link to a specific Soviet state standard for a high-stress firearm component. The use of different steels for different parts—a soft, low-carbon steel for a bullet core designed to deform, a hardenable carbon steel for a magazine body requiring rigidity, and a tough, forgeable alloy steel for a trunnion—reveals a highly sophisticated and deliberate material selection process. It was not a crude, one-size-fits-all approach but a tailored engineering strategy based on the unique mechanical demands of each part. The evidence strongly suggests that the “alloy structural steel” of the trunnion would also be defined by a specific GOST standard.

Section 3: Identifying Candidate Materials: An Analysis of Soviet GOST Standards

The entire Soviet industrial base operated under the framework of the ГОСТ (GOST, an acronym for Gosudarstvennyy standart or State Standard). This all-encompassing system of technical standards ensured uniformity, interoperability, and quality control. The description “alloy structural steel” points toward two primary candidate standards, each representing a different but equally valid Soviet engineering philosophy.

Subsection 3.1: Candidate Standard 1: GOST 1050-88 — The “Mass Production” Philosophy

The first candidate is GOST 1050-88: “Sized Bars Made Of High-Quality Structural Carbon Steel with A Special Surface Finish.” While its title specifies “carbon” steel, the standard includes grades with significant manganese content (0.50-0.80%), which technically classifies them as low-alloy steels and fits the description of “alloy structural steel” in the Soviet context. The use of this standard for other high-stress components like magazines supports its candidacy. This choice would reflect a philosophy of using a common, economical, and versatile steel suitable for massive-scale production. The most likely grades from this standard are Steel 40, Steel 45, and Steel 50, which possess the medium carbon content necessary for effective heat treatment.

Table 1: Chemical Composition of GOST 1050-88 Candidate Steels (%)

Steel GradeCarbon (C)Silicon (Si)Manganese (Mn)Chromium (Cr)Sulfur (S)Phosphorus (P)
Steel 400.37 – 0.450.17 – 0.370.50 – 0.80≤0.25≤0.040≤0.035
Steel 450.42 – 0.500.17 – 0.370.50 – 0.80≤0.25≤0.040≤0.035
Steel 500.47 – 0.550.17 – 0.370.50 – 0.80≤0.25≤0.040≤0.035

Subsection 3.2: Candidate Standard 2: GOST 4543-71 — The “High Performance” Philosophy

The second, and perhaps more likely, candidate is GOST 4543-71: “Rolled products from alloyed structural steel.”10 The title of this standard is a near-perfect match for the primary source description of “легированная конструкционная сталь”.7 This standard covers steels with more significant alloying elements, such as chromium, which are specifically designed for high-strength, high-fatigue applications. This choice would reflect a philosophy of selecting a specialized, higher-performance material specifically for the most critical component in the rifle. The most likely grades from this standard are

40X and 45X, which are chromium-alloyed steels.

Table 2: Chemical Composition of GOST 4543-71 Candidate Steels (%) 12

Steel GradeCarbon (C)Silicon (Si)Manganese (Mn)Chromium (Cr)Sulfur (S)Phosphorus (P)
40X (40Cr)0.36 – 0.440.17 – 0.370.50 – 0.800.80 – 1.10≤0.035≤0.035
45X (45Cr)0.41 – 0.490.17 – 0.370.50 – 0.800.80 – 1.10≤0.035≤0.035

Section 4: The Decisive Process: Heat Treatment and Final Performance Characteristics

Subsection 4.1: The Metallurgical Imperative: Balancing Hardness and Toughness

The raw, normalized properties of the steel forging are insufficient for the final application. A trunnion must possess a complex combination of competing properties: the locking lug surfaces must be extremely hard to resist wear and deformation from the repeated impact and friction of the bolt lugs, while the core of the component must remain tough and ductile to absorb the shock of firing and bolt carrier impact without fracturing. A material that is uniformly hardened to an extreme degree will be brittle and prone to catastrophic failure. The method for achieving this critical balance of a hard, wear-resistant case and a tough, shock-resistant core is heat treatment.

Subsection 4.2: Analysis of GOST-Specified Heat Treatment Protocols

Both GOST standards provide detailed protocols for heat treatment.14 The process for a component like a trunnion would involve two key stages:

  1. Hardening (Закалка, Zakalka): The machined forging is heated to a specific austenitizing temperature, where its internal crystal structure transforms. For Steel 45, this is 820–860°C; for 45X, it is 840°C.14 Once uniformly heated, it is rapidly cooled (quenched) in a medium like water or oil. This rapid cooling traps the carbon in a very hard, brittle, needle-like crystal structure known as martensite.
  2. Tempering (Отпуск, Otpusk): The now-hardened but brittle part is reheated to a much lower temperature (for Steel 45, 550–600°C; for 45X, 520°C) and held for a period.14 This process allows some carbon to precipitate out of the martensite, relieving internal stresses and transforming the microstructure into tempered martensite. This crucial step reduces brittleness and restores a significant amount of toughness, sacrificing some of the peak hardness for a much more durable final product.

The precise control of these parameters allows the engineer to dial in the final properties of the component. For a trunnion, a target hardness in the range of 40-45 on the Rockwell C scale (HRC) is considered ideal, providing excellent surface durability while ensuring the core remains tough enough to prevent fracture. Both families of candidate steels are capable of achieving this hardness range. Data within GOST 1050-88 shows that Steel 45 can achieve a hardness of 49-58 HRC after quenching, which is then reduced during tempering to the desired final hardness.

Section 5: A Comparative Framework: Soviet Steels vs. Modern International Equivalents

Subsection 5.1: An Examination of Modern Materials for AK-Pattern Trunnions

To contextualize the Soviet material choice, it is useful to examine the steels used in high-quality modern commercial and military production of AK-pattern rifles. These materials represent the current state-of-the-art and serve as a valuable performance benchmark. Across the industry, the most commonly specified and respected materials for forged AK trunnions are chromium-molybdenum (chromoly) alloy steels.

The two most prominent grades are:

  • AISI 4140 Steel: A medium-carbon chromoly steel renowned for its excellent balance of toughness, fatigue strength, and wear resistance after heat treatment. It is a go-to material for high-stress applications from firearm components to automotive axles.
  • AISI 4150 Steel: Similar to 4140 but with a higher carbon content, allowing it to achieve greater hardness. It is often specified for military-grade barrels and other components requiring maximum durability.

These modern choices validate the fundamental engineering requirements for a trunnion: a forgeable, medium-carbon alloy steel that responds exceptionally well to heat treatment.

Subsection 5.2: Drawing Parallels: How Modern Material Choices Validate Historical Soviet Engineering

When the chemical and mechanical properties of the Soviet candidates are placed alongside their modern counterparts, a clear picture of parallel technological development emerges. The Soviet engineers, working with the materials available to their massive industrial base, arrived at solutions that were functionally equivalent to the more complex alloys used today.

The steels from GOST 1050-88 (Steel 45, Steel 50) achieve their properties through a medium carbon content and an elevated manganese content. The steels from GOST 4543-71 (40X, 45X) achieve their properties through a similar medium carbon content but with a significant addition of chromium. This makes them the direct chemical and functional analogues of modern AISI 4140 and 4150 steels. The choice between the two Soviet standards represents a choice between a simpler manganese alloy and a higher-performance chromium alloy to achieve the same engineering goal.

Table 3: Comparative Analysis of Soviet GOST Steels and US AISI 4140/4150 Steels

SpecificationSteel GradeCarbon (C) %Manganese (Mn) %Chromium (Cr) %Molybdenum (Mo) %Functional Analogy
GOST 1050-88Steel 450.42 – 0.500.50 – 0.80≤0.25Economical, high-volume
GOST 4543-7140X0.36 – 0.440.50 – 0.800.80 – 1.10Direct analogue to 4140
GOST 4543-7145X0.41 – 0.490.50 – 0.800.80 – 1.10Direct analogue to 4140/4150
AISI/SAE41400.38 – 0.430.75 – 1.000.80 – 1.100.15 – 0.25Modern benchmark
AISI/SAE41500.48 – 0.530.75 – 1.000.80 – 1.100.15 – 0.25Modern high-hardness benchmark

This table serves as a “Rosetta Stone,” translating the Soviet specifications into a familiar modern context. It demonstrates that the Soviet choices were not inferior, but rather different and highly effective paths to the same engineering destination.

Conclusion: A Definitive Finding on the Soviet AKM Trunnion Steel

The evidence, drawn from Russian technical descriptions, analysis of Soviet-era state standards, and comparison with modern engineering materials, converges on a clear conclusion. The manufacturing process for the Soviet AKM front trunnion began with the die forging of a steel billet, a method chosen to impart maximum toughness and fatigue resistance to this critical, high-stress component.7 The material itself was an “alloy structural steel” that was subsequently heat-treated to achieve a precise balance of surface hardness and core toughness.

While the exact technical package for the AKM remains classified, the available evidence points to two highly plausible material specifications, representing two distinct but valid Soviet engineering philosophies:

  1. The “Mass Production” Candidate (GOST 1050-88): It is possible the trunnion was made from Steel 45 or Steel 50. These are economical, manganese-alloyed structural steels that, while officially designated as “carbon steels,” contain sufficient manganese to be considered low-alloy. This choice would prioritize logistical simplicity and the use of a common, versatile material for the widest possible production, a hallmark of Soviet military doctrine.
  2. The “High Performance” Candidate (GOST 4543-71): It is equally, if not more, plausible that the trunnion was made from a dedicated chromium-alloyed steel such as 40X or 45X. The description “alloy structural steel” is a direct match for the title of the GOST 4543-71 standard. Furthermore, these steels are the direct Soviet-era analogues to the modern AISI 4140 and 4150 steels universally favored for high-quality AK trunnions today. This choice would reflect a decision to use a specialized, superior-performance material for the single most critical component of the rifle.

In conclusion, while absolute certainty is elusive without the original blueprints, the evidence strongly supports that the AKM front trunnion was forged from a medium-carbon alloy steel. The choice was between a common manganese-alloyed steel like Steel 45 (under GOST 1050-88) or a higher-performance chromium-alloyed steel like 40X or 45X (under GOST 4543-71). Both pathways would result in a component possessing the extraordinary durability required for a service rifle intended to function reliably through decades of use in the harshest environments on Earth.

Works cited

  1. AK-47 – Survival, accessed July 14, 2025, http://landsurvival.com/schools-wikipedia/wp/a/AK-47.htm
  2. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  3. Kalashnikov and Molot made AK trunnions – AK Operators Union, Local 47-74, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.akoperatorsunionlocal4774.com/2017/03/kalashnikov-made-ak-trunnions/
  4. AK47 Rifles for Sale | Nampa Idaho – Northwest Gun Supply, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.northwestgunsupply.com/ak-47
  5. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
  6. Beginners Guide To AK-47 Parts And Function, accessed July 14, 2025, https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/guide-to-ak47-parts/
  7. Gunsmith Viktor Kalashnikov passes away – MercoPress, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.mercopress.com/2018/03/28/gunsmith-viktor-kalashnikov-passes-away
  8. Manufacturing process of parts on the AK – Page 2 – AK-47 / AK-74 – Palmetto State Armory, accessed July 14, 2025, https://palmettostatearmory.com/forum/t/manufacturing-process-of-parts-on-the-ak/742?page=2
  9. SIZED BARS MADE OF HIGH-QUALITY STRUCTURAL CARBON …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.tubemfg.com/files/GOST/GOST%201050-88.pdf
  10. Technical Properties of 30khgsa Steel Rods (Gost 4543-71 / 2590-88) | PDF – Scribd, accessed July 25, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/482194656/30KhGSA1
  11. 5.45×39mm – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.45%C3%9739mm
  12. Steel 40X: characteristics, properties, analogues – Metinvest, accessed July 25, 2025, https://metinvestholding.com/en/products/steel-grades/40x
  13. ГОСТ 4543-71 Прокат из легированной конструкционной стали (технические у, accessed July 25, 2025, https://uaz74.ru/files/gost/gost-4543-71.pdf

Сталь 45Х: характеристики и наличие – Металлопрокат, accessed July 25, 2025, https://msk-metall.com/marki-stali/konstruktsionnye-stali/legirovannye-stali/45h


AKs Around The World – The Proliferation of the Kalashnikov Design

Growing up in the 70s and 80s, I was patriotic and was mainly interested in American firearms. In 2006, I read an article about building your own AK by the late great Steven Matthews and I changed course dramatically. I’ve always liked history, machines and firearms and started reading books about Mikhail Kalashnikov and his AK designs. My business, Ronin’s Grips, was born along the way.

I though it might be interesting to share how the Kalashnikov design has proliferated around the world with everyone. Thus, I did some digging to create this.

1. Introduction

The Kalashnikov assault rifle, first introduced in the Soviet Union shortly after World War II, represents one of the most influential and widely proliferated firearm designs in history.1 Its simple design, rugged reliability, and ease of mass production contributed to its adoption by numerous armed forces globally and its appearance in countless conflicts.1 The original AK-47 and its subsequent iterations, including the AKM, AK-74, the AK-100 series, and the modern AK-12, have not only served as the standard armament for many nations but have also inspired a vast array of locally produced variants and derivatives worldwide.2

This report documents the countries that have manufactured Kalashnikov-inspired rifle designs. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the specific models produced, their calibers, approximate dates of production, and, where available, estimated production numbers. The scope encompasses rifles directly based on the Soviet/Russian lineage—AK-47, AKM, AK-74, AK-100 series, and AK-12—as well as notable derivatives that share the core Kalashnikov operating principle.

While extensive research has been conducted, it is important to acknowledge that precise production figures for many Kalashnikov-type rifles, particularly those from less transparent or state-controlled manufacturing environments, are often estimates or remain unavailable in publicly accessible records. Nevertheless, this report endeavors to present the most accurate and detailed information possible based on the available data.

2. The Soviet/Russian Kalashnikov Lineage: The Foundation for Global Variants

The evolution of the Kalashnikov rifle series within the Soviet Union and subsequently the Russian Federation laid the groundwork for its global adoption and adaptation. Each major iteration introduced refinements in design, manufacturing, or caliber, reflecting changing military doctrines and technological advancements. Understanding this original lineage is crucial for contextualizing the myriad of international variants.

2.1. AK-47 (Avtomat Kalashnikova obraztsa 1947 goda)

The AK-47, designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov, was officially adopted by the Soviet military in 1949, though its design work began earlier, around 1947.1 Initial production started in 1948.3 The rifle was chambered for the intermediate 7.62x39mm M43 cartridge, a defining feature that offered a balance between the power of full-sized rifle cartridges and the controllability of submachine gun rounds.3 Early models featured milled receivers (Type 1, Type 2, Type 3), which contributed to their durability.3 The AK-47 was designed for simplicity, reliability in adverse conditions, and ease of mass production using methods available in the post-war Soviet Union.3 Its long-stroke gas piston system became a hallmark of the Kalashnikov design.3 Approximately 75 million AK-47s are estimated to have been built, with the broader Kalashnikov family reaching around 100 million units.3 Key manufacturers included the Izhevsk Machine-Building Plant (Izhmash), now Kalashnikov Concern.3

Soviet AK-47, Type 2A made from 1951 to 1954/55. Image source is Wikimedia.5

2.2. AKM (Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovannyj)

Introduced in 1959, the AKM was a modernized version of the AK-47, also designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov’s team.1 A pivotal change was the introduction of a stamped sheet-metal receiver, which significantly reduced manufacturing costs, lightened the rifle, and simplified mass production compared to the milled receiver of the AK-47.1 The AKM retained the 7.62x39mm caliber and the long-stroke gas piston system.4 Other improvements included a new muzzle brake (slant compensator) to reduce muzzle climb during automatic fire, an improved bayonet, and often, laminated wood furniture.6 Production of the AKM in the Soviet Union ran from 1959 to 1977, with an estimated 10,278,300 units built by Izhmash and the Tula Arms Plant.6 The AKM became the most prevalent variant of the Kalashnikov series globally, largely due to its widespread production and export by the Soviet Union and its allies.7

Photo of an AKM, manufactured in 1975. Picture taken in Managua, Nicaragua in a local firing range. Image source: Wikimedia.9

2.3. AK-74 (Avtomat Kalashnikova obraztsa 1974 goda)

The AK-74 was developed in the early 1970s and officially adopted in 1974 as a successor to the AKM.10 The most significant change was the adoption of a new, smaller caliber, high-velocity cartridge, the 5.45x39mm M74.4 This shift mirrored developments in NATO countries towards smaller caliber service rifles, aiming for lighter ammunition, flatter trajectory, and reduced recoil, thereby improving hit probability.10 The AK-74 retained the basic Kalashnikov long-stroke gas piston operating system and many AKM components, with some early models reportedly being re-barreled AKMs.10 It featured a distinctive, prominent muzzle brake to further mitigate recoil and muzzle rise.10 Manufactured by Izhmash (now Kalashnikov Concern) and Tula Arms Plant, production of the original AK-74 ran from 1974 to 1991, with over 5 million units built.10 The modernized AK-74M, featuring a side-folding polymer stock and a universal scope rail, entered full-scale production in 1991 and continues to be produced.4

A left side view of a 5.45mm Soviet AK-74 assault rifle, top, and a 5.45mm RPK-74 light machine gun, bottom. The RPK-74 is the light machine gun version of the AK-74 and has a longer, heavier barrel, a larger magazine, and an attached bipod. Image Source: Wikimedia.12

2.4. AK-100 Series (Export-Oriented Evolution)

Introduced in 1994, the AK-100 series, developed by Izhmash (now Kalashnikov Concern), is based on the AK-74M design but was primarily intended for export markets.13 This family of rifles is characterized by black polymer furniture, side-folding polymer stocks, and the use of AK-74M internal systems, ensuring a high degree of parts interchangeability.13 A key strategic development with the AK-100 series was the offering of multiple calibers to appeal to a wider international customer base. This demonstrated a shift from primarily arming domestic and allied forces with a standardized caliber to a more market-driven approach in the post-Cold War era. The availability of rifles chambered in NATO standard ammunition alongside traditional Soviet calibers was a significant step in maintaining the Kalashnikov’s global relevance. Production numbers for the entire series are substantial, with Deagel.com indicating over 30,000 produced (though this seems low for the entire series and may refer to a specific timeframe or subset) 14, while other sources suggest much larger overall Kalashnikov production from Izhevsk which would include these models.15 The AK-100M/200 series, introduced around 2017, represents further modernization with enhanced ergonomics and Picatinny rails for accessory mounting.13

  • AK-101: An export version of the AK-74M chambered in the NATO standard 5.56x45mm cartridge.4 Production began around 1995.16 Over 270,500+ have been built (this number likely includes other AK-100 variants or is a broader production figure).16
Russian AK-101. Image source: Wikimedia16
  • AK-102: A compact carbine version of the AK-101, also chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, with a shorter 314mm barrel.4 Production: 2000-present.17 Indonesia reportedly acquired 5,000 AK-101 and AK-102 rifles.17
AK-102 at Interpolitex-2009. Image Source: Wikimedia. Note, this photo is by Vitaly V. Kuzmin. Vitaly is a military photo jopurnalist and takes amazing photos of Russian military and defense related subjects. Click here for his blog and the amazing photos he has there. 17
  • AK-103: A modernized AKM chambered in 7.62x39mm M43, incorporating AK-74M features like polymer furniture and a side-folding stock.4 Production: 1994-present, with over 250,000+ built.18 It has seen significant export success, including licensed production in Venezuela and Ethiopia.4
AK-103 with GP-34 Grenade Launcher. Image Souce: Wikimedia19
  • AK-104: A compact carbine version of the AK-103, chambered in 7.62x39mm M43, with a 314mm barrel.4 Production began in 1994.20
AK-104 assault rifle at Engineering Technologies 2012. Image Source: Wikimedia.21
  • AK-105: A compact carbine version of the AK-74M, chambered in 5.45x39mm M74, with a 314mm barrel. It is used domestically by Russian forces as a shorter alternative to the full-sized AK-74M, filling a role similar to the older AKS-74U but with improved ballistics due to a slightly longer barrel and more modern features.4 Production began in 1994.23
AK-105 at the International Military-Technical Forum “Army” in 2022. Image Source: Wikimedia 23

2.5. AK-12 Series (Fifth Generation)

The AK-12 represents the latest generation of Kalashnikov rifles, designed by a team including Vladimir Zlobin and Sergey Urzhumcev under the Kalashnikov Concern (formerly Izhmash).24 The project began in 2011, with serial production commencing in 2018 after undergoing trials and refinements.24 Over 150,000 units have been built, with a significant contract for 150,000 AK-12 and AK-15 rifles for the Russian Ministry of Defence between 2019 and 2021.24

The AK-12 series incorporates significant ergonomic and tactical improvements over previous generations. These include an integrated Picatinny rail on the receiver cover and handguard for mounting optics and accessories, a redesigned adjustable and side-folding telescoping stock, an improved pistol grip, and a new rotary diopter rear sight.24 Early versions featured a two-round burst mode, which was later omitted in the 2023 upgrade based on operational feedback.24 This iterative development, even post-introduction, underscores a responsiveness to user needs and battlefield experiences, a characteristic of successful military firearm evolution. The multi-caliber approach initiated with the AK-100 series continues, broadening the family’s potential applications and export appeal.

  • Models & Calibers:
  • AK-12 (6P70): Chambered in 5.45x39mm.4
  • AK-15 (6P71): Chambered in 7.62x39mm.4
  • AK-19: Chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.4
  • AK-308: A battle rifle variant chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO.4
  • Carbine versions include the AK-12K and AK-15K.24
AK-12 from the Army 2020 Expo. Image Source: Wikipedia. 24
This is an AK-12 at the Army 2022 Expo. Compare it to the 2020 photo above from 2020 Expo. Note the different buttstock, handguard and pistol grip. The rear sight is more compact and the trigger guard was enalged to better accomodate gloves. Image Source: Wikimedia
This photo shows us the four variants – from the top: AK-12, AK-15, AK-19, and the AK-308 at the bottom. This was taken at the Army 2021 Expo. Image Source: Wikimedia

The Soviet/Russian Kalashnikov lineage showcases a remarkable evolution. The initial AK-47 prioritized ruggedness and mass producibility with its milled receiver. The AKM’s transition to a stamped receiver was a critical development, drastically reducing production costs and time, which was instrumental in its massive global proliferation.1 This ability to simplify for mass production without sacrificing core reliability is a key factor in the Kalashnikov’s enduring presence. The AK-74’s adoption of the 5.45x39mm cartridge reflected a broader military trend towards smaller, higher-velocity rounds, aiming for improved soldier loadout and hit probability.10 The AK-100 series marked a strategic pivot towards export markets, offering NATO calibers alongside traditional Soviet ones, demonstrating adaptability to global demands.13 Finally, the AK-12 series integrates modern modularity (Picatinny rails, adjustable furniture) while retaining the fundamental Kalashnikov operating system, indicating an effort to keep the platform competitive in the 21st century.24 The production numbers themselves tell a story: massive outputs of AK-47s and AKMs during the Cold War underscored Soviet military doctrine and global influence, while the export focus of the AK-100 series and the recent ramp-up of AK-12 production reflect current geopolitical realities and domestic military requirements.3 Throughout this evolution, a degree of parts and magazine compatibility (within calibers) has often been maintained, simplifying logistics for users of multiple Kalashnikov generations.18

3. Global Production of Kalashnikov-Inspired Rifles: A Country-by-Country Breakdown

The simplicity, reliability, and Soviet policy of sharing technical data packages with allied nations led to the widespread licensed and unlicensed production of Kalashnikov-type rifles across the globe. Many countries adapted the design to their specific manufacturing capabilities and operational requirements, resulting in a diverse array of variants.

3.1. Albania

  • Manufacturer(s): KM Poliçan & Gramësh factories; State Arsenal.27
  • Models & Details:
  • Automatiku Shqiptar 1978 model 56 (ASH-78 Tip-1): A copy of the Chinese Type 56 (itself an AK-47 derivative), chambered in 7.62x39mm. It often lacks magazine well dimples and features unique selector markings “A” (automatic) and “1” (semi-automatic).4 Production ran from 1978 to 1993, with over 100,000 estimated to have been made.27
Albanian ASH-78 Tip-1. Image Source: Wikipedia3
  • ASH-78 Tip-2: A heavy-barreled version, analogous to the RPK.4
  • ASH-78 Tip-3: Equipped with grenade launching capability.4
  • Tipi 1982 (ASH-82): Generally a copy of the AKS-47 (underfolding stock).4 However, some rifles designated ASH-82 and dated 1981 are fixed-stock Type 56 copies with extended barrels and grenade spigots, while others dated 1986 are Type 56 copies with underfolding bayonets.31 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Various other AKMS-pattern rifles, some with short barrels similar to the Soviet AKS-74U, were also produced.4
  • Notes: Albanian Kalashnikov variants were developed during a period of national isolation and were heavily influenced by Chinese designs due to close ties after Albania’s split from the Soviet sphere.27 Albania notably supplied 30,000 ASH-78 rifles to the Afghan National Army.27

3.2. Argentina

  • Manufacturer(s): FMAP-DM (Dirección General de Fabricaciones Militares).33
  • Model: FARA 83 (Fusil Automático República Argentina), also known as FAA 81.
  • Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO.33
  • Production Dates: Designed in 1981, initial production ran from 1984 to 1990, with a brief resumption in 1990 before cancellation due to economic difficulties.33
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: 1,193 in the initial run; total production numbers are unknown but limited.33 Some sources suggest “a little over 1000” were made in total.34
  • Notes: The FARA 83 was primarily inspired by the Italian Beretta AR70/223, particularly in its magazine and some design features.33 It utilizes a gas-operated reloading system.33 While listed as a “similar rifle” to Kalashnikovs in some sources due to design influences from the Galil and Valmet Rk 62 4, its arguably more of an influenced design rather than a direct derivative. It features a folding buttstock and tritium night sights.33

3.3. Armenia

  • Manufacturer(s): Not specified, but likely domestic state facilities.
  • Model: K-3
  • Caliber: 5.45x39mm.4
  • Production Dates: First displayed in 1996, suggesting production around that period.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Not specified.
  • Notes: The K-3 is a bullpup rifle based on the AKS-74U, designed for compactness.4
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: (A specific Wikimedia Commons link for the Armenian K-3 was not found in the provided snippets; image search required for report inclusion if available.)

3.4. Azerbaijan

  • Manufacturer(s): Ministry of Defence Industry of Azerbaijan (MODIAR).37
  • Models & Details:
  • Khazri: A licensed copy of the Russian AK-74M assault rifle. Caliber: 5.45x39mm. Production commenced in 2011 under a 10-year renewable license from Rosoboronexport, with a potential total production volume of up to 120,000 units for domestic use.4
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: 39 A representative image of an AK-74M could be used if a specific Khazri image is unavailable.
  • EM-14: An AK-101 clone. Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO.37
  • AZ-7.62: An AK-103 clone. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.37
  • Notes: Azerbaijan’s production focuses on modern Kalashnikov variants for its armed forces.37

3.5. Bangladesh

  • Manufacturer(s): Bangladesh Ordnance Factories (BOF).4
  • Models & Details:
  • Chinese Type 56: Utilized by Bangladeshi forces, likely imported or assembled locally. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • BD-08: Listed as a “Similar rifle”.4 This is likely a locally produced version or derivative of the Chinese Type 81 assault rifle, as BOF manufactures the Type 81 under license.40 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Specific dates and numbers for local Type 56 usage or BD-08/Type 81 production are not detailed in the provided sources.
  • Notes: The Type 81, while visually similar to AKs and sharing the same caliber, employs a distinct short-stroke gas piston system.41
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: (For BD-08, a specific image search is required. For Type 56, see China section.)

3.6. Bulgaria

  • Manufacturer(s): Arsenal AD (Kazanlak, formerly State Factory 10).4
  • Models & Details (Examples):
  • AKK / AKKS: Copies of the Soviet Type 3 AK-47 (milled receiver) and AKS (folding stock). Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Assembly from Soviet parts began in the early 1960s, with full licensed domestic production by the mid-1960s.4
  • AK-47M1: A Type 3 AK-47 variant with black polymer furniture.4
  • AR-M1 Series: A modernized derivative of the milled receiver AKK/AK-47, incorporating features from the AK-74 such as a flash suppressor and polymer stock. It is offered in both 5.56x45mm NATO and 7.62x39mm calibers. Production: 1998-present.4
  • Various AKS-74U pattern carbines, such as the AKS-74UF and the AR-SF (chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO).4
  • Licensed production of the AK-105 is also noted.22
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Arsenal (Factory 10) is estimated to have produced over 1,000,000 Kalashnikov-type rifles in total.15 A specific model, the SA M-7 Classic (a clone of the AK-47 Type 3 by Arsenal), had a limited run of only 243 units.28
  • Notes: Bulgaria is a significant and highly regarded producer and exporter of Kalashnikov rifles. Mikhail Kalashnikov himself reportedly stated that the finest AKs were made in Bulgaria.45 The AR-M1 series is notable for retaining the durable milled receiver design.44
Bulgarian AR-M1. Image source: Wikipedia44

3.7. Cambodia

  • Manufacturer(s): Not specified; likely imported rather than locally manufactured in significant numbers.4
  • Models Used: Chinese Type 56, Soviet AK-47, and AKM.4
  • Caliber: Primarily 7.62x39mm.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Not applicable for local production based on available information.
  • Notes: Cambodia has historically relied on external sources for its Kalashnikov-pattern rifles.
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: (Refer to links for Type 56 from China, AK-47 and AKM from Soviet Union/Russia sections.)

3.8. China

  • Manufacturer(s): State Factory 66, Norinco (China North Industries Group Corporation), PolyTech Industries.15
  • Models & Details:
  • Type 56 Assault Rifle: A licensed copy of the Soviet AK-47. Early versions (from 1956) featured a milled receiver (based on AK-47 Type 3), while mid-1960s production shifted to a stamped receiver, similar to the AKM.47 Chambered in 7.62x39mm. Many Type 56 rifles are distinguished by an integral folding spike bayonet (often called a “pig sticker”).48
Chinese Type 56. Image source: Wikimedia.
  • Variants: Type 56-1 (copy of AKS with underfolding stock), Type 56-2 (side-folding stock), QBZ-56C (short-barreled carbine version).48
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Over 10,000,000 units.48
Chinese Type 56-1. Image Souce: Wikimedia.
  • Type 81 Assault Rifle: While visually resembling the AK series and chambered in 7.62x39mm, the Type 81 utilizes a distinct short-stroke gas piston operating system (similar to the SKS) and is not a direct Kalashnikov derivative.4 Production: 1983-present. Numbers: Approximately 400,000 of the basic Type 81 rifle.40 This rifle is noted as distinct due to its operating system.
Chinese Type 81. Image Source: Wikipedia.40
  • Type 84S: An AK variant chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, visually similar to the AK-74.11
  • Norinco AK-2000: A copy of the Russian AK-101.16
  • CS/LR11, SDM AK-103: Clones of the Russian AK-103.18
  • Notes: China has been one of the largest producers and exporters of Kalashnikov-type rifles globally, with its Type 56 being particularly widespread.

3.9. Croatia

  • Manufacturer(s): Končar-Arma d.o.o (a subsidiary of ARMA-GRUPA Corporation).4
  • Model: APS-95
  • Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO.51
  • Production Dates: Designed in 1993, produced from 1993/1995 until at least 2007.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Produced in small quantities; large-scale procurement was halted due to budgetary constraints.51 One source mentions “a little over 1000” for a different rifle (Argentine FARA 83) in a similar limited production context, but this is not a direct figure for the APS-95.34
  • Notes: The APS-95 was developed based on the South African Vektor R4 (itself a Galil derivative, thus tracing lineage to the Kalashnikov via the Finnish RK 62). It features a stamped receiver (unlike the milled receiver Galil/R4), an integrated 1.5x optical sight in the carrying handle, and a distinctive handguard and front sight assembly.51

3.10. Cuba

  • Manufacturer(s): Unión de Industrias Militares (UIM) is the state entity responsible for military production.4
  • Model(s): Copies or derivatives of the AKM.4 Specific Cuban model designations are not widely publicized.
  • Caliber: Primarily 7.62x39mm.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Details regarding the start dates, production volume, or specific factories involved in Cuban AKM production are not specified in the provided materials.53 Cuba was a known recipient of Soviet arms and also played a role in the supply chain for other groups in Latin America.54
  • Notes: Cuba has a long history of utilizing Kalashnikov-pattern rifles.
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: (Specific images of Cuban-manufactured AKM variants are not readily available in the snippets; a general AKM image may be used as a placeholder if necessary, noting the Cuban context.)

3.11. Czechoslovakia (Now Czech Republic & Slovakia)

  • Model: Vz. 58 (Samopal vzor 58)
  • Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • Notes: The Vz. 58 is often mistaken for a Kalashnikov variant due to its external resemblance and shared cartridge. However, it employs a significantly different operating mechanism: a short-stroke gas piston and a striker-fired mechanism, as opposed to the Kalashnikov’s long-stroke piston and rotating hammer.4 Its parts are not interchangeable with AK-pattern rifles.56 Therefore, it is not a Kalashnikov-inspired design in terms of its core operating system and will be noted as such in the summary table.
Vz.58 Rifle – while it looks similar to an AK, it is not. Image Source: Wikipedia.

3.12. East Germany (German Democratic Republic)

  • Manufacturer(s): VEB Geräte- und Sonderwerkzeugbau Wiesa (GSW); Volkseigener Betrieb Fahrzeug- und Jagdwaffenfabrik “Ernst Thälmann” Suhl.15
  • Models & Details:
  • MPi-K / MPi-KS: Licensed copies of the Soviet AK-47 and AKS (folding stock), respectively. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production began around 1957-1959 and continued into the mid-1960s.4
  • MPi-KM: A licensed copy of the Soviet AKM, featuring a stamped receiver and often distinctive plastic furniture (buttstock, pistol grip, handguards) with a “pebble” or “dimpled” texture. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: Circa 1966 into the 1980s.4
  • MPi-KMS-72: A version of the MPi-KM with a side-folding wire stock.4
  • MPi-AK-74N: A licensed copy of the Soviet AK-74. Caliber: 5.45x39mm. Production: 1983-1990.4
  • MPi-AKS-74N: Side-folding stock version of the MPi-AK-74N.4
  • MPi-AKS-74NK: Carbine version of the MPi-AKS-74N.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Nearly 4 million MPi series rifles in total were produced by East Germany.60 Other estimates suggest 2 million from the Wiesa factory alone 15, or 3-4 million MPi-K/MPi-KM rifles.58 Initial production was slow; the 1958 target of 30,000 rifles took nearly three years to achieve.60
  • Notes: East Germany was a significant producer and exporter of Kalashnikov rifles. Production ceased with the reunification of Germany in 1990.60
MPi-KM assault rifles are in service of Vietnam People’s Army and used for training. Image Source: Wikimedia.62

3.13. Egypt

  • Manufacturer(s): Maadi Company for Engineering Industries (Factory 54).2
  • Models & Details:
  • AK-47 copies: Egypt began producing AK-47 pattern rifles from 1958 onwards.4
  • Misr: An AKM copy. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • Maadi ARM: An AKM copy, often seen with a distinctive laminated wood stock and pistol grip. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Other Maadi variants include rifles resembling the RPK (long barrel).
  • Production Dates: AK-47/AKM type production commenced in 1958.15 Semi-automatic “MISR S/A” rifles imported into the US bear manufacture dates from the late 1990s (e.g., 1997-1999).65
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Not specified in the provided sources. The Maadi factory also produced around 70,000 Hakim rifles (a different Swedish-designed system) in the 1950s-60s.64
  • Notes: Egyptian Maadi rifles are well-known among collectors, particularly in the United States.

3.14. Ethiopia

  • Manufacturer(s): Gafat Armament Engineering Complex (GAEC), part of the Metals and Engineering Corporation (METEC).4
  • Models & Details:
  • AK-47 copies: GAEC initially produced AK-47 automatic rifles after its establishment in January 1986.67 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Et-97/1: This is the local designation for the AK-103 assault rifle, produced under license. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • Production Dates: GAEC began AK-47 production in 1986.67 Licensed production of the AK-103 is ongoing.14
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Not specified.
  • Notes: There are reports suggesting North Korean advisors assisted Ethiopia with establishing its small arms manufacturing capabilities.67

3.15. Finland

  • Manufacturer(s): Valmet; SAKO.2
  • Models & Details:
  • RK 60 (Rynnäkkökivääri 60): The initial version of the Finnish Kalashnikov derivative, produced in 1960. It was internally almost a copy of the AK-47 but featured a metallic buttstock, plastic handguard and pistol grip, and notably lacked a trigger guard for easier use with winter mittens.68 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • RK 62 (Valmet M62): The main production model, designed between 1957-1962 and produced from 1965 to 1994. It is a highly regarded AK-47 derivative known for its quality and accuracy, featuring a milled receiver, distinctive tubular stock on early models (later polymer), unique front sight/gas block combination, and aperture rear sight on the receiver cover.2 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Over 350,000 units of the M62 (RK 62) were jointly manufactured by Valmet and Sako.68
Valmet RK 62. Image Source: Wikimedia
  • Valmet M76 (RK 62 76): A version of the RK 62 with a stamped receiver, produced in both 7.62x39mm and 5.56x45mm NATO calibers.4
Valmet RK 62 76. Image Source: Wikimedia
  • Valmet M78: A light machine gun variant based on the RK 62 design.4
  • RK 95 TP (Sako M95): A further modernized version of the RK 62, featuring a side-folding stock and other improvements. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Approximately 20,000 were made.4
RK 95 TP. Image Source: Wikimedia
  • Notes: Finnish Kalashnikov derivatives are renowned for their high manufacturing quality and design improvements over the basic Soviet models. The RK 62 notably served as the design basis for the Israeli Galil assault rifle.69

3.16. Hungary

  • Manufacturer(s): Fegyver- és Gépgyár (FÉG).4
  • Models & Details:
  • AK-55: A domestic copy of the Soviet 2nd Model AK-47 (milled receiver). Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production started around 1956.4
  • AKM-63 (AMD-63 in the US market): A modernized version of the AK-55, featuring a distinctive sheet metal handguard with an integrated forward pistol grip, and a fixed wooden stock. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production estimated from circa 1963 to 2000.4
  • AMD-65M (Automata Módosított Deszantfegyver): A shorter-barreled version of the AKM-63 designed for paratroopers and armored vehicle crews, featuring a side-folding single-strut stock and often a shorter 20-round magazine. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1965-1980.4 “Tens of thousands” were produced.73
This team has the distinctive AMD-65M rifles -note how Hungary used leather slings also. Image Source: Wikimedia
  • AK-63F / AK-63D (Military designations AMM / AMMSz): These models are closer copies of the Soviet AKM and AKMS (stamped receiver), featuring traditional wooden or later polymer furniture, but often retaining the straight pistol grip of the AKM-63. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1977–2001.4 Approximately 7,700 AK-63s were modernized to the AK-63MF standard for the Hungarian Armed Forces.72 Around 7,000 semi-automatic SA-85M versions were imported into the US before the 1989 import ban.72
  • NGM-81: An export version chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Specific overall numbers for FÉG’s AK production are not available in 15 (“N/A”). However, “tens of thousands” of AMD-65s were made 73, and around 11,000 AK-63s were reportedly exported to Central America during the 1980s.72
  • Notes: Hungarian Kalashnikovs often feature unique ergonomic (or not so ergonomic_ and design choices, particularly the early models like the AKM-63 and AMD-65.

3.17. India

  • Manufacturer(s): Ordnance Factories Board (OFB); Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) for design; Indo-Russia Rifles Private Limited (IRRPL) for AK-203 production.2
  • Models & Details:
  • INSAS (Indian Small Arms System) Rifle: While incorporating features from other rifles, the INSAS is primarily based on the Kalashnikov (AKM) operating system, utilizing a long-stroke gas piston and rotating bolt.78 Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO. Development began in the mid-1980s, it entered service in 1990, with mass production starting in 1997.4 The rifle has faced criticism for reliability issues, particularly in extreme conditions.79 Design influences include the Galil and, at least indirectly, the Valmet RK 62..
Indian INSAS rifle. Image Source: Wikipedia.
  • AK-103: India has arranged for licensed production of the AK-103.13
  • AK-203: A significant contract was signed for the licensed production of over 600,000 AK-203 rifles in India by IRRPL, a joint venture between Indian OFB and Russian Kalashnikov Concern. An additional 70,000 rifles were to be imported directly from Russia.13 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Trichy Assault Rifle: An Indian-produced clone of the Bulgarian AR-M1 series (itself an AK derivative).44
  • Notes: India’s adoption of the INSAS marked a move to a NATO standard caliber, though its performance has been controversial. The recent large-scale adoption and licensed production of the AK-203 indicates a renewed reliance on the Kalashnikov platform.

3.18. Iran

  • Manufacturer(s): Defense Industries Organization (DIO).80
  • Models & Details:
  • KLS: A copy of the AK-47/AKM with a fixed wooden stock. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • KLF: A copy of the AKS/AKMS with an underfolding metal stock. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • KLT: A copy of the AKMS with a side-folding metal stock. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • AK-103 copies: Iran produces licensed versions designated AK-133 and unlicensed copies called KL-133. Additionally, some AK-103s were directly imported from Russia.13
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Specific production dates and quantities for the KLS/KLF/KLT series are not detailed, though these rifles typically feature seven-digit serial numbers.80
  • Notes: Iranian Kalashnikov variants are often based on Soviet and Chinese models.

3.19. Iraq

  • Manufacturer(s): Al-Qadissiya Establishments.4
  • Models & Details:
  • Tabuk Sniper Rifle: A designated marksman rifle (DMR) chambered in 7.62x39mm. It is a modified version of the Yugoslav Zastava M76 sniper rifle, which itself is an AK-pattern derivative. The Tabuk features a longer barrel than a standard AKM and is designed for semi-automatic fire only.4
  • Tabuk Assault Rifle: These are direct clones of the Yugoslavian Zastava M70 series of assault rifles (which are AKM derivatives), available with fixed or underfolding stocks. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • Production Dates: Production of the Tabuk Sniper Rifle began in 1978 and is reported as ongoing.84 The Tabuk Assault Rifles (M70 clones) were produced from 1978 into the 1990s.83
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Not specified.
  • Notes: The machinery and technical assistance for establishing Iraqi Kalashnikov production were provided by Zastava Arms of Yugoslavia.84
Iraqi Tabuk Sniper. Image Source: Wikipedia.84

3.20. Israel

  • Manufacturer(s): Israel Military Industries (IMI), later privatized as Israel Weapon Industries (IWI).2
  • Models & Details:
  • IMI Galil: An assault rifle family developed in the late 1960s and adopted in 1972. The Galil’s design is heavily based on the Finnish RK 62 (Valmet M62), which is a high-quality AK-47 derivative. The first Galils were even manufactured using Valmet Rk 62 receivers.69 It features the Kalashnikov long-stroke gas piston system.86
  • Calibers: Primarily 5.56x45mm NATO and 7.62x51mm NATO.70
  • Production: IMI produced the Galil from 1972 to 1998; IWI continues to export and develop versions.70
  • Variants: ARM (Automatic Rifle Machine-gun, with bipod and carry handle), AR (Automatic Rifle), SAR (Short Automatic Rifle).70
  • IWI Galil ACE: A modernized and redesigned version of the Galil, introduced in 2008. It retains the core Galil/Kalashnikov mechanism but incorporates modern materials, Picatinny rails, and improved ergonomics.4
  • Calibers: 5.45x39mm, 5.56x45mm NATO, 7.62x39mm, and 7.62x51mm NATO.87
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Specific numbers for the original Galil are not provided. The Galil ACE production is ongoing.
  • Notes: The Galil is a highly respected Kalashnikov derivative, known for its reliability, particularly in harsh desert environments, and improved ergonomics over basic AK models. It has been licensed for production to several other countries, including Italy, Colombia, South Africa (as the R4), and Vietnam.85
Comparison of the Hungarian AMD-65 (top), the American M16A1 with A2 handguard (middle) and the Israeli Galil ARM (bottom). Image Source: Wikipedia.

3.21. Italy

  • Manufacturer(s): Vincenzo Bernardelli S.p.A..4
  • Models: Bernardelli VB-STD / VB-SR
  • Caliber: Likely 5.56x45mm NATO, as Bernardelli produced the IMI Galil (which was available in this caliber) under license.86
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Not specified in the provided materials.
  • Notes: The Bernardelli VB-STD and VB-SR are listed as “similar rifles” to the Kalashnikov family.4 Given that Bernardelli held a license to produce the Israeli Galil 86, these models are almost certainly Galil derivatives, and therefore share the Kalashnikov-derived operating mechanism. The VB-SR is specifically noted as a modified Galil.

3.22. Nigeria

  • Manufacturer(s): Defence Industries Corporation of Nigeria (DICON).4
  • Models & Details:
  • OBJ-006: A Nigerian copy of the AK-47 assault rifle. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production began in 2006.4
  • Licensed Polish Beryl: DICON has acquired rights to manufacture a copy of the Polish FB Kbs wz. 1996 Beryl assault rifle.90 Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: OBJ-006 production started in 2006; specific numbers are not available. Timelines and quantities for the Beryl production are also not specified. DICON has partnered with a firm called D7G to enhance local defense production, including establishing AK-47 assembly lines.89
  • Notes: Nigeria is working to increase its indigenous small arms manufacturing capacity.
  • Wikimedia Photo Link (OBJ-006): 93

3.23. North Korea

  • Manufacturer(s): State Arsenals, including Factory 61 and Factory 65 in Chongjin.4
  • Models & Details:
  • Type 58 (A/B): A direct copy of the Soviet AK-47, specifically the Type 3 with a milled receiver. The Type 58A is the fixed-stock version, and the Type 58B (or Type 58-1) is the underfolding stock version (AKS equivalent).4 Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1958–1968.94
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Approximately 800,000 units.94
  • Type 68 (A/B): A copy of the Soviet AKM (stamped receiver) and AKMS (stamped receiver, underfolding stock). Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production began in 1968 to replace the more time-consuming Type 58.4 The Type 68-1 features a weight-reducing holed underfolding stock.94
  • Type 88: A copy of the Soviet AK-74 (primarily AKS-74 with side-folding stock). Caliber: 5.45x39mm.4 The Type 88 carbine is noted as a localized copy of the AK-105.23
  • Notes: Initial North Korean production of the Type 58 utilized Soviet-supplied components before transitioning to fully domestic parts.94 North Korean Kalashnikovs have been exported to various countries and non-state actors.94 Identifying marks include a five-point star in a circle and model designations in Hangul script.94
North Korean Type 58. Image Source: Wikipedia

3.24. Pakistan

  • Manufacturer(s): Pakistan Ordnance Factories (POF) for some models; numerous small workshops in the Khyber Pass region for unlicensed copies.4
  • Models & Details:
  • Khyber Pass Copies: A general term for a wide variety of often crudely made, unlicensed copies of Kalashnikov assault rifles (AK-47, AKM, and others). Quality and specifications can vary significantly. Caliber: Typically 7.62x39mm.4
  • POF PK-10: Listed as a POF product.4 Specific details are sparse in the provided material.
  • POF PK-21: An unlicensed clone of the Russian AK-103, manufactured by Pakistan Ordnance Factories.18 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Production of Khyber Pass copies has been ongoing for decades and is decentralized, making numbers impossible to track. Specific production dates and numbers for POF’s PK-10 and PK-21 are not detailed.
  • Notes: The Khyber Pass region is notorious for its artisanal firearms production, including many Kalashnikov variants. POF produces a range of military hardware under license and develops indigenous designs.
  • Wikimedia Photo Link: (No specific links for PK-10/PK-21 found. Khyber Pass copies are too varied for a single representative image. An image of a POF-produced rifle would require a specific search.)

3.25. Poland

  • Manufacturer(s): Łucznik Arms Factory (Fabryka Broni “Łucznik” – Radom), formerly Factory 11.4
  • Models & Details:
  • pmK (kbk AK) / pmKS (kbk AKS): Licensed copies of the Soviet AK-47 and AKS (folding stock). Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production started in 1957.4
  • kbk AKM / kbk AKMS: Licensed copies of the Soviet AKM and AKMS. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: Circa 1965 until 1992, with a short additional run in 2000 primarily from leftover parts.4
  • kbk wz. 1988 Tantal: An assault rifle chambered in 5.45x39mm, based on the AK-74 but with distinct Polish design features, such as a unique fire selector mechanism allowing for semi-auto, full-auto, and 3-round burst fire, and a side-folding wire stock. Production: 1989–1994.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Approximately 25,000 units.100
Kbk wz. 88 Tantal. Image Source: Wikipedia100
  • skbk wz. 1989 Onyks: A compact carbine version of the Tantal.4
  • kbs wz. 1996 Beryl: An assault rifle chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, developed to meet NATO standards and replace the Tantal. Production: 1997–present.4
Polish Beryl wz. 96 (version C), made by Fabryka Broni “Łucznik”. Image Souce: Wikipedia92
  • kbk wz. 1996 Mini-Beryl: A compact carbine version of the Beryl.4
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: For the Tantal, around 25,000 units.100 The Radom factory had a capacity of 70,000 rifles per year in the late 1980s/early 1990s.99
  • Notes: Polish Kalashnikov derivatives are generally well-regarded. The Tantal and Beryl represent significant indigenous developments on the Kalashnikov platform.

3.26. Romania

  • Manufacturer(s): Cugir Arms Factory (now part of ROMARM), with some limited production outsourced to Uzina Mecanica Sadu.4
  • Models & Details:
  • PM md. 63 (Pistol Mitralieră model 1963): A licensed copy of the Soviet AKM. A distinctive feature of many md. 63 rifles is a forward-pointing laminated wooden vertical foregrip integrated into the lower handguard. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1963–present.4
  • PM md. 65 (Pistol Mitralieră model 1965): The underfolding stock version, equivalent to the AKMS. To accommodate the folding stock, the vertical foregrip, if present, is often canted rearwards or is absent on some sub-variants. Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1965–present.4
A Romanian soldier armed with a PM md. 65 in 1989. Image Source: Wikipedia
  • PA md. 86 (Pușcă Automată model 1986): A Romanian derivative of the Soviet AK-74, chambered in 5.45x39mm. It features a distinctive side-folding wire stock (similar to East German designs) and sometimes a 3-round burst capability. It retained some AKM elements like the gas block design.4 Production: Late 1980s–present.
  • PM md. 80: A short-barreled AK variant, often with a unique side-folding stock and a combined front sight/gas block.4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol_Mitralier%C4%83_model_1963/1965. Image Source: Wikipedia.
  • PM md. 90: A 7.62x39mm rifle that incorporates the side-folding wire stock of the PA md. 86.4 There is also a short-barreled carbine version of the md. 90.
PM md. 90. Image Source: Wikipedia.
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: “Several million” total PM md. 63/65 rifles have been produced.105 Over 400,000 were acquired by the Romanian armed forces.105
  • Notes: Romanian Kalashnikovs are widely exported, often under the designations AIM (for fixed stock md. 63 types) and AIMS (for folding stock md. 65 types).106 Versions marked with a “G” on the trunnion were semi-automatic rifles produced for the Romanian Patriotic Guards and are well-known in the US parts kit market as “Romy G’s”.104
US Air Force personnel with AIM md. 65s during a training exercise in 1985. Image Source: Wikipedia.

3.27. Serbia (formerly Yugoslavia)

  • Manufacturer(s): Zastava Arms (Kragujevac).4
  • Models & Details (Examples):
  • M64: An early Yugoslav Kalashnikov derivative, which led to the M70.
  • M70 (Automatska Puška M70): The standard issue rifle of the Yugoslav People’s Army, based on the AK-47/AKM design but with several distinct Yugoslav features. These often include a thicker RPK-style receiver (1.5mm stamped or milled on early versions), a longer handguard with three cooling slots, an integral grenade launching sight, and typically a non-chrome-lined barrel.4 Caliber: 7.62x39mm. Production: 1970–present.83
  • Variants: M70 (milled receiver), M70B1 (stamped receiver, fixed stock), M70AB2 (stamped receiver, underfolding stock).
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Approximately 4,000,000 units of the M70 family.83
M70AB2 rifle. Image Source: Wikipedia108
  • M72: A light machine gun version, analogous to the RPK, based on the M70 design.4
  • M76: A designated marksman rifle chambered in 7.92x57mm Mauser, based on the long Kalashnikov action.4
  • M77: A battle rifle chambered in 7.62x51mm NATO, also using the Kalashnikov action.4
  • M85: A compact carbine chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.4
  • M90: An assault rifle chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO.4
  • M92: A compact carbine version of the M70, chambered in 7.62x39mm (similar to AKS-74U in role).4
  • M21: A modern assault rifle system chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO, incorporating Picatinny rails and modern furniture, but still based on the Kalashnikov operating system.4
  • Notes: Yugoslavian/Serbian Kalashnikov derivatives are known for their robust construction and unique features tailored to Yugoslav military doctrine, such as integrated rifle grenade launching capabilities. They often differ significantly in receiver construction and furniture from Soviet models. We have posts on the M70 and M72 families of rifles.

3.28. South Africa

  • Manufacturer(s): Lyttelton Engineering Works (LIW), later Armscor, now Denel Land Systems.2
  • Models & Details:
  • Vektor R4: A licensed variant of the Israeli IMI Galil ARM (which is itself a derivative of the Finnish RK 62, tracing back to the AK-47). The R4 was adapted for South African conditions, featuring a longer stock made of high-strength polymer and other polymer components to reduce weight. Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO. It entered service with the South African Defence Force (SADF) in 1980.2
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: Approximately 420,000 units.109
  • Vektor R5: A carbine version of the R4, similar to the Galil SAR, with a shorter barrel and handguard. It lacks a bipod.85
  • Vektor R6: An even more compact carbine version designed for paratroopers and vehicle crews.85
  • Truvelo Raptor: Mentioned as a “similar rifle” with AK-basis.4 Specific details are sparse in provided material.
  • Notes: The R-series rifles are a clear example of the Kalashnikov design’s adaptability, modified through several iterations (AK -> RK 62 -> Galil -> R4) to suit specific national requirements.
A South African soldier, part of the UN peacekeeping force, armed with an R4 during a training exercise in 2013 © MONUSCO/Sylvain Liechti. Image Source: Wikipedia

3.29. Sudan

  • Manufacturer(s): Military Industry Corporation (MIC).4
  • Model: MAZ
  • Caliber: Assuming its basis on the Chinese Type 56 4, that strongly suggests the 7.62x39mm cartridge.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Not specified in the provided materials.110
  • Notes: The MAZ rifle is reported to be based on the Chinese Type 56 assault rifle and manufactured using Chinese-supplied machinery.4

3.30. Turkey

  • Manufacturer(s): Sarsılmaz Silah Sanayi A.Ş..4
  • Models & Details:
  • SAR 15T: Described as an AK-47 clone.4 Caliber is likely 7.62x39mm given its AK-47 clone designation.
  • SAR 308 (V2): Also listed as an AK-47 clone.4 The “308” in its name might suggest the 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 Winchester) cartridge, which would make it more of a battle rifle or DMR if based on the Kalashnikov action, rather than a standard assault rifle. 4 lists it as “SAR 15T/308(V2)”. Further clarification on caliber would be needed for precise classification.
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Not specified. Sarsılmaz is a major Turkish arms manufacturer founded in 1880 and exports to over 80 countries.112
  • Notes: Sarsılmaz produces a wide range of firearms for military, police, and civilian markets.

3.31. Ukraine

  • Manufacturer(s): State Space Agency of Ukraine (for Vepr); Interproinvest (IPI) / Krasyliv Assembly Manufacturing Plant (for Malyuk).4
  • Models & Details:
  • Vepr (“Wild Boar”): A bullpup conversion of the AK-74 assault rifle. Designed in 1993-1994 and announced in 2003. It retains the AK-74’s operating mechanism and 5.45x39mm caliber.4
Vepr Bullpup. Image Source: Wikipedia
  • Malyuk (“Baby” or “Vulcan”): Another Ukrainian bullpup assault rifle based on the Kalashnikov operating system (derived from AKM/AK-74 and lessons from the Vepr project). Development started in 2005, it debuted publicly in 2015, and has been in service with Ukrainian special forces since 2017.4
  • Calibers: Available in 5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm, and 5.56x45mm NATO.117
Malyuk Bullpup. Image Source: Wikipedia
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Specific production numbers and detailed timelines are not extensively provided.
  • Notes: Both the Vepr and Malyuk represent efforts to modernize existing Kalashnikov-pattern rifles into more compact bullpup configurations, suitable for modern combat scenarios, particularly in confined spaces. The Malyuk notably features ambidextrous controls and improved ergonomics.117

3.32. United States

  • PSAK-47 series (e.g., GF3, GF4, GF5) in 7.62x39mm.4
  • PSA AK-556 in 5.56x45mm NATO.4
  • PSAK-74 in 5.45x39mm.4
  • PSAK-104 (semi-automatic clone of the AK-104 carbine).20
Author’s customized PSA AK-E. Image Source: Author.
  • Notes: The vast majority of US-produced Kalashnikov-pattern firearms are semi-automatic versions intended for the civilian market, complying with US firearms regulations (e.g., 922R compliance for imported parts). Quality and adherence to original Kalashnikov specifications can vary widely among manufacturers.

3.33. Venezuela

  • Manufacturer(s): CAVIM (Compañía Anónima Venezolana de Industrias Militares).4
  • Model: AK-103 (produced under license from Russia)
  • Caliber: 7.62x39mm.4
  • Production Dates: The license agreement was made in 2006. Factories were officially opened in 2012, and initial deliveries of CAVIM-made AK-103s to the Venezuelan Army occurred in 2013. Full-scale production was planned to commence by the end of 2019, but the project faced significant delays and challenges, including issues with the Russian contractor and allegations of fraud, forcing CAVIM to attempt to complete construction themselves. The current operational status and output of the plant are unclear.119
  • Estimated Numbers Produced: The plant was planned to have an annual production capacity of approximately 25,000 rifles.119 However, actual numbers produced are not specified and are likely much lower than initially planned due to the aforementioned issues.
  • Notes: Venezuela also planned to produce over 50 million rounds of ammunition annually at an associated plant.119 The project has been a subject of scrutiny due to delays and costs.

3.34. Vietnam

  • Manufacturer(s): Z111 Factory.4
  • Models & Details:
  • AKM-1 / AKM-VN: Local designations for AKM pattern rifles, possibly upgraded or locally assembled versions of the Soviet AKM [4 (STL-1A from AKM)]. Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • TUL-1: A light machine gun, likely based on the RPK.4 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • STL-1A: An upgraded version of older AKM rifles, featuring new polymer handguards, a folding buttstock, an ergonomic pistol grip, an updated muzzle brake, and compatibility with M203-type grenade launchers.122 Caliber: 7.62x39mm.
  • STV Series (Súng Trường Việt Nam): A family of modern assault rifles based on the IWI Galil ACE design (itself a Kalashnikov derivative), chambered in 7.62x39mm and using standard AK-47/AKM magazines. These were revealed around 2019-2020 and are becoming standard issue for the Vietnam People’s Army.4
  • STV-215: Carbine version with a 215mm barrel.121
  • STV-380: Standard rifle version with a 380mm barrel.121
  • STV-410: Rifle with a 410mm barrel and adjustments to handguard/gas block for grenade launcher compatibility.121
  • STV-416: Similar to STV-410 but lacks Picatinny rails.121
  • Production Dates/Numbers: Production of older AKM types and upgrades is ongoing. The STV series entered production more recently (post-2019). Specific numbers are not provided.
  • Notes: Vietnam has a long history of using Kalashnikov-pattern weapons and has more recently moved towards producing modern derivatives like the Galil ACE-based STV series. Z111 Factory also produces the Galil ACE 31/32 under license.4

4. Summary Table of Kalashnikov-Inspired Rifle Production by Country

The following table summarizes the countries identified as producers of Kalashnikov-inspired rifle designs, along with key details for representative models. It is important to note that “Estimated Numbers Produced” are often broad estimates or refer to total production of all AK types by a specific factory or country, rather than individual models, unless specified. “N/A” indicates data was not available in the provided sources.

CountryRepresentative Model(s)Caliber(s)Manufacturer(s)Production Dates (Period)Estimated Numbers ProducedNotes
Soviet Union / RussiaAK-477.62x39mm M43Izhmash (Kalashnikov Concern), Tula Arms Plant1948–Present (family)~75 million (AK-47s), ~100 million (Kalashnikov family total) 3Original design, milled receiver initially.
AKM7.62x39mm M43Izhmash, Tula Arms Plant1959–1977 (USSR)10,278,300 (Soviet production) 6Modernized, stamped receiver, widespread.
AK-74 / AK-74M5.45x39mm M74Izhmash (Kalashnikov Concern), Tula Arms Plant1974–Present (AK-74M)5,000,000+ (AK-74) 10Smaller caliber, distinctive muzzle brake. AK-74M has folding stock, scope rail.
AK-100 Series (e.g., AK-101, AK-103, AK-105)5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm, 5.45x39mmKalashnikov Concern1994–PresentAK-103: 250,000+.18 AK-101: 270,500+ (may include others).16 Overall series numbers vary by source.Export-focused, polymer furniture, multi-caliber.
AK-12 / AK-155.45x39mm, 7.62x39mmKalashnikov Concern2018–Present150,000+ (AK-12/15 combined by 2021) 245th Gen, improved ergonomics, Picatinny rails.
AlbaniaASH-78 Tip-17.62x39mmKM Poliçan & Gramësh1978–1993100,000+ 27Copy of Chinese Type 56. Unique selector markings.
ArgentinaFARA 835.56x45mm NATOFMAP-DM1984–1990 (limited)~1,193 (initial run) 33Inspired by Beretta AR70; Kalashnikov operating system lineage unconfirmed by sources.
ArmeniaK-35.45x39mmNot Specifiedc. 1996Not SpecifiedBullpup design based on AKS-74U.
AzerbaijanKhazri (AK-74M licensed)5.45x39mmMinistry of Defence Industry (MODIAR)2011–PresentPotential up to 120,000 (licensed production capacity) 37Licensed AK-74M for domestic use.
BangladeshBD-087.62x39mmBangladesh Ordnance Factories (BOF)Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedLikely Type 81 derivative (Type 81 uses distinct short-stroke piston).
BulgariaAR-M15.56x45mm, 7.62x39mmArsenal AD1998–Present>1,000,000 (total Arsenal AK production) 15Modernized milled receiver AK, AK-74 features. Highly regarded.
ChinaType 567.62x39mmNorinco, PolyTech, State Factory 661956–Present10,000,000+ 48AK-47 copy (milled then stamped receiver), often has spike bayonet.
CroatiaAPS-955.56x45mm NATOKončar-Arma d.o.o1993/1995 – c. 2007Small quantities 51Based on Vektor R4 (Galil derivative), integrated optic.
CubaAKM derivatives7.62x39mmUnión de Industrias Militares (UIM)Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedLocal production details sparse.
East GermanyMPi-KM7.62x39mmVEB GSW Wiesa, VEB Suhlc. 1966–1980s~3-4 million (total MPi series) 58AKM copy, distinctive plastic furniture.
MPi-AK-74N5.45x39mmVEB GSW Wiesa, VEB Suhl1983–1990Part of total MPi series production.AK-74 copy.
EgyptMisr / Maadi ARM7.62x39mmMaadi Company for Engineering Industries (Factory 54)From 1958 (AK types)Not SpecifiedAKM copy.
EthiopiaEt-97/1 (AK-103 licensed)7.62x39mmGafat Armament Engineering Complex (GAEC)From 1986 (AK types), AK-103 ongoingNot SpecifiedLicensed AK-103 production.
FinlandRK 62 (Valmet M62)7.62x39mmValmet, SAKO1965–1994350,000+ 68High-quality AK-47 derivative, milled receiver. Basis for Galil.
HungaryAK-63 (AMM)7.62x39mmFegyver- és Gépgyár (FÉG)1977–2001~11,000 exported to C. America 72; 7,700 AK-63MF modernized.AKM copy with traditional furniture.
AMD-657.62x39mmFegyver- és Gépgyár (FÉG)1965–1980“Tens of thousands” 73Shortened, folding stock, distinct foregrip.
IndiaINSAS Rifle5.56x45mm NATOOrdnance Factories Board (OFB)1997–Present (Mass Prod.)Not Specified (700k replacements ordered for various rifles) 79AKM-based operating system, reliability issues noted.
AK-2037.62x39mmIndo-Russia Rifles Pvt. Ltd. (IRRPL)Production starting/ongoing>600,000 planned (local prod.) + 70,000 imported 13Licensed modern Kalashnikov.
IranKLS / KLF / KLT7.62x39mmDefense Industries Organization (DIO)Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedAK-47/AKM/AKMS copies.
IraqTabuk Assault Rifle7.62x39mmAl-Qadissiya Establishments1978–1990sNot SpecifiedClone of Zastava M70.
Tabuk Sniper Rifle7.62x39mmAl-Qadissiya Establishments1978–PresentNot SpecifiedDMR based on Zastava M76 (AK-derived).
IsraelIMI Galil ARM/AR/SAR5.56x45mm, 7.62x51mmIsrael Military Industries (IMI) / IWI1972–1998 (IMI)Not SpecifiedBased on Finnish RK 62. Highly regarded.
IWI Galil ACEVarious (incl. 7.62x39mm)Israel Weapon Industries (IWI)2008–PresentNot SpecifiedModernized Galil.
ItalyBernardelli VB-STD / VB-SR5.56x45mm NATO (likely)Vincenzo Bernardelli S.p.A.Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedGalil derivative (licensed Galil production).
NigeriaOBJ-0067.62x39mmDefence Industries Corp. of Nigeria (DICON)2006–PresentNot SpecifiedAK-47 copy.
North KoreaType 587.62x39mmFactory 61/651958–1968~800,000 94AK-47 Type 3 copy (milled receiver).
Type 687.62x39mmFactory 61/651968–PresentNot SpecifiedAKM copy (stamped receiver).
PakistanPK-217.62x39mmPakistan Ordnance Factories (POF)Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedUnlicensed AK-103 clone. Khyber Pass copies also prevalent (various makers).
Polandkbk wz. 1988 Tantal5.45x39mmFB Radom (Łucznik)1989–1994~25,000 100AK-74 derivative with unique features.
kbs wz. 1996 Beryl5.56x45mm NATOFB Radom (Łucznik)1997–PresentFactory capacity 70k rifles/yr (late 80s) 99Modern NATO-caliber rifle.
RomaniaPM md. 637.62x39mmCugir Arms Factory1963–Present“Several million” (md. 63/65 total) 105; >400k for Romanian forces 107AKM copy, often with vertical foregrip.
Serbia (Yugoslavia)Zastava M707.62x39mmZastava Arms1970–Present~4,000,000 (M70 family) 83Robust AKM derivative, RPK-style receiver, grenade sight.
South AfricaVektor R45.56x45mm NATODenel Land Systems (LIW)1980–Present~420,000 109Licensed Galil variant, polymer furniture.
SudanMAZ7.62x39mm (likely)Military Industry Corporation (MIC)Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedBased on Chinese Type 56.
TurkeySAR 15T / SAR 3087.62x39mm (likely for 15T)Sarsılmaz Silah Sanayi A.Ş.Not SpecifiedNot SpecifiedAK-47 clones. SAR 308 may be 7.62x51mm.
UkraineVepr5.45x39mmState Space AgencyDesigned 1993-94, announced 2003Not SpecifiedBullpup AK-74.
Malyuk5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm, 5.56x45mmInterproinvest (IPI) / Krasyliv2017–Present (service)Not SpecifiedBullpup Kalashnikov derivative.
United StatesVarious (e.g., PSAK-47, KR-103)Various (incl. 7.62x39mm, 5.56x45mm)Palmetto State Armory, Kalashnikov USA, Century ArmsOngoing commercialVaries by manufacturerSemi-auto civilian market versions.
VenezuelaAK-103 (licensed)7.62x39mmCAVIMFrom 2012 (initial deliveries)Planned 25,000/year; actual output unclear due to delays 119Licensed Russian AK-103, production issues.
VietnamSTV-380 / STV-2157.62x39mmZ111 Factoryc. 2019–PresentNot SpecifiedBased on Galil ACE design.

Photo Sources

Main photo of Mikhail Kalashnikov superimposed over a map with countries using or licensing firearms based on his designs highlighted was generated by Ronin’s Grips using Sora. It is release to the creative commons as long as blog.roningsgrips.com is cited as the source.

The majority of photos were obtained from Wikimedia and Wikipedia and are unaltered. Links to their respective pages are included and they remain the copyright of their respective authors.

Works cited

  1. AK-47 | Definition, History, Operation, & Facts – Britannica, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/technology/AK-47
  2. The AK-47: the world’s favourite killing machine – Amnesty International, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.amnesty.org/ar/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/act300112006en.pdf
  3. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
  4. Kalashnikov rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalashnikov_rifle
  5. File:AK-47-Rifle.svg – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AK-47-Rifle.svg
  6. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  7. The AKM Assault Rifle | PDF | Personal Weapons – Scribd, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/137559756/The-AKM-Assault-Rifle
  8. AK Variants: A Closer Look – The Primary Source On PrimaryArms.com, accessed May 17, 2025, https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/ak-variants-explored/
  9. File:AKM (rifle).jpg – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AKM_(rifle).jpg
  10. AK-74 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-74
  11. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – AK-74 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/AK-74
  12. File:AK-74 RPK-74 DA-ST-89-06612.jpg – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AK-74_RPK-74_DA-ST-89-06612.jpg
  13. AK-100 (rifle family) – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-100_(rifle_family)
  14. AK-100 – Weapon Systems, accessed May 17, 2025, https://old.weaponsystems.net/weaponsystem/AA04%20-%20AK-100.html
  15. Kalashnikov & Variant Factory Dataset (1947-present) – Audrey Kurth Cronin, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.audreykurthcronin.com/p2p-pvid/p2p-pvid-kalashnikov/kalashnikov-variant-factory-dataset-1947-present/
  16. AK-101 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-101
  17. AK-102 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-102
  18. AK-103 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-103
  19. AK-103 assault rifle with GP-34 grenade launcher at Engineering Technologies 2012.jpg- Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AK-103_assault_rifle_with_GP-34_grenade_launcher_at_Engineering_Technologies_2012.jpg
  20. AK-104 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-104
  21. Category:AK-104 – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:AK-104
  22. AK-100 Series – Small Arms Survey, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/SAS-weapons-assault-rifles-AK-100-series.pdf
  23. AK-105 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-105
  24. AK-12 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-12
  25. Russia’s Modernized AK-12 Assault Rifles Are Being Delivered This Year, accessed May 17, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-modernized-ak-12-assault-rifles-are-being-delivered-this-year
  26. What Are the Different Types of AKs? – Guns.com, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.guns.com/news/what-are-ak-variants
  27. ASH-78 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASH-78
  28. Shotgun news, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.arsenal-bg.com/uploads/2016/06/583abffafca0f9dd4ae3c8ba685a074c.pdf
  29. ASH-78 – Customer Build, accessed May 17, 2025, https://akresources.childersguns.com/2024/03/ash-78-customer-build.html
  30. File:Ash-78.jpg – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ash-78.jpg
  31. Centrefire automatic rifle – ASH-82 (Kalashnikov AKM) – dated 1981 | Collection Object | Royal Armouries, accessed May 17, 2025, https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-282536
  32. Centrefire automatic rifle – Automatiku SHqiptar – Model of 1982 (ASH-82) – 1986 | Collection Object | Royal Armouries, accessed May 17, 2025, https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-282534
  33. FARA 83 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FARA_83
  34. Assault Rifles | PDF | Ammunition – Scribd, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/145375992/Assault-Rifles
  35. Argentine indigenous assault rifle design FARA-83 : r/ForgottenWeapons – Reddit, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/19cn75i/argentine_indigenous_assault_rifle_design_fara83/
  36. Category:FARA 83 – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:FARA_83
  37. Azerbaijan PKM Production | thefirearmblog.com, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/azerbaijan-pkm-production-44818135
  38. Ministry of Defence Industry of Azerbaijan – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Defence_Industry_of_Azerbaijan#Products
  39. File:Khazri 2.jpg – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Khazri_2.jpg
  40. Type 81 Assault Rifle – Wikipedia | PDF | History – Scribd, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/665459028/Type-81-assault-rifle-Wikipedia
  41. Type 81 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_81_assault_rifle
  42. AR-M1, accessed May 17, 2025, https://wikipedia.nucleos.com/viewer/wikipedia_en_all/A/AR-M1
  43. Arsenal AD – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenal_AD#Products
  44. AR-M1 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-M1
  45. What country produces the best variations of Ak. Personally I would say Poland, because the tantal, wbp, fox, and Beryl. What would you all say, and why. : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/101jymx/what_country_produces_the_best_variations_of_ak/
  46. AR-M1 – Wikiwand, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/AR-M1
  47. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – AK-47 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/AK-47
  48. Type 56 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_56_assault_rifle
  49. Type 56 assault rifles – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Type_56_assault_rifles
  50. The Chinese Type 81 Information | Total War Center, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.twcenter.net/threads/the-chinese-type-81-information.175527/
  51. APS-95 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APS-95
  52. List of assault rifles – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assault_rifles
  53. Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Cuba#Infantry_weapons
  54. The Gun That Is in Almost 100 Countries: Why the AK-47 Dominates – The National Interest, accessed May 17, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/75-million-guns-ready-war-why-the-ak-47-dominates-20561
  55. SAMOPAL vz. 58: A rifle that looks like an Soviet AK-47 but it is not – Combat Operators, accessed May 17, 2025, https://combatoperators.com/firearms/rifles/samopal-vz-58/
  56. Differences Between the VZ-58 and the AK – Firearms History, Technology & Development, accessed May 17, 2025, http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2015/01/differences-between-vz-58-and-ak.html
  57. vz. 58 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vz._58
  58. East German MPiKM assault rifle | Imperial War Museums, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30029525
  59. East German Wieger STG Rifle – Small Arms Review, accessed May 17, 2025, http://archive.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.printable.cfm?idarticles=1382
  60. East German AK History – Faktory 47, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.faktory47.com/blogs/kalashnikov/east-german-ak-history
  61. East German MPi-KM-72 (AKM) Operator’s Manual : r/milsurp – Reddit, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/milsurp/comments/11l19wp/east_german_mpikm72_akm_operators_manual/
  62. File:MPi-KM.jpg – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MPi-KM.jpg
  63. File:MPI-KMS-74.JPG – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MPI-KMS-74.JPG
  64. Hakim rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakim_rifle
  65. Egyptian Maadi MISR S/A AKM 7.62×39 16″ Rifle AK-47 Romanian Dong, accessed May 17, 2025, https://lsbauctions.com/egyptian-maadi-misr-s-a-akm-7-62×39-16-rifle-ak-47-romanian-dong/
  66. File:Maadi Rifle.webp – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maadi_Rifle.webp
  67. Gafat Armament Engineering Complex – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gafat_Armament_Engineering_Complex
  68. AKs from Finland. Part 2: Valmet RK 62, Advanced AK Designed 62 Years Ago | thefirearmblog.com, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/04/18/aks-from-finland-part-2-valmet-rk-62-advanced-ak-designed-62-years-ago/
  69. RK 62 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RK_62
  70. IMI Galil: An Israel’s derivative of legendary AK-47 – Combat Operators, accessed May 17, 2025, https://combatoperators.com/firearms/rifles/imi-galil/
  71. Valmet M62 – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Valmet_M62
  72. AK-63 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-63
  73. AMD-65 – Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 17, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/816-AMD-65
  74. Fegyver- és Gépgyár – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fegyver-_%C3%A9s_G%C3%A9pgy%C3%A1r
  75. Place: Hungary | Collection Term – Royal Armouries, accessed May 17, 2025, https://royalarmouries.org/collection/facet/place_made/creation/Hungary
  76. Category:AK-63 – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:AK-63
  77. Category:AMD 65 – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:AMD_65
  78. INSAS rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INSAS_rifle
  79. Why is the INSAS rifle considered to be so bad? : r/WarCollege – Reddit, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/1knj4iv/why_is_the_insas_rifle_considered_to_be_so_bad/
  80. Identifying Small Arms and RPGs Produced in Iran, accessed May 17, 2025, https://irp.fas.org/world/iran/smallarms.pdf
  81. Defense Industries Organization – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Industries_Organization#Small_Arms
  82. List of equipment of the Iranian Army – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Iranian_Army
  83. Zastava M70 | Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 17, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/376-Zastava+M70
  84. Tabuk Sniper Rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabuk_Sniper_Rifle
  85. Galil (& close derivatives) – Small Arms Survey, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/SAS_weapons-assault-rifles-Galil.pdf
  86. IMI Galil – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Galil
  87. IWI Galil ACE – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IWI_Galil_ACE
  88. File:Bernardelli VB Practical 9mm (32795519385).jpg – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bernardelli_VB_Practical_9mm_(32795519385).jpg
  89. DICON Partners With Firm On Military Hardware Production – Voice of Nigeria, accessed May 17, 2025, https://von.gov.ng/dicon-partners-with-firm-on-military-hardware-production/
  90. Defence Industries Corporation of Nigeria – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Industries_Corporation_of_Nigeria
  91. Defence Industries Corporation of Nigeria – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Industries_Corporation_of_Nigeria#Products
  92. FB Beryl – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB_Beryl
  93. Nigerian made weapons, a complete list – World Defense, accessed May 17, 2025, https://world-defense.com/threads/nigerian-made-weapons-a-complete-list.7541/
  94. Type 58 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_58_assault_rifle
  95. List of military equipment manufactured in Pakistan, accessed May 17, 2025, https://wikipedia.nucleos.com/viewer/wikipedia_en_all/A/List_of_military_equipment_manufactured_in_Pakistan
  96. Bayonets of Poland – WorldBayonets.com, accessed May 17, 2025, https://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identification_Guide/Poland/Poland_2.html
  97. Polish Radom (11) AKM Barreled Action/Rifle w/ original Polish Chrome Lined Barrel & Polish Imported Receiver – Arms of America, accessed May 17, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/polish-radom-11-akm-barreled-action-rifle-w-original-polish-chrome-lined-barrel-polish-imported-receiver/
  98. FB “Łucznik” Radom – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB_%22%C5%81ucznik%22_Radom
  99. BERYL TANTALSSON: THE SAGA OF THE POLISH KALASHNIKOV CONTINUES, accessed May 17, 2025, https://smallarmsreview.com/beryl-tantalsson-the-saga-of-the-polish-kalashnikov-continues/
  100. FB Tantal – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB_Tantal
  101. en.wikipedia.org, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FB_Radom
  102. Polish kbk AKM and AKMS rifles, 1991-2000. End of an era for the FB Radom AK Kalashnikov – YouTube, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRAXF6GmzLA
  103. Pistol Mitraliera model 1963 ( PM md. 63) AKM Variant – The Armoury, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.wargm.org/armoury/index.php?mode=2&cat=Fully+Automatic+and+Self+Loading+Rifles+and+Carbines&item=121
  104. Pistol Mitralieră model 1963/1965 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol_Mitralier%C4%83_model_1963/1965
  105. PM md. 63 – Weapon Systems, accessed May 17, 2025, https://old.weaponsystems.net/weaponsystem/AA04%20-%20PM%20md%2063.html
  106. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – PM md. 63 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/PM_md._63
  107. PM md. 63 – Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 17, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/489-PM+md.+63
  108. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
  109. Vektor R4 – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vektor_R4
  110. Military Industry Corporation – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Industry_Corporation_(Sudan)#Products_and_Services
  111. Category:Military of Sudan – Wikimedia Commons, accessed May 17, 2025, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_of_Sudan
  112. Sarsılmaz Silah, accessed May 17, 2025, https://sarsilmaz.com/public/uploads/1738761377en.pdf
  113. Sarsılmaz Arms – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sars%C4%B1lmaz_Arms
  114. Sarsılmaz Arms – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sars%C4%B1lmaz_Arms#Assault_Rifles
  115. Why Ukraine Special Ops Use This Bullpup. The Malyuk. – YouTube, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD8W7Ps6Yj8&pp=0gcJCfcAhR29_xXO
  116. Vepr – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vepr
  117. Malyuk – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malyuk
  118. AK Rifles – Century Arms, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.centuryarms.com/ak-rifles
  119. Kalashnikov Venezuela Plant to Start AK-103 Production by 2019 End – Defense Mirror, accessed May 17, 2025, https://www.defensemirror.com/news/22279/Kalashnikov_Venezuela_Plant_to_Start_AK_103_Production_by_2019_End
  120. CAVIM – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAVIM#Firearms
  121. STV rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STV_rifle
  122. Z111 Factory – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z111_Factory#Products
  123. File:VD2022 STV380.jpg – Wikipedia, accessed May 17, 2025, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:VD2022_STV380.jpg

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.


The Engineering History of the Not So Lowly AK-47 Rivet

I’ve been involved with AK rifle building since 2006 and there’s something we take for granted – how rivets are used to secure the forged trunnions, and trigger guards to the sheet metal receiver. Not to mention the center support and side mount scope rail. Some have asked why rivets were even used thinking they were some low-end choice. The truth is quite different. Let’s move ahead and take a deeper focused look at the engineering behind the use of the rivet in the AKM rifle – it wasn’t a lowly choice by any means.

Section 1: Introduction to the AKM Stamped Receiver and Rivet-Based Assembly

The design of the 7.62mm AKM represents a pivotal moment in 20th-century small arms manufacturing. Its departure from the milled-receiver construction of its predecessor, the AK-47, in favor of a stamped-steel receiver assembly, necessitated a comprehensive and robust method for joining dissimilar components under significant operational stress. This report provides a detailed engineering analysis of the riveting system employed in the AKM, examining the materials, dimensions, geometry, and underlying mechanical principles that make it a successful and enduring design.

1.1 The Evolution from Milled to Stamped: Engineering and Production Imperatives

The original AK-47, while exceptionally reliable, was built upon a receiver machined from a solid forging of steel. This process was labor-intensive, time-consuming, and resulted in significant material waste. The primary engineering driver for the development of the AKM, introduced in 1959, was the optimization for mass production.1 Soviet engineers sought to reduce manufacturing complexity, cost, and the overall weight of the rifle without compromising the platform’s legendary reliability.2

The solution was a paradigm shift from a milled receiver to one formed from a single 1.0 mm thick sheet of steel.1 This change dramatically reduced machine time and cost, allowing for faster production rates to meet the vast needs of the Soviet military and its allies. However, this created a new engineering challenge: a thin, U-shaped stamped steel shell lacks the inherent strength and rigidity to contain the forces of a firing 7.62x39mm cartridge and guide the bolt carrier group with the necessary precision.4 The AKM’s riveting system is the critical design element that solves this problem. The following table summarizes the four AK-47 types:

Type DesignationWeapon ModelReceiver ConstructionDescription
Type 1Early AK-47 (1948–51)StampedFirst design; lightweight stamped sheet metal with riveted trunnions. Abandoned due to reliability and tooling issues.
Type 2AK-47 (1952–53)MilledFirst successful milled version; added a rear socket for the stock and heavier construction.
Type 3AK-47 (1954–59)MilledRefined milled design with lighter weight and simplified manufacturing over Type 2. Most common milled AK-47.
Type 4AKM (from 1959 onward)StampedStandardized modern AKM receiver; made from stamped sheet metal with riveted trunnions, very lightweight and economical.

1.2 The Functional Role of Trunnions and Rivets in the AKM Design

The AKM design cleverly separates the functions of pressure containment and component housing. The immense stress of firing is handled by two key high-strength components: the front and rear trunnions.6

  • The Front Trunnion: This is a precisely machined block of steel that serves as the heart of the rifle. It holds the barrel, provides the locking recesses for the bolt’s rotating lugs, and contains the peak chamber pressure upon firing. It absorbs the primary rearward thrust of the cartridge case.5
  • The Rear Trunnion: This machined steel block provides the mounting point for the buttstock and serves as the rear stop for the recoiling bolt carrier group, absorbing its kinetic energy at the end of each cycle.1

The thin stamped receiver acts as a chassis, holding these trunnions and the fire control group in their correct spatial relationship. The rivets are the non-detachable fasteners that permanently join the high-strength trunnions to the receiver shell, transferring the operational loads and creating a unified, rigid structure from otherwise disparate parts.1 Alternative methods like screwing are unsuitable due to the risk of loosening under intense vibration, while welding could warp the thin receiver and create brittle heat-affected zones.7 Riveting provides a permanent, vibration-resistant, and mechanically sound solution.

1.3 System Overview: Mapping the Primary Rivet Groups

The rivet pattern on an AKM is not arbitrary; it is a carefully laid out system designed to secure components and reinforce the receiver. The primary rivet groups, which will be analyzed in detail in subsequent sections, are as follows 8:

  • Front Trunnion Rivets: A group of six rivets securing the front trunnion to the forward section of the receiver.
  • Rear Trunnion Rivets: Two long rivets (for a standard fixed stock) that pass through the receiver and the rear trunnion block.
  • Trigger Guard Rivets: A group of five rivets that attach the trigger guard assembly to the bottom of the receiver.
  • Center Support Rivet: A single rivet and internal sleeve located midway down the receiver that prevents the receiver walls and guide rails from flexing.

The precise placement of these rivets is critical to the firearm’s function and is standardized across Warsaw Pact production, as can be seen in various build templates and diagrams.10

Top: AKMS (older-style wood handguard typical of AK-47 fitted) with type IV receiver; bottom: AK-47 with type II receiver. Image Source: Wikimedia.

Section 2: A Typology of AKM Rivets: Form, Dimensions, and Location

The rivet set used in an AKM is not a homogenous collection of fasteners. It is a specific kit of components where the geometry and dimensions of each rivet type are engineered for its designated location and mechanical function.

2.1 Rivet Geometry: A Detailed Taxonomy

The rivets used in a standard AKM can be classified into several distinct geometric types, each with a specific purpose.

2.1.1 The Swell Neck Rivet

This is the most specialized and structurally critical rivet in the AKM design. Its geometry features a standard domed head, a shank of a specific diameter, and a distinctive conical flare, or “swell,” located directly beneath the head.9 This swell is designed to fit into a corresponding dimpled (countersunk) hole in the receiver sheet. This interface creates a mechanical interlock that provides superior resistance to shear forces, a concept that will be analyzed in detail in Section 4. These are used in the highest-stress locations, such as the trunnion attachments.8

2.1.2 The Domed (Universal) Head Rivet

This is a standard solid rivet with a semi-spherical head, often referred to as a universal or round head type.15 These are used in locations where the specialized shear-resisting properties of the swell neck are not required, but a secure clamping force is still necessary, such as the upper front trunnion holes and parts of the trigger guard assembly.9

2.1.3 The Flat Head Rivet

The center support rivet is unique in that it features a very low-profile, flat manufactured head.8 This is a design constraint dictated by clearance requirements. The bolt carrier group reciprocates along guide rails inside the receiver, and a standard domed rivet head in this location would interfere with its movement. The flat head ensures a smooth, unobstructed path for the carrier.18

2.2 Rivet Specifications by Location

The following table synthesizes data from military specifications, gunsmithing resources, and commercial rivet sets to provide a comprehensive reference for the dimensions and types of rivets used in a standard fixed-stock AKM. All imperial measurements have been converted to metric for engineering consistency.

Table 2.1: AKM Rivet Dimensional and Type Specification

Rivet LocationQuantityRivet Type/ShapeShank Ø (mm)Shank Length (mm)Factory Head Ø (mm)Factory Head Height (mm)Required Receiver Hole Ø (mm)
Front Trunnion, Lower2Swell Neck, Domed Head4.09.5~7.1~2.14.0
Front Trunnion, Middle2Swell Neck, Domed Head4.09.5~7.1~2.14.0
Front Trunnion, Upper2Standard, Domed Head4.09.5~7.1~2.14.0
Rear Trunnion, Long2Swell Neck, Domed Head4.8~50.8~7.4~2.84.8
Trigger Guard, Front4Standard, Domed Head4.09.5~6.9~2.14.0
Trigger Guard, Rear1Standard, Domed Head4.07.9~6.9~2.14.0
Center Support1Standard, Flat Head4.0Varies~7.0Low Profile4.0

Data compiled and converted from sources.9 Dimensions are nominal and may exhibit minor variations based on country of origin and production year. Shank length for the center support rivet varies with the sleeve used. Rear trigger guard rivet length can vary depending on the use of a reinforcement plate.17

2.3 Analysis of National and Historical Variations

While the core Soviet design established the standard, minor variations in rivet specifications and patterns exist among different national producers of the AKM and its derivatives.

One of the most well-documented distinctions is in the front trunnion rivet pattern. Soviet/Warsaw Pact AKMs (Russian, Polish, Romanian, etc.) feature a parallel vertical alignment of the three rivets on each side of the trunnion. In contrast, many Chinese Type 56 rifles utilize a staggered or triangular rivet pattern for the front trunnion.12

Furthermore, small dimensional differences in the rivets themselves have been observed. For example, measurements of demilled kits have shown that Romanian factory-formed rivet heads for the trigger guard average around 6.9 mm – 7.2 mm in diameter, while Chinese examples can be slightly larger, averaging around 7.4 mm in diameter with a greater head height.15 These differences, while minor, reflect distinct manufacturing practices and tooling but do not alter the fundamental engineering principles of the riveting system.

Section 3: Metallurgy and Material Science of Soviet-Era Rivets

The choice of material for the AKM’s rivets is a critical aspect of its design, reflecting a deliberate balance between manufacturability, strength, and cost. The material must be soft enough to be formed without fracture, yet strong enough in its final state to withstand the violent operational stresses of the firearm.

3.1 Material Composition: Analysis of GOST Standard Low-Carbon Steels

Based on an analysis of Soviet-era general-purpose fastener standards, such as GOST 10299-80, the rivets used in the AKM are made from a low-carbon, unalloyed, quality structural steel.20 These steels are not high-performance alloys but are cost-effective, readily available, and possess the specific mechanical properties required for cold-forming applications. The two most probable grades are

Сталь 10 (Steel 10) and Сталь 20 (Steel 20).20 The number in the designation indicates the average carbon content in hundredths of a percent (i.e., 0.10% for Steel 10, 0.20% for Steel 20).22

Table 3.1: Nominal Chemical Composition of Soviet Rivet Steels (GOST 1050)

ElementSymbolSteel 10 (% Content)Steel 20 (% Content)
CarbonC0.07 – 0.140.17 – 0.24
ManganeseMn0.35 – 0.650.35 – 0.65
SiliconSi0.17 – 0.370.17 – 0.37
PhosphorusP≤ 0.035≤ 0.035
SulfurS≤ 0.040≤ 0.040
ChromiumCr≤ 0.15≤ 0.25
NickelNi≤ 0.25≤ 0.30
CopperCu≤ 0.25≤ 0.30
IronFeBalanceBalance

Data compiled from sources.22

3.2 Mechanical Properties: The Engineering Balance of Malleability and Strength

The selection of low-carbon steel is a masterstroke of process-integrated engineering. The material’s properties are ideally suited for both the installation process and the final application.

  • Malleability and Ductility: The extremely low carbon content makes these steels very soft and ductile in their annealed (as-supplied) state. For Steel 10, the hardness is approximately 143 HB, and for Steel 20, it is around 163 HB.22 This high ductility allows the rivet’s shank to be cold-formed (upset) into the buck-tail or formed head with a press, flowing to fill the hole completely without cracking.25 A harder, higher-carbon steel would be too brittle for this process.
  • Work Hardening and Final Strength: While the rivets are initially soft, the process of cold-forming induces significant work hardening (also known as strain hardening). As the steel is plastically deformed, dislocations are generated and rearranged within its crystal structure, which impedes further deformation. This has the effect of increasing the material’s tensile strength and hardness in its final, installed state. The rivet becomes substantially stronger than it was before installation. This elegant mechanism means that the assembly process itself is the final step in achieving the required mechanical properties, eliminating the need for a separate, costly heat treatment cycle for the millions of rivets produced.

3.3 Heat Treatment and Surface Finishing

It is critical to distinguish between the treatment of the rivets and the treatment of the receiver. The rivets themselves are not heat-treated after installation.27 Their final strength is a product of material selection and work hardening.

In contrast, the 1.0 mm stamped receiver is selectively heat-treated. Specifically, the areas around the fire control group (hammer and trigger) pin holes and the tip of the integral ejector are hardened to prevent wear and elongation under repeated stress.4 A common specification for this spot-hardening is a Rockwell C hardness of 38-40.13 Attempting to use a non-heat-treated receiver will result in rapid failure, as the pin holes will stretch and deform, leading to malfunction.13

The standard finish applied to military-issue rivets is a black oxide coating.9 This is a conversion coating that provides mild corrosion resistance and a durable, non-reflective black finish that matches the rest of the firearm.

Section 4: Engineering Rationale and Stress Distribution Analysis

The AKM’s riveting system is more than a simple collection of fasteners; it is an integrated system designed to manage and distribute the complex forces generated during the firing cycle. Understanding this system requires analyzing the stresses on the primary components and the specific design features created to handle them.

4.1 The Trunnions as Primary Load-Bearing Structures

As established, the trunnions are the true load-bearing elements of the AKM.

  • Front Trunnion Stress: The front trunnion bears the highest peak stress in the system. When a cartridge is fired, the expanding gases exert a force on the bolt face, which is transmitted directly to the locking lugs on the front trunnion. This force is on the order of thousands of pounds, corresponding to chamber pressures that can reach approximately 45,000 psi for the 7.62x39mm cartridge.5 The integrity of the trunnion’s locking lugs is paramount. This is why properly forged and heat-treated trunnions are essential; failures of substandard cast trunnions often manifest as cracks or complete shearing of the locking lugs.5
  • Rear Trunnion Stress: The rear trunnion experiences a different type of load: a high-energy impact. At the end of its rearward travel, the entire mass of the bolt carrier group (approximately 500 grams) slams into the front face of the rear trunnion. While the peak force is lower than the chamber pressure, it is a significant, repetitive shock load that must be absorbed and transferred into the receiver shell without causing deformation or failure.7 This repeated impact is why the rear trunnion rivets are often described as taking the most “abuse” in the system.7

4.2 Analysis of Forces: Shear Stress on Trunnion Rivets

The primary force that the trunnion rivets must resist is shear. The rearward thrust on the front trunnion and the impact on the rear trunnion create forces that try to slide the trunnions relative to the receiver skin. The rivets act as pins, resisting this shearing motion. The load is distributed among the rivets in a group, with each rivet carrying a fraction of the total shear force.

4.3 The Swell Neck/Dimple Interface: A Design Solution for Maximizing Shear Resistance

The most ingenious feature of the AKM’s riveting system is the use of swell neck rivets in conjunction with dimpled receiver holes. This is a specific design solution to the problem of transferring high shear loads into a thin (1.0 mm) sheet of metal.

In a standard rivet joint, the shear load is borne by the bearing surface of the hole against the rivet shank. In a 1.0 mm receiver, this bearing area is minuscule, making the hole highly susceptible to elongation or “egging” under load, which would lead to a loose trunnion and catastrophic failure.

The swell neck/dimple system fundamentally changes this dynamic. The process involves using a specialized die to press a conical countersink, or “dimple,” into the receiver hole.8 The front or rear trunnion must be in place behind the receiver to support the sheet during this process.8 When the swell neck rivet is installed, its conical swell nests perfectly into this dimple.13

The basic formula for shear stress (τ) is τ = F/A, where F is the applied force and A is the area over which the force is acting. This formula calculates the average shear stress across the area. 

Explanation:

Shear Stress (τ): It’s a measure of the force acting parallel to the surface area of a material, causing it to deform or potentially fail by sliding or shearing. 
Force (F): This is the component of the force that is parallel to the surface area. 
Area (A): This is the cross-sectional area of the material that the force is acting upon. It’s the area of the surface where the force is applied, not the total surface area of the object. 

So, as the area increases, the sheer stress decreases all things being equal.

This creates a mechanical interlock. The shear load is no longer concentrated on the thin edge of the hole. Instead, it is distributed across the entire conical surface area of the dimple. This vastly increases the bearing surface, dramatically reduces the bearing stress on the receiver material, and effectively locks the trunnion and receiver together, preventing any relative movement.6 Gunsmithing guides explicitly warn against trying to achieve a flush fit by removing material from the receiver instead of dimpling; doing so defeats the entire purpose of the design, leaving only the rivet’s core to resist shear and guaranteeing eventual failure.6 This feature is the key to making a thin stamped receiver perform as if it were much thicker and stronger at these critical junctions.

4.4 The Role of the Center Support and Trigger Guard Rivets in Receiver Rigidity

While the trunnion rivets handle the primary firing loads, the other rivet groups serve a crucial structural reinforcement role, stiffening the inherently flexible U-shaped receiver.

  • Center Support: The center support consists of a rivet passing through a steel sleeve that bridges the two sides of the receiver.8 This assembly acts as a critical cross-member. It prevents the long, unsupported upper guide rails from flexing inward under the lateral forces exerted by the reciprocating bolt carrier, ensuring smooth and reliable cycling. It also prevents the receiver walls themselves from bowing or pinching.33
  • Trigger Guard Assembly: The trigger guard is not merely a safety feature. When its five rivets are properly installed, the entire stamped steel trigger guard assembly acts as a structural floor plate for the receiver.34 This significantly increases the torsional and latitudinal rigidity of the large magazine well opening, preventing the “U” from spreading or twisting under load.

Together, these rivet groups transform the flexible stamped receiver shell into a strong, cohesive chassis capable of withstanding the rigors of military service.

Section 5: The Riveting Process: A Technical Guide to Proper Formation

Achieving the designed strength of the AKM’s riveted joints is entirely dependent on the correct installation process. This is a precision manufacturing operation that requires specialized tooling and meticulous adherence to procedure. Using improper methods, such as a hammer and a simple punch, will result in substandard joints that compromise the safety and reliability of the firearm.

5.1 Essential Tooling: Jigs, Presses, and Forming Dies

Modern, correct riveting practice relies on a set of specialized tools to ensure control and repeatability.

  • Hydraulic Press: A shop press, typically with a capacity of 12 tons or more, provides the slow, controlled, and immense force needed to properly form the rivets without impact shock.13
  • Riveting Jig: A purpose-built jig, such as those made by AK-Builder or Toth Tool, is essential. These jigs securely hold the receiver and trunnion assembly, ensuring it is square to the press ram. They have recesses to support the manufactured head of the rivet, preventing it from being flattened, and they align the forming tool perfectly coaxial with the rivet shank.8 Different jigs or configurations are used for short trunnion rivets, long rear trunnion rivets, and the trigger guard.33
  • Forming Dies and Tools: A set of hardened steel forming tools is used to shape the rivet. This includes cupped support dies for the manufactured head and various forming punches to create a correctly shaped, domed buck-tail on the other end.16

5.2 Receiver and Component Preparation

Proper preparation of the components is as important as the riveting itself.

  • Hole Location and Drilling: Rivet holes must be precisely located on the receiver blank. This is typically done using a plastic layout guide and a transfer punch to mark the hole centers.10 The holes are then drilled to the correct diameter (e.g., 4.0 mm for a 4.0 mm rivet) using a drill press and high-quality drill bits.37 An undersized hole will prevent the rivet from seating, while an oversized hole will result in a weak joint.
  • Deburring: After drilling, all holes must be carefully deburred on both sides. Any burrs or sharp edges will prevent the rivet from sitting flush against the receiver and trunnion, creating gaps that compromise the joint’s integrity.6
  • Dimpling: For all swell neck rivet locations, the receiver holes must be dimpled. This is done using a specialized dimple die in the hydraulic press, with the trunnion installed in the receiver to provide backing support. This forms the conical seat that the rivet’s swell neck will engage.8

5.3 Step-by-Step Installation Protocol

The general sequence for riveting an AKM receiver is as follows, using the appropriate jigs and press tools for each step 8:

  1. Trigger Guard Riveting: The trigger guard assembly is typically installed first, often with a dedicated jig. The four front rivets and the single rear rivet are pressed to secure the guard and magazine catch assembly.13
  2. Front Trunnion Riveting: The front trunnion is placed in the receiver, and the six short rivets are installed. Care must be taken to use swell neck rivets in the four lower and middle holes (which should be dimpled) and standard domed rivets in the two upper holes.8
  3. Rear Trunnion Riveting: The rear trunnion is installed using the two long rivets. This requires a specialized long-rivet jig to support the receiver and apply force linearly down the long shank of the rivet.8
  4. Center Support Installation: The center support sleeve is inserted, and the special flat-headed rivet is pressed into place, again using the long-rivet tool.8

5.4 Inspection and Verification of a Correctly Formed Rivet

A properly formed rivet must meet specific visual and mechanical criteria.

  • Visual Inspection: The manufactured head must be perfectly flush against the receiver surface with no visible gaps. A common field test is to hold the receiver up to a bright light source to check for light passing under the rivet head.39 The formed head (the buck-tail) must be symmetrical, well-rounded with a dome shape similar to the manufactured head, and centered on the rivet’s shank. It should not be flattened, cracked, or off-center.40
  • Mechanical Integrity: The finished rivet must be completely tight. There should be absolutely no detectable movement between the trunnion and the receiver when force is applied. The entire assembly should feel and behave as a single, monolithic component. A loose rivet is a failed rivet and must be drilled out and replaced.
This is a Romanian Pistol Mitralieră model 1963/1965 (abbreviated PM md. 63 or simply md. 63) and is the Patriotic Guard or ‘Gardă’ version readily identifiable by the “G” on the rear sight block. Image source: Author.

Section 6: Conclusion: The Engineering Elegance of the AKM Riveting System

6.1 Synthesis of Findings: A Robust System for a Stamped Platform

The comprehensive analysis of the AKM’s riveting system reveals a design that is far more sophisticated than its rugged appearance suggests. The transition from the milled AK-47 to the stamped AKM was a manufacturing revolution, and the riveting system is the lynchpin of its success. The key findings of this report can be synthesized as follows:

  • A Purpose-Engineered System: The AKM’s riveting system is a holistic solution to the engineering challenges posed by a thin, stamped-steel receiver. It successfully mates high-strength, load-bearing trunnions to a lightweight chassis, creating a firearm that is both durable and easy to mass-produce.
  • Specialized Components: The system does not rely on generic fasteners. It employs a heterogeneous set of rivets, each with a specific geometry (swell neck, domed head, flat head) and dimension precisely tailored to the mechanical requirements and spatial constraints of its location.
  • Optimized Material Science: The choice of low-carbon steel (such as Soviet Steel 10 or 20) is a deliberate act of engineering efficiency. The material’s initial ductility facilitates easy cold-forming, while the installation process itself induces work-hardening, providing the final required strength without the need for a separate heat-treatment process.
  • Advanced Structural Mechanics: The strength of the system is derived not merely from the clamping force of the rivets but from advanced mechanical principles. The swell neck/dimple interface is a brilliant solution for managing shear stress, while the center support and trigger guard rivets act as integral structural reinforcements, adding critical rigidity to the receiver.
  • Process-Dependent Integrity: The design’s success is inextricably linked to the correct installation methodology. Proper riveting is a precision process that requires specialized tooling and meticulous preparation. Deviations from this process directly compromise the mechanical integrity and safety of the firearm.

6.2 Final Assessment

The riveting system of the AKM is a testament to the Soviet design philosophy of elegant simplicity. It achieves maximum functional robustness with a minimum of manufacturing complexity and cost. By understanding the interplay between the stamped receiver, the machined trunnions, and the specialized rivets that join them, one can appreciate the AKM not just as a firearm, but as a masterclass in pragmatic and effective mechanical engineering. It is a system where every component, every dimension, and every step in the assembly process has a clear and logical purpose, resulting in one of the most successful and widely produced firearm designs in history.

Works cited

  1. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  2. AK-47 vs AKM Performance: Insights from GunCreed® Experts, accessed June 20, 2025, https://guncreed.com/2025/03/12/how-does-the-ak47-compare-to-the-akm-in-terms-of-performance/
  3. AR & AK – Night Galaxy, accessed June 20, 2025, https://nightgalaxy.com/blog/ar-ak/
  4. How do I heat treat an AK receiver? [Archive] – The Firing Line Forums, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-325374.html
  5. Ras47 Trunnion failure. : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/abjwaa/ras47_trunnion_failure/
  6. AKM Build Project: From Poland With Love | RECOIL, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.recoilweb.com/preview-build-your-own-akm-rifle-101413.html
  7. New Technique for AK Builds – SKSBOARDS.COM, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=8335.20;wap2
  8. Rivet Tool Instructions – AK-Builder.com, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=pages.view&page_id=10
  9. AK-Builder AK Rivet Set, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29975
  10. Trigger Guard Rivet (AKM, AKMS, AK-74) Layout Guide – Childers Guns, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.childersguns.com/Trigger-Guard-Rivet-Layout-Guide
  11. FCG (AK, AKM, AK74) Layout Guide – Childers Guns, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.childersguns.com/FCG-Layout-Guide-1
  12. Вкладыш тульских АКМ 65-г. : История оружия – Guns.ru, accessed June 20, 2025, https://forum.guns.ru/forummessage/36/2680758.html
  13. AK Krink Build Part 3: Trigger Guard Riveting and Front Trunion Drilling – ITS Tactical, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.itstactical.com/warcom/firearms/ak-krink-build-part-3-trigger-guard-riveting-and-front-trunion-drilling/
  14. AK47 AKM FIXED STOCK RIVET SET – Carolina Shooters Supply, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.carolinashooterssupply.com/AK47-AKM-FIXED-STOCK-RIVET-SET-p/rivets-ak47-fixed.htm
  15. Making Your Own Rivets – The AK Files Forums – Scribd, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/248364164/Making-Your-Own-Rivets-The-AK-Files-Forums
  16. AK-Builder Rivet Tool: MGW, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/akb-t5-11
  17. Power Custom Rivet Set AK-47 AKM, PM90 Side Folding Stock, Model 65 – MidwayUSA, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.midwayusa.com/product/100469512
  18. Easy AK47 Build “Homemade”: Center Support long rivet install ~ Step 3 of 6 – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSCmhLgB4rE
  19. Centrefire automatic rifle – Kalashnikov ‘AKM SU’ – about 1977 | Collection Object | Royal Armouries, accessed June 20, 2025, https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-275685
  20. Заклепка с полукруглой головкой ГОСТ 10299-80 – купить по выгодным ценам от производителя – Первый завод крепежных изделий, accessed June 20, 2025, https://pzki54.ru/product/zaklepki/zaklepka-s-potaynoy-golovkoy-gost-10299/
  21. Заклепка стальная ГОСТ 10299-80, DIN 660 с полукруглой …, accessed June 20, 2025, https://metizorel.ru/zak10299.html
  22. Сталь 10 (ст10) конструкционная углеродистая качественная, Купить прокат из стали марки ст10 – Металлобаза ‘АКСВИЛ’, accessed June 20, 2025, https://aksvil.by/klientam/materialy-po-prokatu/stal-10.html
  23. расшифровка и характеристики | гост и применение марки стали 20 – ТД «Ареал, accessed June 20, 2025, https://areal-metal.ru/spravka/stal-marki-20
  24. Сталь 20 – применение, состав, характеристики, аналоги, расшифровка, accessed June 20, 2025, https://aksvil.by/klientam/materialy-po-prokatu/stal-20.html
  25. Power Custom AK-47 Gas Piston Rivet – MidwayUSA, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1004693281
  26. 7 Key 1020 Steel Properties You Must Know, accessed June 20, 2025, https://jiyuansteel.com/7-key-1020-steel-properties-you-must-know/
  27. Pre-heating rivets?! – Van’s Air Force, accessed June 20, 2025, https://vansairforce.net/threads/pre-heating-rivets.70515/
  28. How do I heat treat an AK receiver? – The Firing Line Forums, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325374
  29. akm rivet set *original polish military imported rivets – Arms of America, accessed June 20, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/akm-rivet-set-original-polish-military-imported-rivets/
  30. AK cast trunnion fail on RAS47 – Boom! – AK Operators Union, Local 47-74, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.akoperatorsunionlocal4774.com/2015/10/ak-cast-trunnion-fail-on-ras47-boom/
  31. Palmetto AK [Archive] – Michigan Gun Owners Community Forum, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.migunowners.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-464626.html
  32. Rivets – ak builder – Arms of America, accessed June 20, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/tools-to-build-an-ak/rivets/
  33. Ak-Builder Rivet Tool, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=29972
  34. AK Trigger Guard Rivet Set – AK-Builder.com, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ak-builder.com/index1.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=30650
  35. AK Builder Rivet Tool Instructions | PDF – Scribd, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/531377426/AK-Builder-Rivet-Tool-Instructions
  36. AK47 Kitchen build Rear trunnion rivet installation Tothtool.wmv – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2uiGKwnsyI
  37. ak build tools – Arms of America, accessed June 20, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/shop-by-category/gunsmithing-tools/
  38. Таблица размеров заклепок: диаметры, длины, параметры установки и расчет зазоров, accessed June 20, 2025, https://inner.su/articles/tablitsy-razmerov-zaklepok-i-parametrov-ustanovki/
  39. Things To Look For When Buying A New AK – Thinline Weapons Wiki, accessed June 20, 2025, https://thinlineweapons.com/wiki/index.php/Things_To_Look_For_When_Buying_A_New_AK
  40. Easy AK47 Build “Homemade”: Front trunnion riveting ~ Step 2 of 6 – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MegvQzASrr4&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD
  41. AK-47 Loose Rivet Rebuild Part 1 – YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7qKa_yhEtw
  42. Комплект заклепок для боковых планок, Тула – Прицелы ПУ, accessed June 20, 2025, https://puscopes.ru/product/komplekt-zaklepok-dlya-bokovyh-planok-tula/
  43. Марка 10 – ТД «СпецСталь». Свойства, характеристики и применение, accessed June 20, 2025, https://tdspecstal.ru/assortment/spetsialnye-stali-i-splavy/10/
  44. Сталь 10 в России – характеристики, аналоги, свойства, accessed June 20, 2025, https://metatorg.ru/marki-stali-i-splavy/stal_konstruktcionnaya/stal_konstruktsionnaya_uglerodistaya_kachestvennaya/stal_konstruktsionnaya_uglerodistaya_kachestvennaya_10/
  45. Сталь 20: свойства, характеристики, аналоги – Метинвест-СМЦ, accessed June 20, 2025, https://metinvest-smc.com/ru/steel/stal-20/

AISI 1020 Low Carbon/Low Tensile Steel – AZoM, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=6114


If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, we are only paid if there is an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay and only if you purchase something.