Tag Archives: AK-47

An Analysis of the Soviet AKM Rifle’s Rear Trunnions

Section 1: The Imperative for Change: From Milled Block to Stamped Steel

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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


An Analysis of the Soviet AKM Rifle’s Front Trunnions

Introduction

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.

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, with GOST 1050-88 being a prime candidate.

Section 3: Identifying the Candidate Material: A Deep Dive into GOST 1050-88

Subsection 3.1: The GOST System: Understanding Soviet State 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 for everything from raw materials to finished products. For an engineer in a Soviet design bureau, specifying a material meant calling out a specific GOST standard and a grade within it. Based on the evidence from related components and the technical description of the trunnion material, GOST 1050-88: “Sized Bars Made Of High-Quality Structural Carbon Steel with A Special Surface Finish” emerges as the most probable governing standard.15 Although its title specifies “carbon” steel, the standard includes grades with significant manganese content, which are technically low-alloy steels and fit the description of “alloy structural steel” in the Soviet context.

Subsection 3.2: A Comparative Analysis of Primary Candidate Grades: Steel 40, 45, and 50

Within GOST 1050-88, several grades present as viable candidates for a forged and heat-treated trunnion. The key selection criteria are a medium carbon content (typically 0.30% to 0.60%), which is essential for achieving high hardness through heat treatment while retaining sufficient toughness, and known suitability for forging. The three most likely candidates are Steel 40, Steel 45, and Steel 50.17

  • Steel 40 (Сталь 40): A medium-carbon steel with a carbon content of 0.37–0.45%.
  • Steel 45 (Сталь 45): A medium-carbon steel with a carbon content of 0.42–0.50%. This grade is historically one of the most common and versatile structural steels in Russian and Eastern Bloc engineering.
  • Steel 50 (Сталь 50): A medium-to-high carbon steel with a carbon content of 0.47–0.55%.

The chemical compositions and baseline mechanical properties (in a normalized, pre-heat-treated state) of these grades are detailed in the tables below, with data drawn directly from the GOST 1050-88 standard.17

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

Table 2: Baseline Mechanical Properties of GOST 1050-88 Candidate Steels (Normalized State)

Steel GradeYield Strength (σy​), min MPaTensile Strength (σu​), min MPaElongation (δ5​), min %Reduction of Area (ψ), min %
Steel 403355701945
Steel 453556001640
Steel 503756301440

These tables illustrate that while the grades are similar, increasing carbon content provides a modest increase in baseline strength but a notable decrease in ductility (elongation). This trade-off becomes far more pronounced after the decisive process of heat treatment.

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

Subsection 4.1: The Metallurgical Imperative: Balancing Hardness, Toughness, and Wear Resistance

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

The appendices of GOST 1050-88 provide detailed protocols for the heat treatment of these steels to achieve their optimal mechanical properties.17 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 in the range of 820–860°C. 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 these steels, typically 550–600°C) and held for a period. 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 the hardening and tempering temperatures, soak times, and quench media allows the engineer to dial in the final properties of the component to meet the exact requirements of the design.

Subsection 4.3: Determining the Final Hardness for Optimal Trunnion Performance

The goal of this controlled heat treatment is to achieve a specific final hardness. For components like the AKM trunnion, a target hardness in the range of 40-45 on the Rockwell C scale (HRC) is considered ideal by modern gunsmithing and engineering standards. This range provides excellent surface durability and compressive strength in the locking lugs while ensuring the core remains tough enough to prevent fracture under shock loading. The GOST 1050-88 standard provides specified hardness values for these steels after various treatments, typically in the Brinell scale (HB), which can be converted to HRC.

Table 3: Specified Hardness of Candidate Steels After Heat Treatment

Steel GradeTreatmentHardness (HB), maxApprox. Hardness (HRC)
Steel 40Annealed / High-Temp Tempered187~91 HRB
Steel 45Annealed / High-Temp Tempered197~93 HRB
Steel 50Annealed / High-Temp Tempered207~95 HRB
Steel 40Hard-Worked (Calibrated)241~23 HRC
Steel 45Hard-Worked (Calibrated)241~23 HRC
Steel 50Hard-Worked (Calibrated)255~25 HRC

Note: The GOST standard focuses on hardness after annealing or in a hard-worked state. The final hardness after quenching and tempering to a specific toughness would be a value determined by the firearm’s technical data package. However, the hardenability data within GOST 1050-88 shows that Steel 45 can achieve a hardness of 49-58 HRC immediately after quenching, which is then reduced during tempering to the desired final hardness (e.g., ~40-45 HRC).17

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, from Polish WBP to American manufacturers, the most commonly specified and respected materials for forged AK trunnions are chromium-molybdenum (chromoly) alloy steels.12

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.19
  • 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.21

Other alloys like AISI 8620, a nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel, are also used, particularly for applications requiring case hardening (a very hard surface over a softer core).23 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 likely 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 a solution that was functionally equivalent to the more complex alloys used today. The critical element for performance—the carbon content—is nearly identical between the Soviet and modern steels.

The primary difference lies in the alloying elements. Where modern AISI 4140/4150 steels use chromium and molybdenum, the Soviet GOST 1050-88 steels rely primarily on an increased manganese content. Chromium and molybdenum significantly improve a steel’s hardenability—its ability to harden deeply and uniformly through a thicker cross-section during quenching. For a relatively small component like an AKM trunnion, this enhanced hardenability is beneficial but not strictly necessary. The Soviets could achieve the required surface hardness and core toughness on their simpler manganese-alloyed steel through precise control of their forging and heat-treatment processes. This choice reflects a brilliant optimization of resources: they achieved a near-identical performance outcome using a simpler, more economical, and more widely available alloy, perfectly suited to the scale of their production.

Table 4: Comparative Analysis of Soviet GOST Steel 45 and US AISI 4140/4150 Steels

SpecificationSteel GradeCarbon (C) %Manganese (Mn) %Chromium (Cr) %Molybdenum (Mo) %Typical Hardness (HRC)
GOST 1050-88Steel 450.42 – 0.500.50 – 0.80≤0.2540-45 (est.)
AISI/SAE41400.38 – 0.430.75 – 1.000.80 – 1.100.15 – 0.2540-45
AISI/SAE41500.48 – 0.530.75 – 1.000.80 – 1.100.15 – 0.2542-47

This table serves as a “Rosetta Stone,” translating the Soviet specification into a familiar modern context. It demonstrates that the Soviet choice was not inferior, but rather a different and highly effective path 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 to a clear and definitive 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.

The material itself, described in primary Russian sources as an “alloy structural steel,” is not an exotic or complex alloy. Instead, all evidence points to a high-quality, medium-carbon, manganese-alloyed structural steel, manufactured in accordance with the Soviet state standard GOST 1050-88. This steel was then subjected to a controlled heat treatment process of quenching and tempering to achieve the final required balance of surface hardness and core toughness.

Based on a comparative analysis of the candidate grades within this standard, the specific material used can be identified with a high degree of confidence:

  • Primary Candidate: Steel 45 (Сталь 45) is the most probable material. Its carbon content of 0.42-0.50% provides the ideal combination of properties for this application. It can be heat-treated to a hardness sufficient to resist wear on the locking lugs (in the range of 40-45 HRC) while retaining the essential core toughness to absorb the repeated shock of firing without fracture. Its chemical and mechanical profile makes it the direct functional equivalent of the modern benchmark alloy, AISI 4140.
  • Secondary Candidate: Steel 50 (Сталь 50) is a plausible but slightly less likely alternative. With a higher carbon content (0.47-0.55%), it could be hardened to a greater degree, but at the cost of some ductility and toughness. Its use would represent an engineering choice prioritizing maximum wear resistance, making it a functional parallel to modern AISI 4150 steel.

In conclusion, the front trunnion of the Soviet AKM was a testament to a mature and sophisticated military-industrial complex. The selection of a common but high-quality forged steel like Steel 45, combined with a precisely controlled heat treatment process, created a component that was both economical for mass production and possessed the extraordinary durability required for a service rifle intended to function reliably through decades of use in the harshest environments on Earth.

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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


Works cited

  1. An Overview of the AK-47 Assault Rifle – Boot Camp & Military Fitness Institute, accessed July 14, 2025, https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/2023/08/28/an-overview-of-the-ak-47-assault-rifle/
  2. AK-47 – Survival, accessed July 14, 2025, http://landsurvival.com/schools-wikipedia/wp/a/AK-47.htm
  3. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
  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. 7,62-мм автомат Калашникова модернизированный АКМ (СССР …, accessed July 14, 2025, http://www.dogswar.ru/strelkovoe-oryjie/avtomaty/9146-762-mm-avtomat-kala.html
  7. Beginners Guide To AK-47 Parts And Function, accessed July 14, 2025, https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/guide-to-ak47-parts/
  8. Suppressed Romanian Battlefield Pickup AK47 : r/GunPorn – Reddit, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/GunPorn/comments/1fzr5df/suppressed_romanian_battlefield_pickup_ak47/
  9. Gunsmith Viktor Kalashnikov passes away – MercoPress, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.mercopress.com/2018/03/28/gunsmith-viktor-kalashnikov-passes-away
  10. 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/
  11. Cast vs Forged AK Trunnions – YouTube, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NqxidFd7jU
  12. Question for AK guys… | The Armory Life Forum, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/question-for-ak-guys.12801/
  13. 5.45×39mm – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.45%C3%9739mm
  14. M+M Industries Bulgarian Steel AK-47 Magazine 30-RD (AK47/AKM …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://mm-industries.com/product/mm-industries-bulgarian-steel-ak-47-magazine-30-rd-ak47-akm-m10x-7-62×39/
  15. GOST 1050 – 1988Sized Bars Made Of High-Quality Structural Carbon Steel with A Special Surface Finish – Global Fastener Platform, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.globalfastener.com/standards/detail_20257.html
  16. GOST 1050-88 Gauged bars with special surface finishing of carbon structural quality steel: General technical conditions, accessed July 14, 2025, https://energosteel.com/en/library/standards/gost-1050-88/
  17. SIZED BARS MADE OF HIGH-QUALITY STRUCTURAL CARBON …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.tubemfg.com/files/GOST/GOST%201050-88.pdf
  18. 7.62×39 WBP Polish AK47 Forged Front Barrel Trunnion – Arms of America, accessed July 14, 2025, https://armsofamerica.com/wbp-front-trunnion-762/
  19. 1913 Rear Trunnion – Occam Defense Solutions, accessed July 14, 2025, https://occamdefense.com/1913-rear-trunnion/
  20. 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
  21. Steel for Firearms: Alloys and Key Characteristics, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.jadesterling.com/ask-the-metallurgist/steel-for-firearms-alloys-and-key-characteristics
  22. 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
  23. Office/Tech: 641-623-5401 – Brownells, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.brownells.com/userdocs/Miscellaneous/catalog73/pdfs/73-Rifle-P156-198.pdf
  24. Is 5160 a good steel for gun parts? : r/gunsmithing – Reddit, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/gunsmithing/comments/15pfom5/is_5160_a_good_steel_for_gun_parts/

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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


    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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


    Yugoslavia’s AK Path: The M70 Family of Rifles

    Really, my experience with Yugo rifles began with the stamped M70 series. We’ve spent these last few posts providing the backstory, but how did Zastava move from the M64 to the M70 series? Let’s find out.

    1. Introduction: Yugoslavia’s Independent Path to the Kalashnikov

    In the complex geopolitical landscape following World War II, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, under the leadership of Marshal Josip Broz Tito, charted a course distinct from both the Western NATO alliance and the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact.1 This policy of non-alignment fostered a unique national identity but also necessitated a high degree of self-sufficiency, particularly in defense production.1 Central to this effort was the state-owned Zastava Arms (Zastava oružje) factory located in Kragujevac, Serbia. With roots tracing back to a cannon foundry established in the 1850s 2, Zastava oružje possessed a long and storied history of arms manufacturing for Serbia and later Yugoslavia.2

    As the nature of warfare evolved in the mid-20th century, the limitations of traditional bolt-action rifles, like the Mauser patterns previously produced by Zastava 1, became apparent. Yugoslav military planners and engineers recognized the need for a modern assault rifle chambered for an intermediate cartridge. Early research in the 1950s involved studying captured German StG 44 rifles 1, but the future clearly lay with the design rapidly proliferating across the Eastern Bloc: the Kalashnikov AK-47.

    However, due to the political rift between Belgrade and Moscow, Yugoslavia could not simply acquire a license to produce the AK-47, as many other nations did.1 Instead, Zastava embarked on an ambitious path of independent development through reverse engineering. The process began in earnest after 1959, when two Albanian border guards defected to Yugoslavia carrying Soviet-made AK-47s.1 These initial samples, while valuable, provided insufficient data for full reproduction. The effort received a significant boost when Yugoslavia covertly purchased a batch of 2,000 AK rifles from an unnamed African nation, which had originally received them as Soviet military aid.1 This allowed Zastava’s engineers – a team including Božidar Blagojević, Major Miloš Ostojić, Miodrag Lukovac, Milutin Milivojević, Milan Ćirić, Stevan Tomašević, Predrag Mirčić, and Mika Mudrić – to meticulously study the design and develop their own manufacturing processes.1

    This independent development program, known as FAZ (Familija Automatika Zastava – Family of Zastava Automatic Weapons) 1, aimed to create a whole family of firearms based on the Kalashnikov operating principle. The culmination of the initial phase was the M64 series of prototypes. Building directly upon the lessons learned from the M64, Zastava refined the design to create the Automatska Puška M70 (AP M70), or Automatic Rifle Model 1970. Officially adopted that year, the M70 became the standard infantry weapon of the Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija (JNA – Yugoslav People’s Army) and represented a uniquely Yugoslavian interpretation of the Kalashnikov, distinct from its Soviet progenitor and other licensed copies.7

    2. From Prototype to Production: The M64’s Legacy and the Birth of the M70

    The Zastava M64, though never mass-produced in its original forms, served as the crucial stepping stone to the M70. The late M64 prototypes established several features that would become characteristic of the Yugoslav AK family. These included a robust milled receiver, heavily based on the Soviet AK Type 3 but featuring unique cosmetic differences like a distinctive raised step on the left side.7 The barrels were threaded into the receiver, similar to the early Soviet AKs, but were slightly thicker and, notably, were not chrome-lined.7

    From the very beginning, Yugoslav engineers designed their Kalashnikov variant with the capability to launch rifle grenades, a feature deemed essential.1 The M64 incorporated an integral flip-up grenade sight, typically mounted on the gas block, which also functioned as a gas cut-off mechanism. When raised for firing grenades, the sight would block the gas port, preventing gas from cycling the action and ensuring all propellant force was directed to launching the grenade.1 Other distinctive M64 features included longer wooden handguards with three cooling vents instead of the usual two found on Soviet AKs 5, a unique hollow cylindrical charging handle borrowed from the Yugoslav M59 SKS rifle 1, and, on the M64B folding stock variant, an underfolding stock adapted from the M56 submachine gun.1

    A particularly interesting feature of the M64 was its internal bolt hold-open (BHO) mechanism, housed within the receiver.7 This device automatically locked the bolt to the rear after the last round was fired, providing a clear visual and tactile indication that the weapon was empty. However, this internal BHO required specially modified AK magazines with a specific cut to function correctly.11

    Despite satisfactory performance in field trials, the JNA did not adopt the M64 in large quantities.7 Military thinking, however, was evolving. Initial reluctance among some senior officers towards issuing automatic weapons to every soldier 1 gradually gave way, potentially influenced by observations of conflicts like the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, where Soviet troops were universally equipped with AK-pattern rifles.1 The push for a domestically produced automatic rifle gained momentum, leading the JNA to formally approve the Zastava design for serial production in 1970, designated as the AP M70.7

    To prepare the design for mass production, Zastava implemented several key changes compared to the M64 prototypes. The most significant alteration was the removal of the M64’s internal, receiver-mounted bolt hold-open mechanism.7 While functionally desirable, the internal BHO added complexity and cost to receiver manufacturing. Zastava opted for a simpler, more cost-effective solution: transferring the BHO function entirely to the magazine. They designed proprietary M70 magazines equipped with follower plates that had flat rear edges. After the last round was fired, this flat edge on the follower would physically block the bolt from closing, achieving the hold-open function without requiring the complex internal linkage of the M64.7 This decision represented a classic engineering trade-off, prioritizing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of rifle production by simplifying the receiver, while accepting the need for specific, slightly more complex magazines – a consumable item – to retain the desired BHO capability.

    Many other features from the M64 were carried over directly into the initial M70 production models. These included the milled receiver construction, the integral grenade sight and gas cut-off system, the distinctive 3-slot handguards, and the non-chrome-lined barrel.7 The unique method of securing the dust cover using a locking recoil spring guide, crucial for preventing it from being dislodged during grenade launching, was also retained.7

    3. The Milled Era: Early M70 Variants (M70, M70A, M70A1, M70B, M70AB)

    The first Zastava rifles to enter widespread service with the JNA in 1970 were built on robust milled receivers.7 These early variants established the foundation of the M70 family:

    • M70: The baseline model featured the milled receiver and a traditional fixed wooden stock.7
    • M70A: This variant offered increased portability for airborne troops or vehicle crews by incorporating an underfolding metal stock, again paired with the milled receiver.7

    These initial production M70 and M70A rifles shared the core characteristics inherited from the M64 program. Their milled receivers were patterned after the Soviet Type 3 AK-47 but possessed distinct Yugoslav features, most notably the smooth left side lacking the large lightening cut found on Soviet and many other milled AKs.7 Zastava also engraved serial numbers just above the magazine well, rather than on the front trunnion as was common Soviet practice.7 Initially, these rifles featured barrels that were threaded into the receiver 7, a strong but relatively labor-intensive method. They retained the integral grenade launching sight/gas cut-off, the 3-slot handguards, the non-chrome-lined barrels, and the unique locking dust cover system.7

    Recognizing the growing importance of night vision and optical sights, Zastava soon introduced a variant specifically designed to accommodate them:

    • M70A1: This model was essentially an M70A (milled receiver, underfolding stock) equipped with a factory-installed scope rail riveted to the left side of the receiver, allowing for the mounting of various optical or night sights.7

    Shortly after the M70 series entered production, Zastava implemented a significant change to streamline manufacturing, even while still using milled receivers. They transitioned from the time-consuming process of threading barrels into the receivers to the faster and cheaper method of pressing the barrels into the receiver trunnion and securing them with a cross-pin.7 This change mirrored the production techniques already used for the Soviet AKM. Rifles produced with this updated barrel attachment method received new designations:

    • M70B: Milled receiver, fixed stock, with a pressed-and-pinned barrel.7
    • M70AB: Milled receiver, underfolding stock, with a pressed-and-pinned barrel.7

    This relatively rapid adoption of pressed-and-pinned barrels, occurring before the eventual switch to stamped receivers, demonstrates Zastava’s proactive approach to optimizing production efficiency. It suggests that engineers were continuously evaluating and implementing cost-saving measures, likely learning from the initial M70 production runs or analyzing contemporary Soviet AKM manufacturing techniques, which had long utilized the press-and-pin method. This incremental optimization occurred even within the constraints of the more complex milled receiver production line.

    4. The Stamped Revolution: The M70B1 and M70AB2

    By the mid-1970s, seeking further reductions in production time and cost to meet military demands, Zastava followed the path previously taken by the Soviet Union and transitioned from milled receivers to stamped sheet metal receivers for the M70 family.7 However, the Yugoslav approach to the stamped receiver resulted in a design significantly different and more robust than the standard Soviet AKM.

    The defining characteristic of the Zastava stamped receiver was its thickness. Instead of using the 1.0mm thick sheet steel common to the AKM and most of its derivatives, Zastava opted for a heavier 1.5mm thick stamping.11 Compounding this increase in strength, Zastava incorporated a front trunnion design based on the one used in the RPK light machine gun.7 The RPK trunnion is substantially larger and more robust than a standard AKM trunnion, designed to withstand the stresses of sustained automatic fire. To accommodate this larger RPK-style trunnion within the stamped receiver, Zastava introduced distinctive bulges on the forward section of the receiver, just ahead of the magazine well.7 These “bulged trunnion” receivers became a visual hallmark of the later M70 series and related weapons like the M72 RPK.

    This combination of a 1.5mm thick receiver and an RPK-style bulged front trunnion resulted in an exceptionally durable rifle, significantly stronger and more rigid than a standard AKM.20 The decision to adopt this heavier construction for the standard infantry rifle, not just the squad automatic weapon, strongly suggests a deliberate design philosophy prioritizing extreme robustness and the ability to reliably handle the stresses of repeated rifle grenade launching, which remained a core requirement.7 This “overbuilding” came at the cost of increased weight compared to other AKM derivatives 9, but clearly aligned with Yugoslav military preferences.

    The two primary variants featuring this heavy-duty stamped receiver construction became the workhorses of the JNA and subsequent forces:

    • M70B1: Featured the 1.5mm stamped receiver with the bulged RPK-style trunnion and a fixed wooden stock.7 The stock on the M70B1 was often noted for being slightly longer than typical Warsaw Pact AKM stocks and frequently included a thick rubber buttpad, enhancing shooter comfort, particularly when launching grenades.10
    • M70AB2: Combined the 1.5mm bulged trunnion stamped receiver with the practicality of an underfolding metal stock.7 This became one of the most widely produced and recognizable M70 variants.

    Both the M70B1 and M70AB2 typically included flip-up night sights integrated into the standard iron sight blocks. These sights utilized either tritium vials (which glow continuously) or phosphorescent paint (which needs to be charged by a light source) for low-light aiming.7 They retained the integral grenade launching ladder sight and gas cut-off mechanism on the gas block 7 and continued the practice of using non-chrome-lined barrels for standard military production.7 The standard Yugoslav fire selector markings were present on the right side of the receiver: “U” for Ukočeno (Safe), “R” for Rafalna (Automatic fire), and “J” for Jedinačna (Semi-automatic fire).7

    This is a replica M70 receiver from Childer’s Guns. It does give us a chance to see a few defining characteristics of a Yugo model. Starting at the top left is the hole for the top cover receiver lock. Zastava introduced the lock to prevent the cover from popping off under the heavy recoil of a rifle grenade launch. Moving to the right, you can see the URJ selector markings. Note, while there is a position for “R” Rafalna (Automatic fire), the receiver is actually only configured for semi-automatic as it lacks the third fire control group hole where the pin that holds the full auto sear would go. Thus, no third hole, means this is semi-auto only. Lastly, you can see the the bulge for the bulged RPK trunnion.
    Here you can see the RPK-style front trunnion. We can see it was a M70B1 (fixed stock) and the year was 1983. The serial number is on the right. Note, the ATF requires serial numbers to be on the receiver. The Childer’s receivers have their information on the bottom.

    The persistent use of non-chrome-lined barrels throughout the main production run for the JNA stands in contrast to Soviet practice, where chrome lining was standard for AKMs to enhance barrel life and corrosion resistance. This Yugoslav decision was likely driven by cost considerations and potentially an established maintenance doctrine that emphasized frequent and thorough cleaning by soldiers, mitigating the risks of corrosion.9 However, this lack of chrome lining could lead to issues, particularly with corrosive ammunition or in humid environments if cleaning was neglected, a problem noted with exported rifles and the Iraqi-made Tabuk copies.9 Indeed, even rifles from various Balkan conflicts arrived in the US aftermarket with heavy bore erosion that would likely have been reduced had there been a sufficient hard chrome lining. It wasn’t until around 2020, largely driven by the demands of the commercial export market (particularly the US ZPAP series), that Zastava began consistently chrome-lining the barrels of its M70 pattern rifles.18

    5. Further Specialization: Later Stamped Variants

    As military tactics and technology evolved, Zastava continued to adapt the robust M70 stamped receiver platform to meet new requirements, leading to several specialized variants:

    Building upon the M70B1 and M70AB2, versions were developed with factory-installed side rails to facilitate the mounting of optical sights and night vision devices:

    • M70B1N: This variant combined the stamped 1.5mm bulged receiver and fixed stock of the M70B1 with an added scope rail on the left receiver wall.7
    • M70AB2N: Similarly, this model added the optics rail to the underfolding stock M70AB2 platform.7

    Another line of development focused on integrating dedicated underbarrel grenade launchers (UBGLs), offering potentially greater range, accuracy, and variety of munitions compared to standard rifle grenades. For these models, the original flip-up rifle grenade sight and gas cut-off were typically removed, replaced by a 40mm UBGL, likely the Yugoslav BGP 40 mm:

    • M70B3: This model featured the stamped receiver and fixed stock, but was configured for use with an underbarrel grenade launcher, omitting the standard rifle grenade sight.7
    • M70AB3: The underfolding stock equivalent, this variant also removed the rifle grenade sight assembly to accommodate the UBGL.7
    This is a M70AB3 – “AB” designating and underfolder and the “3” that there is a under barrel grenade launcher (UBGL).

    The emergence of these ‘N’ (optics-ready) and ‘3’ (UBGL-equipped) variants demonstrates the M70’s inherent adaptability. Zastava successfully modernized the core design to incorporate technologies and meet tactical demands that evolved beyond the original concept focused heavily on integrated rifle grenade capability. This allowed the M70 platform to remain relevant and effective, extending its service life and operational utility by providing specialized tools for enhanced sighting and auxiliary firepower integration.

    The success and robustness of the M70 design led to its use as a foundation for other important firearms within the Zastava portfolio, creating a true family of related weapons:

    • M72 RPK: Serving as the squad automatic weapon counterpart to the M70 rifle, the Zastava M72 Light Machine Gun shares the same 7.62x39mm caliber and operating principles. Crucially, it utilizes the same heavy-duty 1.5mm stamped receiver with the bulged RPK-style front trunnion found on the later M70 rifles.7 Key differences include a longer, heavier barrel (often featuring cooling fins to aid heat dissipation during sustained fire), a standard integral bipod, and sometimes modified rear sights.8 The shared receiver construction underscores the inherent strength Zastava built into their AK platform.
    • M92 Carbine: For roles requiring a more compact weapon, such as for vehicle crews, special forces, or close-quarters battle, Zastava developed the M92 carbine.7 Essentially a shortened version of the M70AB2, the M92 retains the 7.62x39mm chambering, gas operation, and underfolding stock. Its most defining feature is its significantly shorter barrel, typically around 10 inches (254mm) long.8 To manage the increased muzzle blast from the short barrel, the M92 is usually fitted with a distinctive conical flash hider or muzzle booster.31 Despite the shorter barrel, the 7.62x39mm cartridge retains much of its effectiveness at typical carbine engagement ranges.31
    • The Iraqi Connection: Tabuk The M70’s influence extended beyond Yugoslavia’s borders through a significant technology transfer agreement with Iraq. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Zastava provided machinery and technical assistance to Iraq’s Al-Qadissiya Establishments to set up domestic production of AK-pattern rifles.9 The resulting Iraqi rifles were collectively known as the Tabuk.
    • The standard Iraqi Tabuk assault rifle was essentially a direct copy of the Zastava M70B1.7 Early production Tabuks faithfully replicated the M70B1’s features, including the 1.5mm stamped receiver with bulged trunnion, 3-slot handguards, and the integral grenade launching sight (though this was omitted on later, simplified versions).9 Critically, they also copied the non-chrome-lined barrels, which proved problematic in Iraqi service due to harsh conditions and potentially less rigorous cleaning discipline compared to the JNA.9
    • Iraq also produced the Tabuk Sniper Rifle, a designated marksman rifle (DMR) based not on the M70 rifle, but on the Zastava M72 RPK.7 While visually similar to an RPK, the Tabuk DMR featured a longer, but thinner, barrel than the M72, was modified for semi-automatic fire only, included an optics rail on the receiver, and sported a distinctive skeletonized wooden buttstock with a cheek rest.24 It retained the 7.62x39mm chambering, making it effective out to intermediate ranges (around 600 meters) but lacking the reach of true sniper rifles chambered in full-power cartridges.24
    • Iraqi production quality reportedly declined over time, especially after the Iran-Iraq war and subsequent sanctions.9

    The development of the M72 LMG and M92 carbine, alongside the licensed production of Tabuk rifles in Iraq, highlights the M70’s significance as more than just Yugoslavia’s standard rifle. It served as a versatile and robust foundational platform adaptable to various infantry roles and was successfully exported, demonstrating Zastava’s capabilities as an arms manufacturer and technology partner during the Cold War era. The shared heavy-duty receiver across the M70B1/AB2, M72, and Tabuk variants became a defining characteristic of this branch of the Kalashnikov family tree.

    7. Zastava M70 Family Variations: A Comparative Overview

    The following table summarizes the key characteristics and differences between the main variants within the Zastava M70 family, tracing their evolution from the late M64 prototype stage through the various milled and stamped receiver models, as well as related designs.

    Zastava M70 Family Variations Summary

    Model DesignationReceiver TypeTrunnionBarrel AttachmentStock TypeGrenade Sight/Gas CutoffOptics RailKey Distinguishing Features
    M64 (late proto)MilledStandardThreadedFixed Wood (A) / Underfolding (B)YesNo3-slot HG, Internal BHO, Grenade sight, M59/M56 parts (handle/stock)
    M70MilledStandardThreadedFixed WoodYesNoFirst production model, 3-slot HG, Grenade sight, Dust cover lock, Smooth left receiver
    M70AMilledStandardThreadedUnderfolding MetalYesNoFolding stock version of M70
    M70A1MilledStandardThreadedUnderfolding MetalYesYesM70A with added optics rail
    M70BMilledStandardPressed & PinnedFixed WoodYesNoM70 with pressed/pinned barrel
    M70ABMilledStandardPressed & PinnedUnderfolding MetalYesNoM70A with pressed/pinned barrel
    M70B1Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed WoodYesNoFirst stamped model, Bulged trunnion, Night sights, Rubber buttpad (often)
    M70AB2Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedUnderfolding MetalYesNoFolding stock version of M70B1, Bulged trunnion, Night sights
    M70B1NStamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed WoodYesYesM70B1 with added optics rail
    M70AB2NStamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedUnderfolding MetalYesYesM70AB2 with added optics rail
    M70B3Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed WoodReplaced by UBGLNoM70B1 adapted for UBGL (grenade sight removed)
    M70AB3Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedUnderfolding MetalReplaced by UBGLNoM70AB2 adapted for UBGL (grenade sight removed)
    M72 (RPK)Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed Wood (RPK)NoNoLMG version, Heavy/finned barrel, Bipod, RPK sights
    M92 (Carbine)Stamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedUnderfolding MetalNoNoShortened M70AB2, Muzzle booster/flash hider
    Tabuk RifleStamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed WoodYes (early) / No (late)NoIraqi copy of M70B1
    Tabuk DMRStamped (1.5mm)Bulged RPK-stylePressed & PinnedFixed SkeletonizedNoYesIraqi DMR based on M72, Semi-auto only, 7.62x39mm, Optics rail, Skeleton stock

    Note: Barrel lining refers to original military production; modern commercial Zastava ZPAP M70 variants imported into the US typically feature chrome-lined barrels.18 HG = Handguard.

    This table provides a clear, side-by-side comparison, highlighting the evolution of receiver types, barrel attachment methods, stock configurations, and specialized features across the Zastava M70 lineage, fulfilling the need for a consolidated overview of the family’s variations.

    8. In Service: The M70 in Yugoslavia and Beyond

    Formally adopted in 1970, the Zastava M70 quickly became the standard infantry rifle of the Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija (JNA), gradually replacing older firearms like the Zastava M59/66, itself a Yugoslav derivative of the Soviet SKS carbine.7 For over two decades, the M70, particularly the robust stamped M70B1 and M70AB2 variants, served as the primary armament for Yugoslav soldiers.

    The rifle’s most prominent and tragic service came during the brutal Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s. As the federation violently disintegrated, the vast stockpiles of JNA weaponry, including millions of M70 rifles, fell into the hands of all warring factions.6 The M70 became a ubiquitous sight on the battlefields of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo, wielded by soldiers and paramilitaries on all sides, making it an enduring, somber symbol of those conflicts.7

    Following the wars, the M70 remained in service with the armed forces of the newly independent successor states, including Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Slovenia.6 While some nations, like Croatia (which donated its stocks to Ukraine 7) and Slovenia, have largely transitioned to NATO-standard firearms, the M70 continues to serve in various capacities across the former Yugoslavia.

    Beyond the Balkans, the Zastava M70 achieved significant global proliferation through both official exports and the illicit arms trade fueled by the Yugoslav Wars.10 Zastava Arms exported the rifle widely during the Cold War and after, with known users including Iraq (which also produced the Tabuk copy), Cyprus, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine (PLO and PNA), and numerous African nations such as Angola, Burkina Faso, Liberia, Libya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Yemen, and Zaire (used by Serbian mercenaries).7 M70s captured from Iraq were even used by Iran.7 Rifles from former Yugoslav stocks have surfaced in conflicts across the globe, including the War in Afghanistan (provided as US military aid to Afghan forces), the Syrian Civil War, the conflict in Mali, and most recently, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where M70s were donated by Croatia and purchased by the UK for training Ukrainian troops.6 The rifle’s presence in European terror attacks, sourced from Balkan black markets, underscores the dangerous legacy of weapons proliferation from the Yugoslav conflict.33

    Ramadi police officer with either a Zastava M70 or an early model Tabuk wherein they retained the grenade sight, 2008. Given this photo was taken in Iraq, it is most likely to be an early model Tabuk but we’d need more detail than the photo can give, notably the markings. (obtained from Wikimedia – the author submitted it to the Arabic Wikipedia and used the author name of: هــشـام or “Hisham” in Roman script)
    A French soldier from the Military Instruction Advisory Detachment (IMAD) of the 5th Regiment International Army Overseas (RIAOM) trains Somali policemen on the assembly and disassembly of the AK-47 assault rifle in Baidoa. The French were providing training for the Somalian police in Baidoa and Buurhakaba. (Obtained from Wikimedia and the author was Staff Sgt. Jeffrey T Brady)
    Iraqi policemen from the Dhi Qar province pull security during an air assault training event with Soldiers of the 2nd Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Regiment, at Camp Cedar, Iraq, March 2. Date: 02.25.2009. The rifle appears to be a M70AB – zooming in I can see the “URJ” Yugoslav selector markings vs. arabic script that a Tabuk would have. (Obtained from Wikimedia and the author was DVIDSHUB)

    The sheer scale of the M70’s production, estimated at around 4 million units 7, combined with its inherent durability and the chaos surrounding the JNA’s dissolution, ensured its widespread and lasting presence. Its appearance in conflicts decades after its introduction speaks volumes about its robust design, the vast quantities produced, and the long-lasting impact of regional instability on global arms trafficking. The rifle’s legendary toughness undoubtedly contributes to its longevity in the harsh conditions often found in these conflict zones.

    9. Conclusion: The Enduring Legacy of the Yugoslav AK

    The Zastava M70 family stands as a significant and distinct chapter in the global story of the Kalashnikov rifle. Born from Yugoslavia’s unique geopolitical position and drive for self-reliance, it represents an independent, unlicensed development path that resulted in a firearm tailored to specific national requirements.1 Its defining characteristics – the emphasis on extreme robustness evident in the thicker 1.5mm stamped receivers and RPK-style trunnions, the integral grenade launching capability that was a design priority from the outset, the evolution of the bolt hold-open feature, the distinctive three-slot handguards, and the long-standing use of non-chrome-lined barrels in military production – set it apart from its Soviet AKM contemporaries and most other licensed variants.7

    While often praised for its exceptional durability and reliability, sometimes considered superior to other AKM derivatives 1, this robustness came at the cost of increased weight.9 The M70 proved itself adaptable, evolving from early milled receiver models to the ubiquitous stamped variants, and later incorporating features like optics rails and underbarrel grenade launchers to meet modern tactical needs.7 Its foundational design spawned a successful family of weapons, including the M72 LMG and M92 carbine, and served as the basis for Iraqi Tabuk production.9

    From its decades of service as the standard rifle of the JNA, through its tragic ubiquity in the Yugoslav Wars, to its continued use by successor states and proliferation across global conflict zones, the Zastava M70 has carved an undeniable legacy.6 Its enduring presence is further cemented by continued production and popularity in the civilian market, particularly in the United States with the ZPAP M70 line.13 The Zastava M70 remains a highly regarded, distinctively durable, and historically significant member of the vast Kalashnikov family, a testament to Yugoslav engineering and a tangible link to a complex period of European history.


    Image Source

    The main photo is of a Zastava M70-AB3 from Wikimedia. It was taken on July 1, 2011 by Соколрус
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zastava_Arms_M70-AB3.jpg

    Ramadi police officer with either a Zastava M70 or an early model Tabuk wherein they retained the grenade sight, 2008. Given this photo was taken in Iraq, it is most likely to be an early model Tabuk but we’d need more detail than the photo can give, notably the markings. (obtained from Wikimedia – the author submitted it to the Arabic Wikipedia and used the author name of: هــشـام or “Hisham” in Roman script)

    A French soldier from the Military Instruction Advisory Detachment (IMAD) of the 5th Regiment International Army Overseas (RIAOM) trains Somali policemen on the assembly and disassembly of the AK-47 assault rifle in Baidoa. The French were providing training for the Somalian police in Baidoa and Buurhakaba. (Obtained from Wikimedia and the author was Staff Sgt. Jeffrey T Brady)

    Iraqi policemen from the Dhi Qar province pull security during an air assault training event with Soldiers of the 2nd Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Regiment, at Camp Cedar, Iraq, March 2. Date: 02.25.2009. The rifle appears to be a M70AB – zooming in I can see the “URJ” Yugoslav selector markings vs. arabic script that a Tabuk would have. (Obtained from Wikimedia and the author was DVIDSHUB)

    Works cited

    1. Zastava M64. Part 1. The Unusual History of Yugoslavian AKs …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/05/07/zastava-m64-part-1-unusual-history-yugoslavian-aks/
    2. Zastava Arms – Small Arms Defense Journal, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/zastava-arms/
    3. „Заставин” музеј оружја доступан публици – Politika, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.politika.rs/scc/clanak/368411/zastavin-muzej-oruzja-dostupan-publici
    4. Застава оружје — Википедија, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B6%D1%98%D0%B5
    5. Zastava M64 — Википедия, accessed May 12, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M64
    6. Zastava M70 (автомат) – Википедия, accessed May 12, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_(%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82)
    7. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
    8. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – Zastava M70 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Zastava_M70
    9. The History of the Iraqi AK Tabuk Rifle – Recoil Magazine, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.recoilweb.com/the-history-of-the-iraqi-tabuk-ak-rifle-156496.html
    10. Zastava M70 | Weaponsystems.net, accessed May 12, 2025, https://weaponsystems.net/system/376-Zastava+M70
    11. M64 and M70 : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/162awlo/m64_and_m70/
    12. Yugoslavian Steel M64 “Bolt Hold Open” 30 Round AK47 Magazine – 7.62x39mm – Moka’s Raifus, accessed May 12, 2025, https://mokasraifus.com/product/yugoslavian-steel-m64-bolt-hold-open-30-round-ak47-magazine-7-62x39mm/
    13. Zastava ZPAP M70: An Authentic AK For The U.S. Market | An Official Journal Of The NRA, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/zastava-zpap-m70-an-authentic-ak-for-the-u-s-market/
    14. Zastava M70: A Yugoslav derivative of Kalashnikov rifle – Combat Operators, accessed May 12, 2025, https://combatoperators.com/firearms/rifles/zastava-m70/
    15. What weapons were used in the Yugoslav War? – Quora, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-weapons-were-used-in-the-Yugoslav-War
    16. Zastava Arms – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Arms
    17. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikiwand, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.wikiwand.com/en/articles/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
    18. Zastava AKs, Part 2. M70 – The First Mass-Produced Yugoslavian Kalashnikov, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/05/14/zastava-aks-part-2-m70-first-mass-produced-yugoslavian-kalashnikov/
    19. How Does The Yugoslavian Zastava M70 Compare To Other Ak-47 Variants? – GunCreed, accessed May 12, 2025, https://guncreed.com/2024/08/17/how-does-the-yugoslavian-zastava-m70-compare-to-other-ak47-variants/
    20. Yugo AK article – Red Star Arms, accessed May 12, 2025, http://www.redstararms.com/uploads/yugo.pdf
    21. YUGOSLAVIA’S AKM ZASTAVA ARMS M70 – Small Arms Review, accessed May 12, 2025, https://smallarmsreview.com/yugoslavias-akm-zastava-arms-m70/
    22. Yugo M70 and M72 (RPK) receivers – what’s the diff?, accessed May 12, 2025, https://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=141280
    23. Zastava M70 vs. AK-47: Key Differences – AR15Discounts, accessed May 12, 2025, https://ar15discounts.com/zastava-m70-vs-ak-47-key-differences/
    24. Tabuk Sniper Rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabuk_Sniper_Rifle
    25. Zastava USA M72 RPK Rifle 7.62 x 39 21″ Ribbed Barrel | Palmetto State Armory, accessed May 12, 2025, https://palmettostatearmory.com/zastava-usa-m72-rpk-rifle-7-62-x-39-21-ribbed-barrel.html
    26. Zastava 7.62×39 M72 RPK Wood Furniture Bipod 30rd Mag Semi-Auto Rifle – K-Var, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.k-var.com/zastava-m72-rpk-rifle-762×39-wood-furniture-bipod
    27. Zastava M70 FAQ: Your Comprehensive Guide to a Legendary AK – AR15Discounts, accessed May 12, 2025, https://ar15discounts.com/zastava-m70-faq/
    28. M70 B1 Assault Rifle | Armaco JSC. Bulgaria, accessed May 12, 2025, http://www.armaco.bg/en/product/assault-rifles-c2/m70-b1-assault-rifle-p36
    29. ZASTAVA M70B1 semi-automatic rifle – American Liberator, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.americanliberator.cz/en/gun/samonabijeci-puska-crvena-zastava-m70b1
    30. Yugo M64 RPK Rifle BFPU – Atlantic Firearms, accessed May 12, 2025, https://atlanticfirearms.com/M64-RPK-Rifle
    31. Zastava M92 – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M92
    32. Zastava M92 | ShootingRangePrague.com, accessed May 12, 2025, https://shootingrangeprague.com/arsenal/zastava-m92
    33. How Yugoslavia’s Military-Grade Weapons Haunt Western Europe – The Defense Post, accessed May 12, 2025, https://thedefensepost.com/2020/07/30/weapons-yugoslavia-europe/
    34. Застава М64 — Википедија, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%9C64
    35. Print Page – Zastava M77 – Paluba.Info, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.paluba.info/smf/index.php?action=printpage;topic=15504.0
    36. Zastava M70 (pistol) – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_(pistol)
    37. Застава М70 — Википедија, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%9C70
    38. Застава М70 (пиштољ) — Википедија, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%9C70_(%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%88%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%99)
    39. M70 AB1 Parts Kits | Zastava Arms USA, accessed May 12, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/m70-ab1-parts-kits/
    40. Home – Zastava oružje ad, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.zastava-arms.rs/en/

    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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


    Yugoslavia’s AK Path: Where Did the 2,000 Russian AK-47 Rifles Come From

    So far, we have covered the history of Yugoslavian and Soviet relations and then the two Albanian defectors and early Yugo AK development leading to the M64 but we glossed over an enduring mystery that deserves its own post. In this artice, we dive into the riddle of what third world nation Yugoslavia purchased 2,000 Soviet AK-47 rifles from to reverse engineer and why it had to be covert.

    A. The Core Question and Its Significance

    This report addresses the question of the identity of the “Third World nation” from which the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia secretly procured approximately 2,000 Soviet-designed AK-47 assault rifles in 1959. This transaction, a relatively obscure event in the annals of Cold War arms proliferation, was nonetheless of considerable importance for Yugoslavia’s military development. The acquisition of these rifles proved pivotal for Zastava Arms, Yugoslavia’s premier weapons manufacturer, in its ambitious endeavor to independently develop and produce a domestic version of the Kalashnikov rifle. This effort culminated in the Zastava M70, a weapon that would become a mainstay of the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) and a significant export item.1

    The clandestine nature of this purchase and the persistent anonymity of the supplier nation underscore the intricate geopolitical landscape of the late 1950s. Yugoslavia, under Marshal Josip Broz Tito, navigated a complex path of non-alignment, maintaining independence from both the NATO and Warsaw Pact blocs. This unique position influenced its foreign policy and its methods of military procurement, often necessitating unconventional approaches to acquire advanced weaponry.

    B. Methodology and Scope

    The analysis herein is based on an examination of available research materials, encompassing English, Russian, Serbian, and Arabic language sources. A central piece of evidence for this specific arms deal is C.J. Chivers’ comprehensive work, The Gun: The AK-47 and the Evolution of War.1 This report will critically assess the claim made by Chivers, situating it within the broader context of Soviet arms export policies of the era and Yugoslavia’s diplomatic and military relations. The objective is to evaluate the plausibility of potential candidate nations and, if the evidence permits, to identify the most likely intermediary.

    C. Unraveling the Layers of Secrecy

    The clandestine nature of the 1959 rifle purchase points towards a multi-faceted diplomatic maneuver. Yugoslavia, due to its political estrangement from the Soviet Union following the 1948 Tito-Stalin split, could not openly or directly procure sensitive military technology like the AK-47 from Moscow.1 The term “secret purchase” strongly implies a deliberate effort to bypass official channels and to shield the transaction from public scrutiny, particularly from Soviet intelligence. A “Third World nation” already receiving Soviet military aid would have had legitimate access to such weapons. This intermediary role could have offered benefits to all parties: the supplier nation might have gained financially or strengthened its diplomatic ties with Yugoslavia; Yugoslavia would secure the much-needed rifles for its reverse-engineering program. The Soviet Union itself might have tacitly approved such a transfer if it served a broader, albeit unstated, strategic objective, such as subtly bolstering a non-aligned nation’s defense capabilities against Western influence without direct Soviet commitment. Alternatively, the Soviets might have been unaware of, or unable to prevent, a relatively small diversion of arms.

    The specified quantity of “approximately 2,000” rifles is a critical detail. This number is substantial enough to provide a sufficient sample base for detailed reverse engineering, including disassembly, metallurgical analysis, live-fire testing, and comparison of components – a significant step up from the mere two rifles acquired earlier from Albanian defectors which proved insufficient.1 Simultaneously, a batch of 2,000 units is arguably small enough to have been diverted from a larger consignment of Soviet military aid, or siphoned from existing stockpiles within the recipient nation, without triggering immediate alarm or major geopolitical fallout. Soviet aid packages to favored client states, such as Egypt or Iraq, were often extensive.2 Diverting such a quantity, especially if oversight and record-keeping for every individual small arm were not meticulously stringent, would be more feasible and less likely to provoke a severe diplomatic crisis than, for example, the unauthorized transfer of tanks or combat aircraft.

    II. Yugoslavia’s Pursuit of the Kalashnikov: A Non-Aligned Nation’s Arms Dilemma

    A. The Political Context: Independence and Necessity

    Yugoslavia’s foreign policy under President Tito was characterized by a resolute commitment to independence and non-alignment. This stance meant a refusal to join the Warsaw Pact, leading to periods of significant political tension with the Soviet Union, particularly in the aftermath of the 1948 Informbiro period.1 While relations with Moscow experienced thaws and freezes, Yugoslavia could not depend on the Soviet Union for direct, licensed production of critical military hardware such as the AK-47 assault rifle.1 Consequently, the nation adopted a pragmatic approach to arms procurement, seeking weaponry and military technology from both Eastern and Western sources as opportunities arose.6 The inability to secure technical specifications for the AK-47 directly from the USSR compelled Zastava Arms, the national arsenal, to embark on the challenging path of reverse engineering.1

    B. Early Steps: The Albanian Defectors’ Rifles

    A significant, albeit insufficient, breakthrough occurred in 1959 when two Albanian soldiers defected to Yugoslavia, bringing with them their Soviet-manufactured AK-47s.1 These weapons were promptly handed over to Zastava engineers for detailed examination. While the engineers were able to create metal castings from these two samples, they quickly realized that this limited number of rifles did not provide enough technical data to fully understand the design intricacies, material specifications, or manufacturing processes required to reproduce the weapon or its components accurately.1 This initial encounter with the Kalashnikov highlighted the pressing need for a larger quantity of rifles to complete the reverse-engineering process successfully.

    C. The Imperative for More Samples: The Road to the Zastava M70

    The development of what would become the Zastava M70 assault rifle took place between 1962 and 1968, with the rifle officially entering service with the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) in 1970.1 The acquisition of a more substantial batch of AK-47s in late 1959 would have been a critical enabler for this development timeline, providing Zastava’s engineers with the necessary physical examples for comprehensive study and analysis. The Zastava M70 was ultimately an unlicensed derivative, closely based on the Soviet AK-47 Type 3 variant.1 The AK-47 Type 3, which featured a milled receiver, was produced by the Soviet Union from 1955 until 1959, when it began to be phased out in favor of the modernized, stamped-receiver AKM.8 This transition in Soviet production could have made surplus Type 3 models more readily available through third-party channels.

    Yugoslavia’s unique non-aligned status presented both challenges and opportunities. It constrained direct access to Soviet military technology but simultaneously allowed Belgrade to cultivate a wide network of relationships with numerous “Third World” nations, many of which were emerging from colonial rule or navigating their own paths between the Cold War blocs. Several of these nations became recipients of Soviet military assistance as Moscow sought to expand its global influence.2 Yugoslavia’s prominent role within the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), of which it was a founding member 4, provided a diplomatic framework that could facilitate discreet arms deals and technology transfers that would have been impossible through conventional East-West channels. This network of non-aligned partners became an invaluable asset for Yugoslavia’s unconventional procurement strategies.

    The sequence of events in 1959 – the arrival of the Albanian defectors’ rifles early in the year, the rapid assessment by Zastava that these were insufficient, and the subsequent “secret purchase” of approximately 2,000 additional AKs “by the end of the year” 1 – suggests a swift and opportunistic response by Yugoslav intelligence and arms procurement agencies. Once the limitations of the initial two samples became clear, an active search for more examples was likely initiated, leveraging existing diplomatic or intelligence contacts, or rapidly activating networks to locate and secure a larger quantity of the desired rifles. This was not a passive waiting game but a proactive effort to seize any available opportunity.

    III. The 1959 Transaction: Corroborating the “Secret Purchase”

    A. C.J. Chivers’ “The Gun” as the Primary Source

    The specific assertion that “by the end of the year , however, the Yugoslav government had obtained more early pattern AKs from an unidentified Third World nation that was receiving Soviet military aid” is directly attributed to C.J. Chivers’ book, The Gun, published in 2011, on pages 250-251.1 Chivers, a former Marine officer and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, produced a work generally acclaimed for its meticulous research into the history of automatic weapons, with a particular focus on the Kalashnikov.12 His book meticulously documents the origins, global proliferation, and multifaceted impact of the AK-47 and its variants. The information provided indicates that this 1959 purchase was crucial, furnishing Zastava Arms with a sufficient number of AK-47s to “study and effectively reverse engineer the weapon type”.1

    B. Contextualizing the Purchase in Zastava’s M70 Development

    The timeline and technical details surrounding the development of the Zastava M70 lend credence to Chivers’ account. The Zastava M64, an early prototype that directly led to the M70, incorporated design features heavily based on the Soviet AK-47 Type 3, which utilized a milled receiver.1 Soviet production of the Type 3 AK-47 spanned from 1955 to 1959.8 This aligns perfectly with the claim that Yugoslavia acquired “early pattern AKs” in 1959, as these would likely have been Type 3 models. The successful reverse-engineering effort, facilitated by this larger batch of rifles, enabled Zastava to commence unlicensed production of its AK-47 derivative in 1964.1 This production start date is consistent with a 1959 acquisition followed by several years of intensive research, development, and tooling.

    The fact that the Soviet Union began to replace the AK-47 with the modernized AKM (Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniy) in 1959 is also significant.8 The AKM featured a stamped sheet-metal receiver, making it lighter and cheaper to mass-produce than the milled-receiver AK-47 Type 3. This transition in Soviet small arms production could have rendered existing stocks of AK-47 Type 3s obsolescent in Soviet eyes, or at least less critical. Consequently, Soviet client states that had received Type 3s might have found it easier to re-transfer a portion of their inventory, perhaps in anticipation of receiving newer AKM models. Such a re-transfer, especially of older models, might have been viewed as less diplomatically sensitive by the Soviets or easier for the intermediary nation to justify. Thus, the “early pattern AKs” mentioned by Chivers were likely Type 3s, a plausible type of weapon to be involved in a clandestine deal of this nature at that specific time.

    The absence of other readily available public sources explicitly naming the “Third World nation” involved in this specific 1959 transaction is noteworthy. This suggests that C.J. Chivers may have had access to unique primary sources, such as declassified intelligence reports, internal Zastava documents, or interviews with individuals directly or indirectly involved, which are not yet in the public domain or widely known to other researchers. Alternatively, the details of this transaction may remain obscure precisely because of the success of the secrecy that originally enveloped it. The conclusions drawn in this report must, therefore, rely on interpreting Chivers’ historically credible claim within the broader framework of circumstantial evidence regarding Soviet arms recipients and Yugoslav foreign relations during this period.

    IV. Identifying Potential Supplier Nations: Soviet Arms in the “Third World”

    A. Overview of Soviet Military Aid and AK-47 Proliferation (Late 1950s)

    During the Cold War, the Soviet Union strategically employed military aid as a key instrument of its foreign policy, aiming to expand its influence, support ideologically aligned regimes, and counter Western power.10 The AK-47 assault rifle, renowned for its simplicity, reliability, and ruggedness, became a ubiquitous symbol of this policy. It was widely supplied to “developing countries,” nations espousing communist ideals, and various national liberation movements that Moscow sought to cultivate as allies or proxies.11 By the late 1950s, a significant number of “Third World” nations across the Middle East, Asia, and Africa had become recipients of Soviet military assistance, which often included consignments of AK-47s.2 The AK-47 (Type 3) was the standard Soviet rifle until the introduction of the AKM in 1959, meaning that AK-47s were already in circulation through Soviet supply lines to these recipient states prior to or during that year.8

    B. Egypt: A Prime Candidate

    • Soviet-Egyptian Arms Deals: Egypt, under Gamal Abdel Nasser, emerged as a major recipient of Soviet bloc weaponry following the landmark Egyptian-Czechoslovak arms deal announced in September 1955.25 This agreement, valued at over $83 million, effectively ended the Western monopoly on arms supplies to the Middle East and signaled a significant geopolitical shift.2 The 1955 deal explicitly included small arms and munitions.25 While the initial manifests detailed in the provided material do not itemize AK-47s specifically, subsequent Soviet military aid to Egypt was extensive and continuous. By 1966, the total value of Soviet military equipment extended to the United Arab Republic (UAR), of which Egypt was the dominant part, reached $1.16 billion, with approximately 90% of this aid reportedly delivered by that time.2 This substantial aid program commenced in 1955.2 Given the AK-47’s status as the standard Soviet infantry rifle during this period, it is highly probable that significant quantities were supplied to the Egyptian armed forces well before 1959. Russian sources confirm deliveries of various Soviet armaments to Egypt between 1955-1957, including tanks, artillery, and aircraft, though specific numbers for AK-47s are not provided in these particular texts.26 The AK-47 was indeed being developed into the AKM by 1959, implying its prior establishment.27
    • Yugoslav-Egyptian Relations: Relations between Yugoslavia and Egypt were exceptionally close during this period. Both countries were founding and influential members of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), sharing a common vision of independence from superpower blocs.4 Diplomatic ties strengthened considerably following the 1948 Soviet-Yugoslav split and the 1952 Egyptian Revolution.4 The year 1959, the precise timeframe of the AK-47 purchase, was marked by high-level diplomatic exchanges: President Tito visited Egypt in February 1959, and President Nasser visited Yugoslavia in November 1959.29 Such frequent top-level interactions indicate a robust and trusting political relationship, conducive to arranging sensitive, clandestine transactions. Furthermore, there is a documented instance from 1954 where Egypt is believed to have supported Yugoslav efforts to arm Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN) rebels by nominally purchasing Yugoslav-made weapons, which were then discreetly transferred to Algeria.4 This historical precedent suggests a pattern of cooperation in complex, covert arms movements involving both Egypt and Yugoslavia, making Egypt a very strong candidate.
    The first ever meeting between Josip Broz Tito and Gamal Abdel Nasser – onboard the Yugoslav ship Galeb in the Suez Canal (1955). (Photo from the Online Museum of Syrian History, Shared on Wikimedia.
    President Gamal Abdul Nasser and Yugoslavian President Josip Tito in Aleppo in 1959 / From left to right: United Arab Republic Vice President Akram al-Hawrani, the Aleppo industrialist Sami Saem al-Daher, director of Egyptian Intelligence Salah Nasr, President Josip Tito, his wife Jovanka Broz, President Gamal Abdul Nasser. The photo was taken in the home of Sami Saeb al-Daher, who was nationalized by President Nasser and left in bankrupcy in 1960 (Photo from the Online Museum of Syrian History, Shared on Wikimedia.

    C. Iraq: A Plausible Alternative

    • Soviet-Iraqi Arms Deals: Iraq emerged as another significant recipient of Soviet military assistance following the 14 July Revolution in 1958, which overthrew the Hashemite monarchy and established a republic under Abd al-Karim Qasim.30 The new Iraqi regime quickly pivoted away from Western alliances and sought closer ties with the Soviet bloc and non-aligned nations. In February 1959, the Soviet Union extended a substantial loan of $137.5 million to Iraq for economic and technical development, which likely included provisions for military hardware.32 The USSR became a major arms supplier to Iraq commencing in 1958.3 While specific quantities of AK-47s delivered to Iraq between 1958 and 1959 are not detailed in the available materials, it is highly probable that these rifles formed part of the initial arms packages supplied to the new revolutionary government. Later Iraqi consideration of replacing Kalashnikovs with M16s implies prior widespread adoption of the Soviet rifle.33
    • Yugoslav-Iraqi Relations: Diplomatic relations between Yugoslavia and Iraq were formally established in 1958, in the immediate aftermath of the Iraqi revolution.30 Crucially, a Trade and Cooperation Agreement between Yugoslavia and Iraq was signed and came into force on February 19, 1959.30 This development aligns perfectly with the timeframe of the secret AK-47 purchase later that year. Yugoslavia would go on to become a major arms exporter to Iraq, particularly during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s 30, indicating the foundation of a long-standing military-technical relationship that may have had its early, discreet origins in transactions like the one in question. The new Iraqi regime, eager to assert its independence and forge new international partnerships, might have been willing to facilitate such a transfer to Yugoslavia to build goodwill, for financial considerations, or as part of its broader realignment.

    D. Other “Third World” Recipients (Brief Assessment)

    • Syria: Syria had been a recipient of Soviet military aid since the early 1950s.34 However, early arms supplies from other Eastern Bloc countries like East Germany sometimes consisted of WWII surplus before transitioning to more modern Soviet-pattern weapons like the AK-47, typically in later periods (e.g., post-1967 for significant AK-47s from GDR).34 While direct Soviet supply lines to Syria for AK-47s would have existed by 1959, the available information does not highlight the same degree of intimate political alignment or specific diplomatic activity with Yugoslavia in 1959 that is evident with Egypt or the nascent relationship with Iraq.
    • Indonesia: Indonesia began receiving Soviet arms, with initial deliveries noted in 1958 (such as GAZ-69 military vehicles).35 The extent to which AK-47s were delivered and available in sufficient quantity for a 2,000-unit re-transfer by late 1959 is not clearly established by the provided sources.
    • India: India started to receive Soviet military technology and arms, including licenses for local manufacture, primarily in the 1960s, although some foundational agreements may have been laid earlier.22 The timeline for substantial AK-47 deliveries to India that could have been re-transferred by 1959 appears less probable compared to Middle Eastern recipients.
    • Cuba: The Cuban Revolution, led by Fidel Castro, triumphed in January 1959. Significant Soviet military assistance to Cuba commenced in the early 1960s, notably escalating around the time of the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missile Crisis.36 It is therefore highly unlikely that Cuba would have been in a position to act as a supplier of Soviet-made AK-47s to Yugoslavia in 1959.
    • African Nations (e.g., Angola, Ethiopia, Mozambique): While the Soviet Union did provide arms to various African states and liberation movements 37, the large-scale proliferation of AK-47s to these specific sub-Saharan African nations is generally associated with independence struggles and post-colonial conflicts of the 1960s and 1970s, rather than a 1959 timeframe for re-export.

    The political ideologies and strategic alignments of these potential Third World suppliers are crucial factors. A nation deeply enmeshed within the Soviet ideological sphere might have been less inclined to engage in an unauthorized or clandestine re-transfer of Soviet-supplied arms. However, many “Third World” recipients of Soviet aid, while benefiting from Moscow’s support, pursued their own distinct national interests. Egypt under Nasser, for instance, adeptly navigated the Cold War currents, leveraging relations with both East and West to its advantage.25 Such a nation, particularly one like Egypt that shared leadership with Yugoslavia in the Non-Aligned Movement, might have viewed a discreet arms deal as a means of strengthening its own non-aligned credentials, assisting a fellow NAM state, or gaining diplomatic or economic leverage, even if it involved Soviet-origin weaponry. Iraq, with its new revolutionary government, was in a phase of actively seeking new international partnerships and asserting its autonomy, which could have provided a motive for such a transaction.

    Furthermore, a secret arms purchase of this nature would necessitate a degree of trust and established communication channels. Yugoslavia, as a key architect and proponent of the Non-Aligned Movement, actively cultivated diplomatic, economic, and intelligence relationships with a wide array of nations within this group.4 This favors nations with which Yugoslavia had demonstrably active and positive diplomatic interactions in or before 1959, such as Egypt, and the rapidly developing ties with post-revolution Iraq.

    Table 1: Assessment of Potential “Third World” Nations for the 1959 AK-47 Transfer to Yugoslavia

    Candidate NationRecipient of Soviet Military Aid (incl. AK-47s) by 1959? (Evidence & Likelihood)Nature & Strength of Yugoslav Relations by 1959 (Political, Diplomatic, Military)Specific Chronological Markers Supporting/Contradicting 1959 TransferPlausibility as the “Unnamed Nation”Key Supporting Snippets
    EgyptYes. Major recipient since 1955. Highly likely to possess AK-47s in quantity.Very Strong. Founding NAM members, frequent high-level visits (Tito Feb ’59, Nasser Nov ’59). Precedent of arms facilitation.Supports: Close ties in 1959. Soviet arms flow well established.High & Most Likely2
    IraqYes. Recipient since 1958 revolution. Likely included AK-47s in early packages.Developing. Diplomatic relations established 1958. Trade/Cooperation agreement effective Feb 1959.Supports: New regime seeking partners. Trade agreement in place.High, but second to Egypt3
    SyriaYes. Recipient since early 1950s.Moderate. Established relations, but less intimacy highlighted for 1959 specifically compared to Egypt/Iraq.Possible, but less direct evidence of specific 1959 impetus.Medium34
    IndonesiaYes. Initial Soviet arms deliveries in 1958.Moderate.Less clear if AK-47s available in sufficient quantity for re-transfer by late 1959.Low-Medium35

    V. The “Unnamed Nation”: Deciphering the Secrecy

    A. Motivations for Anonymity

    The enduring anonymity of the supplier nation in most historical accounts points to a convergence of interests in maintaining secrecy:

    • Yugoslavia’s Perspective: For Yugoslavia, discretion was paramount. The country meticulously maintained a delicate geopolitical equilibrium between the Eastern and Western blocs. Openly acknowledging a clandestine arms deal involving Soviet-origin weapons, even if acquired through a third party, could have unnecessarily strained its already complex relationship with the USSR. It might also have compromised its carefully cultivated image as a genuinely non-aligned nation, potentially inviting suspicion or pressure from either superpower.
    • The Supplier Nation’s Perspective: The intermediary country would have had strong reasons to ensure the transaction remained covert. Re-transferring military aid, particularly weapons as significant as assault rifles, without the explicit consent or knowledge of the original supplier (the Soviet Union) could have invited serious repercussions. These could range from a curtailment of future Soviet aid to diplomatic censure or other punitive measures. Protecting its own ongoing diplomatic and trade relationships with both the USSR and Yugoslavia, as well as other international actors, would have been a key concern.
    • Soviet Perspective (if aware or subsequently discovered): Even if Soviet intelligence became aware of the transfer, Moscow might have preferred the matter to remain quiet. If the USSR tacitly approved the deal for its own strategic reasons – for instance, to subtly aid Yugoslavia’s independent defense posture without direct involvement, thereby keeping it from leaning too heavily towards the West – publicity would be counterproductive. Conversely, if the transfer occurred without Soviet knowledge or approval, publicizing it would reveal a potentially embarrassing lack of control over its arms exports and the actions of its client states.

    B. Weighing the Evidence: Egypt vs. Iraq

    When comparing the two strongest candidates, Egypt and Iraq, both present compelling arguments:

    • Arguments for Egypt:
    • By 1959, Egypt had a well-established, deep, and multifaceted relationship with Yugoslavia. This included close personal ties between President Nasser and President Tito, shared leadership in the Non-Aligned Movement, and frequent high-level diplomatic consultations, including visits by both leaders to each other’s countries in 1959.4 Such a strong foundation of trust and mutual understanding would be highly conducive to arranging a secret arms transfer.
    • Egypt was a very significant recipient of Soviet arms from 1955 onwards and would have possessed substantial stocks of AK-47s by 1959.2
    • The precedent of Egypt reportedly facilitating the transfer of Yugoslav arms to Algerian rebels in 1954 demonstrates a historical willingness and capability to engage in complex, discreet arms movements in cooperation with Yugoslavia.4
    • Arguments for Iraq:
    • Iraq’s relationship with Yugoslavia was newer but developing rapidly in the crucial 1958-1959 period. The establishment of diplomatic relations in 1958 was quickly followed by a Trade and Cooperation Agreement that came into force in February 1959.30 This formal framework for interaction was in place at the time of the AK-47 deal.
    • Following its 1958 revolution, Iraq became a recipient of Soviet arms and was actively seeking to diversify its international partnerships beyond its former Western patrons.3 A deal with a prominent non-aligned country like Yugoslavia would fit this new foreign policy orientation.
    • The new revolutionary government in Baghdad might have been motivated by political solidarity, financial gain, or a desire to quickly establish Iraq as an independent actor on the regional stage.

    While both nations are strong candidates, Egypt appears to hold a slight edge. The depth and maturity of its political relationship with Yugoslavia by 1959, coupled with the precedent for cooperation in sensitive arms transfers, make it a particularly compelling possibility. However, the confluence of Iraq’s recent political transformation, its immediate embrace of Soviet military aid, and the formalization of ties with Yugoslavia in early 1959 make it an almost equally plausible source. The critical factors are the combination of access to Soviet-supplied AK-47s and a motive or willingness to transfer approximately 2,000 of them to Yugoslavia under conditions of secrecy.

    Logistical considerations, though not detailed in the available materials, would also have played a role. The transfer of 2,000 rifles and their ammunition is not a trivial undertaking. Both Egypt and Iraq, being Middle Eastern nations, share maritime proximity with Yugoslavia via the Mediterranean Sea. Existing trade routes (e.g., Yugoslav timber for Egyptian cotton mentioned in 4, or the general trade agreement with Iraq 30) could have provided cover for such shipments, perhaps disguised as other goods or moved through less scrutinized channels.

    C. Limitations of the Provided Material

    It is crucial to acknowledge that the available research documentation, while extensive, does not contain a definitive, explicit statement from an undeniable primary source (such as a declassified Yugoslav, Soviet, Egyptian, or Iraqi government document or a direct admission from a key participant) that unequivocally names the country involved in this specific 1959 AK-47 transfer to Yugoslavia. The identification process relies heavily on interpreting C.J. Chivers’ well-regarded but singular claim regarding this transaction, and then constructing a circumstantial case based on the known patterns of Soviet arms supplies and Yugoslav foreign relations during the specified period.

    The successful execution of this secret purchase likely had a reinforcing effect on Yugoslavia’s broader strategy of acquiring foreign military technology through various means, including reverse engineering. It would have demonstrated the feasibility of such clandestine operations and underscored the value of cultivating diverse international relationships to achieve strategic defense objectives, ultimately contributing to the growth and capabilities of its significant domestic arms industry.6

    VI. Conclusion: Assessing the Probabilities and the Lingering Mystery

    A. Summary of Findings

    The evidence strongly supports the claim, primarily advanced by C.J. Chivers, that in late 1959, Yugoslavia secretly purchased approximately 2,000 “early pattern” Soviet AK-47 assault rifles from an unnamed “Third World nation” that was itself a recipient of Soviet military aid.1 This acquisition was a critical step for Zastava Arms, providing the necessary physical examples to successfully reverse-engineer the Kalashnikov design, leading directly to the development and subsequent mass production of the Zastava M70 assault rifle, a cornerstone of Yugoslav military armament.

    B. The Most Plausible Candidate(s)

    Based on a comprehensive analysis of Soviet arms distribution patterns in the late 1950s, Yugoslav foreign relations, and specific chronological markers, Egypt emerges as the most plausible candidate for the role of the unnamed intermediary.

    Key factors supporting this assessment include:

    • Its status as a major recipient of Soviet weaponry, including AK-47s, by 1959.2
    • The exceptionally close political and diplomatic ties between Yugoslavia and Egypt, exemplified by their joint leadership in the Non-Aligned Movement and reciprocal presidential visits in 1959.4
    • A documented precedent of Egypt facilitating complex arms transfers involving Yugoslavia.4

    Iraq stands as another strong contender. The 1958 revolution brought a new regime to power that rapidly sought Soviet military assistance and established diplomatic and trade relations with Yugoslavia in early 1959, making the timeline and political context feasible for such a transaction.3 The new Iraqi government may have seen this as an opportunity to solidify new alliances or gain other advantages.

    Without more explicit, declassified documentary evidence directly naming the nation in the context of this specific 1959 AK-47 transaction, a definitive identification remains an educated deduction based on the available circumstantial evidence rather than an absolute certainty.

    C. The Enduring Nature of the “Unnamed” Nation

    The continued anonymity of the supplier nation in most historical accounts, with Chivers’ work being a notable exception in detailing the event itself, underscores the initial success of the secrecy surrounding the deal. This secrecy was vital for all parties involved: Yugoslavia needed to protect its non-aligned stance and its complex relationship with the USSR; the supplier nation needed to avoid Soviet repercussions for re-transferring arms; and the USSR itself may have preferred the transaction to remain unpublicized. This episode highlights the intricate and often opaque nature of Cold War diplomacy, where non-aligned nations frequently resorted to clandestine means to achieve their strategic security objectives while navigating the treacherous currents between the superpowers.

    D. Implications for Yugoslav Arms Self-Sufficiency

    This successful, albeit covert, acquisition of a significant quantity of AK-47s was a landmark achievement for Yugoslavia’s burgeoning defense industry. It directly enabled Zastava Arms to overcome the hurdles of reverse engineering and eventually mass-produce the Zastava M70. This rifle not only equipped the Yugoslav People’s Army but also became a notable export product, reflecting Yugoslavia’s determined pursuit of military self-reliance and its capacity for indigenous arms development.1

    The very fact that this inquiry is prompted by a specific passage in a relatively recent historical work (Chivers’ The Gun, published in 2011) suggests that this particular detail of Cold War arms proliferation may still be emerging from historical obscurity. The Cold War was characterized by extensive secrecy, and archives from that period are continually being declassified and re-examined by historians. It is plausible that the “unnamed” status of the intermediary nation persists simply because the specific documents, testimonies, or archival records that could provide definitive confirmation have not yet entered the public domain or been widely analyzed. Future archival research in Yugoslav (now Serbian and other successor states’), Russian, Egyptian, Iraqi, or other relevant national archives could one day yield a conclusive answer.

    Ultimately, the story of Yugoslavia’s 1959 secret AK-47 purchase serves as a compelling microcosm of the broader phenomenon of Kalashnikov proliferation. It illustrates that the global spread of this iconic weapon was not solely due to direct state-to-state transfers from the Soviet Union or licensed production by its allies. Secondary and tertiary movements of these arms, through various overt and covert channels and involving a diverse range of state and non-state actors, played a crucial role in the AK-47 achieving its unparalleled global ubiquity.10 This particular transaction demonstrates the resourcefulness of a non-aligned state in securing vital defense technology and the complex, often hidden, networks that facilitated the movement of arms during the Cold War.

    Author’s Comment

    This question intrigued me because Yugoslavia needed more AK-47 Type III samples to reverse engineer their milled M70s. To investigate this question, I ran a number of searches and scenarios and it is my opinion based on what I found that the most likely country was Egypt with Iraq being a less likely second. To be clear, I can’t guarantee it, but the odds favor Egypt given the factors indentified. I was once told that “It’s surprising how little history we really know” and this is an example of an event in recent history where we may never know the details.


    Image Sources

    The map of the Middle East in 1959 was generated by the author using Sora. The intent was to mainly show Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Iraq and Iran to give some geographical context.

    Russian AK-47 Type III (Photo by Gunrunner123 shared on Wikimedia)

    The first ever meeting between Josip Broz Tito and Gamal Abdel Nasser – onboard the Yugoslav ship Galeb in the Suez Canal (1955). (Photo from the Online Museum of Syrian History, Shared on Wikimedia.

    President Gamal Abdul Nasser and Yugoslavian President Josip Tito in Aleppo in 1959 / From left to right: United Arab Republic Vice President Akram al-Hawrani, the Aleppo industrialist Sami Saem al-Daher, director of Egyptian Intelligence Salah Nasr, President Josip Tito, his wife Jovanka Broz, President Gamal Abdul Nasser. The photo was taken in the home of Sami Saeb al-Daher, who was nationalized by President Nasser and left in bankrupcy in 1960 (Photo from the Online Museum of Syrian History, Shared on Wikimedia.


    Works cited

    1. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
    2. SOVIET MILITARY AID TO THE UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC, 1955-66 (RR IR 67-9) – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000496350.pdf
    3. Russia Reemerging as Weapons Supplier to Iraq – The Jamestown Foundation, accessed May 11, 2025, https://jamestown.org/program/russia-reemerging-weapons-supplier-iraq/
    4. Egypt–Yugoslavia relations – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt%E2%80%93Yugoslavia_relations
    5. Yugoslavia and the Non-Aligned Movement – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslavia_and_the_Non-Aligned_Movement
    6. 60. Interdepartment Policy Paper Prepared by the Departments of State and Defense, Washington, undated. (7/5/73), accessed May 11, 2025, https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/e15/107794.htm
    7. YUGOSLAV MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND ITS SOURCES – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP79T00429A001100010022-0.pdf
    8. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – AK-47 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/AK-47
    9. AK-47 | Definition, History, Operation, & Facts – Britannica, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/technology/AK-47
    10. www.macalester.edu, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.macalester.edu/russian-studies/about/resources/miscellany/ak47/#:~:text=Recognizing%20its%20demand%20in%20developing,being%20sold%20exclusively%20to%20governments.
    11. AK 47 – Russian Studies – Macalester College, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.macalester.edu/russian-studies/about/resources/miscellany/ak47/
    12. The Gun (Chivers book) – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gun_(Chivers_book)
    13. The Gun by C.J. Chivers | Goodreads, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7775851-the-gun
    14. The Gun – CJ Chivers – Amazon.com, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.amazon.com/Gun-C-J-Chivers/dp/0743270762
    15. The Gun By C.j. Chivers Summary PDF – Bookey, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.bookey.app/book/the-gun-by-c-j-chivers
    16. The Gun | Book by C. J. Chivers | Official Publisher Page – Simon & Schuster, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Gun/C-J-Chivers/9780743271738
    17. THE GUN – Kirkus Reviews, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/cj-chivers/the-gun/
    18. AK-47 History – C.J. Chivers The Gun Excerpt – Esquire, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a25677/ak-47-history-1110/
    19. ОРУЖИЕ ДЛЯ ПРОФИ – Українська Спілка ветеранів Афганістану (воїнів-інтернаціоналістів), accessed May 11, 2025, http://www.usva.org.ua/mambo3/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=337
    20. AKM – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AKM
    21. How did the Middle East get a hold of Russian firearms like the AK-47 and RPG-7? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-Middle-East-get-a-hold-of-Russian-firearms-like-the-AK-47-and-RPG-7
    22. The Avtomat Kalashnikov Model of Year 1947 – Sites at Penn State, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sites.psu.edu/jlia/the-avtomat-kalashnikov-model-of-year-1947/
    23. Methodology: Kalashnikov & Variant Factory Dataset (1947-present) – Audrey Kurth Cronin, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.audreykurthcronin.com/p2p-pvid/p2p-pvid-kalashnikov/kalashnikov-variant-factory-dataset-1947-present/methodology-kalashnikov-variant-factory-dataset-1947-present/
    24. األسلحة الصغيرة – Small Arms Survey, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/sites/default/files/2021-09/SAS-HB-06-Weapons-ID-ch3-ARA.pdf
    25. Egyptian–Czechoslovak arms deal – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian%E2%80%93Czechoslovak_arms_deal
    26. Группа советских военных специалистов в Египте – Википедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%BF%D0%B0_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%85_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85_%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%B2_%D0%95%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BF%D1%82%D0%B5
    27. شاهد بالصور والفيديو: بعد وفاة مصممه “اليوم” ما هو سلاح الكلاشنكوف ومن هو ميخائيل كلاشنكوف القائل: “أنا لا اقتل ولكن يقتل من يضغط زنادي” – دنيا الوطن, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.alwatanvoice.com/arabic/news/2013/12/23/476461.html
    28. Odnosi Jugoslavije i Egipta — Википедија, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr-el/%D0%9E%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B8_%D0%88%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B5_%D0%B8_%D0%95%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BF%D1%82%D0%B0
    29. العلاقات المصرية اليوغوسلافية – ويكيبيديا, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%BA%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A9
    30. Iraq–Yugoslavia relations – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq%E2%80%93Yugoslavia_relations
    31. العلاقات العراقية اليوغوسلافية – ويكيبيديا, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%BA%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A9
    32. Революция в Ираке 1958 г. И изменение ситуации на Ближнем Востоке – КиберЛенинка, accessed May 11, 2025, https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/revolyutsiya-v-irake-1958-g-i-izmenenie-situatsii-na-blizhnem-vostoke
    33. القوة البرية العراقية – ويكيبيديا, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9
    34. Syrian Civil War: WWII weapons used – wwiiafterwwii – WordPress.com, accessed May 11, 2025, https://wwiiafterwwii.wordpress.com/2017/06/27/syrian-civil-war-wwii-weapons-used/
    35. Russia’s arms exports to Indonesia top USD 2.5 billion over 25 years – Army Recognition, accessed May 11, 2025, https://armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/army-news-2018/russia-s-arms-exports-to-indonesia-top-usd-2-5-billion-over-25-years
    36. THE SOVIET-CUBAN CONNECTION IN CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP88B00745R000100140026-6.pdf
    37. Soviet Arms Transfers to Sub-Saharan Africa: What are they Worth in the United Nations? – DTIC, accessed May 11, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA212065.pdf
    38. YUGOSLAVIA, MIDDLE EAST AND CREATION OF THE NON-ALIGNED MOVEMENT Текст научной статьи по специальности – КиберЛенинка, accessed May 11, 2025, https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/yugoslavia-middle-east-and-creation-of-the-non-aligned-movement
    39. The World’s Most Popular Gun – The New Atlantis, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-worlds-most-popular-gun

    Yugoslavia’s AK Path: The Launch of the Zastava Family of Automatic Weapons and the M64

    In the last post, we reviewed the political climate and how the USSR did not want to share their revolutionary AK-47 design with Yugoslavia. At this point, we need to look at the ambitious 1959 launch of the project “Familija Automatskog Oružja Zastava” (FAZ), or the Zastava Family of Automatic Weapons and how the Yugoslav’s worked around the Soviets to create their own version of the AK.

    Forging Their Own Path: Yugoslavia’s Independent Rifle

    In the fractured landscape of post-World War II Europe, the Socijalistička Federativna Republika Jugoslavija (Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – SFRJ) charted a uniquely independent course. Initially aligned with the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia’s relationship with Moscow ruptured dramatically following the Tito-Stalin split in 1948. This political schism cast Yugoslavia adrift from the burgeoning Eastern Bloc, leading to its refusal to join the Warsaw Pact and forcing it into a precarious non-aligned position during the Cold War.1 Wary of potential aggression from both NATO and the Soviet sphere, Belgrade recognized that national survival depended on military self-sufficiency.2

    This drive for independence created a significant arms dilemma. The break with Moscow severed access to the latest Soviet military technology and, crucially, the licenses to produce advanced weaponry like Mikhail Kalashnikov’s revolutionary AK-47 assault rifle.1 While Yugoslavia remained a socialist state, its ideological divergence and independent streak meant Western powers were equally hesitant to provide significant military aid or technology transfers.2 The Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija (Yugoslav People’s Army – JNA), still largely equipped with World War II-era weapons including locally produced Mauser M48 bolt-action rifles, faced the challenge of modernization alone.2

    Yugoslav planners understood the changing nature of warfare. As early as 1952, the defense industry began experimenting with automatic rifle designs, initially drawing inspiration from captured German StG 44 assault rifles, large numbers of which had fallen into Yugoslav Partisan hands during the war.1 This early research underscored the awareness within the JNA of the need for an intermediate-caliber automatic rifle, but the path to acquiring or developing such a weapon remained blocked by geopolitical realities. The quest for a domestic Kalashnikov variant, therefore, was not merely a technical undertaking; it was a direct manifestation of Yugoslavia’s defiant assertion of independence and its commitment to self-reliance in a world dominated by two opposing superpowers. The rifle project became intrinsically linked to the nation’s unique political identity under Marshal Josip Broz Tito.

    Glimpses of the Future: Acquiring the Kalashnikov

    The first crucial breakthrough came unexpectedly in 1959. Two Albanian border guards, armed with Soviet-made AK-47 rifles, defected across the border into Yugoslavia.1 This event provided the Yugoslav military establishment with its first tangible examples of the weapon they desperately sought to understand. The captured rifles, believed to be the milled-receiver Type 3 variant which was then standard Soviet issue, were promptly handed over to engineers at the renowned Zastava arms factory (then operating as Crvena Zastava, or Red Banner) located in the city of Kragujevac, Serbia.1

    While this windfall was invaluable, the two rifles presented significant limitations. Engineers at Zastava meticulously studied the weapons, even making metal castings of components using sulfur to understand their form.2 However, two samples were simply insufficient to reverse-engineer the design effectively. Critical information regarding manufacturing tolerances, precise material specifications, and the intricacies of heat treatment remained elusive.1 Reproducing the rifle reliably based solely on these examples proved impossible. A technical impasse had been reached, threatening to stall the project before it truly began.

    Overcoming this obstacle required intervention from the highest levels of the Yugoslav state. By the end of 1959, or shortly thereafter, the government managed to secure a much larger quantity of AK-47s.1 Accounts suggest that Marshal Tito himself played a direct role during a state visit to an unnamed non-aligned nation.2 This country, possibly Egypt, Indonesia, or India, was a recipient of Soviet military aid.3 Through discreet negotiations, Yugoslavia arranged the clandestine purchase of approximately 2,000 AK rifles from a batch supplied by the USSR.2 This covert acquisition, bypassing official channels and Soviet oversight, provided Zastava with the critical mass of samples needed for thorough analysis. The fact that such a significant acquisition required top-level political maneuvering underscores the project’s importance as a national priority, essential for breaking the technical deadlock and enabling the engineers to finally unlock the secrets of the Kalashnikov.

    The question of which country they bought those 2,000 AKs from has never been formally answered but I have a real strong hunch and that will be the next blog post.

    Unlocking the Kalashnikov: The Zastava Challenge

    With a substantial number of Soviet AKs now available for study, the engineers at Crvena Zastava, which translates into English approximately as “Red Flag” works, in Kragujevac could finally begin the complex process of reverse engineering in earnest.1 This historic arms factory, the heart of Serbian and later Yugoslav weapons manufacturing, became the crucible for Yugoslavia’s Kalashnikov ambitions.2

    In 1959, the effort was formalized under the project designation FAZFamilija automatskog oružja Zastava (Family of Automatic Weapons Zastava).2 This name itself revealed a strategic vision extending beyond merely cloning the AK-47. The goal was to develop an integrated family of infantry weapons tailored to the JNA’s needs, encompassing not only an assault rifle but also potentially a self-loading rifle and, significantly, a light machine gun (LMG).2 This mirrored the Soviet small arms doctrine (which featured the SKS carbine alongside the AK rifle and RPD/RPK machine guns) but aimed for entirely domestic design and production. This indicated a comprehensive, long-term strategy for infantry armament, rather than a simple stopgap measure.

    The FAZ project was a collaborative effort, spearheaded by a team of talented Zastava engineers and designers. Key figures included Božidar Blagojević (who would later design the CZ99 pistol), Major Miloš Ostojić, Miodrag Lukovac, Milutin Milivojević, Stevan Tomašević, Predrag Mirčić, and Mika Mudrić, with engineer Milan Čirić leading the project.2 Their task was immense: to meticulously disassemble, measure, analyze materials, and create complete technical drawings for a weapon system they had no license or official documentation for.1 Every dimension, tolerance, and material property had to be painstakingly deduced through careful examination of the acquired Soviet rifles.

    The First Yugoslavian AK: Enter the M64

    By 1964 and 1965, the intensive work at Zastava bore fruit. The first prototypes of a distinctly Yugoslavian Kalashnikov emerged, designated the M64A (featuring a fixed wooden stock) and M64B (equipped with an underfolding metal stock).1 Alongside these rifles, prototypes for a companion light machine gun, the M65A and M65B (featuring a quick-detach barrel), were also developed, though these LMGs would ultimately not see mass production.2

    While based on the Soviet Type 3 AK-47, the M64 prototypes incorporated several unique features and modifications, reflecting both Yugoslav ingenuity and specific JNA requirements. This early design demonstrated that Zastava‘s engineers were not content with mere replication; they sought to adapt and potentially improve upon the Kalashnikov design. Key differences included:

    • Milled Receiver: Like its Soviet progenitor, the M64 utilized a robust milled steel receiver. However, the Yugoslav receiver had distinct geometry: the characteristic lightning cut above the magazine well was present only on the right side, while the left side featured a unique profile incorporating a visible pin intended to retain the bolt hold-open mechanism.5
    • Bolt Hold-Open (BHO): Perhaps the most significant innovation was a fully functional bolt catch mechanism. This device locked the bolt to the rear after the last round was fired from the magazine, offering a potential tactical advantage by speeding up reloads and providing immediate visual confirmation of an empty weapon. However, this system required specially modified magazines featuring a unique cutout on the follower or feed lip.1
    • Integrated Grenade Launching Capability: Reflecting a strong emphasis in JNA doctrine, the M64 was designed from the outset to launch rifle grenades. It featured a built-in, flip-up grenade sight mounted on the gas block and incorporated a gas cut-off mechanism, allowing the rifle’s gas system to be shut off to safely propel grenades.2 This was a notable difference from standard Soviet AKs, where grenade launching often required separate attachments.
    • Distinct Furniture: The M64 sported longer wooden handguards compared to the Soviet AK, giving it a different profile. These handguards were not interchangeable with standard AK parts.1 The M64B underfolding stock was borrowed directly from the existing Yugoslav M56 submachine gun, showcasing resourcefulness in utilizing existing production lines.2
    • Modified Sights and Charging Handle: The rear sight was positioned further back on the receiver compared to the standard AK placement on the rear sight block (though some very early prototypes experimented with receiver cover mounting), providing a longer sight radius for potentially improved aiming accuracy.1 Additionally, engineers pragmatically adopted the hollow cylindrical charging handle design from the domestically produced M59 rifle (Yugoslavia’s licensed SKS variant, known colloquially as the Papovka), again leveraging existing manufacturing capabilities.2

    These modifications highlight a design philosophy that blended adaptation to specific military needs (grenade launching), innovation (BHO), and practical resource management (reusing existing parts). The M64 was clearly shaping up to be more than just a copy; it was becoming a uniquely Yugoslavian interpretation of the Kalashnikov system.

    Feature Comparison: Soviet AK-47 Type 3 vs. Zastava M64 Prototype

    FeatureSoviet AK-47 (Type 3)Zastava M64A/B PrototypeSnippet Reference(s)
    Receiver TypeMilledMilled (Yugoslav pattern)6
    Bolt Hold-OpenNoYes (requires modified magazine)1
    Grenade Sight/Gas Cut-offNo (added later/separate)Yes (integrated)2
    HandguardsStandard lengthLonger, unique design1
    Rear Sight LocationStandard (rear sight block)Further rearward on receiver1
    Charging HandleStandard AKHollow cylindrical (from M59 SKS)2
    Folding Stock (M64B)N/A (AKS was different)Underfolder (from M56 SMG)2

    Towards a Standard: Trials, Tribulations, and Transition

    Despite the successful development of the M64 prototypes and reportedly satisfactory performance during initial field trials 1, the path to mass adoption by the JNA was not immediate. A degree of conservatism existed within the military leadership; some senior officers remained skeptical about the utility and cost-effectiveness of equipping every infantry soldier with a fully automatic rifle, fearing it would lead to excessive ammunition expenditure.2 Yugoslavia had, after all, only recently standardized its licensed version of the semi-automatic SKS, the Zastava M59.8

    This institutional hesitation was significantly challenged by external events. The Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 served as a stark demonstration of modern Soviet military doctrine, where entire infantry units were equipped with Kalashnikov assault rifles. Witnessing the effectiveness of massed automatic fire likely swayed opinions within the JNA command structure, highlighting the urgent need for a comparable domestic capability.2 The geopolitical situation acted as a catalyst, pushing the JNA to overcome its previous reservations and accelerate the process of adopting a modern assault rifle. Interestingly, around this period, warming relations with Moscow led Yugoslavia to briefly enter negotiations to purchase Soviet AKs directly, primarily for special forces units.2 This development undoubtedly put pressure on Zastava and proponents of the domestic FAZ program to prove their rifle was ready.2

    However, the M64 faced a critical technical hurdle on the path to standardization: its innovative bolt hold-open mechanism. While potentially useful, the BHO necessitated the use of proprietary magazines, incompatible with the standard AK magazines that were becoming increasingly common worldwide.6 From a logistical perspective, introducing a non-standard magazine for the army’s main service rifle presented significant challenges. The JNA leadership ultimately prioritized interoperability and logistical simplicity, deciding that the new standard rifle must be compatible with commonly available AK-pattern magazines.6 This pragmatic decision, favoring ease of supply and potential use of captured magazines over a unique but non-standard feature, sealed the fate of the M64’s BHO system.

    As the design moved towards finalization for mass production, the Vojnotehnički institut Beograd (Military Technical Institute Belgrade – VTI) likely played an increasingly important role.10 While Zastava engineers had driven the initial design and prototyping of the M64 2, the VTI, as the JNA’s central research and development body, would have been involved in refining the technical requirements based on trial results, overseeing final testing protocols, and preparing the definitive technical documentation for the production rifle.2 This included incorporating the mandated changes, most notably the removal of the bolt hold-open feature, paving the way for the weapon that would become Yugoslavia’s standard assault rifle.

    Conclusion: On the Brink of the M70

    The journey from Yugoslavia’s post-war isolation to the verge of mass-producing its own Kalashnikov variant was a testament to national determination, engineering skill, and political will. Blocked from acquiring licensed Soviet technology due to the Tito-Stalin split, Yugoslavia embarked on a challenging path of independent development.1 The opportunistic acquisition of initial AK-47 samples via Albanian defectors in 1959 provided the crucial spark.1 Overcoming the limitations of these few examples required high-level political intervention to secure a larger batch of rifles through clandestine channels, enabling Zastava engineers to undertake a comprehensive, unlicensed reverse-engineering effort under the ambitious FAZ program.1

    The resulting M64 prototypes were far more than simple copies. They represented an innovative adaptation of the Kalashnikov design, incorporating features tailored to JNA doctrine, such as integrated grenade-launching capabilities, alongside novel additions like the bolt hold-open mechanism and resourceful use of existing domestic components.1 However, trials, evolving military thought spurred by events like the 1968 Czechoslovakia invasion, and pragmatic logistical considerations—specifically the need for standard magazine compatibility—led to crucial design revisions.2

    These are photos of M64 prototypes overlaid on a map of Yugoslavia
    This is a photo of a Zastava M64B (B designating that it is an underfolder model) shared on Wikimedia by AZ2001

    By 1970, the culmination of over a decade of effort was at hand. The lessons learned from the M64 program, the strategic decisions made by the JNA leadership, and the collaborative work between Zastava and the VTI had refined the design into a production-ready rifle. In that year, the Yugoslav government formally approved this modified design for serial production, designating it the Automatska Puška Model 1970 (Automatic Rifle Model 1970), or AP M70.1 The stage was set for the introduction of Yugoslavia’s first mass-produced Kalashnikov, a rifle born from political necessity and forged through ingenuity and perseverance. The detailed story of the M70 itself would be a new chapter, but its foundations were now firmly laid in the experiences chronicled here.

    Image Source

    The rifles were uploaded to Wikimedia by TheLokov. And the Yugoslavian map is also from Wikimedia and was shared by the UN. The author created the combined image.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zastava_M-64_prototypes.png
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Former_Yugoslavia_Map.png

    The M64B image is from Wikimedia also and was shared by AZ2001.
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZastavaM64B.jpg

    Works cited

    1. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
    2. Zastava M64. Part 1. The Unusual History of Yugoslavian AKs …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/05/07/zastava-m64-part-1-unusual-history-yugoslavian-aks/
    3. Zastava M70 (автомат) — Википедия, accessed May 12, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_(%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82)
    4. Is the Yugoslav, Zastava M-70, the best licensed built Ak-47 and maybe the best Ak-47 variant to this day? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/10r4iq9/is_the_yugoslav_zastava_m70_the_best_licensed/
    5. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – Zastava M70 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Zastava_M70
    6. Zastava AKs, Part 2. M70 – The First Mass-Produced Yugoslavian …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/05/14/zastava-aks-part-2-m70-first-mass-produced-yugoslavian-kalashnikov/
    7. How Does The Yugoslavian Zastava M70 Compare To Other Ak-47 Variants? – GunCreed, accessed May 12, 2025, https://guncreed.com/2024/08/17/how-does-the-yugoslavian-zastava-m70-compare-to-other-ak47-variants/
    8. My Complete Yugoslavian Smallarms Collection History (Zastava Trek VIII: Communist First Contact) – YouTube, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzJ5v_HREt0
    9. A country’s weapons can be a good indication of whether they wanted to be a Soviet puppet state : r/NonCredibleDefense – Reddit, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/17jukc7/a_countrys_weapons_can_be_a_good_indication_of/
    10. PROCEEDINGS, accessed May 12, 2025, https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/proc-0018/OTEH_2024.pdf
    11. Војнотехнички институт — Википедија, accessed May 12, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%98%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%83%D1%82
    12. ПОЛИТИКА ОДБРАНЕ ЈУГОСЛАВИЈЕ (1945–1958): ИДЕЈЕ И ПРАКСА, accessed May 12, 2025, https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/bitstream/id/143356/Disertacija_12293.pdf
    13. Zakon o Opasnim Materijama | PDF – Scribd, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/395551284/Zakon-o-Opasnim-Materijama

    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, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.


    Yugoslavia’s AK Path: The USSR Would Not Share Their AK-47 Rifles or Designs With Yugoslavia

    I’ve owned and built a number of AK-47 pattern rifles over the years and slowly one of my favorite series are the ones from Zastava when they were part of Yugoslavia partly because they are unique. Now, that opens the door – why were they unique? There is some very interesting history behind that and so let’s dive into this further. This first piece will set the stage by explaining why the Soviets didn’t share their AK-47 rifles or designs with Yugoslavia so let’s dive in.

    I. Introduction: A Strained Fraternity and a Strategic Weapon

    In the shadow of World War II, a brotherhood forged in shared ideology between the Soviet Union (СССР – Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik) and the newly minted Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia (ФНРЈ – Federativna Narodna Republika Jugoslavija) was destined for a dramatic unraveling. What began as a seemingly tight-knit alliance, cemented by the fight against fascism, quickly soured, descending into a bitter schism by 1948. A cautious, often fraught, attempt at reconciliation in the post-Stalin years would follow, but the scars of division ran deep.1 This turbulent political saga inevitably cast a long shadow over every aspect of their relationship, particularly in the sensitive arena of military cooperation.

    At the heart of the Soviet Union’s rapidly expanding military and geopolitical might lay a revolutionary piece of hardware: the Avtomat Kalashnikova obraztsa 1947 goda (Автомат Калашникова образца 1947 года), the AK-47. Officially entering service in 1949, this assault rifle didn’t just arm Soviet soldiers; it became a potent symbol of Moscow’s technological prowess and a key instrument of its foreign policy.3 The Kremlin wielded the AK-47, and especially the rights to produce it, with calculated precision, using its distribution to reward allies and exert influence.4 Whether a nation received this coveted weapon, or its blueprints, became a telling barometer of its standing in Moscow’s eyes.

    Yugoslavia, by the close of 1959, found itself on the outside looking in, denied both the AK-47 and its designs. This wasn’t a simple oversight. It was the culmination of a complex web of factors, chief among them the deep-seated animosity stemming from the 1948 Tito-Stalin split. That seismic event saw Yugoslavia unceremoniously booted from the Cominform (Информбиро / Informbiro – Информационное бюро коммунистических и рабочих партий / Informatsionnoye byuro kommunisticheskikh i rabochikh partiy), the Soviet-led bloc of communist parties, and subjected to a barrage of political and economic pressure.1 This rupture forced Belgrade to chart a new course.

    The plot thickened as Yugoslavia embraced an independent, non-aligned stance on the world stage, a move that saw it increasingly reliant on military aid from the West, particularly the United States. Moscow, meanwhile, maintained a tight grip on its arms exports, prioritizing nations that toed the ideological line. Adding another layer to this complex dynamic was Yugoslavia’s own burgeoning ambition to build its own weapons, a drive that would eventually see the Zastava (Застава Оружје / Zastava Oružje) arms factory successfully reverse-engineer the very AK-47s it couldn’t officially obtain. The story of the unshared rifle is thus a tale of clashing ideologies, geopolitical chess, and one nation’s determined, and ultimately successful, quest for self-reliance in a world divided.

    II. From Alliance to Animosity and Uneasy Reconciliation: Soviet-Yugoslav Political Dynamics (1945-1959)

    A. Post-War Comradeship and Emerging Fissures (1945-1948)

    The early days after World War II painted a picture of camaraderie between Moscow and Belgrade. United by communist ideology and their recent joint struggle against the Axis, the Soviet Union and the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia seemed natural partners. A formal Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation, inked in Moscow (Москва / Moskva) on April 11, 1945, by delegations headed by Josip Broz Tito (Јосип Броз Тито) himself, appeared to seal this bond.1 The USSR officially recognized the new Yugoslav state on December 19, 1945, and Belgrade even became the headquarters for the Cominform in 1946, further underscoring the initial closeness.1

    Soviet aid flowed into war-torn Yugoslavia: vital food supplies, assistance in repatriating prisoners of war, and the deployment of Soviet technical and military advisors.8 Soviet experts even helped organize Tito’s personal security detail.8 On the economic front, joint ventures like the “Juspad” (пароходство «Юспад») shipping company and the “Justa” (ЮСТА – Югославско-советское акционерное общество гражданской авиации / YUSTA) civil aviation firm were launched, aimed at fostering economic growth and integration.8 For the Yugoslav leadership, who had largely liberated their nation through their own partisan efforts, the Soviet Union was initially seen as an indispensable ally and a blueprint for building a socialist society.9

    But beneath this veneer of cooperation, cracks were beginning to show. Tito, a leader with his own strong vision, harbored ambitions for Yugoslavia that didn’t always align with Moscow’s grand strategy. He envisioned Yugoslavia as a dominant force in the Balkans, pursuing plans for a Balkan Federation (Balkanska federacija) that might draw in Bulgaria (Бугарска / Bugarska) and Albania (Албанија / Albanija; Albania – Russian), and he actively backed communist insurgents in the Greek Civil War.2 These moves, often made without Moscow’s full blessing, were viewed by Joseph Stalin (Иосиф Сталин) as potentially reckless and disruptive, especially concerning delicate relations with Western powers.1 Moscow also eyed Yugoslavia’s assertive territorial claims – against Italy over Trieste (Трст / Trst) and Austria (Аустрија / Austrija) regarding Carinthia (Корушка / Koruška; Каринтия / Karantiniya – Russian) – with a degree of apprehension.1

    Stalin expected unwavering loyalty from the Eastern European communist states, seeing them as a vital buffer zone and an extension of Soviet might.2 Tito, however, having led a successful indigenous liberation, saw Yugoslavia as an equal partner, not a subordinate.2 This fundamental clash of perspectives was starkly illustrated in November 1945 when Tito, speaking to The Times, declared that while Yugoslav friendship with the Soviet peoples was deep, there was “nothing exclusive about it,” firmly asserting his nation’s independence.1 Even the early Soviet aid, including the presence of advisors, likely served as an intelligence channel for Moscow. As Yugoslavia began to assert its own path, these points of contact may have become sources of friction, with Soviet officials in Belgrade reportedly sending dispatches to Moscow accusing the Yugoslav leadership of ideological straying and “leaderism” (вождизм / vozhdizm).8 The initial “comradeship,” it seemed, was built on shaky ground, with Moscow perhaps viewing its assistance as an investment that demanded Yugoslav compliance, making Belgrade’s subsequent divergence all the more galling to the Kremlin.

    B. The 1948 Tito-Stalin Split (Raskol Tito—Staljin / Раскол Тито—Стаљин): A Bitter Divorce and the Informbiro Storm

    The simmering pot of Soviet-Yugoslav tensions finally boiled over in 1948, erupting into the infamous Tito-Stalin split (Раскол Тито—Стаљин / Raskol Tito—Staljin; Советско-югославский конфликт / Sovetsko-yugoslavskiy konflikt – Russian) – a dramatic and acrimonious divorce that sent shockwaves through the communist world.7 The Kremlin’s patience with Yugoslavia’s independent streak had worn thin. Tito’s ambitious plans for a Balkan Federation, his assertive stance on Trieste, and his continued support for Greek communists – all actions Stalin feared might provoke a Western backlash – became intolerable to Moscow.2 Stalin’s attempts to tighten his grip on Yugoslav internal affairs, from its economic blueprints to its security forces, met with staunch resistance from Tito, who commanded a loyal and powerful base within the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (КПЈ – Komunistička partija Jugoslavije) and the state apparatus.2

    The crisis escalated with alarming speed in early 1948. In a clear signal of displeasure, the Soviet Union abruptly withdrew its military and civilian advisors from Yugoslavia in March.8 What followed was a volley of increasingly venomous letters exchanged between the Central Committees of the Yugoslav and Soviet Communist Parties. The Soviet missives were laden with accusations, painting the Yugoslav leadership as anti-Soviet, nationalistic, Trotskyite, and guilty of straying from the sacred tenets of Marxism-Leninism.8 The Yugoslavs, unbowed, fiercely defended their policies and their sovereign right to forge their own path to socialism.10

    The conflict reached its zenith on June 28, 1948. Meeting in Bucharest (Букурешт / București), Romania (Румунија / Rumunija; Румыния / Rumyniya – Russian) – a gathering from which Yugoslav delegates were notably absent – the Cominform adopted a resolution that formally cast Yugoslavia out. The KPJ leadership was condemned for pursuing policies hostile to the USSR, for abandoning Marxism-Leninism in favor of bourgeois nationalism, and for cultivating a “terroristic regime” within its own party.1 This act marked the dawn of the “Informbiro period” (Информбиро период), an era of intense political, economic, and psychological warfare waged by the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc allies against a defiant Yugoslavia.7

    The Soviet bloc slapped a comprehensive economic embargo on Yugoslavia, hoping to bring its economy, heavily reliant on trade with these nations, to its knees.7 Ominous military maneuvers were conducted along Yugoslavia’s borders with Hungary (Мађарска / Mađarska; Венгрия / Vengriya – Russian), Romania, Bulgaria, and Albania, creating a very real threat of invasion.7 A ferocious propaganda war was unleashed, with outlets like Radio “Free Yugoslavia” (Радио Слободна Југославија / Radio Slobodna Jugoslavija), broadcasting from Bucharest, and newspapers such as “For Socialist Yugoslavia” (За социјалистичку Југославију / Za socijalističku Jugoslaviju) and “New Struggle” (Нова борба / Nova borba), relentlessly denouncing Tito and his government.8 Moscow also threw its weight behind anti-Tito Yugoslav émigrés and allegedly backed plots to topple the Yugoslav leadership from within, including a failed coup attempt linked to high-ranking military officer Arso Jovanović (Арсо Јовановић).11

    Yugoslavia’s response was one of unwavering defiance. Tito rallied the nation, framing the struggle as a defense of Yugoslav sovereignty and independence.1 Internally, the regime unleashed a brutal crackdown on anyone suspected of Soviet sympathies. These individuals, derisively labeled “Cominformists” (информбировци / informbirovci or ибеовци / ibeovci), faced arrest, imprisonment, and horrific conditions in notorious camps like Goli Otok (Голи оток, literally “Bare Island”).7 Isolated from the East and staring down the barrel of potential Soviet military action, Yugoslavia had little choice but to turn to the West, primarily the United States, for economic and, critically, military lifelines.1

    The repercussions of the Tito-Stalin split were immense. It cemented Tito’s authority at home and dramatically boosted his international standing as a leader who had dared to defy Stalin.1 It set Yugoslavia on the unique path of “Titoism” (титоизам / titoizam), a brand of socialism characterized by worker self-management and a non-aligned foreign policy.7 The split also triggered purges of suspected “Titoists” in other Eastern Bloc countries as Stalin moved to consolidate his control.7 For Yugoslavia, the immediate economic and military fallout was severe, forcing a wholesale reorientation of its foreign and defense strategies.7 The failure of the Informbiro campaign to unseat Tito, despite its ferocity, not only hardened Yugoslav resolve but also, ironically, spurred the development of a more self-reliant defense posture and a domestic arms industry. The very real threat of invasion, coupled with the initial uncertainty of finding alternative arms suppliers, drove home the strategic necessity for Yugoslavia to bolster its own defenses – a lesson that would profoundly shape its approach to national security, including its eventual quest to produce its own version of the AK-47, and later leading to its “Total National Defence” (Општенародна одбрана / Opštenarodna odbrana) doctrine.15

    C. Navigating the Thaw: Khrushchev’s Olive Branch and Lingering Shadows (1953-1959)

    The death of Joseph Stalin in March 1953 signaled a potential sea change in the icy relations between Moscow and Belgrade, ushering in a period of gradual, though decidedly cautious, normalization.1 The new Soviet leadership, with Nikita Khrushchev (Никита Хрущёв) eventually emerging at the helm, embarked on a broader policy of de-Stalinization and sought to dial down international tensions. Mending fences with Yugoslavia was part of this new playbook.17 The Kremlin hoped to repair the rift within the socialist world and perhaps coax Yugoslavia back into a closer orbit.

    A pivotal moment arrived with Khrushchev’s landmark visit to Belgrade in May-June 1955. The visit culminated in the signing of the Belgrade Declaration (Београдска декларација / Beogradska deklaracija; Белградская декларация / Belgradskaya deklaratsiya – Russian) on June 2, 1955.1 This document was a diplomatic breakthrough, formally acknowledging the legitimacy of “different paths to socialism” and enshrining principles of mutual respect for sovereignty, independence, and non-interference in internal affairs.8 Diplomatic ties were fully restored, and trade agreements were struck, easing the economic vise that had squeezed Yugoslavia since 1948.17

    But this thaw, while welcome, had its limits, and a deep-seated distrust lingered beneath the surface. Tito’s Yugoslavia remained fiercely committed to its non-aligned foreign policy, carefully navigating a path between the Eastern and Western blocs.1 Tito famously quipped that Yugoslavia would receive Soviet overtures “with a grain of salt,” a clear indication of Belgrade’s enduring skepticism about Moscow’s true intentions.17 While Khrushchev harbored hopes of bringing Yugoslavia back into the Soviet-led “socialist camp” (often dubbed the “Lager“), Tito was resolute in safeguarding Yugoslavia’s hard-won independence.22 Suspicions cut both ways: Yugoslav leaders feared Moscow’s ultimate aim was to reassert dominance, while the Kremlin remained wary of Tito’s independent spirit.17

    The fragility of this rapprochement became starkly clear by late 1956. The Soviet military crackdown on the Hungarian Uprising (Мађарска револуција 1956. / Mađarska revolucija 1956.) and the events of the Polish October (Пољски октобар / Polski oktobar) drew criticism from Yugoslavia, reigniting ideological clashes and chilling the recently warmed relations.13 Soviet accusations of Yugoslav “revisionism” resurfaced, and in a throwback to earlier pressure tactics, the USSR in 1958 postponed previously agreed-upon loans to Yugoslavia.8

    Military relations during this period of normalization mirrored this complex dance. High-level military delegations were exchanged. Yugoslav State Secretary for National Defence, General Ivan Gošnjak (Иван Гошњак), journeyed to Moscow in June 1957, and Soviet Defence Minister Marshal Georgy Zhukov (Георгиј Жуков / Georgiy Zhukov; Георгий Жуков / Georgiy Zhukov – Russian) paid a return visit to Belgrade in October 1957.23 These visits saw discussions on potential military cooperation and Soviet offers to showcase their latest military hardware.23 However, a significant catch remained: the Soviets consistently tied any substantial military-technical assistance, especially the provision of modern weaponry, to Yugoslavia severing its military aid relationship with the West – a price Belgrade was unwilling to pay.23 Since 1948, Yugoslavia had become a major recipient of US military aid, a lifeline crucial for modernizing the Yugoslav People’s Army (ЈНА – Југословенска народна армија / Jugoslovenska narodna armija).13 While Yugoslavia did announce the end of the US grant aid program in 1957, it continued to purchase spare parts and sought to diversify its arms suppliers, signaling no intent to become wholly reliant on Moscow.14 Adding another twist, Marshal Zhukov’s sudden ouster from his posts in late October 1957, immediately after his Yugoslav trip, further complicated and ultimately derailed the tentative military rapprochement.23

    The post-Stalin normalization, therefore, while politically important in ending the overt hostility of the Informbiro era, failed to forge deep military-technical trust, particularly when it came to advanced offensive weapons like the AK-47. Yugoslavia adeptly used the thaw to cement its non-aligned status and maintain its vital Western military connections. This independent posture, heavily reliant on Western arms, was fundamentally at odds with the Soviet Union’s strategic desire for bloc unity and tight control over its key military technologies. The “thaw,” in essence, remained more of a political maneuver than a genuine strategic military partnership that would have justified Moscow sharing its sensitive arms designs with Belgrade.

    III. The Kalashnikov Doctrine: Soviet Arms Export Policy and the AK-47

    A. The AK-47: Birth of an Icon (1949) and Early Years (up to 1959)

    The Avtomat Kalashnikova obraztsa 1947 goda (АК-47) was born from the harsh lessons of World War II and the Soviet Union’s urgent post-war drive to modernize its infantry. Drawing inspiration from weapons like the German Sturmgewehr 44 (StG 44) and built around the new intermediate 7.62x39mm M43 cartridge, the AK-47 was the brainchild of a design team spearheaded by Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov (Михаил Калашников).3 Early prototypes, dubbed the AK-46, underwent a significant overhaul with input from Aleksandr Zaitsev (Александр Зайцев), leading to the version that would become legendary.4 Following successful trials, the rifle was officially adopted by the Soviet Army in 1949, earning the GRAU index 56-А-212.3 The green light for its technical documentation and initial experimental production at the Izhevsk Motozavod (Ижевский мотозавод / Izhevsk Motozavod) came from Minister of Armaments D.F. Ustinov (Д.Ф. Устинов) on January 21, 1948.29

    Getting the AK-47 into mass production wasn’t without its headaches. The initial design called for a receiver made from stamped sheet metal – a method ideal for churning out large numbers. However, difficulties in welding crucial components like the guide and ejector rails led to a high number of rejected units.4 To overcome these hurdles and speed up production, a heavier, more expensive machined (milled) receiver was temporarily adopted. These milled receiver versions, known as Type 2 (from 1951) and the later, lightened Type 3 (from 1954/55), became the standard for several years.4 As a result, the AK-47 didn’t reach Soviet troops in large numbers until around 1956, with the older SKS carbine continuing in production as a stopgap.4

    The quest for a more efficient and cost-effective design didn’t stop there. By 1959, the Soviet military rolled out the AKM (Автомат Калашникова Модернизированный / Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniy), or Modernized Kalashnikov Automatic Rifle.3 The AKM boasted a redesigned stamped sheet metal receiver that was lighter and cheaper to make, a distinctive slanted muzzle brake to counter muzzle climb, and a hammer retarder to boost reliability during automatic fire.4 This evolution underscores that the AK-47 platform was a top-priority, constantly developing system for the Soviet military throughout the 1950s. The rifle’s own lengthy development, early production snags, and its significant upgrade to the AKM by decade’s end suggest an intense internal focus. This, coupled with its immense strategic value, naturally meant Moscow would be extremely cautious about exporting it, especially when it came to sharing the latest designs with nations not firmly under its military and political thumb.

    B. Moscow’s Armory: The Politics of Soviet Arms Transfers

    During the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s arms export strategy was less about profit and almost entirely about politics and power.5 The Kremlin’s main goals were to bolster the socialist bloc, support nations taking an “anti-imperialist” line, cultivate allies in international arenas like the United Nations, and, crucially, to foster dependencies that would tie recipient countries closer to Moscow.5 This was clear in the preferential treatment given to Warsaw Pact members, who got first dibs on Soviet weaponry and were pushed to standardize their arsenals along Soviet lines to improve coalition fighting capabilities.5

    But this didn’t mean an open tap for all military technology. The Soviets were careful, keeping a tight rein on what went where. They generally avoided sending arms to countries that might use them aggressively, destabilize a region, or whose political loyalty was shaky.5 Secrecy often shrouded the technical details of exported weapons, especially newer systems, to protect Soviet security and prevent sensitive information from falling into enemy hands.5 Notably, the export of nuclear weapons, strategic missiles, and the most cutting-edge military technologies was severely limited or outright banned for most countries, even many socialist allies.5 Often, arms packages included a mix of modern gear and updated, but essentially older, systems.5

    Licensing weapon designs, like that of the AK-47, was a meticulously controlled affair, typically reserved for the most trusted allies within the Warsaw Pact or key strategic partners who showed unwavering political devotion. China, for example, received a license to produce its AK-47 variant, the Type 56, in 1956 3, and other Warsaw Pact nations also set up their own production lines.6

    The Khrushchev era (1953-1964) saw Moscow extend its reach to newly independent and non-aligned nations in the developing world, courting countries like India, Egypt, and Indonesia.34 This was a pragmatic move to chip away at Western influence, gain Cold War allies, and project Soviet power globally. Aid, including military assistance and arms, was a key tool in this game.34 However, this didn’t translate into freely sharing the most advanced Soviet military tech or production licenses with every non-aligned state. Even under Khrushchev’s more flexible foreign policy, Soviet arms exports operated on a tiered system of trust. Full licensing and transfer of top-tier infantry weapons like the AK-47 were likely kept for nations deeply embedded in the Soviet security sphere (i.e., Warsaw Pact members) or those, unlike Yugoslavia, that weren’t simultaneously cozying up to Western powers for military hardware, training, and political backing. Yugoslavia’s unique tightrope walk – a socialist state outside the Soviet bloc, actively cultivating ties with the West, and a major recipient of Western military aid – put it in a distinctly less trusted category when it came to accessing Moscow’s sensitive military technology.

    C. The AK-47: A Crown Jewel in the Soviet Arsenal

    The AK-47 wasn’t just another rifle for the Soviets; it was a game-changer in infantry firepower. Renowned for its straightforward design, ruggedness, reliability in the toughest conditions, and suitability for mass production, it was a weapon perfectly adapted for both conventional armies and revolutionary fighters.3 These qualities made it an incredibly valuable military asset, and Moscow was understandably careful about who got their hands on it.

    The early spread of the AK-47 illustrates this cautious approach. Even a close ally like the People’s Republic of China was initially supplied with the older SKS semi-automatic carbine before eventually receiving the license to manufacture its own AK-47 version, the Type 56, in 1956.3 This points to a deliberate, phased rollout of this critical technology, even with ideologically aligned partners. The introduction of the modernized and more cost-effective AKM in 1959 only increased the strategic value of the Kalashnikov system, and the Soviets would have been keen to control the dissemination of this improved design.3

    Ideologically, the AK-47 was often portrayed as the weapon for the “liberation of the proletariat” and the arming of “socialist workers and peasants.”6 This framing implied that any nation receiving such a weapon, particularly the know-how to make it, needed to be deemed ideologically pure and politically reliable by Moscow. Yugoslavia, after the 1948 split, was seen by the Kremlin as an ideological traitor, guilty of “revisionism” and nationalism.8 Despite the later political thaw under Khrushchev, this deep-seated ideological mistrust never fully evaporated.17 To provide the AK-47 or its designs to a nation that had so publicly defied Soviet authority, was charting its own “path to socialism,” and was actively building ties with the West would have flown in the face of core Soviet principles of ideological conformity and strategic control. The AK-47’s status as both a revolutionary icon and a vital military tool meant its export, especially licensing, was a decision freighted with significance. For Yugoslavia – a nation that had not only broken from the Soviet orbit but had also become a major recipient of Western military aid – the chances of getting this premier Soviet rifle or its blueprints were slim to none.

    IV. Yugoslavia’s Armament Dilemma: Between Western Aid and Indigenous Ambition

    A. Rearming the JNA Post-1948: A Lifeline from the West

    The 1948 Tito-Stalin split threw the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA – Југословенска народна армија / Jugoslovenska narodna armija) into a perilous situation. Suddenly facing open hostility and the looming threat of invasion from the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc allies, Yugoslavia was in desperate need of modernizing its armed forces.15 The JNA’s arsenal at the time was a patchwork of captured World War II weapons (German and Italian), some pre-war domestic models, and the limited Soviet aid received before the bitter divorce – hardly enough to deter a potential Soviet-led onslaught.1

    Out of necessity, Yugoslavia turned its gaze westward, primarily to the United States, for military assistance. Beginning in late 1951, under the Mutual Defense Assistance Program (MDAP), Washington began to supply substantial quantities of military hardware and provide crucial training to the JNA.13 This aid was a game-changer, transforming the JNA’s inventory. By 1957, when Yugoslavia requested an end to US grant aid (which officially ceased in 1959, though some purchases continued), it had received a massive infusion of military support.14

    Table: Major US Military Equipment Deliveries to Yugoslavia (approx. 1951-1959)

    Equipment TypeModel(s)Approximate QuantityDelivery Period (approx.)Sources
    Jet FightersF-86D Sabre, F-86E Sabre, F-84G Thunderjet405 (total US jets)1950s14
    TanksM4A3 Sherman, M-47 Patton860 (US models)1950s14
    Self-Propelled GunsM7 Priest, M18 Hellcat, M36 Jackson7151950s25
    Armored/Scout CarsM3A1 Scout Car, M8 Greyhound5651950s25
    Artillery Pieces105mm, 155mm, 203mm howitzers7601950s25
    TrainersT-33 Shooting Star (TV-2)701950s46
    Transport AircraftC-47 Skytrain, DC-627 (C-47), 2 (DC-6)1950s46
    HelicoptersH-5, S-55 Whirlwind, H-23Small numbers1950s46
    Naval VesselsMinesweepers, Patrol BoatsSome1950s14
    Small Arms & Other GFEVarious (e.g., M20 recoilless rifles)Large quantities1950s46

    Note: Quantities are approximate and reflect data available for the period. “GFE” refers to Ground Forces Equipment.

    Yugoslavia also procured limited military equipment from other Western nations, such as the United Kingdom, which supplied items like Anson aircraft, destroyers, and jet engines for Yugoslav-made aircraft.14 This massive influx of US military aid, while indispensable for Yugoslavia’s defense in the early 1950s, simultaneously widened the gulf with Moscow regarding sensitive military technology. The aid cemented a Western orientation in much of the JNA’s equipment, training, and operational thinking.13 Such strong Western military ties made the idea of integrating a key Soviet system like the AK-47 not only politically thorny for the USSR but also practically challenging for the JNA. Handing over AK-47s to an army largely equipped and trained by the West would have been counterproductive to Soviet goals of bloc unity and risked their top small arms technology being compromised. Yugoslavia’s termination of US grant aid in 1957 was a nod to Moscow during the normalization period, but it didn’t signal a complete break from Western military ties or a wholesale embrace of Soviet arms.14

    B. Zastava Arms (Zastava Oružje / Застава Оружје): Forging an Independent Path to the AK

    The Yugoslav People’s Army’s approach to small arms in the post-war era was deeply influenced by its partisan roots and the changing face of infantry warfare. Initially, the JNA fielded a diverse collection of weapons, including captured German Mauser Kar98k rifles. The Zastava factory in Kragujevac (Крагујевац / Kragujevac) began reworking these and producing its own version, the M48 bolt-action rifle.44 Soviet-designed small arms, like the SKS carbine (later made domestically as the Zastava M59) and various submachine guns, also filled the JNA’s racks.43 However, the world was moving on. The limitations of bolt-action rifles in terms of sheer firepower and the shorter reach of submachine guns were becoming increasingly obvious with the rise of intermediate-cartridge assault rifles.55 Having witnessed the effectiveness of weapons like the German StG 44 during the war, the JNA knew it needed a modern automatic rifle.56

    As early as 1952, Zastava Arms began experimenting with automatic rifle designs, often drawing inspiration from the StG 44.56 This early interest signaled Yugoslavia’s intent to keep pace with global military advancements.

    The year 1959 became a pivotal moment in Yugoslavia’s quest for the AK-47. Shut out from official Soviet designs or licensed production due to the chilly political climate, Belgrade turned to unconventional methods. In a stroke of luck, or perhaps shrewd opportunism, two Albanian soldiers defected to Yugoslavia in 1959, carrying their Soviet-made AK-47s. These rifles were swiftly delivered to Zastava’s engineers for meticulous inspection.56 While these initial samples provided a crucial first look and even allowed for metal castings, they weren’t enough to unlock all the secrets of the rifle’s precise technical data and manufacturing tolerances needed for full-scale reproduction.56

    Later that year, or soon after, Yugoslavia managed a more significant acquisition, secretly purchasing a batch of reportedly around 2,000 early-pattern AK-47s. Legend has it this deal was struck during one of President Tito’s visits to an unnamed African nation that was a recipient of Soviet military aid.57 With a larger pool of rifles to dissect and study, Zastava’s engineers finally had what they needed to effectively reverse-engineer the prized weapon.

    This clandestine effort culminated in the Zastava M64, Yugoslavia’s first domestically produced, unlicensed version of the AK-47.30 Based on the milled receiver design of the Soviet AK Type 3, the M64 incorporated several distinctly Yugoslav features. These included modifications for launching rifle grenades – a key element of JNA doctrine – different handguard designs (often with three cooling slots instead of the Soviet two), and, on some early prototypes, a mechanism to hold the bolt open after the last round was fired.56 The Zastava design team, featuring engineers like Božidar Blagojević (Божидар Благојевић) and Major Miloš Ostojić (Милош Остојић), worked under the “FAZ” (Фамилија Аутоматика Застава / Familija Automatika Zastava – Family of Automatic Weapons Zastava) concept, aiming to create a whole family of weapons based on the Kalashnikov system.57

    Yugoslavia’s success in acquiring AK-47s through these back channels in 1959 and then launching its own reverse-engineering program was a testament not only to its ingenuity but also to its unwavering commitment to an independent defense. This proactive stance was a direct result of the post-1948 reality, where relying on former allies had proven a dangerous game. It sent a clear message: if denied critical military technology by one bloc, Yugoslavia was ready and able to get it elsewhere, reinforcing its non-aligned position and diminishing any leverage Moscow might have hoped to exert through arms denial. This bold move set a precedent for Yugoslav technological autonomy and significantly boosted the capabilities of its burgeoning domestic arms industry.

    V. The Withheld Design: Why Moscow Said No

    The Soviet Union’s refusal to hand over AK-47s or their blueprints to Yugoslavia by 1959 wasn’t a simple “no.” It was a decision born from a complex cocktail of deep-seated political mistrust, cold geopolitical calculations, established arms export policies, Yugoslavia’s own determined push for military self-reliance, and the AK-47’s own development and rollout schedule.

    A. The Ghost of ’48: A Chasm of Mistrust

    The 1948 Tito-Stalin split wasn’t just a diplomatic disagreement; it was a seismic ideological and political earthquake that shattered the foundations of trust between Moscow and Belgrade.1 In the Kremlin’s eyes, Tito’s defiance was nothing short of a betrayal of the socialist cause. Stalin himself reportedly harbored such intense animosity towards the Yugoslav leader that he even sanctioned assassination attempts.1 This profound bitterness didn’t simply vanish with time. Even after Stalin’s death and Khrushchev’s attempts at reconciliation, a thick fog of suspicion hung heavy in the air between the two nations.16 Yugoslav leaders remained deeply skeptical of Soviet intentions, fearing a renewed push for dominance, while the Soviets doubted Tito’s commitment to any form of socialist solidarity that didn’t place Moscow at the top.17 The Soviet Union had, after all, publicly and vehemently denounced the Yugoslav leadership for “anti-Soviet” policies and dangerous “revisionism.”8 In such a poisoned atmosphere, the idea of transferring a premier military technology like the AK-47 design – a weapon that embodied Soviet military might – to a nation seen as ideologically wayward and politically untrustworthy was almost unthinkable. The essential ingredient for such a sensitive deal – mutual confidence – was conspicuously absent. Moscow simply couldn’t be sure that Yugoslavia wouldn’t share the technology with its newfound Western friends or use it in ways that undermined Soviet interests.

    B. Geopolitical Chess: Yugoslavia’s Western Embrace as a Deal-Breaker

    Yugoslavia’s strategic pivot to the West for military support after the 1948 schism was a game-changer in Soviet calculations. The substantial military aid flowing from the United States and other Western countries from 1951 onwards forged undeniable links – both in terms of hardware and doctrine – between the JNA and Western militaries.13 This wasn’t just a trickle; it was a flood of modern tanks, jet aircraft, artillery, and extensive training programs.14 Adding to Moscow’s alarm was the formation of the Balkan Pact (Balkanski pakt) in 1953-1954, a mutual defense treaty that brought Yugoslavia together with Greece and Turkey – both NATO members.10 Although Tito tried to downplay its military significance to Khrushchev, the Soviets saw it as a move that, at least indirectly, pulled Yugoslavia into a Western-aligned military orbit.22

    A fundamental rule in the Soviet arms export playbook was to prevent its advanced military technology from falling into Western hands or bolstering countries with strong Western military ties.5 During military discussions in 1956-1957, any Soviet offer of significant military aid, including modern weaponry, came with strings attached: Yugoslavia had to cut its military ties with the West and send the US military mission in Belgrade packing.23 Tito, however, wasn’t willing to pay that price, as Western support remained crucial for Yugoslavia’s security and economic stability. Consequently, from Moscow’s perspective, providing AK-47s to a Yugoslav military heavily equipped, trained, and influenced by the United States would have been akin to indirectly arming a Western-leaning force. Worse, it risked the rifle’s technology being dissected, exploited, and potentially countered by NATO. The potential for technological leakage or strategic misuse far outweighed any slim chance of wooing Tito with this particular weapon, especially while Yugoslavia kept its Western military lifelines open.

    C. Moscow’s Prudence: Guarding Key Tech from an Independent Outsider

    The AK-47 was more than just an effective rifle; it was a cutting-edge piece of Soviet military innovation, a prized technological asset.3 Soviet policy on licensing and exporting such critical military designs was notoriously tight-fisted, generally reserved for its most loyal Warsaw Pact brethren or exceptionally close, ideologically pure states, like China in the early days of their alliance.3 Yugoslavia, an independent, non-aligned nation that had openly thumbed its nose at Moscow’s authority and carved out its own distinct foreign policy, simply didn’t fit the bill as a trusted recipient for such a crucial weapon system.1

    A general principle of Soviet arms export strategy was caution, especially with its most advanced systems. Moscow aimed to prevent uncontrolled proliferation, avoid unnecessarily inflaming regional conflicts, and maintain a degree of control over the capabilities of recipient nations.5 The Cold War was, in many ways, a technological arms race, and both superpowers were intensely wary of their key military innovations falling into the hands of, or being exploited by, states they couldn’t fully control. Yugoslavia, with its unique geopolitical balancing act and proven independence, was a textbook example of such a nation. Handing over AK-47 designs or large quantities of the rifle would have meant relinquishing control over a vital military technology to a state operating outside its direct sphere of influence, risking its adaptation or spread in ways that didn’t serve Soviet strategic interests.

    D. Yugoslav Autonomy: Belgrade’s Go-It-Alone Spirit

    The shock of the 1948 split and the subsequent Soviet-led blockade left an indelible mark on Yugoslavia’s approach to national security. It drove home the harsh lesson about the dangers of relying too heavily on a single foreign power for essential military gear.15 As a result, building a strong domestic arms industry became a top strategic priority for Belgrade. Zastava Arms in Kragujevac already had a history of arms manufacturing, churning out Mauser-pattern M48 rifles and other small arms in the post-war years.51 This existing industrial foundation provided a springboard for more ambitious endeavors.

    The clandestine acquisition of AK-47 samples in 1959, followed by Zastava’s dedicated efforts to reverse-engineer the weapon and develop the M64 prototype, stands as a powerful testament to Yugoslavia’s proactive and determined pursuit of modern military technology, even without Moscow’s blessing or a license.56 This independent streak demonstrated a clear commitment to achieving a degree of self-sufficiency in critical defense areas. It’s plausible that even if the Soviets under Khrushchev had offered the AK-47 designs or a license, the political strings or economic terms attached might have been unacceptable to a Yugoslavia fiercely protective of its sovereignty. Having already embarked on a path of diversifying its arms sources (thanks to Western aid) and nurturing its own capabilities, Belgrade might have preferred the longer, more challenging road of independent development over a Soviet deal that could have entailed unwelcome dependencies. The Soviet refusal to provide the AK-47, therefore, met a Yugoslav determination to acquire the capability one way or another. This, in turn, ultimately strengthened its military-industrial complex and reinforced its non-aligned defense posture, making Yugoslavia less vulnerable to future political pressure through arms supplies from any bloc.

    E. The AK-47/AKM Timeline: A Premier System, Sparingly Shared

    The AK-47’s own development and deployment timeline also played a role. Though officially adopted in 1949, getting the rifle into the hands of Soviet troops in large numbers took several years due to initial production hiccups, especially with the stamped receiver.4 The significantly improved and modernized AKM version, featuring a more easily mass-produced stamped receiver, only made its debut in 1959.3 This means that throughout the entire period of Yugoslav-Soviet normalization (1955-1959), the AK-47 was the USSR’s primary, relatively new assault rifle, and its definitive mass-production iteration, the AKM, was just appearing on the scene as the decade closed.

    The transfer of such cutting-edge military technology, particularly its production license, typically followed a strict pecking order: first, equip your own forces, then provide it to your most trusted and strategically vital allies. Even a major communist power like China only began licensed production of its AK-47 variant, the Type 56, in 1956 – several years after the AK-47’s formal adoption by the Soviet Army.3 This points to a deliberate and controlled process for sharing AK-47 technology. Given this internal Soviet timeline for the AK-47’s own development, production refinement, and initial dissemination, Yugoslavia – with its complicated and often strained political relationship with Moscow – was simply not high enough on the priority list to receive such a sensitive and relatively new technology transfer by 1959. Even if political relations had been significantly warmer and free of the deep-seated mistrust, it’s likely that widespread licensing or export of the AK-47, let alone the just-emerging AKM, to a non-Warsaw Pact country like Yugoslavia would have been deemed premature from the Soviet strategic viewpoint, which naturally prioritized its own forces and its closest, most reliable allies. The profound political issues merely sealed a fate already influenced by the weapon’s own lifecycle and Soviet dissemination practices.

    VI. Conclusion: Forging Arms and Independence

    The Soviet Union’s decision to keep its AK-47 rifles and their designs out of Yugoslav hands by the end of 1959 was not a simple “no.” It was a complex verdict shaped by a potent mix of factors. The deep, lingering mistrust from the 1948 Tito-Stalin split, which painted Yugoslavia as an ideological maverick in Moscow’s eyes, set the stage.1 This fundamental distrust was amplified by Yugoslavia’s determinedly non-aligned stance and its significant reliance on Western military aid, particularly from the United States, making any transfer of sensitive Soviet military technology to Belgrade a geopolitical non-starter for the Kremlin.13

    Moreover, Soviet arms export policies during the early Cold War were notoriously restrictive when it came to advanced weaponry. Moscow prioritized its Warsaw Pact allies and ideologically compliant states, exercising extreme caution with nations like Yugoslavia that charted an independent foreign policy course and maintained strong Western ties.5 The AK-47, and its successor the AKM (which arrived in 1959), were crown jewels of Soviet military technology, and their dissemination was tightly controlled.3 The AK-47’s own development and deployment timeline meant it was still a relatively new and evolving system within the Soviet military itself, making widespread export or licensing to a country outside its immediate security bloc highly unlikely by 1959.4

    Meanwhile, Yugoslavia, steeled by the hard lessons of the Informbiro period and driven by a powerful imperative for self-reliance, was actively building its own domestic arms industry.51 The clandestine acquisition of AK-47 samples in 1959, followed by the impressive reverse-engineering efforts at Zastava Arms that led to the M64 prototype, showcased Belgrade’s resolve to obtain modern assault rifle technology, with or without Soviet approval.56 This bold initiative not only highlighted Yugoslav ingenuity but also underscored a deep commitment to an autonomous defense posture.

    In the end, the Soviet refusal to share the AK-47 did not stop Yugoslavia from arming itself with Kalashnikov-pattern rifles. Instead, it spurred the nation’s engineers and defense industry to develop their own versions, most notably the Zastava M70 series. These rifles became a mainstay of the Yugoslav People’s Army and a significant export success in their own right. This outcome fostered a crucial degree of self-sufficiency in small arms production for Yugoslavia, a cornerstone of its independent defense doctrine and its distinctive non-aligned identity on the turbulent stage of the Cold War.

    The story of the Soviet-Yugoslav AK-47 dynamic is a vivid illustration of how the intricate dance of Cold War power politics, ideological clashes, national interests, and technological ambitions shaped military relationships. It underscores that the transfer – or denial – of arms and military technology was a powerful tool of statecraft, with far-reaching consequences for industrial development, strategic autonomy, and the geopolitical paths nations chose to tread in a bipolar world. For Yugoslavia, the rifle Moscow withheld ultimately became a catalyst, driving it to forge not only its own weapons but also a more independent destiny.


    The next post will explore more about the early phases of the Zastava AK program because then it gets really interesting. Click here to open a new browser tab and read about how Zastava developed the first “Yugo” AK – the M64 – that preceded the M70 series.


    Image Sources

    The Map of Yugoslavia was obtained from Wikimedia. Image source was “The Cartographic Section of the United Nations (CSUN) Date=2007-03-10” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Former_Yugoslavia_Map.png

    Works cited

    1. Soviet Union–Yugoslavia relations – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union%E2%80%93Yugoslavia_relations
    2. The Soviet Union’s Foreign Policy in the Balkans during the First Years of the Cold War (1945-1960) – Digital Commons @ Wayne State, accessed May 11, 2025, https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1081&context=honorstheses
    3. Gun History: The Origin Story of the AK-47 – Outdoor Life, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/gun-history-origin-story-ak-47/
    4. AK-47 – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47
    5. 3. Conventional arms transfers during the Soviet period – SIPRI, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/files/books/SIPRI98An/SIPRI98An03.pdf
    6. The Breakout: The Mass Production, Distribution, and Early Use of the AK-47 – The Gun, accessed May 11, 2025, https://erenow.org/ww/the-gun/7.php
    7. Tito–Stalin split – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tito%E2%80%93Stalin_split
    8. Советско-югославские отношения – Википедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%8E%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F
    9. Yugoslavia and the USSR 1945 – 1980: The History of a Cold War Relationship, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.yuhistorija.com/int_relations_txt01c1.html
    10. Раскол Тито—Стаљин — Википедија, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB_%D0%A2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%BE%E2%80%94%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%99%D0%B8%D0%BD
    11. Informbiro period – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informbiro_period
    12. Советско-югославский конфликт – Википедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%8E%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%82
    13. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1958–1960, Eastern Europe; Finland; Greece; Turkey, Volume X, Part 2 – Historical Documents – Office of the Historian, accessed May 11, 2025, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1958-60v10p2/d158
    14. THE CHANGING PATTERN OF YUGOSLAVIA’S ARMS PROCUREMENT – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T00875R001600040005-2.pdf
    15. Total National Defense in Yugoslavia – DTIC, accessed May 11, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0742397.pdf
    16. Yugoslav-Soviet relations, 1953-1957: normalization, comradeship, confrontation, accessed May 11, 2025, http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/2525/
    17. YUGOSLAV- SOVIET RELATIONS – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP91T01172R000300020025-1.pdf
    18. СОВЕТСКО-ЮГОСЛАВСКИЙ КОНФЛИКТ 1948 – Большая российская энциклопедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://old.bigenc.ru/domestic_history/text/3589560
    19. Югославия – Советский Союз. 1955-1956. Первые встречи после развода – LiveJournal, accessed May 11, 2025, https://humus.livejournal.com/2526263.html
    20. Односи Југославије и Совјетског Савеза — Википедија, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B8_%D0%88%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B5_%D0%B8_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%98%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3_%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B0
    21. SOVIET-YUGOSLAV RELATIONS – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP79R00890A000700100003-6.pdf
    22. YUGOSLAV-SOVIET RELATIONS, 1953- 1957: Normalization, Comradeship, Confrontation – LSE Theses Online, accessed May 11, 2025, http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/2525/1/U615474.pdf
    23. Др Александар ЖИВОТИЋ УСПОН И ПАД ЈУГОСЛОВЕНСКО-СОВЈЕТСКИХ ВОЈНИХ ОДНОСА 1957. – Токови Историје, accessed May 11, 2025, https://tokovi.istorije.rs/cir/uploaded/1%202014/CLANAK%20-%20ZIVOTIC%20ALEKSANDAR.pdf
    24. Нови хоризонти спољне политике Југославије: Балкан, Европа, свет – SANU, accessed May 11, 2025, https://dais.sanu.ac.rs/bitstream/id/64017/bitstream_64017.pdf
    25. Yugoslav People’s Army – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_People%27s_Army
    26. 60. Interdepartment Policy Paper Prepared by the Departments of State and Defense, Washington, undated. (7/5/73), accessed May 11, 2025, https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/e15/107794.htm
    27. AK-47 Automatic Rifle | Smithsonian Institution, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.si.edu/object/ak-47-automatic-rifle%3Anmah_439260
    28. Автомат Калашникова – Википедия, accessed May 11, 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
    29. История автомата Калашникова (АК-47) – Ижевский мотозавод «Аксион-холдинг, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.axion.ru/kalashnikov-100/
    30. AK-47 – Survival, accessed May 11, 2025, http://landsurvival.com/schools-wikipedia/wp/a/AK-47.htm
    31. AK-47 | Definition, History, Operation, & Facts – Britannica, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/technology/AK-47
    32. Russian Military-Technical Cooperation: Structures and Processes – Columbia International Affairs Online, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/olj/sa/sa_june01bab01.html
    33. Soviet Union Study_9 – Marines.mil, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.marines.mil/portals/1/publications/soviet%20union%20study_9.pdf
    34. The Main Drivers of Soviet Foreign Policy Towards India, 1955–1991, accessed May 11, 2025, https://tnsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TNSR-Journal-Vol-8-Issue-1-SAHNI.pdf
    35. The Main Drivers of Soviet Foreign Policy Towards India, 1955–1991, accessed May 11, 2025, https://tnsr.org/2024/11/the-main-drivers-of-soviet-foreign-policy-towards-india-1955-1991/
    36. Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16
    37. Kalashnikov rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalashnikov_rifle
    38. Khrushchev’s Peaceful Coexistence: The Soviet Perspective | Guided History – BU Blogs, accessed May 11, 2025, https://blogs.bu.edu/guidedhistory/russia-and-its-empires/michelle-van-sleet/
    39. Yugoslavia and the Soviet Policy of Force in the Mediterranean Since 1961. – DTIC, accessed May 11, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA106190.pdf
    40. SKS – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKS
    41. The Avtomat Kalashnikov Model of Year 1947 – Sites at Penn State, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sites.psu.edu/jlia/the-avtomat-kalashnikov-model-of-year-1947/
    42. Chapter 4 The Tito Doctrine in – Brill, accessed May 11, 2025, https://brill.com/display/book/9789004358997/BP000016.xml
    43. Did the USSR give Yugoslavia weapons before 1948? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Did-the-USSR-give-Yugoslavia-weapons-before-1948
    44. Why did the Yugoslavs during the war employ the MG42 and its derivatives like the Zastava M53, although most of their firearms are of Soviet origin? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Yugoslavs-during-the-war-employ-the-MG42-and-its-derivatives-like-the-Zastava-M53-although-most-of-their-firearms-are-of-Soviet-origin
    45. What weapons were used in the Yugoslav War? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/What-weapons-were-used-in-the-Yugoslav-War
    46. YUGOSLAV MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND ITS SOURCES – CIA, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP79T00429A001100010022-0.pdf
    47. YUGOSLAV MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND ITS SOURCES | CIA FOIA (foia.cia.gov), accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp79t00429a001100010022-0
    48. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Central and Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV – Historical Documents – Office of the Historian, accessed May 11, 2025, https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1950v04/d768
    49. Yugoslav Nuclear Diplomacy between the Soviet Union and the United States in the Early and Mid‑Cold War – OpenEdition Journals, accessed May 11, 2025, https://journals.openedition.org/monderusse/11239
    50. Советско-Югославский конфликт. 1948-1953гг – Холодная война, accessed May 11, 2025, http://www.coldwar.ru/conflicts/yugoslaviya/conflict-1948-1953.php
    51. Zastava Arms, accessed May 11, 2025, https://sadefensejournal.com/zastava-arms/
    52. Zastava Arms – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Arms
    53. Zastava M59/66 – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M59/66
    54. Why did the Yugoslav People’s Army use the Zastava M48 (a locally produced variant of the German K98k) as their primary service rifle until the mid-1960s, even though bolt action rifles were already obsolete during WW2? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Yugoslav-Peoples-Army-use-the-Zastava-M48-a-locally-produced-variant-of-the-German-K98k-as-their-primary-service-rifle-until-the-mid-1960s-even-though-bolt-action-rifles-were-already-obsolete-during-WW2
    55. Intermediate cartridge – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_cartridge
    56. Zastava M70 assault rifle – Wikipedia, accessed May 11, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_assault_rifle
    57. Zastava M64. Part 1. The Unusual History of Yugoslavian AKs – The Firearm Blog, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2024/05/07/zastava-m64-part-1-unusual-history-yugoslavian-aks/
    58. Chinese and Yugo AK similarities : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/vhvwa4/chinese_and_yugo_ak_similarities/
    59. Yugoslavian Serbia AK-47 History – Zastava – Faktory 47, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.faktory47.com/blogs/kalashnikov/yugoslavian-serbia-ak-history
    60. Последняя «Zastava», сербский взгляд на автомат Калашникова – Военное обозрение, accessed May 11, 2025, https://topwar.ru/8858-poslednyaya-zastava.html
    61. Автомат (штурмовая винтовка) Zastava M64 / M70 / M77 / M92 – ВКонтакте, accessed May 11, 2025, https://vk.com/@weapons-avtomat-shturmovaya-vintovka-zastava-m64-m70-m77-m92
    62. We’ve Got a List of Every AK-47 Ever Made – The National Interest, accessed May 11, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/weve-got-list-every-ak-47-ever-made-78141
    63. Zastava M64 – The Unusual History of Yugoslavian AKs | The Armory Life Forum, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/zastava-m64-the-unusual-history-of-yugoslavian-aks.19074/
    64. Српски “калашњиков” осваја Америку – Lovački savez Republike Srpske, accessed May 11, 2025, https://lovcirs.com/aktivnosti/srpski-kalasnjikov-osvaja-ameriku/1402/
    65. Автомат Калашникова по рецепту Иосипа Броза Тито – Военное обозрение, accessed May 11, 2025, https://topwar.ru/29027-avtomat-kalashnikova-po-receptu-iosipa-broza-tito.html
    66. Zastava M70 (автомат) – Википедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M70_(%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82)
    67. Топ-5 малоизвестных разновидностей “Калашникова” – новости Подоляка, accessed May 11, 2025, https://podolyaka.ru/top-5-maloizvestnyh-raznovidnostey-kalashnikova/
    68. Югославская автоматическая винтовка «Застава» – боевой и гражданский варианты, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.militaryplatform.ru/10307-jugoslavskaja-avtomaticheskaja-vintovka-zastava-boevoj-i-grazhdanskij-varianty.html
    69. Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games – Zastava M70 – Internet Movie Firearms Database, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Zastava_M70
    70. AK-47 Assault Rifle | PDF | Firearms | Projectile Weapons – Scribd, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.scribd.com/document/137558177/AK-47-Assault-Rifle
    71. Yugoslavian M64 AK Overview – YouTube, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1MB4jX_0QM
    72. Yugo M64 reweld – SKSBOARDS.COM, accessed May 11, 2025, http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=96259.0
    73. Ak 47 | PDF | Magazine (Firearms) | Personal Weapons – Scribd, accessed May 11, 2025, https://fr.scribd.com/document/175746045/AK-47
    74. What’s your opinion on the M70 Zastava rifle? – Quora, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Whats-your-opinion-on-the-M70-Zastava-rifle
    75. Nonaligned Movement: Liberation Movements – Yugoblok, accessed May 11, 2025, https://yugoblok.com/nonaligned-movement2/
    76. Zastava M57 – Википедия, accessed May 11, 2025, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_M57
    77. Югославская снайперская. Винтовка Zastava M 48B | Оружейный журнал «КАЛАШНИКОВ» – KALASHNIKOV.ru, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.kalashnikov.ru/yugoslavskaya-snajperskaya/
    78. A country’s weapons can be a good indication of whether they wanted to be a Soviet puppet state : r/NonCredibleDefense – Reddit, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/17jukc7/a_countrys_weapons_can_be_a_good_indication_of/
    79. Is the Yugoslav, Zastava M-70, the best licensed built Ak-47 and maybe the best Ak-47 variant to this day? : r/ak47 – Reddit, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ak47/comments/10r4iq9/is_the_yugoslav_zastava_m70_the_best_licensed/
    80. Selling the Russians the Rope? Soviet Technology Policy and U.S. Export Controls – RAND, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2008/R2649.pdf
    81. Watching the Bear: Essays on CIA’s Analysis of the Soviet Union, accessed May 11, 2025, https://www.cia.gov/resources/csi/static/Watching-the-Bear-Essays-on-CIAs-Analysis-of-the-Soviet-Union-1.pdf