Author Topic: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver  (Read 3000 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Board Supporter
  • SKS Gunsmith
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« on: November 21, 2011, 09:39:38 PM »
What are the advantages of a milled receiver?  I think I have read that in full auto, they are tighter and lead to more accuracy.  For a semi-auto sporter type AK, is there any real advantage to justify the extra cost??  I do like the perceived extra quality of a receiver machined from a solid block of steal, but are there any practical advantages.

I'm tired of reading about SHTF.   I am planning for the more likely scenario SSDD (Same Sh_it, Different Day).

Booming Sooner

  • SKS Sniper
  • *****
  • Posts: 641
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2011, 10:19:13 PM »
My understanding is that they are higher quality, more durable and more accurate in full or semi-auto.  However I've also been told in the grand scheme of things, for practical use by most people, the difference is fairly negligible.  Having never fired one I can't add any personal experience, this is just what people who have had both have told me when I asked.
If the busses can't run on time, why can you carry a gun?


  • Board Supporter
  • SKS Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 10371
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2011, 10:21:33 PM »
Well the milled receiver is more rigid and stable than the stamped version.  As far as accuracy and superior quality., it is kind of a toss up and not automatically a big advantage.
They are sweet and solid and generally very smooth.  I like them.
It depends on how much of a premium is being asked.
In places like Afghanistan or Pakistan some of the early milled AK47's are still around as a testament to their durability.

Polish Model 60 currently offered in the $600 range.  Milled Chinese, some milled Bulgarians SLR93, 95 etc and some Yugo etc.,


  • SKS Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
  • Love my x39's
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2011, 10:24:11 PM »
i wandered the same thing and then it was pointed out to me. most  third world countries are using stamped recievers for their full auto. this includes bulgaria which is one of the best aks out there. now yes i did go with a wasr for the point that i didnt even know if i was going to like aks. i love it so much that i am going to get an arsenal bulgarian with taxes. the stamped are also loaded the same weight as a milled with no mag. jmo 8) :lol:
I'd rather die as a Wolf, than to follow as a Sheep!


  • Board Supporter
  • SKS Gunsmith
  • *****
  • Posts: 1616
  • Barrels? I don't need no steenkin barrels!
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2011, 01:49:00 AM »
Not quite as simple as milled vs. stamped. Mainly because you have two major different stamped receivers right off the bat. The 1mm AKM and the 1.5mm AK

First off the AK-47 was designed for stamped receivers, but Uncle Joe was having some quality control issues (mainly in the heat treating dept.) So that's how the milled receiver came to be. The original AK has a thicker barrel. They finally went on to stamped receivers and still retained things like the thicker barrel and used a thicker receiver, a good example is a Chinese type 56 or MAK-90. Eventually the AKM-47 came along, it used a lighter barrel and thinner receiver, which helped shed some weight. The AKM is the most common one found worldwide and has more than proven itself.

As far as the general opinion goes, most agree on the internet that the milled/stamped AK hold some accuracy and service life over the stamped AKM, but also agree that it's negligible. Personally I wouldn't worry much about the life of it as an AKM is expected to be in service 30+ years under relatively harsh conditions. That's the military FA ones at that. There really isn't much stress put on the receiver itself aside from the bolt carrier banging around in it and the forces put on the axis pins by the FCG. All the real pressure is between the barrel and the trunion lugs. I'm kinda suprised no one has milled one from aluminum with steel rails put in it.


  • Administrator
  • SKS Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 26479
  • نعم أنا كافرة, شكور ل يسأل!
    • Gary's Gun Shop LLC - Torrington WY
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2011, 10:35:37 AM »
Just to echo what has been said already,  milled  versions have less flex, but that does not automatically translate to more accuracy. They do seem smoother in function but its not really a noticeable advantage when shooting.  They tend to weigh more, but that is also negligible for most people as very few of us will wear out any AK, or any rifle for that matter. 
When you become outraged at a man who encourages you to abide by your conscience, it means your conscience has already condemned you.

Reality is that which when you refuse to believe, or stop believing in it, doesn't cease to exist.


  • SKS Plinker
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2011, 05:52:31 PM »
I would also add that milled rifles are generally heavier too.  I prefer my milled underfolder to stamped ones, because the weight soaks up the recoil better and it is nicer to shoot. 


  • SKS Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 284
    • Lest We Forget
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2011, 03:32:02 PM »
Having both, if I had to pack one all day... I'd go stamped, but milled does have a certain sexiness and intrinsic value imho
All else being equal, if I had to pick just one... I would go milled every time.

Arsenal Bulgaria w/blond wood

Romanian SAR1 (stamped)

« Last Edit: December 04, 2011, 04:08:07 PM by Briar »
CCW and C&R


  • Board Supporter
  • SKS Gunsmith
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
  • Cheap plastic surgery! Contact Old Outlaw!
Re: Milled vs. Stamped Receiver
« Reply #8 on: December 11, 2011, 11:07:54 PM »
Stamped are lighter saving almost two pounds to the total weight! Having it my way i would go milled just for the fact of a one piece construction is always more appealing to me.
"For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security."
Thomas Jefferson