I have a WASR 10/63 Romarm/Cugir that I purchased “new” about 5-6 years ago. It shoots every kind of ammo great, with never a malfunction. I know it isn’t the quality of an Arsenal. However, want to know how long the WASR would last in battle scenario relative to a higher quality AK 47 such as the Arsenal. I guess high round count experiences would be somewhat telling. Looking forward to a healthy discussion on this or a related issue. Thanks.
I’d only worry about the US made compliance parts. The commie bits will still be going for long after you run out of ammo.
The Arsenal AKs get you better fit & finish, hardchromed gas blocks, and nicer stocks. Durability wise, there ain’t much difference. I’ve owned both and still have the Arsenal rifles, but that’s because of the fit and finish thing, not because I broke the Romy product.
H
The big difference is the mag wells. Typically on the WASRs the modification is pretty rough and you run into problems with magazine fit and the ability to hang a magazine wrong getting it wedged pretty good.
Totally agree. But if you have a WASR that actually works it’s probably going to keep working.
I like to have spare firing pins and extractors for everything I own. But I’m just paranoid.
H
Sure. But given the potential mag change issue I have a hard time trusting them. I’d rather spend the extra money on a SAR rifle with dimples.
I like my Arsenal ak but honestly I will probably run out of ammo and money for ammo before my wasr goes tits up.
Thanks for all the responses so far. I did forget to mention that mine was imported by Century, if that makes any difference. I was also hoping some would come along with experience with high round counts on the WASR.
(no disrespect intended but…)
my question is why would you trust a rifle that you know is “sub par” in comparision? or why would you consider it your go to rifle in a long term fight?
why not just spend the $200 or $300 difference and buy a waffen or an arsenal?
espicially if its your go to gun? one of your most valuable pieces of equipment, and you just want “good enough”???
I already have the rifle. I do trust it completely because it has never failed. The simple question is with regard to the longevity of the WASR after numerous rounds. “Good enough” is absolutely fine with me as long as the rifle has reliability after numerous rounds. I don’t care that it may not be as well finished as higher end rifles. All I care about is, well, what I said above.
7.62x39 isn’t much of a barrel burner.
Unless you are dumping RPK drums back to back, barrel life will be very, very, VERY long.
Most of the time, when someone talks about trashed AK barrels they are talking about the non-chrome-lined Yugos.
I’ve seen some old AKs though with worn rifling that spent a bit too long in full auto land during what must have been some very successful soccer seasons. 
Most of the “G” model Romanian AKs (Semi Only) that showed external rust and worn FCG parts had pretty great barrels as evidence.
Because with a Waffen Works he is getting an inferior and out of spec US manufactured barrel. With the WASR, except for a portion of one year’s importation, he is getting a CHF, properly spec’d barrel from a former East Bloc factory.
The receiver is the issue with the WASRs, but that too has been addressed in later importation, and is a simple point of inspection.
I thought only the new WASRs had chrome lining.
Only a few in the middle don’t have Romanian CHF barrels.
I believe the American barreled WASRs are contained to a few months of the “10/63” series, due to their use of surplus barrels and the BATFE’s new interpretation of “non sporting barrels.”
Cugir was honest about their origin and once they used up their bench stock of “barrels that touched a machine gun” they are now being imported with fresh barrels off the line.
I’ve had a Romanian Intrac MK II/Romak II 5.45x39 since the late 90’s. It came in as a complete rifle with the goofy thumbhole stock. I had it converted to an AK-74 clone with American parts to make it 922r compliant. It functions, and shoots great, and has been a reliable an accurate rifle. As someone else said the cosmetics may not be up to Arsenal standards, but it’s a good AK.
I’m curious as to the barrels and parts used by wasr designed rifles. Is there that much of a difference in a wasr purchased today vs one 3 years ago? 5 years ago? I’ve not seen much at least from century arms to tell any difference. They are all cheap but function and that’s the attitude I’ve held with them. Maybe I should look at them with a different attitude…
i thought the new ESS barrels were made to spec. not CHF but still CL. and ive heard nothing bad yet, and mine shoots well.
Thanks for your input. Just some follow-up questions.
- what was the issue with the receiver that has been addressed in later importation and what is later importation?
- what is the “simple point of inspection” re the reciever?
- please elaborate on the CHF and what year was the portion to which you refer.
Looking forward to your response.
I have about 15k rounds through my wasr and it has spent most of its life in the back of a mule being abused. Never skipped a beat and it is pretty accurate. It also has a very well cut magwell compared to other wasr I have played with. I mostly shoot it a lot cause I am not worried about wearing it out or breaking it and the ammo is super cheap. I definitely trust it. Keeping it traditional it is very light and one of the best brush guns I have carried. I just took a buck with it last weekend too. That being said I have seen some of them that really suck… Considering they are not as cheap as they use to be… I would just get an arsenal if I was buying a new ak. If you have one that works it probably will work.
I treat my Wasr like it owes me money. Throw it around, never clean it, drag it through brush, feed it horrible ammo, and it still acts right. Wasr’s welded piston(can tell if issue if piston heavily wears on one side, I was told), canted sights(vids on how to properly fix), not a matching part # on entire gun(ya, your just stuck with that) prove quality control can be iffy, but fixs/upgrades can be done (I personally like project guns) if worried. Most don’t and never have a problem. Cant really give accurate round count on my Wasr, because it has been passed around my family as a reliable brush gun. I would not allow a gun to go anywhere but a pawn shop if wasn’t reliable, and sure as hell not going to let family use it unless it runs Perfect… If can get Arsenal then great, if only can get Wasr then great. I don’t care who makes it, If I was going into a “battle scenario” weapon would be tried and true. Still I think training, not weapon would win the day.
Dimensional spec?
If they are not CHF, they are not to spec.
-
The WASR series comes into the US with a standard front trunnion and mag release and a single stack mag well. After US parts are installed, they are “opened up” to accept double stack mags. This can lead to some side-to-side wobble (exacerbated by the non-dimpled receiver). Later WASRs have more conservatively cut mag wells with less wobble, earlier ones vary.
-
The simple point of inspection is to lock in a standard Euro-pattern steel magazine and check the fit. If it’s too sloppy, you should probably pass… although the sloppy guns do apparently run from what I’ve heard.
-
Nobody but Century knows when the US barrels start and stop (maybe not event them). It is believed to be limited to the 10/63 series. I’m sure they really wish Cugir was as reckless and stupid as they are and just said, “We don’t know where these barrels came from!”
Thanks KalashniKEV for the responses to my specific questions. Thanks to the others as well.
As an additional thought, I closely inspected my WASR last night and observed that there is very slight cant to the gas block that is barely visible; however, I see that when my gas tube is off and I put the piston assembly in and just when it goes to go into the block the piston comes into contact with the right side of the block as opposed to going straight in. Will this be an issue of future problems or is this completely acceptable? I did not notice an abnormal wear on the piston or the gas block in the area of contact.