PDA

View Full Version : Replacement irons for a featureless Saiga?


mhswlee
07-05-2012, 11:57 AM
Hi, so I recently acquired a featureless Saiga. I slapped on a UTG side mount and a budget red dot sight because I hated the irons and liked the idea of a readily removable optic. However, I noticed that I could not get a cheek weld with the sporter stock the way it is, so I added a cheek riser. (It adds roughly 5/8s of an inch in height, so it's sort of like an AR--very comfortable.)

But now I have a problem: I cannot use the iron sights! xD

So, to the point: I am trying to find an elevated iron sight replacement that allows me to remove my side mount if my red dot dies without having to remove the dust cover. I have done a lot of research on the matter, and have not yet found an ideal solution.

I was wondering if there were any featureless Saiga users that use a side mount who have also opted to replace their iron sights. (Suggestions from others who are knowledgeable in this area are, of course, appreciated.)

If it is any help, here is the gun as it looks now (sorry for the quality):

http://i695.photobucket.com/albums/vv319/mswlee/Saiga762-2.jpg

Yeah. The purists are probably gagging now.

--

EDIT: I forgot that I should add some things that I considered and am curious about:

I looked into using HK sights, but I want the rear half of my dust cover exposed for the side mount removal. (Plus, I find seating irons on my dust cover to be haphazard, since the thing does have a tiny wiggle.) Is there a way to run HK sights with a rear iron sight forward of the dust cover?

And what about flip-up sights? Is there a flip-up sight designed to be forward mounted for the AK? Or perhaps a flip up sight that can be seated in the rear sight block in place of the old rear sight blade?

JBaus
07-05-2012, 12:33 PM
funny you should mention something about iron sights. I literally just watched a video covered by NutNFancy on Youtube where he spoke about a set of new iron sights that he placed on his AK47. This maybe something to looking into or consider.....Below is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9aFATFbJ04

Another thing that you may want to look into is attaching a Kydex Grip to a pistol grip (Youtube has a video) which would still keep your gun featureless and you can place a forend grip and not have to place a bullet button. I was looking into doing that with a 7.62 Saiga since I found a pistol grip and adjustable stock that would fit in place of the sporter stock.

And yes, we are going to hear from the Purists about keeping an AK an AK, but technically, Saiga is a different rifle that originated from the same factory where AK's are built. It's like how Ford has Volvo parts.......

Keep us up to date with more pics progressing to the final finished rifle.

TZL
07-05-2012, 1:23 PM
Just ditch the side mount and put the red dot on the quad rail

Dr Rockso
07-05-2012, 2:06 PM
RS Regulate has co-witnessing sidemounts for red dot sights. If your micro red dot has the same mounting pattern as the Aimpoint T1/H1 or Primary Arms models you could just slap that on, remove the riser, and keep your stock irons. I have the full size red dot version with an Aimpoint M3 and couldn't be more satisfied.

I have not seen elevated iron sights for AKs. I'd be kinda surprised if they exist since the AK's height over bore allows suppressors to be run with regular sights, which is the usual reason for tall sights in the first place.

mhswlee
07-05-2012, 2:21 PM
Just ditch the side mount and put the red dot on the quad rail

Four things:
1) I wanted to be able to remove my red dot sight whenever I wanted.
2) I hate the AK iron sights.
3) I don't want to make the front half of my gun any heavier than it already is.
4) You do not get co-witness even with a quad rail. I mean, seriously, I would need a gas piston mount to get a solid 1/3 co-witness.

Lagduf
07-05-2012, 2:59 PM
RS REGULATE.

If you have a side optic rail then this is the optic mount you need. You can cowitness the dot with the iron sights.

http://www.rsregulate.com/products.php

mhswlee
07-05-2012, 3:13 PM
@Dr Rockso, Lagduf
The RS Regulate looks interesting, but I would like to point out that the purpose of the thread is really to look for elevated iron sights rather than a new side mount.

I'm not terribly interested in cowitnessing the terrible AK iron sights as they are. Indeed, I would rather stick to my UTG 5th generation (it's low mount, but not as low as the RS Regulate AKML), and not co-witness at all than to have to use these things.

SoCal1
07-05-2012, 3:39 PM
I'm in the process of building my featureless AK47 and will probably go with these:

http://www.onesourcetactical.com/samsonflip-upfrontrearsightsethk-style.aspx#.T_YhRjF5mSM

The front sight wills go as far forward as I can get it on this hand guard:

http://www.onesourcetactical.com/samsonflip-upfrontrearsightsethk-style.aspx#.T_YhRjF5mSM

And the rear sight as far back as I can on this:

http://www.texasweaponsystems.com/id1.html

The problem with mounting a HK style rear sight forward of the dust cover is that the rear peep sight is intended to be close to the eye.

mhswlee
07-05-2012, 4:23 PM
The problem with mounting a HK style rear sight forward of the dust cover is that the rear peep sight is intended to be close to the eye.

Exactly my dilemma.

Those dust cover mounts are definitely interesting. But like I said, I really want to be able to take my side mount on and off without a tool. That is one of the appeals of the AK system.

Richard Erichsen
07-05-2012, 4:31 PM
I'm in the process of building my featureless AK47 and will probably go with these:

http://www.onesourcetactical.com/samsonflip-upfrontrearsightsethk-style.aspx#.T_YhRjF5mSM

Way too tall. They were made for AR15s.

The front sight wills go as far forward as I can get it on this hand guard:

http://www.onesourcetactical.com/samsonflip-upfrontrearsightsethk-style.aspx#.T_YhRjF5mSM

Your distance between sights will be less than a typical Krinkov. Are you sure you want to do that?

And the rear sight as far back as I can on this:

http://www.texasweaponsystems.com/id1.html

Not a great sight. TWS got a lot of questions about what to do about a rear sight and came up with that fixed aluminum aperture as a cheap and dirty solution. I bought one and hate it.

There are alternatives. You'll need to increase the height of the front post by turning it out to use the rear aperature sight for picatinny railed covers like the TWS (there is one other, I can't recall the name, but it's legit), but I have found this aperture to be the best option:

http://www.newenglandcustomgun.com/

Second from the top. It comes with two apertures, but any Williams-style aperture can screw into it, with pinpoint small apertures for distance, or larger apertures for quicker acquisition (the bigger of the two that comes with was way too large for my needs).

The problem with mounting a HK style rear sight forward of the dust cover is that the rear peep sight is intended to be close to the eye.

The Polish Beryl has a flip up front sight. If you really want something to flip out of the way for a low mounted optic, I'd suggest the Beryl method is the better approach.

R

Richard Erichsen
07-05-2012, 4:36 PM
Exactly my dilemma.

Those dust cover mounts are definitely interesting. But like I said, I really want to be able to take my side mount on and off without a tool. That is one of the appeals of the AK system.

You do realize the TWS Dogleg 2 hinges to the rear sight base, using a pin through the old sight base as an axis point? When you press the "button" that is the spring guide assembly and holds the top cover firmly down, this releases the cover. It is not the original spring guide assembly you may be familiar with, a new, more precisely made recoil spring guide assembly comes with the top cover and is slightly oversized, requiring a degree of filing or lapping to get it to fit. The bottom of this assembly slots into the inverted T cross section of the top of the rear trunnion.

If you want to inspect the gizzards or field strip, push the recoil assembly forward with your thumb and swing the cover open, proceed as normal with bolt carrier removal, selector switch and FCG. You can't misplace the cover with this system and NO tools are needed for releasing or locking.

R

SoCal1
07-05-2012, 4:39 PM
With the extended hand guard I think the sight radius would ok. It would look something like this:

157759

This picture is with the TWS hand guard.

Richard Erichsen
07-05-2012, 4:49 PM
funny you should mention something about iron sights. I literally just watched a video covered by NutNFancy on Youtube where he spoke about a set of new iron sights that he placed on his AK47. This maybe something to looking into or consider.....Below is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9aFATFbJ04

Tech-Sights AK100S and AK200S. I prefer the single aperture 200 series with windage and elevation so I can zero to a specific range and leave it alone. AK100 series has two apertures for distance and no room for the elevation knob, but is windage adjustable.

One precaution is that these sights are so adjustable you need to center the front sight post and lock them down with threadlock so you will only be adjusting from the rear. You do not want to chase adjustments at both front and rear. The rear is knob adjustable, so once re-centered you'll never need to use the sight adjustment tool for the front sight again.

The top cover sheet metal parkerizing doesn't match all finishes and may need to be refinished to match. For example, parkerized doesn't match black enamaled rifles like the Saiga.

Finally, the top cover relies on a new recoil assembly guide that slots into the rear trunnion to allow a return to zero. You can expect to use jewelers files to get it to fit and it should be tight to avoid play and if you haven't replaced the spring on the recoil assembly before, it can get pretty exciting without vice grips or a helper.

As for tools - once fitted you can use the tip of a bullet to depress the spring loaded retaining pins on each side to pop the top, push it forward and pull straight up. It sounds more complicated than it is.

R

SURVIVOR619
07-05-2012, 4:50 PM
Tech-sights...

http://img.tapatalk.com/62b010c1-368f-c6b5.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk🔫

Richard Erichsen
07-05-2012, 4:55 PM
With the extended hand guard I think the sight radius would ok. It would look something like this:

157759

This picture is with the TWS hand guard.

That is a very expensive handguard for what it is. The tall sight line above the bore needs to be compensated for mentally at short range (your POI will be at least 2" below your POA), not something the AK suffers from ordinarily.

Co-witnessing always sounds like a great idea until you do it for awhile. I've come to appreciate why very few military weapons are configured to do so, it's distracting. With excellent iron sights like the Tech-Sights AK100 or AK200 series or the TWS DogLeg 2 with the NECG adjustable peep sight, I prefer tall rings/high Kalinka BP02 so that you can change your head position for the optic and lower it to use the iron sights beneath. Try it for awhile, you might find as I did it may be the better solution.

R

mhswlee
07-05-2012, 5:08 PM
Picking up on what Richard Erichsen pointed out, I find co-witnessing to be rather distracting as well. It really clutters up the limited sight picture that you have.

But what does everyone think about angled iron sights?

Example:

http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/xti_angle_mount_300ppi-tfb1.jpg

The idea is that you can still use your sights, even if your red dot sight shatters and obstructs your above-bore line of sight. In a fire fight, I imagine you do not have much time to remove a sight, even quick release ones like the AK/Saiga side mount or the quick release AR mounts. Obviously though, you won't be shooting competition with these things. xD

Any that people would recommend for a Saiga?

Richard Erichsen
07-05-2012, 5:28 PM
Picking up on what Richard Erichsen pointed out, I find co-witnessing to be rather distracting as well. It really clutters up the limited sight picture that you have.

But what does everyone think about angled iron sights?

Example:

http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/xti_angle_mount_300ppi-tfb1.jpg

The idea is that you can still use your sights, even if your red dot sight shatters and obstructs your above-bore line of sight. In a fire fight, I imagine you do not have much time to remove a sight, even quick release ones like the AK/Saiga side mount or the quick release AR mounts. Obviously though, you won't be shooting competition with these things. xD

Any that people would recommend for a Saiga?

I think this may not be the optimal rifle for that given that rails for the platform top $350 (a typical AK costs less than $500) and the type of sights that would make sense to be on a 45 degree adapter. I'll get to the example image in a moment.

There is no cheap way to get into that configuration. The 45 degree angled iron sights would need to be on a rail of one kind or another, and it's going to be over $300 whether using the TWS long handguard jobbie plus the top cover, or an Ultimak railed gas tube and a TWS top cover plus the cost of the 45 degree angled adapters, or fixed notch and post sights similar to what is in your pics (more for the nicer tritium vial equipped night sights).

The most common type of sights used on those 45 degree angled sights is the other issue of concern: NOTCH AND POST SIGHTS! Unfortunately, these are the same sort of sights the OP was trying to replace on his AK, minus the distance adjustment and with a much shorter sight radius.

R

mhswlee
07-06-2012, 12:39 AM
@Richard Erichsen
Wait... I have a set of quad rails... those won't work?

I was just providing an example of angled iron sights. I don't want this exact set up.

And I am the OP. xD

zfields
07-06-2012, 12:52 AM
Richard,
Parabelum arms is the other company putting out the dust cover. TWS is also releasing a version that uses a sight picture similar to the standard leaf rear sight.

OP,
You are fighting a losing battle my friend. Best way I could think of doing this is dump the cheapy quad rail, replace it with a ultimak or Midwest industries setup to cowitness the sights, then replace your rear with a tech sight.

All the flip up sights are going to put your sight over bore ridiculously high.

Richard Erichsen
07-06-2012, 7:47 AM
@Richard Erichsen
Wait... I have a set of quad rails... those won't work?

I was just providing an example of angled iron sights. I don't want this exact set up.

And I am the OP. xD

So you are - serves me right for not scrolling back and checking. ;)

In any case, angled sights are an exercise unlikely to solve your fundamental gripe about the notch and post sight picture.

Your quad rail may or may not be adequate, but the configuration you have in mind is jumping through hoops for what should be a straightforward problem/solution.

For a low sight line, the Beryl front sight can be folded down out of the way (military users appear to share the view co-witnessing is a bad thing). The TWS top cover with the NECG or the Tech-Sights AK100 or AK200 series will solve the back end of the equation.

R

Richard Erichsen
07-06-2012, 7:47 AM
Richard,
Parabelum arms is the other company putting out the dust cover. TWS is also releasing a version that uses a sight picture similar to the standard leaf rear sight.

OP,
You are fighting a losing battle my friend. Best way I could think of doing this is dump the cheapy quad rail, replace it with a ultimak or Midwest industries setup to cowitness the sights, then replace your rear with a tech sight.

All the flip up sights are going to put your sight over bore ridiculously high.

Thanks Z, the name always slips my mind. Agree on your summary above.

R

Dr Rockso
07-06-2012, 8:22 AM
You are fighting a losing battle my friend. Best way I could think of doing this is dump the cheapy quad rail, replace it with a ultimak or Midwest industries setup to cowitness the sights, then replace your rear with a tech sight.

All the flip up sights are going to put your sight over bore ridiculously high.

Agreed, but a budget red dot mounted to a gas tube rail will likely be cooked to death in short order. The cheapest route is still a cowitnessing side mount like the RS Regulate product. I'm not sure about the AKML version, but the full size one seems to give me a cowitness a bit lower than 1/3, maybe more like 1/4. I find it to be pretty unobtrusive while still having access to the backup irons if needed, and the standard AK irons are going to be better backup sights than something like those angle mounted notch and post sights mentioned previously.

morthrane
07-06-2012, 9:49 AM
Four things:
2) I hate the AK iron sights.

Out of curiosity, why, and what do you normally prefer?


The idea is that you can still use your sights, even if your red dot sight shatters and obstructs your above-bore line of sight. In a fire fight, I imagine you do not have much time to remove a sight, even quick release ones like the AK/Saiga side mount or the quick release AR mounts. Obviously though, you won't be shooting competition with these things. xD

Any that people would recommend for a Saiga?
Seems like much effort for nearly no return. Can't remember where I read it, but instead of getting fancy weird angled irons, I'm going to just try to remember to spend time at the range practicing using the charge handle as an aiming point.

zfields
07-06-2012, 10:32 AM
Agreed, but a budget red dot mounted to a gas tube rail will likely be cooked to death in short order. The cheapest route is still a cowitnessing side mount like the RS Regulate product. I'm not sure about the AKML version, but the full size one seems to give me a cowitness a bit lower than 1/3, maybe more like 1/4. I find it to be pretty unobtrusive while still having access to the backup irons if needed, and the standard AK irons are going to be better backup sights than something like those angle mounted notch and post sights mentioned previously.

That's true about the optic burn out. The midwest set up keeps it off the tube, though not by much. Not sure if a rs mount would work with a tech site though if the op is set on swapping irons.

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk 2

BigfootHunter
07-06-2012, 4:18 PM
I have the Tech Sights with an Ultimak on my Saiga 223 and I am considering going back to the factory rear sight leaf since the only way to get the rear sight locked in and eliminate any wobble is to really tighten down the set screw. The cover they give you is also kind of a pain to remove as it has those little spring loaded tabs you have to fuss with. It's nice that the cover comes off, but to actually remove the bolt you have to remove the rear sight completely. I really wish they would have just made that a fixed piece with the set screw, and then allowed the recoil spring to stick into the front of it and be removed that way. Yeah you would still have the funky rear cover for that to work but at least you wouldn't have to disturb the rear sight to fieldstrip the rifle.

The Ultimak allows my Aimpoint H-1 to lower 1/3 co-witness with the tech sights and I don't find that distracting (absolute co-witness I could see being annoying or cluttered). On a side note, I couldn't find a cheapie red dot that would work, as most of the ones I looked at had the emitting diode at the 6 o'clock position of the tube which interferes with the view of the front sight (my Konus definitely had this and as such is waiting for something else to be put on).

Richard Erichsen
07-07-2012, 8:57 AM
I have the Tech Sights with an Ultimak on my Saiga 223 and I am considering going back to the factory rear sight leaf since the only way to get the rear sight locked in and eliminate any wobble is to really tighten down the set screw.

There is so much variation in AKs that the set screw is one of the last resorts for tightening it up. On the Yugos I never needed it because the recoil spring assembly took some filing to get it to fit in the top of the trunnion and when it did it was tight enough I have to smack it to get it completely out of the T shaped groove in the rear trunnion when the cover is off. It was similarly tight on my Bulgarian AK74M1.

The cover they give you is also kind of a pain to remove as it has those little spring loaded tabs you have to fuss with. It's nice that the cover comes off, but to actually remove the bolt you have to remove the rear sight completely.

Yes, but since it always returns to the same position, that doesn't seem to matter. If you have it dialed in and a tight fit, it will hold zero as designed.

There are several users who forgo the spring loaded pins and either remove the spring loaded pins entirely and rely exclusively on the close fit in the groove behind the rear sight base, or use a short cable with pins that just press into place. To remove the top cover, you would yank the pins by their cable connection and the top pops off. I suppose the downside is you could lose the cabled up pins. If you use the point of an FMJ bullet, you can depress one side, hold it with one hand and then press the other, the whole time pushing towards the rear sight base and it will release. It takes a few dozen times to master the technique, but when you have it comes off easily.

I really wish they would have just made that a fixed piece with the set screw, and then allowed the recoil spring to stick into the front of it and be removed that way. Yeah you would still have the funky rear cover for that to work but at least you wouldn't have to disturb the rear sight to fieldstrip the rifle.

I really don't find removing the rear sight problematic given that it seems to maintain zero just fine.

R