AR vs AK pistol

[Refleks]

Now that the ATF has confirmed that it's ok to shoulder a buffer tube and/or sigbrace, and that you can go to a pistol to a rifle and back to a pistol so long as you don't create an NFA item in the process, I've recently had an itch for an AR or AK pistol but I'm torn on what to get.

AR Platform...

Even though I plan on getting a sig brace, I really like that the AR15 has a buffer tube already, especially if they change their mind on the sig brace in the future.

 

I do plan on getting into reloading eventually but 5.56mm isn't cheap, and out of a short barrel it's critical to buy decent expanding ammunition since FMJ may not ever reach fragmenting velocity which drives up the cost.  .300 blackout is even more expensive, although it does better in a short barrel, and if I ever decide to suppress it would be nice.  On the other hand, if I go .300 blackout and don't suppress I might as well go 7.62 x 39 which is similar ballistically with cheaper ammo.

 

AK Platform

This seems like it would be cheaper to get started in AND cheaper to feed in the long run.  PAP M92 and an AK sig brace and there you have it, inexpensive to set up and inexpensive to feed.  Big downside is that it's a little longer than some AR pistol setups, and if they change their mind on the legality of the sig brace it's not particularly useful anymore (whereas with an AR there's always the buffer tube...)

[c.a.willard]

couple of things.  Century makes a SB47 brace that is similar in design to sigs brace.  I know there are folks out there that are attaching buffer tubes to AK pistols and using the sig version.  There are also some utilizing the century international variant.  I would recommend doing some research on legalities as it regards AK variants. We know it is perfectly legal to install and shoulder on a AR pistol and that the brace does not change the weapons classification.  However i am not sure if the same would hold true to the AK platform, especially with adding the buffer tube.  

 

As you well know the buffer tube on an AR pattern pistol is part of the action of the firearm.  Since it is not part of the action on an AK pistol i am not sure if this would be enough to constitute a design change. 

 

If it were me i would either A, stick to the AR as the legalities are out there and covered in writing already, or send an email to the ATF with an inquiry. 

[Oh Shoot]

couple of things.  Century makes a SB47 brace that is similar in design to sigs brace.  I know there are folks out there that are attaching buffer tubes to AK pistols and using the sig version.  There are also some utilizing the century international variant.  I would recommend doing some research on legalities as it regards AK variants. We know it is perfectly legal to install and shoulder on a AR pistol and that the brace does not change the weapons classification.  However i am not sure if the same would hold true to the AK platform, especially with adding the buffer tube. 

 

1. Nothing attached to the butt of a firearm has every been ruled illegal except a stock on a short barreled firearm or device that allows more than one bullet to be fired from one trigger pull.

 

2. the SIG brace as been ruled as not a stock when attached to "a firearm" (not just an "AR firearm") and that firing "a pistol" from the shoulder with it is also not illegal (not just an "AR pistol").

 

3. Thus, the brace and anything that would attach it are not illegal separately or together on any pistol.

 

That's why the AK version has not required a separate letter.

 

At this point about all the ATF could do to reverse its two decisions on the matter and thus to make it illegal on any firearm is to declare that the SIG brace is indeed actually a stock, and oops sorry we blew it. :)

 

- OS

Edited May 26, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[teecro]

Was going to reply pretty much what OS has commented.... The idea of attaching a buffer tube to the AK by numerous means has been "tested" by many; take a look at the forum AKFILES and you will see. That being said going the brace route on the AR does not add to its length but in doing so on the AK it adds around 9 odd inches so least be warned that it will be rather large. Having both I will comment that the AR is quite light when compared with the AK. Overall cost of the rounds in the 5.56 is a little higher but really if your going to let a dime per round more change your mind then you might as well find another hobby...

 

The ARP now sports a KAK buffer tube and SIG brace as well as a few other choice goodies and the AKP is sporting a coat of stealthly black truck bed liner on the wood  a shorter under rail and will soon have a sidefolding SIG brace too...

 

 

Edited May 27, 2014 by teecro

[Smith]

IMO, while they are cool, AR pistols essentially get turned into an expensive to shoot .22 mag as far as effectiveness goes. A few more accessories but it's more a novelty than usable weapon for anything other than range use. AK pistols, in x39, don't lose hardly any velocity and maintain their effectiveness across the entire useable range of a standard barrel length AK. As to the brace buffers tube issue, don't think it's an issue due to what OS spoke to above.

[teecro]

.... but it's more a novelty than usable weapon for anything other than range use.....

 

Yep I have no qualms with calling mine "range toys" because they are and I have them simply because I can....

[c.a.willard]

1. Nothing attached to the butt of a firearm has every been ruled illegal except a stock on a short barreled firearm or device that allows more than one bullet to be fired from one trigger pull.

 

2. the SIG brace as been ruled as not a stock when attached to "a firearm" (not just an "AR firearm") and that firing "a pistol" from the shoulder with it is also not illegal (not just an "AR pistol").

 

3. Thus, the brace and anything that would attach it are not illegal separately or together on any pistol.

 

That's why the AK version has not required a separate letter.

 

At this point about all the ATF could do to reverse its two decisions on the matter and thus to make it illegal on any firearm is to declare that the SIG brace is indeed actually a stock, and oops sorry we blew it. :)

 

- OS

I understand that the brace does not constitute a stock, my worry would be does adding the non essential buffer tube to an AK constitute a stock.   Also just as a general FYI both ATF letters specifically mention AR type weapons

[teecro]

I understand that the brace does not constitute a stock, my worry would be does adding the non essential buffer tube to an AK constitute a stock.   Also just as a general FYI both ATF letters specifically mention AR type weapons

 

The SB47 as built incorporates a non essential buffer tube like devise and carries the same letter from the BATF

 

It carries the same letter as it too was submitted to the BATF and they deemed it as legal as the SB15 brace....

[Wingshooter]

 
 

Teecro, what length barrel do you have on that ARP? Looks good

[teecro]

7.5" Batman with a very short linier comp to direct gas and sound forward as much as possible...

[Oh Shoot]

....Also just as a general FYI both ATF letters specifically mention AR type weapons

 

No, for YOUR info, though AR config was mentioned in the questions and/or submission, the wording in the decisions do not mention AR at all:

 

First one to Alex Bosco:

 

"Base on our evaluation, FTB finds that the submitted forearm brace, when attached to a firearm, does not convert that weapon to be fired from the shoulder and would not alter the classification of a pistol or other firearm."

 

Second one to Joe Bradley:

 

"...we have determined that firing a pistol from the shoulder would not cause the pistol to be reclassified as an SBR."

 

Nowhere are the decisions limited to an AR type pistol -- words do mean things, and quite precisely so in the legal realm.

 

- OS

[c.a.willard]

 Going back and rereading the first letter i realized my error as it only mentions that the brace is molded to fit an AR, the question was not asked about AR's in particular.

 

And again my concern would not be the brace, either the SB 15 or 47, but rather using the SB15 on an AK pattern pistol as that would require installing a separate buffer tube assembly that is not covered under any of the letters.   I probably could have worded that better in my first post.  

[Oh Shoot]

And again my concern would not be the brace, either the SB 15 or 47, but rather using the SB15 on an AK pattern pistol as that would require installing a separate buffer tube assembly that is not covered under any of the letters.   I probably could have worded that better in my first post.  

 

- AKs do not need a buffer tube to attach a SIG brace, although that is one method of doing it with an adapter to the trunnion.

 

- SIG sells a piston 5.56 AR with buffer tube unnecessary for its operation specifically to allow attachment of the SIG brace.

 

- SIG sells a .22LR AR pistol with buffer tube unnecessary for its operation specifically to allow attachment of the SIG brace.

 

Methinks you fret about future decisions that have already been circumvented by previous ones. The brace is legal "when attached to a firearm". No limitations on attachment type was specified in the ruling.

 

- OS

[c.a.willard]

I guess that makes since, I do tend to worry to much.

[KKing]

This conversation makes me want to grab one of the .223 versions of the AK pistol when they go on sale for about $350. Would be a neat little shooter with the brace on it

[Oh Shoot]

This conversation makes me want to grab one of the .223 versions of the AK pistol when they go on sale for about $350. Would be a neat little shooter with the brace on it

 

Don't really see why ya wouldn't stay with 7.62x39 with AK pistol myself, though. Quite a bit better bite for the bark.

 

- OS

Edited May 27, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[KKing]

Don't really see why ya wouldn't stay with 7.62x39 with AK pistol myself, though. Quite a bit better bite for the bark.

- OS

Oh I agree ballistics wise. For me it's just a caliber thing. If I had a AK anymore and stocked x39, I'd definitely go that route. I plan to add an AK back to the collection this year, but if I bought the pistol tomorrow I'd have to go with the 5.56. It would be a sub 100 yard plinker for me anyway, just another fun gun. If I were wanting to use it in any sort of defensive role, I'm with you on it needing to be a 7.62x39 so there's minimal velocity loss Edited May 27, 2014 by KKing

[Refleks]

You guys have convinced me, I think I have decided to get both :D hehe

[austin7.62]

As mentioned above, the 7.62x39 performs better out of a short barrel, and the ammo is cheap. What's not to love??