View Single Post
  #3  
Old 08-08-2014, 11:35 PM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,688
Default

I greatly appreciate the feedback, gentlemen. I especially appreciate the subject matter expertise on gun smithing.

I don’t think I did a good job of explaining the mechanism and thought process I see behind bringing AK-74 (possibly among other rifles) to the US for resale on the civilian market. The two principal goals would be a modest revenue stream that could be used to support US allies (albeit very modestly) and building some domestic involvement in the war among people not involved in the arms industry. By the end of October, 1995 the PRC should find herself in possession of a significant stock of AK-74, among other weapons. By this point in the real world, the AK-101 had been introduced. I’m not yet prepared to comment on whether this system would have been introduced in the Twilight v1 chronology. However, I’m imagining that some enterprising individual suggests buying some of these rifles from the PRC and modifying them for sale on the US civilian market. I’m imagining, perhaps fancifully, that someone would have crunched the numbers on costs to figure out whether these reworked rifles could have turned a profit.

Congress could be convinced to allow the rifles into the country for sale on the civilian market as a special effort to support our Chinese comrades. China gets some money from selling the rifles to the US, which the PRC promptly spends on materiel from the US. The US government taxes the rifles at every step in their transition from China to the hands of eager buyers in the US. The tax revenues, though comparatively modest, can be earmarked for something or other that will get Congressmen who haven’t bought into the idea on board.

So what I’m gathering from the commentary above is that the reboring job would be difficult because the tolerances would be very tight. How difficult is difficult? On the other hand, what does it cost to make a new 5.56 barrel when you’re making 50,000? I honestly don’t know. One thing I’m not understanding is why increasing the diameter of the bore by 0.08mm makes the barrel much thinner such that thinness would be an issue.

I see from the link provided that the magazine compatibility issue can be overcome. This, and a new trigger group, would enable a rebuilt AK-74 to enter the civilian market. At what cost? Would it be cheaper to rebore or cheaper to replace the barrel? How much support would the civilian market show for AK-74 at various cost options? Would the civilian market accept a new barrel? Would they accept a rebored barrel? Would one see both options at different prices? I am assuming that a certain segment of the American populace would be eager consumers of rifles formerly owned by Soviet troops. I’m sure a range of opinion would exist regarding the virtues and evils of converting the rifles to fire 5.56N, as well as replacing other features like the hand guard, etc. My concern comes back to what the costs of the minimum rebuilding necessary for the rifles to fire 5.56N, use M16 magazines, and fire on semi only would be and whether the US market would be sufficiently robust at this level of expense to justify the investment on the part of the firms doing the work and resale. I don’t know the answer, but I’d like to. Having a shop doing this work someplace in Nevada would help equip the Shogun’s forces with rifles well suited for the environment.
__________________
"We're not innovating. We're selectively imitating." June Bernstein, Acting President of the University of Arizona in Tucson, November 15, 1998.
Reply With Quote