India should scrap AK 203 rifle and buy Trichy assault rifle

[WolfPack86]

Indian army must buy Trichy assault rifle

 

[SKC]

Indian army must buy Trichy assault rifle

In this format? No!
Needs change in stock used. No picatiny rails.

 

[Hari Sud]

Nonsense to dump the world’s best AK203 rifle whose basic mechanism dates back to 1945 and has worked so well that even the enemies love it. No the arguments to dump the deal is flimsy. Only input needed is how to speed up the project. For your information the Trichy Rifle and INSAS rifle come from the same group of people who could not keep the quality and brought bad name to the country.

Next best in Galil rifle, which is almost double the price.

 

[Johny_Baba]

in this form, definitely yes

i tell you what, if Thiruchirapilli factory guys have any "difficulties" in copying this style of hinged rail thing on Trichy, then they just better consult SSS Defense that provided that SVD upgrade kit to the armed forces,
as it also incorporated similar hinged rail thing for providing that upgrade

 

[SKC]

Nonsense to dump the world’s best AK203 rifle whose basic mechanism dates back to 1945 and has worked so well that even the enemies love it. No the arguments to dump the deal is flimsy. Only input needed is how to speed up the project. For your information the Trichy Rifle and INSAS rifle come from the same group of people who could not keep the quality and brought bad name to the country.

Next best in Galil rifle, which is almost double the price.

The basic principles of Assault Rifles remain the same.

both AR-15 and AK platforms are both old and most copyrights or IP rights are expired, and many private players are making new gen rifles based on both platforms.

 

[Hari Sud]

The basic principles of Assault Rifles remain the same.

both AR-15 and AK platforms are both old and most copyrights or IP rights are expired, and many private players are making new gen rifles based on both platforms.

‘No Country has been able to copy exactly like Ak47, although Bulgaria, China and India have tried but not as good.

 

[JBH22]

‘No Country has been able to copy exactly like Ak47, although Bulgaria, China and India have tried but not as good.

At last,some one said this. It would be hilarious to compare the Type 56 with Ak-47.
Ak 203 is good rifle looking into the purpose, our troop demographic profile and lastly qualitative jump from INSAS. It should give India good comfort for at least 2 decades.

 

[Johny_Baba]

all these contrarians and their larp of MUH ORIGINAL AK47 HURR DURR



they either don't understand AK platform at all or just being edgy for sake of it

 

[Johny_Baba]

all these contrarians and their larp of MUH ORIGINAL AK47 HURR DURR



they either don't understand AK platform at all or just being edgy for sake of it

last time someone larped similar bullshit about 4 years ago and i had to explain it in detail

These eastern Europeans Ak knock off are Inferior to the Russian original. Lt General Mikhail Timofeyvich Kalashnikov came up with such a brilliant design that even the Romanians or Bulgarians can’t copy it properly, there is bound to be a difference in quality between the original and the clones. Do you think that both IA's cancelled and the current tenders were meant for insas replacement only?

I don't agree with this A SINGLE BIT.

Those Romanian AKs we use en large are just copy of Ruskie AKMs,not a single thing is different between them except markings,and they're considered as high quality AKMs.

Vietnam war,US Army's M16 had to mostly face chinese made Type 56s,not russian AK-47/AKM in most cases,and we all know legends related to those incidents here.



Oh yeah ?

1.Valmet series rifles from Finland
2.Yugoslavian Zastava series of rifles from former Yugoslavia (currently made by serbians)
3.Chinese Type 56 series of rifles
4.East German MPi-K / MPi-KM rifles
5.Galil series rifles from Israel (based on Valmet but at very basics it's kalashnikov)

^All these are basically AK Copies (but i prefer to call them Kalashnikov Derivatives) and they're almost equal,if not better than russian made AK-47/AKMs.Some of these are far better than Russian made AK-47/AKM.

Finally,Indian INSAS too is an Kalashnikov Derivative.

Maybe you should visit some actual gun forums,read history behind these rifles,read those manuals and so of different AKs to understand it.All those stuff sold in the US to the civvies (whose videos you'll often find on the Youtube) has their receivers cut off and certain parts removed as per NFA regulations and so,so naturally it won't be that good compared to a full import gun.

This is how you' d receive a Russian AK-47 (this one's milled receiver,Type 2) "Parts Kit" in the US.

So if you wanna blame the gun,blame that particular build,not those authentic military version of the Eastern Euro AKs. Plus,many of such current import civilian rifles from these nations are specifically made 'export versions' for civilians so "your mileage may vary".

And i simply don't get your logic of Eastern Euro AKs being bad.

Which specific model are you referring to ? Romanian Pm.Md.63/65/90 ? Hungarian AK-63/AMD-65 ? Bulgarian AKK series (forerunner of current gen Arsenal Guns) ? Yugoslavian Zastava M70 and series ? Polish PMK/PMKM/Tantal/Beryl ?

O Unkil,

Original ones are good but what you wrote here,you specifically meant that.

View attachment 25552

Especially with that 2nd line on Kalashnikov's BRILLIANT DESIGN and "EVEN THE ROMANIANS OR BULGARIANS CAN'T COPY IT PROPERLY" thing.



To answer that,I'd simply say go and do a little bit of background research on their origins,actual combat reviews and so from different sources.

It all started with Warsaw Pact,where it was insisted by the USSR to all participant states to use common standardised ammos in their firearms,and at the time,7.62 x 39mm M43 was chosen to be used as standard issue assault rifle cartridge among all participants of the warsaw pact,rest other soviet cartridges like 7.62 x 54mmR,12.7 x 108mm,14.5 x 119mm etc were standardised for other category of firearms.

Now,to satisfy their requirements of firearms in these calibers,participants of the Warsaw Pact started making their own firearms in these calibers and even then USSR gave full support to this move (in form of technical assistance,transfer of technology,training the labour etc),

At those times,most of the nations opted Kalashnikov design to further maintain a commonality between the parts,with Czechoslovakia being a notable example as they opted for an indigenous firearm i.e. Vz-58.

So,after inception of AKM in 1959,many of these warsaw pact nations started manufacturing their own AKs there,and majority of these firearms were EXACT COPIES of the original AK-47 and newcomer AKM with only difference being in markings on them (Still,exceptions exist here,too,most notably Hungary and Yugoslavia

Take Romanian AKs for example..

Origin - > Before 1960s,Romania used to be dependent on then Soviet Union for their requirement of firearms and so,but finally at around 1963,they started manufacturing their own Kalashnikov based on then newly produced AKM. Their version of the Kalashnikov,called Pm.Md.63 (also called AIM) is EXACT COPY of the original AKM,not a single rivet is out of place between the two,difference being in the markings,only.

All further iterations of the romanian AKs are based on Pm.Md.63,including the Pm.Md.90 that we use in RR,

They've not only used it extensively in Romanian Defense Forces,but also exported it en masse to all others who're willing to pay,and these guns have seen tonnes of conflicts,battles,civil wars,gang wars,actual wars and what not and it's enough for testimony of its quality.

We had imported more than 1.5 Lakhs of these during 1990s,and since then it's been backbone of all kalashnikovs we have here. If they're so inferior to USSR/Russian AKs,why did we opted for that,when we could've simply got anything we want here ?

Now,Bulgarian AKs,

Just like Romania,Bulgaria too used to be dependent on others (mainly on Poland) for their requirements of the firearms,and likewise received helps/ToT and what not from these guys to start local production of their own kalashnikovs during mid-1960s.

These time these bulgarian guns are not exact copies of AKMs but based on Type-3 AK-47,and their version is called AKK which is copy of russian AK-47 Type 3 with difference being in markings.

Just like Romania,Bulgaria too have exported these AKK,AKKM and other domestically produced AKs en masse and these guns too have seen various conflicts etc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've given my reasoning here why i think these eastern european AK IMPOSTERS are quite equal to the original,in both this post and other post

Now,your turn,How do you conclude that these eastern europeans kalashnikovs are inferior to original Soviet/Russian made one ?

All former Eastern bloc and chinese type 56 AKM are considered good quality. They all share the same basic design with interchangeable components. Small arms quality is governed by the quality of factories and all these factories and production lines were set up by the soviets. All these rifles are comparable in quality because the AKM was a production friendly gun with components designed to be finished without advanced machining skills if you have the jigs in place.

UNCLE,NOW YOU'RE GETTING ANNOYING.

WITHOUT GIVING A SINGLE REASON BEHIND SUCH YOUR OPINIONS,HECK,NOT EVEN TRYING TO FIND ANSWERS ON YOUR OWN (ALL STUFF IS THERE ON THE INTERNET,GO AND FIND IT!) YOU'RE THROWING ALL THESE AT ME ?! DO YOU EVEN FIRST KNOW HOW THE KALASHNIKOV WORKS,TO START WITH ?

Anyway,



Because of economy of these eastern european nations (both before and after USSR times).

One of the major industry in all these Warsaw Pact states was export of the defense products.While the USSR was a big player to start with,all these small states were not that defense giants but they DID / DO have formidable small arms industries there,yet them being smaller economies is one of the main reason why their guns are cheaper compared to the original USSR/Russian made ones.



Depends on a lots of factors.

First of all,All USSR era eastern european AKs were/are indeed of good quality because of strong QC regulations set upon them due to the Warsaw Pact,so you can trust these USSR era stuff as of EQUAL (in some cases,like East German MPi-K / MPi-KM and so,even much better than) to the original Soviet/Russian stuff.

Real Thing started when USSR and Warsaw Pact fell like house of cards,and once tighter regulations became non-existent and in consequence of all these inferior quality stuff started being made and sold in the international market at even more cheaper than before just so they can have some bread to eat,and majority of such stuff started coming to the US market where many of these rifles were panned as being of inferior to the russian ones,as Russia,even after breakup of the USSR had quite good QC regulations and so on their small arms plants unlike their former warsaw pact friends.

Then,there is this civilian stuff being sold to the US and other markets where QC regulations were further screwed up like hell,then all NFA regulations set upon import stuff further screwed it all up so now they have to specifically make these stuff as per civilian standards.

Though after some time,their economies became stable again and other issues related to QC regulations were resolved,so now they're back to the original stuff.

Finally,at the very basics they were exact copies of AK-47s/AKMs as i stated in my posts above,so with proper QC Regulations they were/are able to make quite equal,if not better,quality of firearms to the original.Just because they were cheaper doesn't necessarily mean they're inferior,so please get over it!


SERIOUSLY,WHY AREN'T THESE CALLED AK-47 RIFLES ?

Ok,this is the question which could be made as long as you want,but i'll try to keep it as short as i can (because you're fuckin' annoying,Uncle,that's why).

What you call AK-47 and so,is actually a generic term,a common noun generally used to refer all Kalashnikov Derivatives mostly used where one is not sure of actual name of the rifle.

Now,coming to your question,WHY THESE RIFLES HAVE DIFFERENT NAMES ? BECAUSE THESE ARE DIFFERENT RIFLES MADE IN DIFFERENT NATIONS BASED ON SAME DESIGNS I.E. AK-47 AND/OR AKM !

All these designations have their own meanings,mostly initials mean their official designations and end years shows the year when production of all these firearms started.

Then there are language differences,as

AK - Abtomata Kalashnikova i.e. Kalashnikov's Automatic Rifle (even then,it's true translation is "Kalashnikov's Submachine Gun" or "Kalashnikov's Automatics",with Automatics term referring to Assault Rifle,Automatic Rifle or even Submachine Gun,though they have a dedicated term PP i.e. Pistolyet-Pulemyot = machine pistol to denote Submachine Guns ) in Russian.Examples here are AK-47,AKM,AK-74 and so

MPi - MaschinePistole i.e. Machine Pistol or Sub-Machine Gun in German (i.e.then East Germany here),examples being MPi-K where K is Kalashnikov,MPi-KM i.e. MaschinePistole Kalashnikov Modernisiert (Modernised i.e. version of AKM)

I really can't write explanations of names of all these different rifles,just google them.



What,seriously,you mean since MARCOS use AK-103 it makes these eastern european AKs inferior in quality ? Then what would you call this different Para guys still using Romanian and East German AKs,nowadays with those saaxy FAB Upgrades and so ?

Coming back to your question,
I really can't answer this,mainly because what was there in MARCOS' requirement to obtain those 103s is completely unknown to me.

And if you're comparing 103s with those USSR era eastern euro AKs then again,this is comparing Pentium 4 to Core i7 as 103 is 21st century derivative of AK-74M (which came out around 1991) in 7.62 x 39mm,a helluwa upgraded variant than these eastern euro guns which are based on warsaw pact era designs i.e. AK-47 and AKM.

If you are really willing to compare 103 with current gen eastern euro AKs then you should look at these ones...

Beryl from Poland

Zastava M21 from Serbia

Rest,if you're comparing USSR era Soviet/Russian AKs with USSR era eastern bloc AKs,then they're quite equal to ORIGINAL ones.



I am not saying there're not bad AKs and so,especially from these nations,but i've shared some reasons why they're equally good or bad and based on those reasons all i want to say is Warsaw Pact era eastern euro AKs for military are as good as original russian ones,then "mileage may vary" based on countless conditions,some of them i've mentioned in my previous posts,some in this post.

Then There're other reasons,too,like using parts not fully compatible with particular rifle,using non compatible ammo/low quality ammo,magazines and so that often results in catastrophe.

^All these things apply to original russian AKs,too.

but what reasons you gave about this posts of yours ? so far,not a single one!



Finally,

Uncle,I think you're just being 'pro-indian army's choice' here.Just because IA is going with AK-103 you're praising it with such a 'BHAKTI' that all other Kalashnikov derivatives are worth dust to you,all kalashnikov derivatives that are not ORIGINAL RUSSIANS are just not worth comparable and so.

Sure it's best choice to go with AK-103 (actually we're going with AK-103M i.e. one shown below) but both your knowledge and thinking is quite limited.

AK-103M

and frankly i don't even care what the fuck you think anymore,yha bas me akela hi kutto ki tarah bhonk raha hu...backstory,reasons etc de raha hu aur tumne ab tak kya samajme aaye aisa reason diya,Unkil ? tumhe toh yeh bhi samaj nahi hain ki in sab ke naam alag alag kyoun hain aur aaye bada AK pe gyaan pel ne....

This will be my last post on this topic.I am simply retreating from here.

 

[Blademaster]

Fix your formatting in your above post asap! I can't understand which one is you saying what and the other being quoted.