Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 101

Thread: Hadar build

  1. #21
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,442
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    a standard 10-22 stock could accept a standard AK stock but the woo would be thin at the front. You would have to deepen the barrel channel as well. i have looked at this a few times. I am going to order a stock for a mosin from that sie and see how they look thinking of getting one of the cheap blems just to see.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #22
    Gunco Regular allesennogwat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    921
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1biggun View Post
    as I recall the 308 Galil has the magwell moved back and the trigger guatd scrunched up but the FGC is in a standard location.

    i wouldnt worry anout the reciver thickness a .045 will be fine. a lug added to the front of it and inleted into the stock would not hurt however to take the stain off the stock

    The 308 bolt is standard length but the hammer is not interchangeable with the 223 Galil. The story is the parts and maybe the hammer pivot positition are different to speed the lock time to match the M-14 lock time for improved accuracy.

  3. #23
    TRX
    TRX is online now
    Gunco Irregular TRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,627
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    Looks like Midway has the best deal on a 6.5 barrel - Adams & Bennett 26" long, 1:9 twist, for $79.99.

    I'll have to lop it off to 18 or 20", step it to take the gas block, cut the tenon, and chamber it. Since the Hadar doesn't have an FSB or RSB it makes things quite simple.

  4. #24
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,442
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    if you get the right midway barrel there is pleanty of meat for the GB you will need just profile it to what you want there is a medium and lighter profile. Im pretty sure sither will work. we used the medium profile. if you look at the websight there is a profile chart shoing the specs.


    The 308 bolt is standard length but the hammer is not interchangeable with the 223 Galil. The story is the parts and maybe the hammer pivot positition are different to speed the lock time to match the M-14 lock time for improved accuracy.
    Hmmm i have never heard that the pin hole location has changed. I know thye would have notch a 308 hammer to clear the mag. do you have any more INfo on this???? if the lock time is in fact faster Id like to try a FGC from one if there out there. I can make the holes any were I want on my recivers.

  5. #25
    Gunco Veteran [486]'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    MSP area, MN
    Posts
    1,631
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    You'd probably get quicker locktime from a lightened hammer before moving the holes would do anything, it is probably still the same spring pushing on it in the same place with the same force, I don't see how changing the position of it changes that.

    ETA: Hey, there's another thing you can lighten on your lightweight build, the hammer!

  6. #26
    Gunco Regular allesennogwat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    921
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    I had a book about the Galil and the 308 was designed to compete in international sales against the FAL and the G-3. The original barrel length was 21 inches. Same as the FAL so as not to give up and velocity. The original selector positions were changed to S-F-A instead of the 223 Galil's S-A-F. The few countries that did buy 7.62 Galil's had troops that were already familar with the 5.56 Galil or the AK and thought the FAL/G-3 selector positions would be confusing and requested the original AK selector positions. IMI had to redesign the fire control parts because none of them are interchangeable with the 5.56 Galil. I think two armies and one navy bought 7.62 Galil's and the navy ones are the only ones that have the FAL selector positions. The book also said the lock time was improved and the US M-14 was the goal lock time. I guess this could be done by changing the hammer hook and trigger hooks but I think it said the axis pin position was changed. It's hard to tell by looking because the magazine is moved back. If you have an IMI rifle you could measure the distance between the axis pins. The "improvements" were, longer barrel, selector order and faster lock time. The auto sear is mounted on the hammer pin. There is no third pin due to the magazine and I think they slowed the rate of fire also.

  7. #27
    TRX
    TRX is online now
    Gunco Irregular TRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,627
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default

    I did some web searching on the .308 Galil trigger group. Two hole receiver, my my... I hope those don't come to the attention of the ATF.

    "Nothing to see here. Move along. These aren't the receivers you're looking for."

  8. #28
    Gunco Regular allesennogwat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    921
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    The 308 Galil FCG is not suppose to be interchangeable with the 223 Galil FCG. If it was just the hammer shaped to clear the 308 magazine then the parts should still work in the 223 Galil. But for some reason they don't, or at least not how they are suppose to work. Changing the lock time with moving the axis pin of the hammer makes sense. How do the hole spacing and height compare to a European-made AK or a 223 Galil?

    I remember when the Hadar was first sold here it was said it was designed for a European country, maybe Germany, but the laws changed and it wasn't allowed so the thumb hole rifles were sold in America when thumb hole stocks weren't required. For a long time I couldn't think of what law change it might be but then Russia said they tried two lug bolts for 308 AK's and they wouldn't pass CIP proofing. I think that CIP proofing started around 1989 as a universal European requirement. Maybe it was this reason that the Hadar couldn't be sold in Europe. If the FCG axis pin holes are in different positions to improve lock time a 308 Galil FCG might help the accuracy of a custom AK with similar hole locations.

  9. #29
    No Hope For Me 1biggun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    13,442
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Default

    HMMMM were does one find a 308 Galil FGC cheap??? Id like to see one up close

    I already lighten the hammer on most of my builds. i gut off the side not used as well as thin it some. I have no idea if it really healps but it makes sence.

  10. #30
    Gunco Regular allesennogwat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    921
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default

    Sarco and I think Gunparts Corp has 308 Galil FCG's. Or at least the hammers which may or may not require matching triggers. I am looking at receiver pics now and if there is any difference in the hammer pin location it's too close to see in the pics I have. I'm pretty sure if the pistol grip hasn't been moved the trigger pin is in the standard location. That only leaves the hammer pin. Now maybe they did something else to the hammer and trigger in improving it without moving the hammer pin but I remember reading that the hammer pin was moved for this reason. Look at the Tapco flats and the Ace templates. They don't match a factory AK but they are close enough to work most of the time.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Search tags for this page

There are currently no search engine referrals.
Click on a term to search our site for related topics.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •