View Full Version : Differance between WASR and AK?

July 11, 2007, 23:04
How do you tell the differance between a WASR and a normal Romy AK? I am looking at one on auction and they only have pics of the right side with no pic of the whole buttstock or the FSB.

July 12, 2007, 01:11
The SAR rifles came ready for double stack mags when imported whereas the WSAR were originally single stack receivers that were later converted for double stack mags after import

This may shed some light on it for you ............


Personally I do not like the WSAR's because of poor quality on the mill work and sloppy mag fit

July 12, 2007, 02:02
easiest way to tell.

if it has no mag well dimples and takes double stack mags, it its a converted single stack WASR.

July 13, 2007, 10:49
Any difference in the quality?

July 13, 2007, 12:13
The WSAR's have sloppy mill work where they chewed out the mag wells on them. Take a look at one and you will see what I mean. On many of them they removed too much material and mags will fit loosely because of it.
Other than that WSAR's do not have muzzle brakes or bayonet lugs.

July 13, 2007, 12:33
I have a WASR 10. Had to dremel out the mag well to get mags to fit. I was wondering if the workmanship was better or worse on them. Mines pretty sloppy.

July 13, 2007, 14:59
I have a WASR-10. Metal mags fit, synthetic do not. Romanian 75 rnd drums work great in mine also. The mag well was wallowed out for a dbl stack mag and they fit loose from side to side but function fine. The drum hasn't any play.

My barrel is not timed properly, being a couple of degrees to the right, so the front sight is cranked way to the left to zero. I just got a Romy kit and the bbl is the same on it as well. Look down the rifle from the butt to the muzzle. You can tell if the bbl is canted or not. It will also show at the front of the handguard as one side will be inset fron the forend and one side overlapping it.

Mine has a threaded bbl and a muzzle break with a front sight base that has a detent to hold the brake on.

Trigger pul on mine wasn't too bad but I put a Tapco G2 dbl hook in it. Had to modify the rcvr. for the trigger assmbly.

Have seen WASR-10 with and without the muzzle break. I would rather have it as the bble is threaded and the front sight base is correct. I would only get one without the break if it was SUBSTANTAILY less in price.

Overall fit was pretty good but the finish is nothing to write home about.

I like mine alot tho', and will retime the bbl when I build my kit up, and refinish them both at the same time.

July 20, 2007, 22:40
I've got both a SAR 1 and a WASR. Evidently, I got lucky with my WASR, as I got it right after the Ban sunset. Everything was straight on it. Couldn't say the same for the SAR 1. Front site base was canted, as was the gas block.

The main difference between the two is that the WASR came with all the "evil" features intact. Bayonet lug, threaded barrel, and 2 30 rd mags. When I bought the SAR, it had the neutered bayo lug and no threads.

When looking at a side-by-side comparison of a SAR 1 and WASR 10 (even if the SAR has been returned to no-ban status and in an identical configuation as the WASR), the SAR will have dimples in the receiver above the mag well. The WASR won't.

Fit and finish on both is hit and miss. Some WASR's have a really good finish and some SAR's have a really crappy finish and vice versa. Any AKM-clone can have canted sites, even the much vaunted Arsenal products. It's just that Century (or the factory in Romania) seems to employ drunken one-handed monkeys to do the work on their rifles and it shows. I currently own 4 rifles that have CAI either stamped or engraved on them (SAR 1, SAR 2, WASR 10, and PSL54C) and everyone of them has had some kind of finish work done to clean them up.

August 13, 2007, 09:26
again to save alot of typing.....


A kit built gun will have the Cugir arsenal stamp on the left side of the trunion a triangle with arrow or a triangle without arrow the one without is a kit after 1980 when they just started useing the 5.45x39 front trunion for both calibers. all the crap engraved on the WASRs is just that... its all added by Century after they are imported for marketing purposes etc... ALL Actual military grade rifles will have been built in the USA on hopefully a Nodak reciever from a parts kit and will have the arsenal marking as well as serial # and date stamp on the left side of the trunion....... a G kit as oppsed to a GP kit will have a "G" engraved on the left side of the rear sight block.... the GP will have all the same trunion markings but no G engraved on the sight block ANYTHING engraved on the reciever like the dumbass dates of 10/63 GP SA/Cugir etc... is all purly BS added by century as when they get the crates of rifles there is nothing at all engraved on em Century has 15 days to assign a serial number and add their import markings etc...

And ALL of the GP series rifles with the exception of the 1975s which never got used as the regular army switched to the AIM 74 that year were totally worn out here are pics of the BEST 1964 (the actual first year they were made in Romania NOT 1963 , 63 was the year they were adopted) this was the absolute best GP kit of 30 that I hand picked from Centuries bin of em at their warehouse a few years back....... after lookin at the bullet tested barrel ya tell me just how nice a WASR aledgedly made from one would be ;) I built em to accent my nice AKs with some battle worn ones, by the way in this thread are very detailed pics of the correct GP front trunion markings