Third Party Press

PTR 44 purchase opportunity

Intruder196 said:
Justinian, do share your thoughts on the PSA rifle. I have argued for years against guys who wanted one in some other caliber than 7.92x33 till I’m blue in the face but it just doesn’t die. Then when HMC announced they were going to build it in 4 calibers I knew it was destined to fail.
7.62x39- get an AK clone
5.56- get an AR or HK93 clone
300 BO- get an AR

It’s just my opinion but I think shooting 7.92x33 is part of the experience. Plus there’s no need to redesign the wheel because MP44/STG44’s were already perfected in 7.92x33. That PSA went from a January 2023 announcement of the same HMC idea to recently “well, sometime later in 2024” release date tells me they’re having trouble trying to create a 4 caliber gun.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the delayed response.

I think it's a neat idea, but considering the average quality of a PSA gun (let's be real, they are bottom of the barrel), it's likely to be subpar and serve as a mere "consolation" for people. Are you expecting them to manage AK development, which has been prone to issues, while also conducting R&D for basic ammo? Now they're entering the Krinkov game (which is subpar, by the way), and venturing into the MP44 market isn't wise from a business and development standpoint in my opinion. They're stretching themselves too thin, if you catch my drift. I've seen terrible AK builds from them at the SHOT Show in the past, lol.

When I held it, I immediately nicked my hand on the metal. It felt rushed; mind you, it's probably either the HMG one or a one-off prototype. However, upon examining the magazine well, I could tell something was off. I didn't hold it for long, as the quality control disappointed me. Dabbling in too many caliber variations will only tarnish their reputation. At that point, you're better off considering a different gun, as you suggested. If you want to shoot an STG-44 in 5.56, go for anything else. For 7.62x39? Opt for an AKM. And then .300 BO with a long barrel? It makes no sense to me. The wood felt of poor quality, reminiscent of their knockoff Chinese Type 56 wood (the original Type 56 stuff is great).

As someone who has studied history from an educational perspective and firearms as a hobby, it was disappointing. I commend PSA for attempting innovation. However, if you're going to do it, you need to do it right. I mean, it took how many AK generations to get it somewhat right, like 60%?

Hopefully, this sheds some light on the matter. Honestly, wait for a BD44 to release, get a kit and a BD44 flat, undergo a reweld, or purchase a PTR-44 or even a transferrable. It simply isn't worth it, lol.
 
I’m not actually in the market for a PSA clone of any sort. As I have a reweld to semi only MP44 original. It can be done. I saw and took a screenshot of an ATF letter of one that was rewelded into semi only. Everything that was done to that gun, I had the same mods already in mine. The only difference was this one that was sold on gunbroker a few years ago was redone in 9x19.
Justinian said:
Sorry for the delayed response.

I think it's a neat idea, but considering the average quality of a PSA gun (let's be real, they are bottom of the barrel), it's likely to be subpar and serve as a mere "consolation" for people. Are you expecting them to manage AK development, which has been prone to issues, while also conducting R&D for basic ammo? Now they're entering the Krinkov game (which is subpar, by the way), and venturing into the MP44 market isn't wise from a business and development standpoint in my opinion. They're stretching themselves too thin, if you catch my drift. I've seen terrible AK builds from them at the SHOT Show in the past, lol.

When I held it, I immediately nicked my hand on the metal. It felt rushed; mind you, it's probably either the HMG one or a one-off prototype. However, upon examining the magazine well, I could tell something was off. I didn't hold it for long, as the quality control disappointed me. Dabbling in too many caliber variations will only tarnish their reputation. At that point, you're better off considering a different gun, as you suggested. If you want to shoot an STG-44 in 5.56, go for anything else. For 7.62x39? Opt for an AKM. And then .300 BO with a long barrel? It makes no sense to me. The wood felt of poor quality, reminiscent of their knockoff Chinese Type 56 wood (the original Type 56 stuff is great).

As someone who has studied history from an educational perspective and firearms as a hobby, it was disappointing. I commend PSA for attempting innovation. However, if you're going to do it, you need to do it right. I mean, it took how many AK generations to get it somewhat right, like 60%?

Hopefully, this sheds some light on the matter. Honestly, wait for a BD44 to release, get a kit and a BD44 flat, undergo a reweld, or purchase a PTR-44 or even a transferrable. It simply isn't worth it, lol.
Click to expand...
 
Justinian said:
Sorry for the delayed response.

I think it's a neat idea, but considering the average quality of a PSA gun (let's be real, they are bottom of the barrel), it's likely to be subpar and serve as a mere "consolation" for people. Are you expecting them to manage AK development, which has been prone to issues, while also conducting R&D for basic ammo? Now they're entering the Krinkov game (which is subpar, by the way), and venturing into the MP44 market isn't wise from a business and development standpoint in my opinion. They're stretching themselves too thin, if you catch my drift. I've seen terrible AK builds from them at the SHOT Show in the past, lol.

When I held it, I immediately nicked my hand on the metal. It felt rushed; mind you, it's probably either the HMG one or a one-off prototype. However, upon examining the magazine well, I could tell something was off. I didn't hold it for long, as the quality control disappointed me. Dabbling in too many caliber variations will only tarnish their reputation. At that point, you're better off considering a different gun, as you suggested. If you want to shoot an STG-44 in 5.56, go for anything else. For 7.62x39? Opt for an AKM. And then .300 BO with a long barrel? It makes no sense to me. The wood felt of poor quality, reminiscent of their knockoff Chinese Type 56 wood (the original Type 56 stuff is great).

As someone who has studied history from an educational perspective and firearms as a hobby, it was disappointing. I commend PSA for attempting innovation. However, if you're going to do it, you need to do it right. I mean, it took how many AK generations to get it somewhat right, like 60%?

Hopefully, this sheds some light on the matter. Honestly, wait for a BD44 to release, get a kit and a BD44 flat, undergo a reweld, or purchase a PTR-44 or even a transferrable. It simply isn't worth it, lol.
Click to expand...
Ouch, the fact that they didn't even file down the edges doesn't lend confidence. I remember when I first heard about them, I was excited, and then the next thing I was told was that it was going to be in 5.56 and my excitement vanished.

No matter what, any STG44-clone made in a cartridge that isn't 8kurz will have the same uncanny valley look as the PSA gun. The original trunnion has a super tight hole where the magazine fits in to put cartridges in the path of the bolt, and because 7.92x33 is such a relatively short and wide round, redesigning the rifle to fire 5.56 will make it look strange. It doesn't matter that they supposedly will sell it in 8kurz, economic realities will likely mean that there will be one type of trunnion blank at least, with more than likely one single type of large trunnion that they machine. Resulting in a weirdly disproportional rifle if someone is used to an original.

It is the same thought process behind the AK100 series, where the only thing that needs changing between different chamberings is the bolt, barrel, and the magazine catch.
 
Justinlacore said:
It can be done top one 7.92 x 33 bottom 5.56View attachment 391515
Click to expand...
That's a weird one, and I wasn't saying you couldn't make one in 5.56 that looks normal, I was saying that you couldn't make one that looks normal while maintaining the original tilting bolt operating system. Sorry if that wasn't well conveyed in the original message.

Also, what's the fun of a stg with an AR bolt? You wouldn't get that satisfying crunchy feel cycling it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top