Jump to content

exclusive images of the ICS AK74-M and AK74-S


FarEast

Recommended Posts

ICS has sent us some exclusive images of the soon to be released ICS AK74-M and AK74-S which we covered on the news section back in March 2007. It looks like these will be available to customers either at the end of August to Mid-Septemer. Right now we don;t have any pricing or other features of the gun, but as the saying goes " A picture is worth a thousand words!"

 

First off the ICS AK74-M

 

ak74m01gu4.jpg

 

ak74m02vk1.jpg

 

ak74m03gl8.jpg

 

ak74m04gz5.jpg

 

ak74m05ra9.jpg

 

ak74m06ao8.jpg

 

ak74m07nr4.jpg

 

ak74m08os8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be more excited if the last two ICS AKs I had to work on weren't such utter bastards - and the cool bolt was really the only thing I really liked about the ICS design.

 

So these don't really strike my fancy - plus I'd be willing to bet that they're still using that silly "plastic reciever with a 1mm thick covering of metal" thing.

 

Still, if they've sorted the horrid shimming and piston/pistonhead/cylinderhead/nozzle/wiring quality issues, it might be worth a look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm quite happy with what I'm seeing a proper 74m (that actually has the folding stock) and as for the....74s i'd be happy with it after burning that wood, it looks terrible. Also have they put the battery connector in the worst possible place imaginable? Why put it there out of every where?

 

Finally BURN THE RIS, BURN THE RIS!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That AK 74-S...mmmmm.

 

Not sure if this is the place to ask but is there any chance of making one using parts already available? Is the gun already on the market under a different manufacturer? I've really started liking the gun since watching Goldeneye the other day :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never owned an ICS so I'm asking purely for educational purposes, but I hear folks running them down all over and I hear people that 'invest'(?) mucho dinero into them and love them.

 

Although I believe they are a Taiwan product, wouldn't they be equivalent roughly to any brand of chicom "clone" product that folks are raving about for the past year or so? meaning they likely require the same care and upgrade to gearbox, etc to make them as 'reliable' as their Japanese counterpart?

 

....and would also make them analogous to G&G, CA, so on and so forth?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Slainte!

 

 

-G

Link to post
Share on other sites
Although I believe they are a Taiwan product, wouldn't they be equivalent roughly to any brand of chicom "clone" product that folks are raving about for the past year or so? meaning they likely require the same care and upgrade to gearbox, etc to make them as 'reliable' as their Japanese counterpart?

 

Except ICS's prices are much higher than CYMA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never owned an ICS so I'm asking purely for educational purposes, but I hear folks running them down all over and I hear people that 'invest'(?) mucho dinero into them and love them.

 

Although I believe they are a Taiwan product, wouldn't they be equivalent roughly to any brand of chicom "clone" product that folks are raving about for the past year or so? meaning they likely require the same care and upgrade to gearbox, etc to make them as 'reliable' as their Japanese counterpart?

 

....and would also make them analogous to G&G, CA, so on and so forth?

Slainte!

-G

 

 

You kinda hit it on the head. QC of the ChiCom clones, but the externals and price of a CA. Not to mention that ICS REALLY doesn't like to make their internals compatable with TM/CA/anyone. ICS just doesn't understand the basic principals of building a gearbox. Hence my statment about yanking out the gearbox and hop and replacing with CA ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You kinda hit it on the head. QC of the ChiCom clones, but the externals and price of a CA. Not to mention that ICS REALLY doesn't like to make their internals compatable with TM/CA/anyone. ICS just doesn't understand the basic principals of building a gearbox. Hence my statment about yanking out the gearbox and hop and replacing with CA ones.

 

 

Lots and lots of people absolutly love ICS invation, ie split gearbox.

 

The gearbox on my ICS mp5 was pretty nice. Don't see how they "don't understand basic pricipals of building a gearbox".

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not fair everyone is so eager to bash ICS. Now I admit their beginning as an airsoft manufacturer was less than stellar, but they were the first to produce modernized AK's for mass consumption. Even if their original "AK-74M" was in actuality a late model AK-74N, they worked hard on accurately reproducing the rifle as well as giving it good shooting characteristics.

 

Why would you compare this to a TM? TM was responsible for the awful Beta Spetsnaz, which in my opinion is a far greater crime than anything committed by ICS. I would loved to have seen a full metal receiver and was indeed surprised when I took my gun apart to see a plastic frame, but I still would rather have had my ICS than an awful looking CA SLR or the incorrect G&G "RK-103". This thread is about the new ICS AK series, not about how you don't like their MP-5's or how you want people to buy a VFC.

 

And thanks FarEast for providing pictures; I am sure they will interest some budget minded Russian arms enthusiasts...

Link to post
Share on other sites
You kinda hit it on the head. QC of the ChiCom clones, but the externals and price of a CA. Not to mention that ICS REALLY doesn't like to make their internals compatable with TM/CA/anyone. ICS just doesn't understand the basic principals of building a gearbox. Hence my statment about yanking out the gearbox and hop and replacing with CA ones.

 

Erm you ever heard of copyright infringment, if ICS want to sell thier guns in Japan there are certain things that they cannot copy from the TM weapon, the selector Mech is one, hopup is another.

 

If you want a STAR or CA here in Japan they come without hop unit and selector switch and you have to put them in yourself due to the law.

 

The split gearbox design is excellent and is a huge improvement on the TM style gear box, the forward assist is a great innovation and its actually great to see a company that is pushing forward new ideas rather than copying a design that is now about 20 years old.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.