Contrast recoil 7.62x39 vs .223


PDA






AnthonyC.
August 23, 2007, 10:31 PM
I feel like im asking to many questions and taking up peoples time but, I was wondering what the recoil is like out of an SKS 7.62x39 compared to a bolt action .223? I would think that the recoil is similar? right?


Srry for bothering everyone,:o


A.C.

If you enjoyed reading about "Contrast recoil 7.62x39 vs .223" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Anteater1717
August 23, 2007, 10:36 PM
Don’t worry about asking too many questions it gives me something to read. I have no personal experience but supposedly recoil is very mild with a SKS.

CDignition
August 23, 2007, 10:38 PM
Recoil is a bit more than a 223, but it isn't bad. Much less that a 30-30 lever gun

GunNut
August 23, 2007, 10:38 PM
The recoil is not that much worse, but keep in mind that a SKS has a fairly short stock and metal butt pad.

You'll know that you have fired a real gun, but it won't knock you over backwards.

Technosavant
August 23, 2007, 10:38 PM
I've never fired a bolt .223, but SKS recoil is negligible. A touch more than you get out of a .22LR rifle. The weight of the firearm keeps things nice and kind.

You'll run out of ammo and energy before your shoulder starts hurting.

AnthonyC.
August 23, 2007, 10:45 PM
Much less that a 30-30 lever gun

So you have been reading my threads huh? well i still cant decied on what to get and its really starting to kill me, ever since i have fired my friend's .222 and 30-06 i have been longing for some more centerfire action...lol

CDignition
August 23, 2007, 10:53 PM
Think M1 Garand.

AnthonyC.
August 23, 2007, 10:57 PM
You know your not helping by putting more expensive options in to the mix?:neener::scrutiny: :banghead::mad:gosh dangit dont ever do that again.

W.E.G.
August 23, 2007, 10:59 PM
You can probably buy THREE SKS rifles for less than you would pay for a scoped .223 bolt gun.

So, from that perspective the bite of the SKS is much less than the .223.

Better yet, 7.62x54R ammo is cheap, and so are the M44 Nagants.
Yep. That's the ticket. An M44 and a case of 54R.
Practice shooting from the prone position a lot. T-shirts in hot weather. :evil:

trueblue1776
August 23, 2007, 11:06 PM
If you shot a .30-06, the recoil of an SKS would feel like an airgun, the .223 bolt gun might be about a powerful airgun. You'll be fine with either one, recoil-wise anyhow.

ROMAK IV
August 23, 2007, 11:26 PM
Get an SKS, a Chinese "sporter" with a thunbhole stock and a rubber recoil pad, get a US made pin on muzzle brake, a US made op rod, a US made gas piston, a US made AK magazine, and a US made upper handguard, and it will recoil so mild, you will wonder if it actually fired. Just kidding, both rifles will have a mild recoil, becasuse they are lower power, and the SKS because it is also semiautomatic.

ndolson
August 24, 2007, 12:16 AM
Or you could just buy an AK-47...

Nothing against tricking out an SKS, but by the time you add all those extras, might as well spend an extra hundred or two over a stock SKS and get the real deal.

Either way, you will have lots of fun though.

IMO the 7.62x39 has slightly more recoil than the .223, but both are negligible compared to larger calibers.

Samuraigg
August 24, 2007, 03:38 AM
Yeah the recoil from the Garand really surprised me. Had a bruise on my shoulder after firing only 40 rounds or so, maybe I wasn't holding it firmly against my shoulder enough.

The recoil from the SKS is not bad at all.

Outlaws
August 24, 2007, 09:26 AM
Shouldering an SKS is like shouldering a 2x4. That tiny cartridge car barely be felt.

foghornl
August 24, 2007, 10:12 AM
I have a Yugo 59/66 SKS. With the grenade launcher, g/l sights, heavy blade bayonet, etc the weight really cuts down on the recoil. Not quite as much 'kick' as my Marlin .30-30

woof
August 24, 2007, 12:25 PM
7.62x39 recoil is about 7 ft/lbs and .223 is about 3.5. For comparison a .30-30 is about 10-11 and a .30-06 about 17. The difference between the x39 and .223 can be significant for some shooters. My wife doesn't like the x39 but is comfortable with the .223.

GunTech
August 24, 2007, 01:59 PM
Recoil is a function of weapon weight, bukllet weight, velocity and powder charge. You can't compare them without al those factors. Shooting the same round out of the same platform will at least give you comparitive recoil between the rounds only.

For example, shooting the 223 in a 9 pound rifle generates 2.8 ft-lbs
The 7.62x39 in the same weight rifle generates 5.7 ft-lbs

If we reduce the weight to 7 pounds the 223 recoil energy goes up to 3.6 ft-lbs and the 7.72x39 goes up to about 7.3.

Keeping the weight equal, 223 has about half the recoil, however if we don't make the weight equal, that is compare a 9 pound 7.62 to a 7 pound 223, the diofference is less: 3.9 ft-lbs vs 5.7 ft-lbs.

There are several recoil calculators on the web - for example: http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

MD_Willington
August 24, 2007, 02:00 PM
.223 has recoil ?

:neener:

maybe just a bit... :D

elenius
August 24, 2007, 02:07 PM
There's a big difference in the "feel" of the recoil of a bolt action and a semi-auto. The bolt going back forward on a semi-auto pushes the muzzle back down a bit again. (I don't have a bolt gun, but the last shot in the mag on my semi-auto is way different from the rest).

BeJaRa
August 24, 2007, 02:36 PM
honestly, I think my norinco SKS with chicom ammo has as much felt recoil as my M1 Garand. It has alot to do with weight of the rifle, the action (semi vs bolt) plus the egornomics of the weapon that gives you your percieved recoil. I have shot several 223 in my life and never thought any of them had any substantial recoil. a 20" govt profile AR as slightly more recoil than a 22 LR to me

RockyMtnTactical
August 24, 2007, 02:39 PM
Don't feel bad about asking questions, that's why most of us are here. To answer questions and ask them ourselves.

The recoil of an SKS will be slightly more than that of a .223 but it's not all that bad. It's still fairly tame in terms of recoil.

Nameless_Hobo
August 24, 2007, 02:41 PM
Barely any versus nothing.
They're both so miniscule that most anybody can shoot it well.

pdowg881
August 24, 2007, 03:35 PM
I wouldn't even describe the sks as having any recoil. To me it's more of a "jump". It jumps a little when I shoot it. Mine's also a yugo 59/66 though and I beleive it's a pound or two heavier than the other variants.

mljdeckard
August 24, 2007, 04:44 PM
Come to think of it, I've only fired .223 in ARs, and varmint set-up bolt rifles. Both of these soak up a LOT of recoil. I've never felt a .223 in a light-meduim weight bolt rifle. The pretty heavy rifle for the cartridge, and I find that the cycling of the action is more significant than the actual recoil.

My dad rolled his eyes when I puld it out the first time, then I told him how much the rifle and ammo cost, and he saw it my way.

JonB
August 24, 2007, 04:52 PM
That's the ticket. An M44 and a case of 54R.
Practice shooting from the prone position a lot. T-shirts in hot weather.

:evil: Certainly would be a bit different that a .223 or SKS.


You'll know that you have fired a real gun, but it won't knock you over backwards.

Mr White
August 24, 2007, 05:16 PM
7.63x39 = getting punched in the shoulder by an average-sized 12 year old.
.223 = getting punched in the shoulder by an average-sized 5 year old.

Your 5 and 12 year olds may vary.

Don't Tread On Me
August 24, 2007, 06:34 PM
Guntech has it right. Generically speaking, a .223 has 1/2 the recoil of the 7.62x39, all things being equal like weapon weight.


7.62x39mm is a mild shooting cartridge. Can go all day with that and no problems. However, it is not like the .223 which is like a tiny bump. It's more of a medium bump (I wouldn't call it kick like a .308 or greater would have). You will notice that a .223 is significantly easier to stay on target with than a 7.62x39mm. Muzzle will wander much, much less during rapid fire.

MD_Willington
August 24, 2007, 06:47 PM
Okay, smart guy comment aside;

I've fired both types of rounds, .223 in semi-auto and .223 in a bolt gun, less felt recoil in the .223 semi than in the .223 bolt gun.

But .223 felt recoil was less than 7.62x39 in both Russian and Yugoslavian SKS, the SKS are heavier than my semi .223 and the .223 bolt gun I shot..

Honestly, both are not bad at all, my friend had his 11 year old son shooting his Chinese SKS without any problems, he was a lanky maybe 80lbs kid...

pdowg881
August 24, 2007, 07:51 PM
I've seen a lot of pictures from the Vietnam war with little Vietnamese carrying SKS's (Ak's too obviously). Most were around 5 ft tall and probably not very heavy so I'm sure most people can handle 7.62x39. Maybe someone here has experience seeing this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vietcong1968.jpg

jpwilly
August 24, 2007, 07:54 PM
The rifle is heavy and the heavy gas piston and bolt slow the recoil down so much that most of the recoil in an SKS is muzzle climb.

If you enjoyed reading about "Contrast recoil 7.62x39 vs .223" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!