[WheelMan]

I have an SKS that has proven to be a great little rifle for me. Primary uses are woods carry, plinking, and potential for home or community defense. Generally I prize it for it's durability, reliability, and the cheap ammo available. Accuaracy is adequit for my purposes.

recently I have thought about picking up an AK to replace the SKS in the above roles. The (cheap) detachable mags and pistol grip setup appeal to me. The question is, what am I gaining or losing making this switch. Any notable difference in relability or accuracy, anything else I should be aware of? Thanks.

[amprecon]

Wheelman,
I went through the same thing your going through now. I had a Norinco "Paratrooper" model. I don't think one was ever made for the military but Norinco called it that for marketing purposes. Anyway the only difference was that it had a 16.5" barrel, not the standard 20".
The "detachable" magazines that I bought for it were awkward to use but reliable. I always felt that the rifle was way over-built for the cartridge.
I decided that I might as well get an AK and have all the detachable magazines I could buy and know that they were supposed to go with the weapon.
I heard alot about how innaccurate most AK's were, but it was generally aimed at the stamped receiver models. So after much research I settled on the Bulgarian Arsenal made milled receiver SLR-95. I wasn't thrilled about the thumbhole stock, but it didn't interfere with operation and it appeared to be much more stout than the original design.
As far as accuracy goes it seemed to be as good as the SKS. I could consistently hit the 2'X3' steel plate at the 300 yard mark with both rifles. For carbines labeled as innaccurate, this is plenty accurate for my purposes.

[WheelMan]

Got this in the wrong forum.

[Justin]

No problem. :-D

[Al Thompson]

I'd keep the SKS and save up for an AK. Always good to have a spare rifle around.

[Destructo6]

I'll second the vote for both. You'll regret selling one to fund the other, and the prices are pretty low, so have your cake and eat it, too.

You know the reputation for AK reliability and you'll probably find few to dispute it. Accuracy is similar.

[Dave Markowitz]

I have both and suggest that rather than selling the SKS, keep it and save up for the AK.

You may find that the SKS is easier to shoot well due to the longer sight radius. Both guns are capable of similar accuracy, however. The AK will probably have a better trigger. The SKS has got to have one of the crummiest triggers I've ever felt.

[AV1611]

I don't know... The trigger on my Yugo 59/66A is pretty nice. I'd certainly keep the SKS and also get an AK. It's wise to own more than one firearm in the sale caliber. Two people, two weapons, same ammo = good.

AV1611 out...

[MAKOwner]

I've still got my Norinco SKS, but the AK is superior in nearly every way as far as I'm concerned. I certainly don't regret getting into AKs. I haven't shot the SKS in awhile. The AK is handier, designed slightly better/simplier (one piece gas piston/bolt carrier, much better trigger setup, far better magazine design comparing detachables, the SKS fixed mag is a good one but not as fun :) , etc)

My SKS and various AKs (couple MAK90s, couple Romanian SARs) have all shot virtually identical groups. My SAR2 in 5.45 shoots a little tighter than all the others.

[Shweboner]

Definitely keep the SKS, and get the AK.

Check out FAC for the WASR-10 hicap model. Its the same thing as a SAR-1 but costs $50 less. They have them for $259. I have my 2nd WASR-10 coming in a couple weeks.

[Dorrin79]

I have a Yugo SKS, and have been considering getting a SAR-1.

I wouldn't get rid of that Yugo for anything.

Besides, you can never have too many ugly russian refugees in 7.62x39