Are the days of finding a nice SKS for $350 over?


PDA






KYamateur
September 27, 2013, 12:33 AM
I've been shopping for an SKS rifle. All I can find for $350 are beat up pieces. I watch gunbroker but nice ones are listed for $500+ even though they don't sell. That kind of defeats the purpose. Seems like these things were everywhere until I finally got around to shopping for one. I have a VZ58 and a CZ 527 bolt action and thought the SKS would be a nice pick up to shoot the same ammo. At those prices it seems like I may as well spend $700 and get an AK.

If you enjoyed reading about "Are the days of finding a nice SKS for $350 over?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
juk
September 27, 2013, 12:39 AM
Only a few years ago you could pick up a pretty nice one for under 200. I wouldn't pay over 300 for one unless it was a genuine Russian. Like you said, once they hit a certain price point, it makes no sense to NOT spend a little more and get an AK.

wally
September 27, 2013, 12:45 AM
it makes no sense to NOT spend a little more and get an AK

Depends on if 1.5-2X more is "only a little". An SKS will generally shoot about half the group size off sandbags as an AK will.

I don't shoot my SKS collection much, I have good ones and beaters, but the one that seems to shoot the best had a firewood quality stock (since replaced) and no matching numbers.

KYamateur
September 27, 2013, 01:00 AM
I would give maybe $400 for a very nice SKS. However anymore and I will just wait a little while and shell out the extra on an AK. I like the SKS rifles with the original 10 round flip down mags.

mljdeckard
September 27, 2013, 01:24 AM
Check the pawn shops. Remember, SKSs are only 'new-ish' to begin with.

Ridgerunner665
September 27, 2013, 02:09 AM
I remember buying SKS's for $85 at the local hardware store...along about 1990 or so.

That's some pretty nice appreciation...I still have 3 of them.

ColtPythonElite
September 27, 2013, 02:36 AM
I sold a like new SKS a while back for $275 and, thought I made out like a bandit.

jmr40
September 27, 2013, 07:32 AM
The last, only one, I bought was under $200, and that was with 1,000 rounds of ammo. The rifle was $69, ammo $125. That was years ago and I was still glad to get rid of it. I never really liked the rifle, but at that price couldn't go wrong. If I'd kept it I could make a much better profit now than I did by selling it when I did.

jagdpanzer347
September 27, 2013, 07:46 AM
It's like Nagant's. I remember buying a sweet M44 for 69.00 several year's ago.Glad I bought my SKS's before the market got stupid.

Captcurt
September 27, 2013, 09:30 AM
I have been getting $375 to $450 for Norincos. I you can find a nice one for $350 you better buy it. Most distributors are getting $325 wholesale.

yzguy87
September 27, 2013, 11:17 AM
What's up with the higher prices? Is the price increase due to all demand on the consumers part or are importers just not bringing in as many as they used to?

I bought a yugo 59/66 in February 08 for $245 and thought it was a decent deal.

brbdwyr
September 27, 2013, 01:35 PM
What's up with the higher prices? Is the price increase due to all demand on the consumers part or are importers just not bringing in as many as they used to?

Yes and Yes.

On a side note, all these "I remember When" posts are pointless. I remember gas at $.80 and soda at a quarter, but I don't keep dipping in the barrel of memories about it.

The SKS is a battle-proven semi auto that shoots a respectable round. If a 10/22 is fetching $300, why shouldn't an SKS?

To the OP: yes, you can find them for under $350, but it's tough and those days may be gone. I passed up a Tula refurb last month that had a $395 price tag on it and I'm still kicking myself. As one poster said, keep an eye on pawn shops.

improperlyaged
September 27, 2013, 01:57 PM
You can still find good ones for less than 300, you just have to be patient and look around a bit.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=728415

Got me a Romy for 260 OTD

GoWolfpack
September 27, 2013, 02:01 PM
Are the days of finding a nice SKS for $350 over?

Unless import laws get a major overhaul, yes. You may find somebody willing to part with one for less, but the average market price for one in good condition is going to stay over $350 for a very long time.

TIMC
September 28, 2013, 05:38 PM
I got a Norinco couple months ago off gunbroker for $350 so they are still around.

jimmyraythomason
September 28, 2013, 06:00 PM
The price overall is coming down but is going to stabilize around $300-350 for Norincos and $400+ for Russians(my wag!). I sold a Norinco with less than perfect finish for $475 a few months back and he told me he would have gladly paid the $525 that others were asking.

improperlyaged
September 28, 2013, 08:06 PM
Its hard to imagine them going for so much, in my area they are still around 275 to 325.

ball3006
September 28, 2013, 08:19 PM
I think I paid 100 bucks for my like new Albanian and Russian a few years ago. chris3

Quick Shot xMLx
September 28, 2013, 09:14 PM
They don't appear to be showroom quality but Atlantic is selling Chinese SKS for $300. That appears to be about the "new normal" price.

http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/component/virtuemart/shipping-rifles/chinese-type-56-sks-7-62x39mm-rifle-detail.html?Itemid=0

husker
September 28, 2013, 09:41 PM
No. but you have to look around. They pop up from time to time on face books Nebraska gun exchange for 3 bills

tarosean
September 28, 2013, 09:54 PM
Dang this was a 60 dollar gun 20yrs ago.

TexasPatriot.308
September 28, 2013, 11:46 PM
ever once in a while you luck out, a friend of mine bought a tricked out one with Archangel typle stock, laser, red light, rails, a so so UTG scope and ammo for $500, not my cup of tea, but a helluva deal if you are looking for one.

Black Butte
September 28, 2013, 11:47 PM
I remember when Romanian SKSs flooded the market and you could get them with the attached grenade launcher in near unissued condition for $100.

barnbwt
September 29, 2013, 12:26 AM
I recently got a Tula '51 and a few dozen rounds for 450$ plus tax. Other than needing new varnish the stock's great (just needs some lotion) and the mis-match parts are in as-new condition and everything fits great and is clean. I'd pay 30$ just to not have to bathe the rifle (and myself) in solvent to get it working like those "deal" rifles ;)

Is it more than an SKS is "worth?" Probably. But not by much, it's a solid gun, I don't see it getting much if any cheaper in the future, and now no one can say I don't own an SKS :rolleyes:. And, I haven't seen a real-deal Russian model recently --just a really crummy reweld for 300$ and heavily cosmo'd Yugos which just don't do it for me-- so it's perhaps slightly uncommon around here.

It'll play well with my VZ58 :D

TCB

zoom6zoom
September 29, 2013, 12:29 AM
Dang this was a 60 dollar gun 20yrs ago.
and minimum wage was under four bucks. It's all relative.

Ignition Override
September 29, 2013, 01:31 AM
Considering that 7.62x39 ammo has been back to .25/rd. for months, a bit over $400 might be a decent deal.
Noticing the prices for an AK clone, Vz-58, why not buy an SKS? With the original mag, you might consume less ammo.

For an extra $60 to easily install a Tech Sight TS 200 aperture sight, nobody is limited to the original leaf sight, which can be re-installed.
The SKS is much more accurate with the Tech TS 200.:)

nathan
September 29, 2013, 09:54 AM
I love SKSs. In fact i sold a nice Albanian still in cosmolene for $475 last month.
THe local buyer act as if its too expensive but he paid anyway. SKS is a really great design and it has come full circle for people to know its a great all around medium caliber rifle. It is worth the price of what is priced now. They dont make them no more . They are solid, simple to operate and no hassle free.
And the bulk ammo price of 7.62 x 39 is not going to burn your wallet.

And for those who thinks sks ought to be cheap, then get you a Ruger 10/22. Now that is cheap gun.
The prices are only going to go up for the SKS, so might as well find a nice piece for which you can afford. All thing s dont stay the same especially they dont make them no more.

ball3006
September 29, 2013, 11:05 AM
Last winter I picked up a SKS barreled receiver in a nice stock for 60 bucks. I had enough parts in the box at home to complete the rifle. It is mismatched but a great shooter. The bayo lug had been removed and I installed a 5 round mag I had. No "assult rifle" here......chris3

barnbwt
September 29, 2013, 01:13 PM
And for those who thinks sks ought to be cheap,
They need to remember that the SKS is actually made quite a bit better ;). Milled receiver, more rigid overall, cleaner workmanship, and more expensive to make parts.

There's a reason they went to the AK to build a zillion of and give away to half the world instead of SKS's redesigned to take box mags (like the Chinese did) ;)

TCB

tarosean
September 29, 2013, 02:15 PM
and minimum wage was under four bucks. It's all relative.

using an inflation calculator 69.00 in 1990 its only 123.47 today.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

nathan
September 29, 2013, 05:41 PM
SKS is also perfect to train youngsters the joy of shooting their first centerfire semi auto rifle from a bolt .22 LR rifle.
NO fumbling of inserting the mags but rather the old top loading of a 10 rd stripper . The practice of basic iron sight alignment is key then they can progress to more advance sighting systems like red dot s and riflescopes with other rifles.

The cheaper bulk ammo of the 7.62 x 39 will give you more bang for your money, too. Just a thing we needed in these days of high inflation.

BCRider
September 29, 2013, 07:37 PM
Sometimes it pays to be up here in Canada. I can still get armory re-furbished and as issued SKS's for under $200C. The odd thing is that I'm really not that keen on the SKS. Especially up here where it has to be pinned for the mag to hold no more than 5 rounds.

I've seen and been slightly interested in some 1953 offerings since the rifle was born the same year as me. But I keep passing on them since I just don't get a big kick out of the rifle.

KYamateur
September 29, 2013, 09:57 PM
I found a nice looking SKS for $300 finally. The wood looks great, and the parts look almost new. Not one part has matching serial numbers but everything seems to function right. I think I am going to buy it. It almost looks new it is in such good shape. I can live with mismatched serial numbers, it is basically just going to be a shooter anyways.

nathan
September 29, 2013, 10:38 PM
if i can find a nice Romanian SKS, that be my hope someday.

justice06rr
September 30, 2013, 01:14 AM
Yes and Yes.

On a side note, all these "I remember When" posts are pointless. I remember gas at $.80 and soda at a quarter, but I don't keep dipping in the barrel of memories about it.

The SKS is a battle-proven semi auto that shoots a respectable round. If a 10/22 is fetching $300, why shouldn't an SKS?

To the OP: yes, you can find them for under $350, but it's tough and those days may be gone. I passed up a Tula refurb last month that had a $395 price tag on it and I'm still kicking myself. As one poster said, keep an eye on pawn shops.

That gave me a chuckle. It is completely pointless to remenisce those prices. Gas will never be less than $1 again, and Mosin's and SKS's will never be that cheap again. Unless some miracle happens...


Inflation for one, and demand are some of the reasons why they have gone up in price. The last 2 SKS's I bought were about $350 each, and I'm not complaining. I wish I gotten into this game of buying AK's and SKS's when they were under $300. Right now if you can find one for under $400 buy it ASAP.

HexHead
September 30, 2013, 06:29 AM
And back in the 60's a Porsche 911 was a $6500 car. What's your point?

Kiln
September 30, 2013, 10:37 PM
Yeah I overpaid for my Norinco SKS seven years ago when I shelled out $275 for it but now that'd be a great price for a Norinco SKS in perfect condition.

I see them all the time going for $350 or so now.

9thchild
October 1, 2013, 12:52 PM
So is the $300 Type 56 on Atlantic a good deal? This will be a project rifle.

meanmrmustard
October 1, 2013, 04:28 PM
Armslist still gets flooded here and there with $300 Yugos.

Sam1911
October 1, 2013, 04:34 PM
So is the $300 Type 56 on Atlantic a good deal? This will be a project rifle.

I'd say probably ok. For a "project rifle"? I'd imagine with a Tapco of Choate folding stock and some of those nifty duckbill magazines you could build it into a $200 rifle quite easily!

:)

silicosys4
October 1, 2013, 04:46 PM
Shoot, I paid $550 for my sks at the beginning of summer, and its not even Russian! It does take AK magazines though...

lewk416
October 1, 2013, 06:06 PM
You poor buggers! We get a crate of 10 for $1800 here. The only problem is most of the 'fun' add on stuff comes from you folks which we either can't have or pay dearly to get. Be nice to get rid of this cross border firearm crap!

cheers,

aka108
October 1, 2013, 06:28 PM
I had 5 SKS at one time. Gave one Russian with a laminated stock to my Son. Sold 3 and kept the Norinco. The Norinco was the most accurate of the bunch.

9thchild
October 1, 2013, 06:29 PM
I'd say probably ok. For a "project rifle"? I'd imagine with a Tapco of Choate folding stock and some of those nifty duckbill magazines you could build it into a $200 rifle quite easily!

:)
I was thinking more like refinishing the stock, coating the metal parts, tech sites, removing the bayonet, a safari sling, and maybe the tapco gas system replacement that has a rail to mount a red dot.

This would primarily be a hunting rig.

Sam1911
October 1, 2013, 06:35 PM
Sure. But by the time you've done all that, you'll have several hundred more into it. Now it's a $500-600 rifle only it's mother (meaning you, of course) could love! :)

Not saying it wouldn't be worth it to you, but seems like a little looking around could snag you one that was "pre-bubbad" for a bit less. There should be about a million floating around that have already had the bayonet cut off, the stock replaced, etc.

I know, though, everybody thinks their "custom" SKS is worth just as much as Atlantic wants for an original Type 56.

Tough call.

jimmyraythomason
October 1, 2013, 07:02 PM
Sure. But by the time you've done all that, you'll have several hundred more into it. Now it's a $500-600 rifle only it's mother (meaning you, of course) could love!

Sam,things have changed. SKSs have a BIG following here and folks are paying big money for deck out-dolled up SKSs especially Norincos. The more plastic hanging off of them the better. There is a trade forum locally that is for SKSs only and the hundreds of members think nothing of paying $400-600 for tacted out Chinese rifles.

Sam1911
October 1, 2013, 07:07 PM
OMG, that's hilarious! Cool news, though, for an awful lot of folks who spent the last 10 years or so regretting having butchered a pretty nice rifle.

I think there's an Irish (or Chinese?) blessing for that occasion, "May ye find a willing buyer for all your past mistakes!"

:)

Kiln
October 1, 2013, 08:53 PM
Yeah you can actually sell the SKS rifles modded with Tapco gear these days. People love them. I put up the original stock on my SKS after taking it off so if I ever decide to sell it I can sell it as a set or sell the Tapco gear seperately.

Honestly though I feel as though I brought my SKS into another era when I slapped on the new stock and higher capacity mags. I appreciate the adjustable shoulder stock the most, the old stock was too short for comfort. I doubt I'll ever be inclined to get rid of it.

WolverineFury
October 1, 2013, 09:12 PM
What MrMustard said, I see all different kinds of SKS's posted on ArmsList in KY for $300 - $350 (I occasionally see someone ask more). They've definitely gone up the last year though. They were asking around $250 last November.

lewk416
October 1, 2013, 09:29 PM
Here's mine. Started out as a Russian refurb. Thought I'd sporterize it a little for fun. The optics 'were' a cheap knock off of an Eotech. Crapped out after the first 3 shots! Busted every cheap plastic internal part. Replaced with a spare 3x9 Burris scope.

monotonous_iterancy
October 1, 2013, 09:55 PM
The SKS is a great rifle. I know that some of them, like Yugoslavians, aren't chrome-lined. I don't know if any others aren't, but does lack of chrome lining affect anything?

Sam1911
October 1, 2013, 10:01 PM
Chrome lining the barrel makes the bore less susceptible to rusting when firing corrosive ammo and not cleaning immediately afterward.

If you get one that was not used much and was kept in cosmoline, you running modern non-corrosive ammo through it will never bother it a lick.

If you get one that was used a lot and not cared for, the bore might be a "sewer pipe."

wally
October 2, 2013, 09:22 AM
for an awful lot of folks who spent the last 10 years or so regretting having butchered a pretty nice rifle.


What is "butchered" about replacing a stock, magazine, and gas tube to add a red dot sight? Easy enough to restore to original condition unless you discard the parts, although my two "Bubba's" original stocks are looking more and more like firewood every time I go up in the attic -- many of the $70 "originals" were rough, and most late Chinese imports had to have the bayonet lug removed.

Here are a few of mine:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=187462&d=1375818672
The "Bubba's" shoot much better since I can't hardly see the iron sights anymore, you'll get there eventually too!

The "Bubba" with the scope is a total mixmaster with no numbers matching and came equipped with a PU style scope & mount, its a very good shooter.

lewk416
October 2, 2013, 11:42 AM
Nice!

They are fun to shoot and inexpensive/plentiful enough to modify/bubba etc without feeling guilty.

cheers,

Sam1911
October 2, 2013, 11:56 AM
...and inexpensive/plentiful enough to modify/bubba etc without feeling guilty. Well, that is rather the point of the thread. Not so much any more. Neither so plentiful nor so inexpensive.

lewk416
October 3, 2013, 01:40 PM
Sorry, should have added 'here in Canada'. Dealer up here selling brand new Chinese SKS for $75 when you buy a crate of ammo! Another selling a crate of Russian refurb's for $1800 (10 rifles).

cheers,

Sulaco
October 3, 2013, 03:09 PM
Yeah, crazy, I paid $100 for my first SKS (Norinco) years back. Haven't wanted another since!

19-3Ben
October 3, 2013, 04:22 PM
I remember when I was in college and WAAAYYY overpaid because I bought a NIB 59/66 for $200 OTD. I got ripped off bad.

Man... (shakes head)...

rooter
October 3, 2013, 08:19 PM
Dang this was a 60 dollar gun 20yrs ago.

It is still a $60 gun, there are just fools willing to pay too much for them now. Just like AR'S were still $800 guns when fools were paying $1600 for them last year.

tubeshooter
October 3, 2013, 08:49 PM
With respect to 20 years ago...

Is it still a $1.35 gallon of gas, and we're all fools?

Is it still a $3.35 burger combo, and we're all fools?

How much ground chuck can you buy for $4 today, compared to 1993?

(Because the SKS hasn't been a $60 gun since the 90's...)


Things change. Prices change. Doesn't make you a fool for paying today's going rate. If all guns were sold for the original and initial value, there would be a lot of sweet older K frames around for $150 or less. Obviously things don't work that way. Wish it did.

lewk416
October 3, 2013, 09:10 PM
The few SKS's I shot (my own Russian refurb) and a friends Chinese model, are both under valued in my opinion. You cannot by a comparable firearm for that price.
All metal construction and aside from the earlier Norinco's, they work really well and cheap to shoot.

I typically take mine along to the range whenever I go. It's just fun!

cheers,

Sam1911
October 3, 2013, 09:11 PM
Look at all that goes into making an SKS. It isn't a $60 gun. It never was a $60 gun. No more than a Swiss K-31 is a $125 gun, or a M1903 was a $17 gun, nor ... well you get the point.

The only reason any of those guns came to us at extremely depressed prices was due to some countries making large numbers of them (and spending a whole lot more than you or I...) and then getting rid of them for near scrap value when they didn't want them any more. Set out to build one -- any one of them -- and you'll see that you've got a pile of raw materials of pretty respectable quality, and a large number of fairly complicated and quite precise machining, heat treating, and finishing steps to produce one. How much does that cost?

If a modern company -- say, oh I don't know...how about Ruger? -- wanted to make a semi-auto carbine with a wooden stock that fires common service rifle ammunition and has a business-like, utilitarian mien, how much would that cost? Well, an SKS is not a significantly less "quality" rifle than a Mini-14. Maybe a hair less on the smoothness of finish. Maybe a hair more on the accuracy. So I'd say $600-$800 in today's market?

What are you getting for your money? A rugged and reliable, if utilitarian, semi-automatic rifle in an intermediate chambering. How much is that worth? $60? What kind of silly talk is that?

orionengnr
October 3, 2013, 09:35 PM
Yep, I remember going to gun shows and seeing guys who had crates full of $69 SKSs. They would practically give you the first spam can...and as many as you could carry away weren't that much more money. Wish I'd bought a couple crates worth. :)

Back then (IIRC, and I may not) AKs were ~ $350.

So, look at it this way. These days AKs are a bargain--they have only gone up about 100%. SKs are like gold--up 1000% and somewhat over-valued, IMHO.

Once again IMHO, the thing that made both a bargain (in their day) was the price of surplus ammo. But that day is long gone.

The Mosin is another example of the same phenomena. When x54R ammo was cheaper than toilet paper, why not buy three? Now everyone trying to get into that market is on the tail end.

If you like the rifle because of its history, and maybe will reload for it in the future, go for it. But much of the bloom is off that rose. Many would rather have a Garand or a good old M-700--initial investment is not all that much more, value is only going up, and ammo is a known quantity (if not a giveaway, at least available). And re-loading 30-06 is not exactly a lost art.

Just my .02.

X-Rap
October 3, 2013, 10:26 PM
I thank my lucky stars I bought a shopping cart full when they were $69. Today I would probably not have much quarrel with $400 + especially if the ammo was still as cheap as back then.
They are a fun simple gun that will do what most need for a decent price and I'd take one over a Mini any day and twice on Sundays.

Sam1911
October 3, 2013, 10:44 PM
And even now you can get 7.62x39 ammo, factory new, for ~$0.24 a shot (just found some on line), and -- while that's not as cheap as it was, by far -- that's still pretty much the bottom end of the rifle ammo market, in all cartridges. (Probably beat only by corrosive surplus 5.45x39.)

So, even if you lament the rise of ammo, the cheap gun you bought to shoot cheap ammo still shoots the cheapest ammo around.

barnbwt
October 3, 2013, 11:21 PM
If a modern company -- say, oh I don't know...how about Ruger? -- wanted to make a semi-auto carbine with a wooden stock that fires common service rifle ammunition and has a business-like, utilitarian mien, how much would that cost? Well, an SKS is not a significantly less "quality" rifle than a Mini-14. Maybe a hair less on the smoothness of finish. Maybe a hair more on the accuracy. So I'd say $600-$800 in today's market?


I buy that argument. Probably even more than the Mini due to the historical connections, especially for rifles that weren't modified for import/bubba. When time eats enough of the rifles, I can see them sitting right up there with SVT40's (as guns become more scarce, people take better care of them and they become scarce more slowly). A Tula SVT isn't nicer or functionally that different from a Tula SKS other than size, and collector's items aren't sold by the pound ;)

TCB

jimmyraythomason
October 4, 2013, 10:47 AM
Here is a sample of an ad on Shelby County(Al.)Guns and Parts trade forum as an example of a typical offering.hey guys, I have a buddy who owns 3 SKS, with cosmoline still on 'em. He's been offered $600/each but he is getting the $600 in trade credit toward something else in the traders shop. I've tried to explain to him that he should let "normal people" (and I often use that term loosely...lol) have a chance at them, so that people who do NOT want to deal with an FFL, can obtain something without the paperwork. I'll have pics soon, but I think he will take $500/each. Shoot me the # you might think about and I'll run it by him.

Ignition Override
October 4, 2013, 06:18 PM
Maybe with a Tech Sight and Kivaari trigger job, the SKS (and FR8) makes a good "scout rifle"?
Why spend over $700 on a new Ruger "Scout"?

rooter
October 4, 2013, 10:51 PM
With respect to 20 years ago...

Is it still a $1.35 gallon of gas, and we're all fools?

Is it still a $3.35 burger combo, and we're all fools?

How much ground chuck can you buy for $4 today, compared to 1993?

Was the oil used in our fuel today refined 20 years ago when it was cheaper to produce fuel....nope
Is the burger butchered 20 years ago when labor costs were less being sold today....nope
Was the SKS produced decades ago, fixing the cost......sure was
Is the cost of an SKS inflated because fools are willing to pay more for them...yep
Will we ever see cheap SKS's again....yep, if the fools stop buying them

Sam1911
October 4, 2013, 11:09 PM
Was the SKS produced decades ago, fixing the cost......sure was.Yup. Just like that 1903 Springfield. Or that Parker SxS 12ga. Or that 1956 Corvette. Or that 1790 house on the village square.
People are so stupid. They'd pay more today for those things than they were worth 65, 100, or 200+ years ago! If the fools stopped paying for them, the price would fall back to what it was way back then!

(Of course, when the price falls below similar items in the market because demand is deflated, those items -- however much utility and absolute value they might have -- become valueless and unwanted and so are simply discarded as trash. A worthwhile fate for that Corvette or house or rifle, right? Since so few people want one that the price has fallen below the market?)

Is the cost of an SKS inflated because fools are willing to pay more for them...yepFools willing to pay for them? Yeah, and Mini-14s, and AKs, and ARs and everything else which is of similar capability on the market today. Are you really suggesting that people should ONLY pay the original purchase price (uh, apparently the price paid by a foreign government who produced them via whatever esoteric and non-free-market procurement system?) for an item, EVER?

So if you buy a Winchester Model 70 in 1990 and it costs you $600, but your grand-dad bought one in 1960 for $150, his rifle is only WORTH $150? Perhaps you see the flaws in your theory?

Will we ever see cheap SKS's again....yep, if the fools stop buying themOk, now that's just silly. Not even wishful thinking, just nonsense.

barnbwt
October 5, 2013, 01:24 AM
Was the SKS produced decades ago, fixing the cost......sure was

Far from setting a fixed price, cessation of production sets (pretty firmly) a ratcheting lower limit on what the cost can be. Moreover, it guarantees a gradual upward pressure on the price due to the natural decay of that supply. The original slave-labor cost losses incurred by the USSR allowed us to procure them initially for an exceptionally low price in their time of desperation --it does nothing to keep that price from bidding right back up where it belongs at a future date when the sellers are no longer desperate

A big reason Pythons have jumped in price so much is because so many are locked away in safes (lost, for intents and purposes of commerce) or worn out. They'd never have sold new for anything like they do now. And their price will never decrease since gunowners have precious little incentive to ever short sell anything.

And that's completely independent of inflation, no less. We've had significant true inflation over the years, and more recently, the outside world's economy is strong enough that their stuff simply costs us more to bring in. Since many of the SKSs in particular were imported years ago, that aspect at least, is less significant.

TCB

rooter
October 5, 2013, 05:45 PM
Yup. Just like that 1903 Springfield. Or that Parker SxS 12ga. Or that 1956 Corvette. Or that 1790 house on the village square.
People are so stupid. They'd pay more today for those things than they were worth 65, 100, or 200+ years ago! If the fools stopped paying for them, the price would fall back to what it was way back then!

(Of course, when the price falls below similar items in the market because demand is deflated, those items -- however much utility and absolute value they might have -- become valueless and unwanted and so are simply discarded as trash. A worthwhile fate for that Corvette or house or rifle, right? Since so few people want one that the price has fallen below the market?)

You are weaving supply and demand into the mix. The fact is the SKS likely cost $30 or less to produce. Adjust it for inflation, factor in supply and demand (which is truthfully just fools paying too much for an item in its simplest form) if you must, but the SKS is still selling for more than it is worth.

If the fools stopped paying for them, the price would fall back to what it was way back then!

Ever hear of Detroit, MI? $100K homes selling for $50. Is it a $50 home now? Hell, the salvage value is more than $50.

Sam1911
October 5, 2013, 06:06 PM
The fact is the SKS likely cost $30 or less to produce. Adjust it for inflation, factor in supply and demand (which is truthfully just fools paying too much for an item in its simplest form) if you must, but the SKS is still selling for more than it is worth.Is it? Go ahead. Make one. Today in 2013. You can't POSSIBLY judge the costs to make something based on the lowest price you can remember paying for that item as surplus 20 years ago.

I know you can't make one, so ask Ruger to make some.

Yeah, basically they do, in the Mini-14. Nothing substantively different, in fact a lot that's simpler, about that gun. So how much does it cost to make THAT gun, today? $60? Ok...sure, right, so we know that's not true. But say it only costs maybe $250 in materials and actual 2013 production line time to make.

And you want to buy one for that cost? So we aren't paying for packaging, shipping, taxes, duties/tariffs, distributors' costs, retail space and staff overheads all along the supply chain -- to say nothing at all of any profit for any of the companies involved in putting that firearm in your hand?

Yeah, now I'm bringing economics into it! :rolleyes: Like, figuring out the real costs of things. And that actually DOESN'T yet deal with the very real fact that there is a more-or-less free-ish market by which folks who want a thing vie with other folks who want that thing to see who will pay enough for it to a) make it worth all those companies' whiles to provide it, and b) outbid enough other potential purchasers to actually acquire a limited item that multiple people want.*

Ever hear of Detroit, MI? $100K homes selling for $50. Is it a $50 home now? Hell, the salvage value is more than $50.Well good. At least you accept my point. Your original statement is analogous to saying that those houses are "worth" only whatever it originally cost to build them, regardless of market forces, inflation, or any possible other factor. And that's obviously invalid.

When folks don't WANT something, the price falls. When it is so unwanted that the price folks will pay isn't enough to make producing or providing that thing, that thing becomes roughly worthless. And none of that applies to a reliable, acceptably accurate, rugged, and perfectly serviceable semi-automatic rifle on the market in a country where the citizens generally have the freedom to own such a thing and a nationally rising interest in doing so.

Believing that an SKS is only worth $60 is just utterly detached from reality. It's just an irrelevant statement. Might as well say, "A Ferrari is only a $1,000 car." All that statement signifies is that you'll never own one.

Saying that only "fools" pay money for things like that is a VERY strange statement for a member of a shooting interests forum largely dedicated to exactly that sort of pursuits.




* -- (Supply and demand control EVERY transaction for goods that we make. Heck, they control EVERY transaction of every kind we make -- right down to questions of love and other less hard-econ. phenomena. So if you accept that everyone in the world is a fool, then sure supply and demand is just a bunch of fools paying too much for everything in their lives. :rolleyes: In reality supply and demand is the phenomena by which everyone pays EXACTLY the right amount for what they need. (Because the price paid in one transaction influences every other transaction in the market, and so helps DEFINE demand, and set the limits of supply.) But that's getting pretty intense for this kind of discussion.)

rooter
October 5, 2013, 08:49 PM
Supply and demand control EVERY transaction for goods that we make. Heck, they control EVERY transaction of every kind we make -- right down to questions of love and other less hard-econ. phenomena.

Really?

Well good. At least you accept my point. Your original statement is analogous to saying that those houses are "worth" only whatever it originally cost to build them, regardless of market forces, inflation, or any possible other factor. And that's obviously invalid.

I think you missed it altogether. Intrinsic value and market value are non synonymous. Those houses are worth exactly what is cost to build them, considering like and similar condition. $100K homes are not suddenly worth $50, next year $5000, the next year $500. Supply and demand does not ensure "exactly the right amount" is being paid. Detroit is a prime example. Equilibrium is what you refer to, and equilibrium can be artificially inflated or deflated. Exogenous factors also cause disequilibrium. Were DPMS M4's "worth" $1400 6 months ago and now only "worth" $750. No, they were always worth exactly the same amount of money. Fools paid too much (an exogenous factor), disequilibrium set in, and the price rose until reaching the artificially inflated price (new equilibrium).

Saying that only "fools" pay money for things like that is a VERY strange statement for a member of a shooting interests forum largely dedicated to exactly that sort of pursuits.

If you are going to challenge my statement, challenge it! Do not change its meaning to attempt to make a point. Fools and largely the misinformed artificially inflate prices. If members here are "largely dedicated" to being foolish enough to pay $400-$600 for a $60 rifle, tell me again what is strange.

Like I said, the days of non-inflated SKS's won't be over unless fools and the misinformed continue to cause artificial inflation of the price.

You may have the last word sam1911, I'm usually amused by most of your ripostes.

GoWolfpack
October 6, 2013, 06:59 AM
Pro buyers tip: decide how much you want to pay for an item. What you think is a fair price. Then start looking for your chosen item at or below that price. You'll be happier this way.

In the case of an SKS, should you decide the max you're willing to pay is $100, I hope you can live happily without one.

outerlimit
October 6, 2013, 09:23 AM
Ten years ago I was paying $89 for unissued Yugo's still in the cosmo with all matching #'s.

Ten years before that they were $1200-1500+ because of scarcity. Now they're $400-$600 because of stupidity.

nathan
October 6, 2013, 09:54 AM
SKS is a very solid built semi auto centerfire rifle designed for war. It s designers
made it robust , simple and idiot proof. And the bayonet comes in handy. Whats not to like? The cool factor, too, is that these were made a half century ago in the Cold War years between East and West. f you ever find a nice one all original configuration with mint bore for $400, then thats a steal nowadays. They dont make them no more.....

If you want a cheapo $200-250 semi auto, then might as well find the old reliable Ruger 10/22 rimfire with all its variations.

jimmyraythomason
October 6, 2013, 02:44 PM
Now they're $400-$600 because of ...... Because that is what the buyer and seller agree on,which is the sole deciding factor in determining any thing's value. It makes no difference what anyone else thinks it's value is,it is worth what someone is willing to give,no more,no less.

MrWesson
October 6, 2013, 04:30 PM
Yes.. the days of owning one for 250 long gone and 100 further still.

A SKS going up in value I have no problem with.. Its the lack of import of new/used/mil surp arms from all over the world to replace it with something.

I worry about a gun world where it takes 5-600 to break into and may scare away new/young people from owning them.

tubeshooter
October 6, 2013, 05:12 PM
^ This is a good point. Back when I picked up my SKS, it was an affordable way to get into the game.

The way prices are rising now, after awhile all new shooters will have to turn to will be ultra-budget bolt guns or maybe a very well-worn .30-30 for that super-affordable first centerfire. As you say - most anything else will be somewhat more (then again I've never been a big Mosin Nagant fan).

Jim Mac
October 6, 2013, 05:26 PM
I found a SKS sporter at the local flea market a couple months ago. The blueing was pretty gone and it was in a ATI folding stock. I asked the guy the price and was told $200. I quickly paid for it. Another guy that got to the table about a minute behind me was trashing the SKS saying the 200 was waaaay overpriced. (I think he wanted me to put it down and think twice). The seller said thats funny because this guy didnt have any problems forking the money over, full asking price.
I didnt wait around for them to finish the conversation. I quickly walked away popping the AK47 magazine out of the magwell. Yes it was a 16" norinco "sporter". I did sell it a month later to fund the purchase of my compact RIA 45. jim

Sam1911
October 6, 2013, 05:32 PM
Really? Yes, really. The effects of supply and demand influence much more of our lives than simple monetary transactions. But we're getting off topic so let's not go farther with that one.

I think you missed it altogether. Intrinsic value and market value are non synonymous. There is no such thing as "intrinsic value." It's a fallacious theory. There are costs for finished goods, raw materials, parts, pieces, labor, overhead, etc., etc., but you can't even look at those costs, the week you put your gun, car, house, etc. together, and say that's an "intrinsic value" because all of those parts and pieces -- and the raw materials for them, all the way back to the costs of the right to the minerals, timber, energy, and labor to harvest them, are dictated by the market. Your house is worth $100,000 because that's what it cost in materials and labor? Oh? Why did the studs cost $3.50 each? Why did the fuel for the delivery truck cost $3.89 a gallon? Why did the electrician's or plumber's labor cost $60 or $120 an hour? Why did...? I'm sure you get the point.

Now on to another point: If you're a manufacturer of things (any things) you'd better flippin' HOPE your goods are WORTH more -- much more! -- than it costs to produce them! Otherwise, you're out of business before you start. There's a word for a company that makes goods that aren't worth more than the labor, and materials, and overhead, (and transport, and distribution, and retailing, and taxes, and...) it costs to make those goods: FAILURES.

Those houses are worth exactly what is cost to build them, considering like and similar condition.
Wait, what? They're worth exactly what it cost to build them? Or something considering like and similar condition? That's two completely different things! Cost to build them is heavily dependent on market forces (and as we've seen, no builder will stay in business if his houses are only worth what it cost him to build them! That's just working your way into bankruptcy.), but it is a single-point recorded amount which is handy. However, condition modifiers and "comps" of other houses similar to that one are totally at odds with cost to construct and often FAR different! Why include them in one sentence as if they were related?

$100K homes are not suddenly worth $50, next year $5000, the next year $500. Uh, tell that to the folks who want to buy and sell! You can CLAIM the house you want to sell is worth what you paid to build it. (Well...what YOU paid? Or what the builder paid? Or what the materials suppliers paid? Or? ... ;)) But that claim won't get you one extra nickle at settlement. You can CLAIM that a house in a nice neighborhood is only worth what it cost the previous owner, or the owner 15 owners back(!), to build it, but that will get you laughed out of the real estate office.

You can claim those things, but they're detached from any form of reality.

Supply and demand does not ensure "exactly the right amount" is being paid. Well, yes, yes it does. The law of supply and demand says that you pay whatever it takes to procure an item, and no more. You might have to pay more than it cost someone to make it because a lot of people also want to buy items like that and you have to outbid enough of them to procure one for yourself. You might have to pay a lot LESS than it cost someone to make it because there are a lot of these things around and few people want one. You don't GET to pay JUST what the maker paid, even though lots of folks would pay more. You don't HAVE to pay every penny that the maker paid, even though no one's bidding against you and he really needs to move these things and recoup as much of his costs as he can. You (have the chance to, at least) pay EXACTLY the perfect amount. No more or less than necessary.

And, what you pay becomes even more perfect because your price point "data" becomes part of the market and helps to define and change the market. Your price pulls the market price closer to itself. You've paid an amount and you've taken some of the available supply. You've informed the market.

Hey, feel good about yourself! YOU make a difference! :) (Shucks, beats voting! :D)

Equilibrium is what you refer to, and equilibrium can be artificially inflated or deflated. Oh really? It is what it is. It's no more artificial than saying you're "artificially fat" because you eat a lot of Cheetos. Factors go in, results come out.

Were DPMS M4's "worth" $1400 6 months ago and now only "worth" $750. No, they were always worth exactly the same amount of money. Well, if you think that's the case, you'd better tell me what that "same amount of money" is. Is it $750? Why? What makes it WORTH $750?

But let's say it is $750. WHY was it $750? Because the market said so. There were x,xxx DPMS M4s for sale for every x,xxx people who wanted one on any given day. That surplus or deficit of guns for buyers pushed the price to $750. DPMS makes a few too many, that price falls to $650. DPMS makes a thousand or so fewer that month, the price rises to $850. All moderated and modulated by a market full of makers doing the same thing and choosing different price points at which to sell. Everyone and their brother wants whatever AR they can get? Price rises to $1,400.

Neither price is one iota more "artificial" than any other. They just are what they are.

Now DPMS might be able to survive as a company on the profit from making that gun and selling it for $750. They might be breaking even or losing money selling it for $650. They might be banking cash and opening up new divisions, taking home fat bonuses, and investing heavily into R&D if they're selling each one for $1,400. None of that matters at all to what their guns are WORTH.

If members here are "largely dedicated" to being foolish enough to pay $400-$600 for a $60 rifle, tell me again what is strange. Once again, it isn't and never was a "$60 rifle" in any sense of the word that has meaning, and second -- if the price to buy a semi-automatic military surplus rifle is $400-$600, and they want to own one, they aren't FOOLS for buying. They may be POSSIBLY intemperate for buying now and not waiting for a better deal. They may POSSIBLY be very prescient for buying at only $600 when that rifle might have been worth $1,200 in another year. (And depending where you live, that's a very real possibility.)

When the price of poker is $600, and we constantly clamor that we need more folks on our side playing our brand of poker, it seems very counter-productive to ridicule them and label them FOOLS for jumping in the game.

Like I said, the days of non-inflated SKS's won't be over unless fools and the misinformed continue to cause artificial inflation of the price.
DO you have any -- really, ANY -- concept of what a non-artificial price for an SKS "should" be today? Pick a number. But declare your reasoning for coming up with that number. Is it just whatever the Russian or Chinese or Albanian government paid ... uh, itself(?) or whatever... to make it in the 1950s or '60s? Is it what someone would have had to pay to get one in the USA in 1960? Is it what Ruger would have to charge today to make that rifle and turn a profit? Is it what someone could have bought one for in 1991? Is it what a resident of a ban state would have to pay for a "grandfathered" one? Is it what you could whittle one out yourself in your garage for? Where is the "intrinsic" value set?

[EDIT TO ADD:]
It is still a $60 gun ... <and, later>...The fact is the SKS likely cost $30 or less to produce.
I assure you, $30 USD has nothing at all with what it cost any of those governments to produce them. How would you even begin to figure it out anyway? Command economies, heavily subsidised production throughout a half-dozen or so different producing countries in several different parts of the world, in multiple decades? All you've basically said is that these guns cannot be valued properly because there is literally NO way to begin to calculate a standard of what it cost to produce them. Your guess that it cost about $30 to make one is about as groundless as any guess I'd make on the number of strands of spaghetti it would take to span from here to the moon -- except that my guess would be A LOT EASIER to substantiate!

I'm usually amused by most of your ripostes.I prefer them with marmalade.

nathan
October 6, 2013, 05:46 PM
Dont get stuck with the idea these SKS s are still priced low like ten years in the past tense. We are in different times now. The only thing constant is change, and change means high prices and values go up especially for those that arent made no more. If its a nice Russian SKS for $500, then dont wait a second. Grab it and be happy.

Ignition Override
October 7, 2013, 12:20 AM
If there is a parallel with Enfield #4/Mk.1s, I suspect that if imported 7.62x39 ammo (.25/rd. in bulk) is ever taxed much more or has very high tariiffs added, so that the prices were to approach US-made x39 prices, the SKS might fall a bit in demand and price, as the rifle will never have quite the Hollywood-driven insurgent/guerrilla image of the AK clones.

Maybe my impressions are also wrong about Enfield #4/Mk.1s, but with very scarce, non-reloadable surplus .303 ammo selling for not much less than reloadable commercial Prvi P. ammo (.75/rd.:(), this seems to have kept #4 rifle prices pretty stable since '09.

leadcounsel
October 7, 2013, 02:45 AM
I'd like to buy some gold that was mined in 1960 for 1960s prices....

As for the SKS, I think all the 'fools' realized that this is a great rifle and was a steal at $70, $150, and even $300... and the prices will continue to rise and peak around $500 or so in todays dollars, just beneath the AK and AR and other similar semi-auto rifles.

Warp
October 7, 2013, 07:36 AM
I cannot believe how expensive they are.

I got one in excellent condition, still covered in cosmoline, for $135 shipped with FFL transfer fees, in about 2006. That really wasn't all that long ago...and now we are asking if the days of $350 are over.

Holy crap.

Sam1911
October 7, 2013, 07:46 AM
Oh, certainly. I bought a Russian years back for $200, and probably should have shopped around a bit more at the time. Now what's a pristine Russian SKS go for?

But here's the thing: It is a very solidly built, blued and wood semi-auto, all original, military service rifle (with an integral bayonet, for what that's worth). Accurate and dependable, in a very useful and effective cartridge quite suitable for defensive purposes or hunting out to maybe 200 yards or so.

Why WOULDN'T that cost $400-$600 today? We've been very spoiled by having a huge surplus firearms market which put a whole lot of quite good guns in the hands of a lot of shooters for many decades. But the low price of those guns was about as "artificial" as you could possibly ever expect to see. Heck, when I got my Garand (yeah, from the DCM...not the CMP!) it cost me $265, and folks were grumbling about how much they'd gone up! Good heavens. Just look at one and explain what makes that a $265 rifle? Nothing but high supply and relatively low demand.

It has nothing to do with how much it cost a government to make or purchase them, nor anything at all to do with how good a gun it is relative to other guns, or with how useful such a thing would be to any owner.

GoWolfpack
October 7, 2013, 10:19 AM
Because that is what the buyer and seller agree on,which is the sole deciding factor in determining any thing's value. It makes no difference what anyone else thinks it's value is,it is worth what someone is willing to give,no more,no less.
Losing battle Jimmy, might as well try to explain it to your cat.

jimmyraythomason
October 7, 2013, 10:48 AM
Losing battle Jimmy, might as well try to explain it to your cat.
I suppose you're right. I've been here before. BTW,my cat already knows this but the dog is still struggling with it.

leadcounsel
October 7, 2013, 11:46 PM
Nothing about an SKS is cheap. The ONLY reason people think they are cheap, is because of simple supply and demand. WE were flooded with these (and other milsurps).

If they had trickled in at $800 each people would have been happy to get one at $700.

Agreed, that these well made rugged semi-auto battle rifles are comparable to many other rifles at twice the cost.

Some people are slow to understand this concept. I'm glad I scored mine over the years, and still buy up any good ones I can find ...

Ignition Override
October 8, 2013, 12:24 AM
For those who now contemplate and find their first SKS to be affordable, you might consider buying a heap of ammo first.
Ammo prices can jump far out of proportion compared to the rifles.

We know what can happen overnight with absolutely no warning. Just clicks with a credit card.

leadcounsel: many of us are so thankful that the various AR rifles' and components' "cool factor" diverts vast amounts of cash away from other rifles.
At the river or club, I seldom see an SKS, but the ARs are countless.

If you enjoyed reading about "Are the days of finding a nice SKS for $350 over?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!