SKS or AR?

Been there, wouldn’t ever trade an AR for an SKS.

Keep your AR, save up for an SKS or an AK but the accuracy and ergonomics of either will be inferior to your AR. Right now ARs are the bargains that the SKS and AK used to be!

You're limited to under 200m with either and more likely 100m with the size of WI deer so neither would be ideal for that purpose (unless you get a 6.5G or 6.8SPC upper). I don't see how you can think the SKS has better ergos than an AR but that's purely subjective and I guess you fall into that 1%. I enjoy my Yugo SKS at the range occasionally but would take any of my ARs in any caliber for hunting/defense/ranch rifle 10/10 times.
An AR is good to have in any case and you don't have big $ tied up in this one so why not just keep it and get the SKS?

The only possible reason I can see for preferring an SKS over an AR is a pending AWB that defines an AR as an AW but exempts an SKS.

Keep at least your favorite or most practical AR and buy an SKS, if you have a desire for a mid-twentieth century wood and steel mil-surp.

I have one of each. I bought the SKS first a long time ago. My SKS can't even come close to my AR when it comes to the trigger, accuracy, sighting system, or optic mounting. I'm talking about a plain jane flat top AR, not a modified 3-gun AR.

The SKS is a bit easier to clean than an AR, but that's mostly due to the multi-lug chamber of the AR, IMO.

I’ve spent more time behind the trigger of SKS than AR15. I spent my youth with surplus rifles and have a warm place in my heart for wood stocks against, blued or parkerized steel. A good SKS is a fine carbine and will certainly satisfy just about any need inside of 100 yards with iron sights. They are reliable, eat steel cased ammo without skipping a beat, and the 7.62x39 cartridge will kill just about anything inside of 100 yards. The SKS is no precision rifle but accuracy isn’t bad, seemingly on par with many other surplus rifles or even your average Mini 14. Generally the triggers leave a lot to be desired. A tremendous about of take up, a heavy pull and non-crisp break. You can have a trigger job done to make them pretty nice if you’re into that. The biggest downsides to me are optics and lack of a safety. There is really no good way to mount an optic that doesn’t interfere with using stripper clips and(or) need to be removed to properly clean the firearm. Some people will try and modify the SKS with detachable magazines, optic mounts on the spring housing, etc. while everyone’s free to do what they want, I’m just not a fan and haven’t had the level of success I’d like with those modifications. If you are happy with iron sights up to 100 yards, don’t need a detachable magazine and feel comfortable without a safety then an SKS might be for you. If you get one, I highly recommend fully disassembling the bolt to clean until the firing pin channel is impeccably clean, as well as inspecting and correcting any signs of negative sear engagement. Proper sear engagement is key to making an SKS safe. The only safety mechanism on the SKS is a trigger block, but negative sear engagement can allow the hammer to slip off the sear and negligently discharge.

After only a handful of years using the AR15, I will say that I much now prefer an AR over any other platform for all of the obvious reasons. I recently took my favorite Yugo SKS out for the first time in over a year. I found that while I enjoyed shooting it, I felt satisfied running 20 rounds through it, casing it up, and getting back to shooting the AR.

If you really dislike AR15s then look for a Soviet built SKS. They are better in balance than the Yugos with the awkward grenade launcher you'll never use.

DeadFlies said:

I do, and that’s the problem.

I know that thr AR makes way more sense. Was hoping you guys could talk me out of disposing of it.

Click to expand...

Really the only way to find out if you value the traditional rifle ergonomics and emotional connection to woood stocks is to get some time behind the triggers of each and figure out what you like more.

DeadFlies said:

I do, and that’s the problem.

I know that the AR makes way more sense. Was hoping you guys could talk me out of disposing of it.

Click to expand...

Sometimes it's simply the appeal of wood. My SKS is prettier, but it's not even close to being the shooter my AR is. Even when I use only iron sights on the AR.

I've thought about a wood stock set for my AR on occasion, but the thinness of wood on top of the buffer tube and where the handguard mounts seems to dictate a laminated wood stock from Boyd's. But Boyd's has an non-traditional cut to their AR stocks which might not appeal to some.

Below is a mid-length AR that I photoshopped with a Boyd's laminated stock and handguard.

Windham Weaponry uses the same Boyd's stock on some of their rifles. https://www.windhamweaponry.com/firearms/rifles/308-caliber-rifle/308-hunter-2/

View attachment 785856

Having shot many High Master scores with my AR, out to 600 yards, I would not give up an accurate, reliable AR for a SKS. I did buy a couple of Chinese SKS's back in the 80's/90's. The cheapest one was $69.00, I could not walk away from it!. Everything Colorado man says about the SKS is consistent with my experience. The SKS is a battle proven design, but the trigger, ergonomics, and accuracy are inferior to a AR, and the lethality of the ammunition is so close, that ammunition alone would not make me change.

I bought my Chinese SKS back in the 80's when you could pick them up for $70. It's a great shooter and accuracy is about the same as my Mini 14. I like both my SKS and Mini 14, but they spend more time in the gun safe while the AR's go to the range.

DeadFlies said:

I do, and that’s the problem.

I know that thr AR makes way more sense. Was hoping you guys could talk me out of disposing of it.

Click to expand...

If you really want the SKS more than your AR and just can't afford both, then do the trade. As I said, the AR is the bargain the SKS used to be and will be very easy to replace, for the near future at least.

I've never really cared for AR's, I would take the SKS. Thats personal preference and nostalgia talking, the AR is more versatile, and the logical choice. To say nothing of simply being more mainstream, you could ask the question: x rifle or AR, you will get 85 votes for the AR hands down, 10 votes saying x rifle is nice but just isn't worth the $ compared to the AR, and 5 votes for x rifle.

Colorado Man and Slamfire give a pretty accurate summary. You can get some pretty surprising accuracy from an SKS from handloading if you wish along with Tech Sights (they make peep sights for the SKS). Using H4198 and some Hornady 123 gr. plastic tipped varmint type bullets, I could get about 2.5 to 3 MOA from it at 100 yards. The SKS trigger group resembles that of a Garand so it can be improved by someone who knows what they are doing but it will never be a match trigger. It is a bit easier to add optics than an AK as they make receiver cover optic mounts that are decent. If the choice was between an AK or a SKS--take the SKS.

Between the AR and SKS at current price points (roughly equal), if you are choosing between them, you need to have a pretty compelling reason such as you like the 7.62x39 cartridge in steel cased ammo, etc. to choose an SKS. I am not a fan of 7.62x39 in an AR for a variety of reasons. SKS replacement parts are getting fewer and more expensive by the year and I doubt that situation will get better soon and aftermarket options are also getting fewer in number in the market place. The whole grenade launcher Yugo model is interesting from a technical standpoint but pretty useless as far as function.

For me personally, the AR family is hard to love if you are a traditionalist but it has become the most adaptable platform with choices available for a dizzying array of calibers, optics mounting, excellent accuracy, and so forth. Parts of all kinds are readily available as well as very good reliability using decent quality parts.

IMHO, the SKS was one of the best of the Sov Bloc firearms back in the day for what it was designed as--a simple rugged rifle that untrained soldiers could shoot pretty well in a variety of climates, etc. For a collector, there are a dizzying array of SKS's made by different combloc countries. I am generally not a Sov bloc weaponry nor a semi/full auto fan and prefer old bolt actions. However, I like the SKS much better than some of its contemporaries if that tells you something. It and the Garand show their WWII vintage where militaries were transitioning from the obsolete military bolt action rifle. The SKS does so pretty well and compares favorably with some other early semi and full auto rifles made by FN resulting in the FAL system, the French 49/56, the M-14, the Czech VZ-58, or even the Mini-14/30 etc.

Of the later designs, I think that the AR is superior in design and usefulness when compared with the CETME/G3 series or the AK series. I am purposefully leaving out things like the Steyr or Tavor bull pups, submachine guns, or other variants such as the Galil, Valmet, and so forth which are interesting technically but are niche firearms right now.

A very personal preference thing.

There is no accounting for taste, which is why I could not understand the title. An AR OR Sks? Who would want an Sks?(Just kidding!)

For ease of user maintenance and accessorization, the AR is a good choice.

The SKS may be the better long term investment. The value of them has increased about 5 times in the last 15 years and with more and more states implementing assault rifle bans I don't see that trend reversing. The only reason I don't own them is because of the $500 they are now going for. For just $150 more you can get a field grade Garand from the CMP! My favorite AR I've ever shot is my side charging 7.62x39. It works perfectly. If I wanted to hunt with my semi auto carbine that would be my choice due to the optics options.

I've owned several sks's over the years. The last one being a Norinco that was modified to use standard AK -47 magazines. Pretty handy feature versus the long tongue standard mags. I used it as my rainy day hunting rifle, leaving the prettier bolt action home. Having recently purchased an ar, I couldn't justify keeping both. Weighing the pros and cons of both, I kept the ar. Just so much more versitile.

someguy2800 said:

The SKS may be the better long term investment. The value of them has increased about 5 times in the last 15 years and with more and more states implementing assault rifle bans I don't see that trend reversing. The only reason I don't own them is because of the $500 they are now going for. For just $150 more you can get a field grade Garand from the CMP! My favorite AR I've ever shot is my side charging 7.62x39. It works perfectly. If I wanted to hunt with my semi auto carbine that would be my choice due to the optics options.

Click to expand...

If you look around and aren’t afraid to make offers, you can still pretty regularly obtain a decent SKS for $350. I agree that from an investment point of view, barring an AR ban with grandfathered “pre-ban” designation, the SKS is probably a better investment outside of the collector value Colt AR15. As much as I love the Garand, I prefer an SKS.

If you really want to get an SKS, look for an un-refurbished Russian . IMHO they are the best.
I use to have a 1954 un-refurbished in 90 to 95 % condition and I am still kicking myself for selling it.

DeadFlies said:

HI all. A little background, first. I recently purchased a PSA middy rifle kit to go with the Anderson lower I had purchased a few months before that. I've built and fired a few ARs before, but couldn't really love them. They're cheap and light and modular, and uppers can be switched out for different calibers, etc. This is probably the practical option, especially when mounting optics is concerned.

I've had a few SKSs go through my hands over the last few years. Never fired any of them, but I really liked the feel. I remember a particular Yugo SKS that I really liked. Beautiful wood and steel. Internal mag. Grenade launcher. Smelled like Hoppes and stale cigarette smoke. Loads of character. But I have no experience with combloc weapons or the 762x39 round whatsoever.

Either one would necessarily be a range toy, a Wisconsin woods deer rifle, and an investment. I'm leaning towards trading my AR stuff for a nice SKS, but wanted to know what others think.

Click to expand...

What you seem to have here is a choice between an apple and an orange. I have to agree with those who mentioned it's a matter of your personal likes and which rifle between the two trips your trigger so to speak. Even when a decision is made there are a dozen variations of each to choose between. My remaining SKS is a Chinese Communist gun which was originally a GI surplus gun before the new versions poured into the US. I like the little rifle and mine does well what it was designed and intended to do. I also have several AR 15 guns including a few Colt SP 1 rifles. Being a nostalgic type I like the Colt SP 1 guns as they are close to what I dragged around in SE Asia and the SKS is also nostalgic of SE Asia. I like both rifles but personally lean towards the AR. That is just a matter of my taste. I also own a 1992 minty Harley Davidson Electra Glide so go figure I have a fetish for retro things.

What I or anyone else has nothing to do with what you may like. You mentioned having had several SKS flavors but never fired one. You at least know the feel of each rifle. Just my opinion but I think the AR will offer you a more accurate rifle with the right choice but again just my take. Between the two there are very few if any close similarities. Like I mentioned, apple or orange?

Ron