SKS vs. AR-15

So you just want a fun little gun to plink with?

Go with the SKS.

Well, I have both. They are both great plinkers and I wouldn't get rid of either.

If cost is a major factor, The SKS can't be beat. They are reliable, fairly accurate, and the rifle itself is still very affordable. Ammo isn't bad either.

But the AR is a very nice platform and is cheap to shoot as well. Probably edges out the SKS in the accuracy dept. (entry level, of course. AR's can be extremely accurate if you're willing to pay for it.). Long term value? The AR wins by quite a margin.

If you are looking for fun to shoot, you really can't go wrong with either.

I should have asked this at the same time. If a gun ban is ever reinstated, would it effect any weapons currently owned or just make it so you can't buy any others?

Click to expand...

That would depend on how the law was written. If it "grandfathered" weapons sold/owned prior to enactment of the law, then you would be able to keep the ones you already owned, but not buy more. If it "grandfathered weapons manufactured prior to enactment, you could buy a new one based on the date it was manufactured. If it is retroactive, you're pretty much hosed in the eyes of the law if you own one.

If you're gunnin' for fun, go with the SKS!

I have both.

The SKS is marginally more fun. Ammo is a little bit cheaper and you can use the crappy surplus without much worry. Less felt recoil although the weapon itself is heavier. SKS just looks pretty cool... and the attached bayonet on the Yugo is just frosting on the cake lol.

If you're lacking funds, the SKS should satisfy your 'fun' appetite while you save up for the AR.

I have both, and an AK. I probably like the AR best, followed closely by the SKS and way back the AK.

I say this because I find that only accurate guns are interesting. The AR is accurate. The SKS, marginally so. The AK, no way. However, the SKS is cheaper to get into, the ammo is cheaper, it's built like a tank, and I don't mind using and abusing it because I know parts are cheap as is a replacement gun. The AR, not so. But, with the AR, you can do so much with that platform by changing uppers, accesorizing, etc. The SKS, too many people try to make it into something it's not by bubbatizing it. Just leave the SKS stock, you won't improve it much if any by messing with it.

I think the SKS and the AK are both much easier to clean and maintain than the AR for sure, if that matters to you.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=231405

That's AK vs SKS. I'd not consider the AR in the same class, cheap, reliable, useful for medium game, mainly the cheap part. I have no need for anything tacticool, though I did dress up an SKS for the heck of it. But, I don't think the AR is anything I'd actually want. I have absolutely NO use for any black gun like that in .22 caliber especially. For those that love tacticool, I suppose it's the ultimate, but I use my rifles to hunt with and hunting rifles are better at hunting than tacticool rifles. Sure, you can hunt with a tacticool rifle, you can also kill someone with a M700 Remington. Neither is ideal for those applications unless you are a sniper. There are Remington 700 based sniper rifles.

For me, though, this sort of gun, the SKS in particular, is just a cheap knock about fun gun for range blasting with cheap ammo. I can't justify the cash for an AR when the SKS works so well for this. If you wanna split the difference with a decent caliber, more tacticool, but still affordable, consider the AK. I don't much care for AKs either, though.

I suppose it's your perceived "need" that will get you into what you choose. If you're a black helicopter survivalist type, you might want the AR tacticool in the NATO caliber. For me, the SKS is just a cheap fun gun and that's why I have a couple. I mean, at the price you can't NOT own one, not considering how well they work!

If you enjoy cleaning the weapon after use, get the AR. If you just want to toss in behind the truck seat and leave it until you want to use it again get the SKS or a AK.

No Doubt

The AR. You like the feel of it. Do you need another reason?

But if you need logical reasons:
AR is more Ergonomic, its controls are where you expect them to be. It is a more intuitive design, and it shows. The AR is much more comfortable to shoot.

AR’s for the most part, are much more accurate that the sks’s. Sure, I know, your friend’s, brother’s, cousin’s, uncle’s, dog has one that shoots sub MOA at a million yards. But, for the most part, the AR family of rifles is more accurate.

Oh yea, and you like the feel of the AR.

If you can afford the AR, you can buy one of each and not have to decide.

The SKS ergos may be cruddy, but with an aftermarket stock and with extraneous crap removed (grenade launcher if any, bayonet) it's not bad. I think the Mini-14/30 leaves it in the dust WRT ergonomics and overall feel, but Mini-14/30s are getting expensive. They don't need excessive cleaning, though, and with stainless and xytel, they can be ignored until you feel like cleaning them.

If you'd have to put an AR on a credit card, get an SKS and budget for an aftermarket stock. You'll have plenty of fun with it; maybe more.

On the other hand, I don't enjoy a day at the range -- the organized range, anyway -- with a gun that's not pretty accurate.

I don't even take my Mini-14 to the range for paper punching, but it's far and away my favorite rifle for plinking and shooting at faraway coffee cans while sitting in the dirt. It's not accurate enough, at least after it heats up, to be fun for paper punching. But I love the ergonomics and everything about how it shoots, as a "real world" carbine.

The SKS is in the same general category. It's not a range rifle, IMO. It's a "real world" carbine. The AR can fill both niches pretty well; it's fun for plinking and back country practice, and it's accurate enough to shoot paper for a while without frustration, especially if you get a heavier barrel.

Another thing: .223 is domestic ammo and it's relatively cheap in various forms from various sources. 7.62x39 domestic FMJ is as expensive as hunting ammo; if there's an interruption in the supply of Wolf, the SKS could become far less fun to play with.

(Hawken .50's are fun!)

I vote SKS.

Partly because loading up mags is a PITA at the range.

I am going to have to say, "Get both".

These 2 rifles are truly comparing apples and oranges. Not even close to being in the same category.

If you want and can afford an AR, then getting a SKS afterwards is really only a small expense. SKSs can be found between $100 to $200 depending on condition and your location.

Now, if you can only afford a $150 rifle, then it is a no brainer. The SKS is a fantastic $150 rifle.

Both are a lot of fun for plinking. Both are serious rifles. Both have their own advantages and disadvantages. Having both will cover a lot of bases.

BTW, I have both.

People tend to make plinking sound like something they can enjoy with a less than accurate rifle. I'm the opposite. When I "plink" I want to hit what I'm plinking. My SKS sits in the cabinet while i plink with my RRA AR15, cuz if I feel like plinking a soda can 75 yards away, I'm going to hit it.

My plinker has to be a tackdriver. There's no fun in missing.

A decent SKS (both of the Yugos I've used) can hit a soda can at 75yd without trouble.

The SIGHTS kind of suck, but that's another issue altogether.

I can hit clay pigeons at upwards of 100 yards with the Mini-14 using iron sights. The gun is as accurate as I am, even hot. Keyword is "can", not "always do." But I'm practicing for practical accuracy, not an amazing group.

If I'm trying to put 5 through the center of a paper target, the Mini isn't going to make a nice tiny group.

I do understand, though, the fun in "plinking" at a good distance with a scoped centerfire bolt action. It's just a different sort of plinking.

I personally think that you should go with the sks, it is one of the funniest guns to shoot and plink with, one of the easiest weapons to clean, and maintain, as well as being one of the easiest to handle. they are light and handy and just an overall hoot to shoot.

it is one of the funniest guns to shoot and plink with

Click to expand...

I don't know. There's little in the world funnier than the .500 S&W revolver -- if you're watching someone ELSE shoot it.

If I'm looking to bench rest, I'll take one of my MOA hunting rifles, probably my 3/4 MOA Remington M722 in .257 Roberts. If I'm shooting at clay pidgons at 100 yards off hand, the SKS is great fun! It's a 3moa gun, accurate enough to dust that clay bird if you're on it and indeed does. OR, I can whip out my new Remington M597 .22 magnum, 1 1/2 MOA so far, haven't tried all the different brands of ammo, yet. At about $7.50 a box of 50, it's not that expensive to shoot, either.

The SKS was cheap and is fun, what more justification is needed than that for under 100 bucks? Now, a 700 dollar AR, I'm going to need a niche to fill for that one. I really don't have one, either. If I wanted to shoot quarter inch groups at 100 yards, I'd be looking at building a bench rest rifle, but MOA is good nuf for this old hunter. I have three rifles that will do that, one Savage and two Remingtons.