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

[monotonous_iterancy]

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]

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]

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:

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]

Nice!

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

cheers,

 

[Sam1911]

...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]

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]

Yeah, crazy, I paid $100 for my first SKS (Norinco) years back. Haven't wanted another since!

 

[19-3Ben]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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...yep

Fools 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 them

Ok, now that's just silly. Not even wishful thinking, just nonsense.

 

[barnbwt]

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]

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]

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! 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. 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]

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]

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.