Contrast recoil 7.62x39 vs .223

[Mr White]

7.63x39 = getting punched in the shoulder by an average-sized 12 year old.
.223 = getting punched in the shoulder by an average-sized 5 year old.

Your 5 and 12 year olds may vary.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

Guntech has it right. Generically speaking, a .223 has 1/2 the recoil of the 7.62x39, all things being equal like weapon weight.


7.62x39mm is a mild shooting cartridge. Can go all day with that and no problems. However, it is not like the .223 which is like a tiny bump. It's more of a medium bump (I wouldn't call it kick like a .308 or greater would have). You will notice that a .223 is significantly easier to stay on target with than a 7.62x39mm. Muzzle will wander much, much less during rapid fire.

 

[MD_Willington]

Okay, smart guy comment aside;

I've fired both types of rounds, .223 in semi-auto and .223 in a bolt gun, less felt recoil in the .223 semi than in the .223 bolt gun.

But .223 felt recoil was less than 7.62x39 in both Russian and Yugoslavian SKS, the SKS are heavier than my semi .223 and the .223 bolt gun I shot..

Honestly, both are not bad at all, my friend had his 11 year old son shooting his Chinese SKS without any problems, he was a lanky maybe 80lbs kid...

 

[pdowg881]

I've seen a lot of pictures from the Vietnam war with little Vietnamese carrying SKS's (Ak's too obviously). Most were around 5 ft tall and probably not very heavy so I'm sure most people can handle 7.62x39. Maybe someone here has experience seeing this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vietcong1968.jpg

 

[jpwilly]

The rifle is heavy and the heavy gas piston and bolt slow the recoil down so much that most of the recoil in an SKS is muzzle climb.