rduchateau2954
Member
Local guy has one, wants to trade for an SKS, which I have. Thoughts? My SKS is an unmolested Norinco.
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
The SKS is more modern and advanced design for which wide selection of ammo is available. I'm assuming the bolt gun is chambered for .303 cartridge. Always keep reliable self loader over something that has to be worked "a mano".Local guy has one, wants to trade for an SKS, which I have. Thoughts? My SKS is an unmolested Norinco.
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
Some have wandering zero - but certainly not all of them.Keep the SKS. The Jungle Carbines have notorious wandering zero issues. There are much better Enfields out there.
I'm personally not an Enfield fan, primarily do to the appearance and relatively weak action, but even I admit I rather liked an Ishapore 2A I encountered in a local gun store. It has a different magazine and better aesthetics. Were it not for its inability to safely handle commercial .308 loadings, I'd have probably snatched it up.
I would agree. But to clarify a point, the wandering zero isn't a myth, the British did have an issue with it, but it affected some rifles and not others. Not all, or even most No. 5s had it. The issue was indeed mentioned in field reports, and was investigated by R.S.A.F. Enfield and S.A.S.C. (according to Maj E.G.B. Reynolds, a member of the Small Arms Inspectorate during and after WW2, and author of the "The Lee Enfield Rifle"). Capt. Peter Laidler, a now retired British army armorer, and author of several technical articles on the Lee Enfield also mentioned encountering the problem. But again, the problem didn't show up in every No. 5. The rifle that did were scrapped and used for parts, if they could not be repaired, and the result is that any No. 5 that is still around today is almost certainly not one of those that had a wandering zero problem. So this is just yet another reason to buy the Enfield if it's a real No. 5 and not a fake. Unfortunately for your shoulder, however, that rubber recoil pad will be rock hard after all these years.If the Nº5 is authentic and appears to be equally "unmolested", I would not hesitate to make the trade.
Pay no attention to the Wandering Zero Myth.
I've heard it said that the recoil pad offers as much reduction as a frozen brick - and I wouldn't argue with that. However, I have seen repro pads for sale - and you always have the option of trading the original for a slip-on pad.I would agree. But to clarify a point, the wandering zero isn't a myth, the British did have an issue with it, but it affected some rifles and not others. Not all, or even most No. 5s had it. The issue was indeed mentioned in field reports, and was investigated by R.S.A.F. Enfield and S.A.S.C. (according to Maj E.G.B. Reynolds, a member of the Small Arms Inspectorate during and after WW2, and author of the "The Lee Enfield Rifle"). Capt. Peter Laidler, a now retired British army armorer, and author of several technical articles on the Lee Enfield also mentioned encountering the problem. But again, the problem didn't show up in every No. 5. The rifle that did were scrapped and used for parts, if they could not be repaired, and the result is that any No. 5 that is still around today is almost certainly not one of those that had a wandering zero problem. So this is just yet another reason to buy the Enfield if it's a real No. 5 and not a fake. Unfortunately for your shoulder, however, that rubber recoil pad will be rock hard after all these years.
I'm looking to sell the SKS. Just not a fan. Had it for like 15 years and it's maybe seen 100 rounds. For years it was a cheap deer rifle so it was only shot for sight ins. I stopped gun hunting in like '02 I've put maybe two or the boxes through it. I take it out shoot it a few times until I'm reminded I don't enjoy shooting it.Keep the SKS.
Shells are cheaper and it's an automatic.