First off, I really want an AK-47.. a bit out of my price range atm though. I have a /26\ Norinco sks 1982 production with a steel 30 round mag for it and it works pretty much flawlessly. I have heard that these types of mags are pretty useless, but from my experience i disagree. This makes it pretty similar in function to the ak47 in terms of round capacity and firepower. So, what should be my incentive for purchasing or trading in my sks for an ak 47?
SKS just as good as an AK 47?
- Thread starter Scoped
- Start date
- Status
I'll take an SKS any day over an AK. I've owned both. The SKS is more accurate and that goes for all of them I've shot and owned. Plus the good SKS models are true milsurp and are built like tanks. AK's are made for the US market because a true AK is capable of full auto. Yes some are very similar to the original but others aren't at all.
The SKS is cheaper and more accurate and every bit as durable. I have one SKS that was converted to detachable mags too. It also works pretty much flawlessly. I have another SKS that still takes stripper clips. I actually prefer the stripper clips. You can carry more ammo with you since you don't have to carry the weight of the mags.
The SKS is cheaper and more accurate and every bit as durable. I have one SKS that was converted to detachable mags too. It also works pretty much flawlessly. I have another SKS that still takes stripper clips. I actually prefer the stripper clips. You can carry more ammo with you since you don't have to carry the weight of the mags.
I prefer a good SKS over an AK. I've always just shot the SKS better. Back when I had both and shot them side by side, I was able to make hits reliably about 100 yards further with the SKS using issue sights on both. Not to say there aren't more accurate AK's, but I shoot the SKS better.
bhhacker
Member
I think that SKS's are more bang for your buck but thats just my personal opinion. I guess it really comes down to what you want the rifle for.
I live out in Southeast Alaska and i decided to get an sks over an ak because i dont have to deal with magazines. I dont plan on fighting a horde of zombies or anything so if rapid reloading was needed id just use my AR
I live out in Southeast Alaska and i decided to get an sks over an ak because i dont have to deal with magazines. I dont plan on fighting a horde of zombies or anything so if rapid reloading was needed id just use my AR
Swampman
Old Fart
In my opinion the SKS is more practical than an AK for just about all the "real world" shooting that most people do. They have a longer sight radius which helps accuracy and usually at least four inches more barrel for slightly higher velocity.
I guess if I were regularly attacked by swarms of zombies or goblins while going about my daily life an AK might hold more appeal, but I've managed to survive this long with a lowly, box stock SKS as my "truck gun" and don't feel any strong urge to "upgrade".
I guess if I were regularly attacked by swarms of zombies or goblins while going about my daily life an AK might hold more appeal, but I've managed to survive this long with a lowly, box stock SKS as my "truck gun" and don't feel any strong urge to "upgrade".
carbine85
Member
The only drawback with the SKS is the open action and fixed magazine if you consider that a drawback. I prefer the SKS over the AK any day. It's more than reliable, better accuracy and you can reload them quickly with stripper clips. They also look nicer IMHO.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Just as good? As a general thing, probably not. History shows that one rose and the other fell, and there are several very practical reasons for that having to do with how soldiers really fight with carbines.
Just as good, for a civilian in peacetime and not running high-round-count dynamic multi-gun/3-gun matches? I'd say so, certainly.
I really quite like the SKS, even though I don't grab it to take to classes or matches. It's a very solid, very shootable, pretty decently accurate rifle that will provide great service.
Just as good, for a civilian in peacetime and not running high-round-count dynamic multi-gun/3-gun matches? I'd say so, certainly.
I really quite like the SKS, even though I don't grab it to take to classes or matches. It's a very solid, very shootable, pretty decently accurate rifle that will provide great service.
There's no reason to get rid of an SKS, especially a ChiCom, for an AK unless that's the only way to finance the AK (and you just realllllllly are Jonesing for an AK).
The SKS is an excellent semi milsurp. They are accurate, reliable and hold their value if cared for.
If you compete with the gun then it could be relevant, the idea that changing magazines over feeding from stripper clips is important isn't really relevant since it is just a way to burn through ammo/money for 99% of people. Keep your reliable, accurate SKS and save up for an AK and you won't regret the decision.
The SKS is an excellent semi milsurp. They are accurate, reliable and hold their value if cared for.
If you compete with the gun then it could be relevant, the idea that changing magazines over feeding from stripper clips is important isn't really relevant since it is just a way to burn through ammo/money for 99% of people. Keep your reliable, accurate SKS and save up for an AK and you won't regret the decision.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
A stamped AK is shorter and handier than an SKS, and a bit lighter given the same size magazines. The SKS is very reliable but the AK is a little more so in harsh conditions (I have personally seen an 1952 Tula SKS short-stroke every shot due to powder fouling and lack of lubrication; a shot of oil fixed it).
The biggest difference though is optics. If you intent to shoot iron sights only, then the SKS's somewhat longer sight radius tends to make it a little more accurate, but it is easier to scope an AK than to scope an SKS. There are also more accessories made for the AK platform than the SKS, if that is important to you.
You can also get an AK in 5.45x39mm and 5.56x45mm/.223, but AFAIK all SKS's are 7.62x39mm.
They are both excellent rifles, but to me the AK fills the "carbine" role better due to its shorter length, if that is what you are after. The SKS is more of a full-length rifle.
The biggest difference though is optics. If you intent to shoot iron sights only, then the SKS's somewhat longer sight radius tends to make it a little more accurate, but it is easier to scope an AK than to scope an SKS. There are also more accessories made for the AK platform than the SKS, if that is important to you.
You can also get an AK in 5.45x39mm and 5.56x45mm/.223, but AFAIK all SKS's are 7.62x39mm.
They are both excellent rifles, but to me the AK fills the "carbine" role better due to its shorter length, if that is what you are after. The SKS is more of a full-length rifle.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
I think Sam summed it up nicely overall, from a reality standpoint.
The SKS is a decent rifle, but its not an AK.
While it seems some think the mag is a detriment, its really not. You can load/unload/reload the gun quickly, safely, and without fumbling. Something not said for the SKS. I can pop a mag in an AK without chambering a round, and lock the selector, and the gun is "safe". It can be quickly charged if needed, or quickly unloaded if needed, without fiddling.
The mags also keep your ammo secure, and easily accessed. My experience with the SKS and strippers, has not been as positive, especially if you draw the strippers from a chest bag or pouch. The strippers tend to be poorly made, and dont retain the cartridges well, and more often than not, you dont get the full ten rounds in the gun. If they havent already left rounds in the pouch when you try and draw them, they often drop them on the way to the gun.
As far as speed of reloading, theres no way the SKS is quicker. First and foremost, you have to load the SKS three times to equal one mag of the AK's, so youre already behind. Reloading the AK is much more positive and with less fumbling. A quick "top off" is also a lot easier.
"Most" of the SKS's with aftermarket extended mags Ive shot, were not very reliable. Im not saying all of them dont work, but that wasnt my experience. I have shot one of the SKS's with the "factory" AK mag conversions, and it seems to be the way to go, if you insist on a high cap SKS.
Accuracy wise, I never really saw much of a difference. With both, the ammo itself is usually more of an issue than the guns themselves, and with ammo they like, both are more than capable of decent accuracy.
One thing Ive never seen for the SKS was a good way to mount optics. The AK's have a couple of decent options, and you can either cowitness your irons to the optic, or they can be removed and replaced without loss of zero if needed.
The SKS is a decent rifle, but its not an AK.
While it seems some think the mag is a detriment, its really not. You can load/unload/reload the gun quickly, safely, and without fumbling. Something not said for the SKS. I can pop a mag in an AK without chambering a round, and lock the selector, and the gun is "safe". It can be quickly charged if needed, or quickly unloaded if needed, without fiddling.
The mags also keep your ammo secure, and easily accessed. My experience with the SKS and strippers, has not been as positive, especially if you draw the strippers from a chest bag or pouch. The strippers tend to be poorly made, and dont retain the cartridges well, and more often than not, you dont get the full ten rounds in the gun. If they havent already left rounds in the pouch when you try and draw them, they often drop them on the way to the gun.
As far as speed of reloading, theres no way the SKS is quicker. First and foremost, you have to load the SKS three times to equal one mag of the AK's, so youre already behind. Reloading the AK is much more positive and with less fumbling. A quick "top off" is also a lot easier.
"Most" of the SKS's with aftermarket extended mags Ive shot, were not very reliable. Im not saying all of them dont work, but that wasnt my experience. I have shot one of the SKS's with the "factory" AK mag conversions, and it seems to be the way to go, if you insist on a high cap SKS.
Accuracy wise, I never really saw much of a difference. With both, the ammo itself is usually more of an issue than the guns themselves, and with ammo they like, both are more than capable of decent accuracy.
One thing Ive never seen for the SKS was a good way to mount optics. The AK's have a couple of decent options, and you can either cowitness your irons to the optic, or they can be removed and replaced without loss of zero if needed.
I have two Russian SKS's, and two AK's both in 5.45x39. I need to add a rubber butt plate to increase the LOP on my SKS's, and put American length stocks on my AK's as I have long arms. Anyway, bottom line is I prefer shooting the SKS, and with stripper clips it is pretty fast to load. I find I can shoot the SKS a bit more accurately, although it is pretty close. I just enjoy shooting the SKS more for whatever reason. I really can't put my finger on it.
Hokkmike
Member
Let me qualify my statement before hand by saying I have owned and shot both. In fact I have owned three different types of AK's and have shot Chinese and Russian SKS's.
The AK-47 is FAR superior in terms of ease of loading, reliability, ergonomics, and capacity. There is a reason, of course, why the AK-47 REPLACED the SKS as the issued military arm of choice.
That being said, they both are fun guns with historical notoriety and high interest. Owning and shooting either one is just fine in itself....
I have several. SKS, AK-47, and AK-74. All are great guns. The SKS feels more like a "long gun" if you know what I mean. Maybe because it actually IS a longer gun. 10 rounds in the fixed mag is plenty for me though I do have one set up for the detachable 30 round mag. From a military standpoint I see no advantage to the SKS over the AK-47 but most of us aren't using them for military purposes. I probably shoot the AK-74 more than the others combined because ammo is cheaper.
I don't ever recall having an FTF of any kind with any of these guns but I admit I don't run them all that hard.
I don't ever recall having an FTF of any kind with any of these guns but I admit I don't run them all that hard.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
I'll quibble just a tiny bit here, and only because I think it is relevant to the question at hand.
The SKS wasn't so much a predecessor to the AK which was then replaced, per se, by it, but rather they were complimentary contemporaries of each other. The two rifles were fielded only 2-3 years apart (1945 and 1947) and the SKS remained in various facets of Soviet service for many years. In fact, the SKS was still being produced up into the late '70s, at least in Albania.
So, while it could be said that the AK and AKM made the SKS obsolete as a front-line military weapon, it was still made, issued, and used to millions of various kinds of troops in many countries for decades. (Still today, in fact.) It was always considered, and is still considered, a serious rifle for serious purposes.
And so it is for us here in the US today. The fact that the Kalashnikov has some benefits really shouldn't detract from just how good the SKS is at doing what it does, even if that's a less glamorous, secondary role.
ForumSurfer
Member
Having owned both, I think the correct answer is buy both. Always works that way, doesn't it?!
SKS - Accurate enough for what it is, 10 rounds is plenty.
AK (assuming it is a decent one) - Accurate enough, really quick mag changes. Lots of manufactures making solid optics mounts for low power scopes and aimpoint/eotech or whatever your 1x optic of choice is.
If I could only have one, I'd take a decent AK. This one isn't traditional and a purist or two may weep...but it was a hoot to shoot. Of course I had to count parts on my fingers and toes to make sure it was legal. The new owner is running it in competition and swears he draws a crowd when he shoots reloads through it due to the comp venting the smoke due to lube.
SKS - Accurate enough for what it is, 10 rounds is plenty.
AK (assuming it is a decent one) - Accurate enough, really quick mag changes. Lots of manufactures making solid optics mounts for low power scopes and aimpoint/eotech or whatever your 1x optic of choice is.
If I could only have one, I'd take a decent AK. This one isn't traditional and a purist or two may weep...but it was a hoot to shoot. Of course I had to count parts on my fingers and toes to make sure it was legal. The new owner is running it in competition and swears he draws a crowd when he shoots reloads through it due to the comp venting the smoke due to lube.
mokin
Member
The short answer to the first question is yes. Unless you are in a situation where you need to reload a lot of ammunition fast. As to the second question, I am reluctant to advise you as to an incentive to trade your SKS for an AK. I've got a couple of Norincos and doubt I'd be able to replace either with an AK I'd like as much. I find the ergonomics of the SKS to be much more agreeable than the AK. I never got used to the way you have to fit the magazine in (spoiled by the AR-15), and having to move either one hand or the other to manipulate the fire control switch seemed like too much movement. All the finer points seem to have been touched on already. If you want an AK save up for one and enjoy!
ForumSurfer
Member
That's another thing to contemplate. Mag changes are undeniably easier and faster with an AR. Given the current market, AR's can be had cheaper than some nice AK's. Practice makes you better, but no matter how good you get...there will always be less wasted movement with an AR.
I'd hang on to the SKS and save for an AK/AR.
wojownik
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,086
I have several SKS' and AK variants.
As stated, these are complementary rifles. I like the ergonomics of the SKS - i.e. that traditional rifle feel. Plus, I find myself more accurate with the SKS in just about all conditions (Paper dinner plate accuracy with the AK, and small dessert plate with the SKS).
On the other hand, the AK is ridiculously simply to disassemble and maintain (the SKS is pretty easy too). And, I find the AK to be a bit more fun plinking on the range, even though its not as accurate for me.
As stated, these are complementary rifles. I like the ergonomics of the SKS - i.e. that traditional rifle feel. Plus, I find myself more accurate with the SKS in just about all conditions (Paper dinner plate accuracy with the AK, and small dessert plate with the SKS).
On the other hand, the AK is ridiculously simply to disassemble and maintain (the SKS is pretty easy too). And, I find the AK to be a bit more fun plinking on the range, even though its not as accurate for me.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
With a little practice, the AK's mag changes are really pretty quick and easy. They can be done with the shooting hand on the grip, and the mags can be released with the middle finger of that hand while it is on the grip as well. With the proper technique, you can drop an AK's mag without touching it in most cases. Even if it were to hang, a slight shake will drop it.
I have both AR's and AK's, and find that while I am probably a little quicker with reloading the AR's, its not all that much faster. Im not trying to set world speed reload records, but just more focusing on getting either reloaded as smoothly and reliably as possible.
The common complaint you hear about the AK's ergos is also another misnomer, and usually heard from people who havent bothered to learn to run an AK. Spend a little quality time with one, and 99% of all complaints go away as you become familiar with the gun.
With any of them, the person who is well versed in what they have, will usually easily out pace someone who isnt.
Not much to add to what's been said, except that the gap narrows if we are talking about an SKS-M or SKS-D. They were designed to take AK magazines, and have 16" bbls. So they are compact, take AK mags, and boast the same advantages as other SKS's. The downside is that like other SKSs, they are tougher to mount with optics if that's your thing.
Godsgunman
Member
Having owned both I think it comes down to personal preference. I sold the AK and kept the SKS. I like that with the SKS the bolt stays open after the last round. I converted mine with a Tapco stock and use the 20 rnd Tapco mags. I never timed them side by side but it seems to be just as fast reloading the SKS mag as the AK mag since the bolt holds open. Yeah the latch on the SKS is hard to release compared to the AK but with practice it can be almost as fast, granted you have to turn the rifle more. For my and probably the vast majority of people's purposes the SKS does just fine. Military wise I can see the AK having the advantage for quicker reloads.
Jackal
Member
SKS wins in cost and clearly wins if you prefer traditional rifle styling/ergo's. AK wins if you prefer pistol grips and detachable mags. As far as accuracy, a good representation of each will generally be in the 2-3moa region. The Arsenal 26 is a mil spec SKS, the best quality version made by any country since the original Russian model. I have one, also a 1982 thats still unfired. I seem to prefer shooting my AK's most of the time, even over my AR's. My AK74 eats corrosive ammo purchased for 16 cents per round and only requires a 5 min Ballistol/water cleaning. Pretty hard to beat.
Inebriated
Member
Depends on what you want to do.
AK's lend themselves to modern shooting techniques, they're lighter weight, easy optics mounting, most are easy to mount brakes to, come in a shorter package, are more reliable, are much simpler, and there are many many more parts out there for them than the SKS. As far as accuracy goes, they're not benchrest rifles. Both will hit a chest 300 yards away, and if you take good examples of each, they'll shoot about the same.
The SKS is good, the AK is better IMO.
AK's lend themselves to modern shooting techniques, they're lighter weight, easy optics mounting, most are easy to mount brakes to, come in a shorter package, are more reliable, are much simpler, and there are many many more parts out there for them than the SKS. As far as accuracy goes, they're not benchrest rifles. Both will hit a chest 300 yards away, and if you take good examples of each, they'll shoot about the same.
The SKS is good, the AK is better IMO.
- Status
