SKS just as good as an AK 47?

[zhyla]

It's pretty hard to argue with detachable magazines. I love my SKS but for any purpose other than sitting there looking pretty my Norinco AK wins out.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I like my SKS's for hunting. I only use the AK at the range.

 

[orionengnr]

If the SKS was "just as good" as the AK, wouldn't it command the same price?
I remember when AKs were $349 and SKSs were $69 each.
Just sayin'...

 

[Jackal]

The AK is a superior WEAPON. Thats why we dont see any modern militaries issuing them to combat forces within the last 40 years. Much like our Garand, the SKS has been relegated to parade/ceremony use. Its certainly not a bad rifle by any stretch (I love the SKS), but it is an inferior WEAPON when compared to any military grade AK. Its like saying the Garand is a superior weapon to the 03A3. It doesnt make the earlier rifle bad, its just that the new rifle is better for the intended use.

 

[surfinUSA]

I've had both and sold both. If I had to get another I would look for one of the SKSs that take AK mags.

Although I prefer the rotating bolt and magazine of the AK, you really can't overcome the superior placement and ease of use of the SKS safety.

Although people say the SKS is more accurate than the AK I didn't find that to be true. However, my sks was well used when I got it and the AK (Norinco) was new.

I sure their current owners still enjoy them.

 

[Biohazard1993]

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.

Yeah I agree, I sold my almost mint norinco sks after having Hikock45 syndrome (cuts on my hands) while in a hurry loading it. It also needed way more lube than any ak I have shot (well aks realy don't need that much lube to begin with but my sks needed regularly lubed like my Tanfoglio Witness Combat 9 does). Oh I also do not need the bayo on it (sorry bayonet lovers) and didn't feel like replacing the stock because a wood stock without the bayo looks . Darn this thread reminds me I need an AK something fierce I never filled that niche in my heart or my arsenal. Maybe a draco will be my next purchase!

 

[silicosys4]

Either is great at what it is meant for. The ak is a better battle rifle, if one were in battle, but that doesn't make the sks an inferior overall weapon.
I have an sks-m that accepts ak mags. That evens things up a lot but It is still bulkier than the ak and wont accept aftermarket stocks because of the ak magazine conversion, so optics are hard to mount and cowitness. I haven't looked that hard though.
I do like that the sks is a machined receiver.

 

[silicosys4]

Pics to compare. You can see the para length sks is still bulkier and longer.o

 

[Cee Zee]

There is a reason, of course, why the AK-47 REPLACED the SKS as the issued military arm of choice.

Yes there is a reason of course. And that reason is that the AK was full auto while the SKS was always semi-auto (except for a few experiments by the Chinese). That makes a HUGE difference in battle. It also helps to have an endless supply of ammo that someone else is paying for which is what happens in the armies of the world.

The price of these weapons was brought up also. The SKS sold so cheap because the Chinese were dumping them for whatever they could get back in the late 80's and early 90's. They were already made and just gathering dust (and rust). So they sold them off cheap. It was always a supply and demand thing. The supply was huge while the demand took a while to get going. Prices went up as demand picked up. The AK was always more expensive because they had to be made to sell in the US unlike the SKS which could sell in stock format. You didn't even need an FFL to buy them. You just needed a C&R license. Clinton got mad at the Chinese over unrelated issues and ended the importation of the SKS from China but other countries also had surplus rifles to get rid of. So the Yugo started selling big time. It's always a matter of supply and demand like everything else.

Another big factor in this discussion should be the length of the mags. Even with your detachable mag setup you can get mags with less capacity (get USA brand mags - they're hard to find but they work). And less capacity means they hang down from the bottom of the rifle far less. With a standard 10 round mag on an SKS you can shoot off all sorts of things as rests. With a 30 round AK it's hard to shoot off anything as a rest. Very hard in fact.

I have a Norinco that works perfectly with detachables and I have several mags all of which are USA brand. That's the only brand that was available way back when. I use the 15 round mag I have because it doesn't hang down causing the rifle to be hard to work with in the field. That alone can make a big difference if you're going to knock down a deer with your SKS. I actually see them as more of a wild hog rifle myself. They have enough power to knock down a hog and they fire enough rounds to knock down a whole bunch of hogs (which run in packs). They can be good coyote guns too if you're a good enough hunter to get close to a pack of coyotes.

The AK was made as a fire from the hip, full auto much like the Thompson was designed to do. The SKS is more like the M1 carbine in it's design and function. Yes both the AK and the SKS use the same ammo while the Thompson and the M1 carbine don't. But the way they are generally fired is what I'm talking about. The AK is certainly fired from the shoulder a lot but if you look at photos of the AK in action it is often fired from the hip. After all it's pretty hard to fire an AK from the shoulder if it doesn't even have a shoulder stock or it has a collapsible stock that is collapsed.



http://www.gunclassics.com/ak47.html

 

[justice06rr]

AK47 is definitely better than SKS. Let me count the ways:

- Other calibers available
- Detachable and high capacity mags
- lighter
- Different configurations including those with folding stocks, AK Pistols, etc.
- Option of milled and stamped receivers

I'm not hating on SKS. I actually like them. but for the advantages of the AK, I sold 2 of my SKS's (a Chinese26 and a Yugo59/66). Now I own 2 AK47's.

I still want to buy a Chinese SKS again just to own one. They are fine rifles on their own, but unfortunately have its downsides.

 

[HisStigness]

So you can get an SKS for $350, and it's sort of like an AK, but not really. Or you can get the real deal for around $550. I would definitely go for the AK because of it functions better and has a plethora of aftermarket items available. I shot an SKS for the first time a while ago, and it wasn't bad at all. It's a lot of gun for the price. It's definitely more accurate than the AK. However, I didn't like the whole magazine design where it goes way up into the stock, and the fact that it was impossible (at least for me) to reload from the shoulder. Not to mention it tried to eat my fingers every time. If the AK didn't exist, I would probably own an SKS. But with Dr. Pepper on the market, I just can't justify drinking Dr. Thunder even if it is cheaper.

 

[csa77]

accuracy wise my norico SKS shoots alittle better then my 2 AK's (wasr and maadi) but a high end AK like a VEPR, would beat any SKS.
But that's not really fair comparison- I mean if a company wanted to Make a quality modern SKS it would probably beat even a high end AK. the SKS I think, is very similar to a SVD after all.

 

[Scoped]

Wow, I've been at work all day so sorry for not responding earlier. Thanks for all the responses.. definitely going to keep my SKS now, haha. A lot of awesome points have been brought up, too. I guess i'll be saving my pennies!

 

[justice06rr]

Yes, keep that SKS. I regret selling my Chinese26 unissued SKS. Its hard to find those now. If anything they hold more collectible and intrinsic value. SKS shoot very well and are also quite balanced.

But an AK it is not...

 

[jrdolall]

I bought an SKS a few years back that had a Tapco stock so it had all the bells and whistles of an AK. Folding stock, detachable mag etc but it still was an SKS instead of an AK. I have since taken it back to "original" and it is a fine shooter.
$350 for an SKS, $100 for a Tapco stock and you have something similar to an AK for $450 or so. A new AK is $600 so why not just buy the AK if you are looking for an SKS that looks like and AK?

 

[fiddleharp]

CeeZee's post #34 nailed it!
All this arguing about detatchable mags v.s. accuracy is pointless, because us American civilians use these semi-auto rifles to do nothing more lethal than punching holes in paper.
Since none of us will engage in Balkan-Style street fighting anytime soon, what's the point of this argument?
On the other hand, if a group of Crips, armed with semi-auto AK-47's, wipe out a group of Bloods, armed with SKS's in a Los Angeles street battle, then we'll have some data to work with in this "which is better" argument.

 

[jrdolall]

Atlantic Firearms has Chinese SKS's for $299 right now. Battle rifles so definitely not show pieces.

 

[Cee Zee]

I appreciate the thumbs up fiddleharp. But let me add another point or two here. We did see the SKS used very effectively in street fighting right here in the good old USA. During the Rodney King riots in LA those very gangs you mentioned were looting and burning the businesses owned mostly by Koreans. They have a bone to pick with those shop owners I guess. Whatever it didn't call for burning down those shops.

The Koreans were very familiar the SKS though. It was used extensively in the war fought on their home soil. Lots of those business owners had their very own SKS. What I saw reported was that the few stores that avoided being burned were protected by the owner on the roof with an SKS holding off those roving bands of looters.

There was more use for the SKS after Katrina. But I don't know if they were used there or not. I never saw that being reported.

Also I bought my Yugo a couple of years ago for $250, not $350 as someone suggested. Maybe that's the price now but the price was over $500 during the last shortage. And the best thing about my SKS's is that they are extremely reliable. I don't get where people think they are less reliable an AK.

Also there are stamped and milled SKS rifles. I have a milled example and I've seen stamped models.

It is important to point out that all SKS's are not created equal. Some are milsurp and are very solid. Some are made for the US market and are a lot less solid. Plus there are some that were pretty rough when they were imported. Those rifles were made in a lot of places and with varying degrees of quality. The same is true of AK's of course.

FWIW I'm not knocking the AK's at all. They are great rifles or they can be anyway. I've seen (and owned) models that were pretty rough too. MY BIL had a Maadi that was exceptionally nice.

I guess my main thing is that the two rifles are actually very equal in quality for the most part. But the AK's cost a lot more. And IMO the SKS is a better rifle. It isn't a lot better but it is better.

Atlantic Firearms has Chinese SKS's for $299 right now. Battle rifles so definitely not show pieces.

That might be part of the found Norincos left over from the great import wave of the 1990's. Most were pretty rough from that lot.

 

[Biohazard1993]

CeeZee's post #34 nailed it!
All this arguing about detatchable mags v.s. accuracy is pointless, because us American civilians use these semi-auto rifles to do nothing more lethal than punching holes in paper.
Since none of us will engage in Balkan-Style street fighting anytime soon, what's the point of this argument?
On the other hand, if a group of Crips, armed with semi-auto AK-47's, wipe out a group of Bloods, armed with SKS's in a Los Angeles street battle, then we'll have some data to work with in this "which is better" argument.

As far as poking holes in paper yes. As far as needeing the rifle for a survival situation (which is another important common facet to look at in these times)no. There is a reason for the discussion (Not argument, argument is when people become uncivilized at one another; I have seen none of that in this conversation). Some people like the sks better for target shooting. I could agree with this wholey. But I think the biggest point made is that the AK platform is a better Weapon for self defense especially in many survival facets. As I stated before, reloading an autoloading weapon is one of the most important points to me and I had a tendency to cut my hands on an sks clip (a big no no for me in the field) and reloading one at a time is even worse for an auto-loader. Never liked the bill mags either (that is just me). As for the biggest point that I sold my sks, the weight/size. An ak suited my needs better all around. I live in a small town dotted with buildings (a 400+ yard shot is not needed) so the accuracy loss in the ak is no big deal. As much as I would like a room full of guns I do not have room so I needed to choose an over all good, fun, survival rifle. I will opt for the lighter, shorter, standard mag using, less accurate ak-47. But thats just me, If people like the sks good, so did I (for target shooting) but in the end I got rid of the sks because it filled less points of use at the time. Good conversation guys lets keep it going.

 

[Onmilo]

Like a lot of other posters here, I had a couple really nice SKS rifles and I also bought an Egyptian AKM sporter.
I kept the AKM and sold the SKS rifles but truth be told, the SKS rifles were BETTER in every way except firepower than the AKM could ever hope to be and that mainly hinges on the accuracy potential of the guns.
SKS rifles, ALL good mil spec SKS rifles are more accurate than the great and vast majority of AK/AKM type rifles, just as reliable and as one poster noted, just as useful if not actually more so in real world practical shooting.

As such, I have been in the market for another SKS like the Russian and Chinese Military ones that I used to own.
Not so easy to find the good ones anymore and when you do find one, they are much more expensive than they used to be.
Must be some reason for that,,,Hmmmm

 

[aka108]

I own AK's and SKS a rifles. I am pretty sure the SKS has a edge in the accuracy department. Both are enjoyable to shoot. The AK I believe is a superior combat weapon. The SKS has a more compliated operating system with more parts and that could be a problem. The AK is a uncomplicated weapon with a simple operating system that is difficult to bugger up no matter what.

 

[Tirod]

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.

These are the same reasons I use to show why the AR is a better hunting rifle than a manual action with blind mag well. Therefore, the AK is the better rifle in terms of safety of use and ergonomics vs the SKS.

It IS easier to unload a magazine fed rifle, it doesn't scar the nose on the rounds cycling them all out of the chamber, and there is less chance of an ND fiddling around doing it. Pop the mag, unload the chamber, done.

If the AK and AR both superceded older designs, this is exactly one of the reasons for it - manipulating the weapon is significantly safer. When it comes to ND's in hunting weapons, the one with the bigger negative reputation is the Rem 700 - not the AK or AR. Whether the trigger has problems is much less the point than the fact most users cycle all the ammo through the chamber to unload it. Blind magazine firearms are not as safe as detachable mags.

Now consider the Win 94 and having your hand so close to the trigger when you close the bolt cycling ammo out of it. I own both, it's a messy and problematic issue unloading one. In general practice, I suspect nobody does when faced with a field obstacle like fencing. With a detachable mag, it's not nearly as much an issue.

And yet the knee jerk reaction is to defend the blind magazine gun as "better" because tradition is superior. Not. Bluntly, it's more dangerous and has the track record to prove it. That is exactly why those features were deleted from battle rifle designs, humans make mistakes and ND's will happen in the highly stressed situation of combat.

A good argument could be made for the SKS being more accurate, that goes to the individual gun, not the design. Plenty of highly accurate AK's or AR's are out there. Fact is, the AR has run off the M1's and older guns from Service Rifle because it's easier and cheaper to accurarize, and shoots rapid fire more accurately. <--- Which is another reason the mag fed designs are better hunting rifles. Most now are chambered in intermediate cartridges, which is another bonus with the AK. Lower recoil means the shooter is battered less and more likely not to flinch. That makes them more accurate, and also recover to take another shot more quickly and more accurately. They are subject to less recoil.

Some of us have been saying this for years, the difficulty is that the naysayers have never shot a modern sporting rifle and categorically refuse to admit the ergonomics and safety are superior. Well, if the old guns were all that good, we'd still see old gun designs being issued for mass use by soldiers. Nope. Not happening. Those old guns had flaws and no amount of love for them makes them better, you just accept them for what they are and work around them.

I've proposed a similar test in the past, line up two tables with ten rounds on one and a manual blind mag action, the other with a semi auto sporter and magazine loaded with ten rounds. When the clock starts, load, aim, fire five (5!) rounds, and unload. Score the targets. See for yourself - which is faster, more accurate, and easier to unload?

BTW, you AK guys, try it against an AR, ten mags with one round apiece. When you can beat the AR shooter you know you are really good. It still won't make you well ranked in Three Gun, there are no AK's in the top ranks and there are reasons, like, no bolt hold open or off hand bolt charging.

That's why most of the modern battle rifles now designed use AR control locations - they work better with the human hand and how we do things. That is applying the lessons learned from the older, less well done designs and refusing to make the same mistakes again. That is why modern sporting firearms are better than traditional ones for civilian purposes like hunting, target, or self protection.

It's why we don't drive cars with flathead motors and mechanical brakes, use dial telephones, or wear wool underwear. Things get better and we move on.

 

[fiddleharp]

I guess the main point I was trying to make is that the semi-auto "AK-47" range toy owned by the typical semi-retired white American male is a completely different animal from the selective-fire "Kalashnikov" being used to kill people at this very moment in conflicts all over the third-world.
Yeah, I suppose in some future TSHTF scenario, fools who are staking their lives on their semi-auto SKS's might be mowed down in their thousands by hardened guerrillas firing semi-auto AK-47 "weapon platforms" on American streets, but seeing how the average age of THR posters seems to be about 60 years old, I doubt any of us will ever see it.
As I recall, those Korean storekeepers on rooftops during the LA Riots used the intimidation factor to great effect. I can't recall them actually killing anyone. I also seem to recall a variety of firearms in those photos, like Ruger Mini-14's, shotguns, and all kinds of things.

 

[Hokkmike]

I guess the main point I was trying to make is that the semi-auto "AK-47" range toy owned by the typical semi-retired white American male is a completely different animal from the selective-fire "Kalashnikov" being used to kill people at this very moment in conflicts all over the third-world.

Yeah, I guess we own what we can afford. And, not a completely different animal - just different.

I know lots of younger guys with AK's. The semi retired and white comment is just out there. I don't get the purpose.....

 

[AK103K]

I guess the main point I was trying to make is that the semi-auto "AK-47" range toy owned by the typical semi-retired white American male is a completely different animal from the selective-fire "Kalashnikov" being used to kill people at this very moment in conflicts all over the third-world.

It not "completely" different, one simply has an additional position on the selector, and if you understand its use, you know its not likely to be used all that much. Some will argue that its position in the stack, was chosen so that it had to be a "conscious choice" to attain it, and not a "panic choice". In a panic, you get semi.

So in reality, even the full auto AK's are probably shot more in semi than they are full.

Yeah, I suppose in some future TSHTF scenario, fools who are staking their lives on their semi-auto SKS's might be mowed down in their thousands by hardened guerrillas firing semi-auto AK-47 "weapon platforms" on American streets, but seeing how the average age of THR posters seems to be about 60 years old, I doubt any of us will ever see it.

We may never see it, but whos to say our kids or grand kids wont? My kids were taught how to properly shoot full auto weapons, as well as single shots, repeaters, and semis, and all as kids I might add, and their kids will likely have the same experience. Should I "assume" youve done the same for yours?

Unfortunately, most kids here wont get to ever experience shooting full auto weapons (many probably wont get to shoot the semi only versions of them), let alone, understand how they work, and how and when you employ them. Realistically, most adult American shooters are in the same boat.