SKS vs AK accuracy ?

[Harve Curry]

One day I tested 5 SKS rifles (3 Chinese & 2 Russian)and 3 AK's (Chinese)from a bench rest at 100 yards. All used the same Chinese ball ammo.
The SKS all shot under 2" for 3 shot groups. The AK's were 3.5" to 5".
What makes the SKS more accurate and the AK what it is??

 

[TooTaxed]

Simply, the SKS has a longer barrel and sight radius than the AK. I came to the same conclusion when I fired both in Vietnam...and that's why I chose to buy an SKS...which has to be the greatest price bargain on the market for a semi-auto .30!

If you want to put a long scope on an SKS, get a $5 case deflector from CDN, as the cases eject upward. I have fun ringing the 300-yd gong with every shot!

You can get 20 and 30-round detachable mags for the SKS, which gives the same capacity as an AK, though they are slower to change mags. However, the long mags are a handicap in bench shooting, and I've gone back to a detachable 10-round mag.

 

[Waffen]

A longer barrel and a heavier gun generally equate to more accuracy.

[russian accent]"IN SOVIET RUSSIA THE SKS SHOOTS YOU!"[/russian accent]

 

[JShirley]

The SKS does not fire a full-power rifle round, and is therefore not technically a "battle rifle", though it is the same size as most. (M1, etc.)

John

 

[Eightball]

If I had to guess

I'd say that it's the longer barrel/sight radius, as well. That, and there's a slight difference in the mechanisms IIRC. Not that I'm an expert (I am most assuredly not) on the matter, but that may attribute to something.

 

[Gewehr98]

Depends on which AK variant you're testing, too.

I've owned and witnessed AK's that shot better than the results you posted for your SKS. Fed the proper ammo, an AK can go into 2 - 2.5" at 100 yards. A Bulgarian SLR-95 is a good example of that. The older Polytech NM versions did quite well in the accuracy department, too. Don't expect the best groups from steel-cased surplus crap ammo, btw.

Sight radius does make a difference. Put glass on both the SKS and the AK and then do a comparison.

 

[TooTaxed]

JSHIRLEY, let's have some fun. Hate to differ with you, but most battle encounters are at less than 300 yards...in my experience few are further..., and the 7.62 x 39 is certainly capable at that range. In Vietnam I saw SKS's with scopes used effectively as sniper rifles. A cartridge doesn't have to be at least as powerful as a .308 Win to be quite effective in battle. What is your definition of a "full-power rifle round"? Where does the 5.56 NATO fall?

 

[Ivy Mike]

Full power cartridges are from earlier eras when accuracy at great distance was the norm. You needed a large case to hold enough powder to get the bullet to 1000yds with enough speed and power to kill.

The SKS fires a reduced power cartridge because it isn't intended to get out to that distance.
Its just the names they acquired and shouldn't be representative of their ability.

The 5.56x45 NATO is a reduced power cartridge. It uses a fair amount of powder, but drives a smaller bullet and thus, it bleeds a lot of energy. The lethality of such a round is questionable at distances mentioned above.

A full power cartridge needs to be large and heavy to maintain energy and velocity at distance. It needs enough powder (large case) to get the bullet out to the required ranges.

 

[Crosshair]

It might also be that the SKS uses a short stroke gas system and the AK a long gas system. AK's also mostly use a stamped receiver, while the SKS uses a machined receiver. Guess witch one inherently is more accurate.

 

[dfaugh]

Put a scope on the SKS

and I bet you can get 1". Machined receiver, tighter tolerances, heavier gun....

 

[Commissar Gribb]

the SKS is a beautiful design that takes too many insults. the 2 stage piston is much cleaner and more accurate than the AK design.

 

[jobu07]

I think for something along the lines of just punching paper, and given that, from a bench, i'd opt for an SKS. The 10 rounder and heavier design would be ideal for a bench I'd say. Now, if you were going to be shooting offhand for any length of time, i'd go for an AK. Lighter and more rounds on tap. If it were something more serious than punching paper you had in mind, i'd definatly take the AK. They'll both get the job done...

 

[goon]

Roger on what was already said.
One thing that I did to make my AK more shootable was to open the rear sight notch up. It makes the sight picture look like it is coming from a longer barrel and makes the rifle much more shootable.
My AK also has a better trigger than my SKS. I haven't gotten to try the SKS out at farther ranges than 100 yards yet so I can't say which of mine will be more accurate, but my other experiments tell me that the SKS will do a little better.
The FAL will almost certainly beat them both. I already know that both the 91/30 and the M-39 will.

 

[Crosshair]

I agree with the statement that the scope makes the SKS more accurate. Simple fact is that scopes allow more precision shooting

 

[TooTaxed]

The scope just makes sighting easier. The SKS and it's ammunition are not extremely accurate...I get about three to four inch groups at 100-yd...and can hit the 350-yd gong every shot...and that's still a lot of fun! To get greater accuracy, you're going to have to lay out a lot more bucks for a tighter rifle and quality ammunition (and I have several). The SKS is just a fun plinking gun, excellent value for the money, inexpensive ammo, and I find myself shooting it a lot.