SKS vs AK47

[.303]

quote: "So if you're buying an AK you better hope you don't get one my buddy built because the receiver is liable to crack wide open at the first sign of heat. Just check out the AK boards and you'll find that a LOT of people are getting into this. That means a LOT of people are making questionable quality AK's."


you probably shouldn't have a problem with this if you buy a Russian or Chinese (or some country who actually issued them) mfg.

 

[RockyMtnTactical]

The SKS is a cheaply made autoloading russian rifle.

The AK-47 is a cleverly designed piece of mechanical magic.



The SKS was reknowned for being the cheapest weapon to manufacture in its class.

The AK-47 is reknowed for being ubelievably reliable in comparison to much more expensive guns.


In my opinion, I'd say comparing an sks to an ak-47 is like comparing a hi-point to a glock. Of course, some people love their cheap guns. I have a buddy with a chinese SKS that loves it. He claims the only time he ever cleaned it was after the action became so fouled that he had to beat the bolt open with a hammer.

This is an absurd post. I must wonder if you have even ever held/shot either weapon...

 

[Rubber_Duck]

The SKS is a cheaply made autoloading russian rifle.

Well, when you put it that way, so is the AK. Russian, autoloading, and inexpensive to manufacture.

However....

This is an absurd post.

Agreed.


The SKS is not made any "cheaper" than an AK. They are just different designs, and thus require a different manufacturing process. Granted, I feel safer tinkering with the AK because of its sheer simplicity, but both rifles will put bullets where you aim them (for all practical purposes), and they'll do it with comforting reliability. I can finally say I have both (bought my SKS last month, woohoo!), and between the two, I prefer the SKS. But either will serve me just fine.

For an everyday-use gun however, I would prefer the AK. I can get it from filthy to clean and lubed in less than 15 minutes. The maintenence on the SKS seems more involved to me.

 

[benEzra]

you probably shouldn't have a problem with this if you buy a Russian or Chinese (or some country who actually issued them) mfg.

If you buy a SAR, WASR, Century Yugo, Atlantic, Krebs, etc. then the "built by a clown in a garage" doesn't apply. Parts-kit guns by no-name builders are a TINY percentage of the civilian AK market.

SAR's, at least, use receivers made by Romarms at Cugir.

in fact, i would wager that my sks could preform as well or better than any ak out there. in controled AND combat conditions.

The SKS is indeed quite reliable, but it is less tolerant of lack of lubrication than the AK is. My wife's 1952 Tula fails to go fully into battery sometimes if it gets dry, because there is more metal-to-metal contact in the SKS and clearances are tighter.

 

[crackhead]

(besides, punk rockers like me are distant cousins of goths in the subculture family tree)

Let's not even get started on us metal-heads!

 

[benEzra]

I wouldn't argue about the quality of the guns you mentioned but the percentage of garage built guns is increasing fast. That gun someone has hanging on the wall of their gun shop may be made by a well know manufacturer and it may not. Most of the quality guns are marked of course but I doubt all of them are. The parts kits have markings on them too.

Still, they will not have the markings of reputable manufacturers and importers; the manufacturer/importer is required by law, after all.

A gun from Century (still by far the most common you'll see) is a known quantity, as long as you can inspect it in person for canted sights and whatnot.

I didn't say it was impossible to get a good AK. I just said be careful about what you're getting or you may regret it.

It doesn't take a great deal of care if you go for a major manufacturer. An AK from someone you've never heard of, that would be a different story. But I personally have never seen, in person, a homebuilt/garage-built AK; I've seen a lot of AK's at the range and in gunshops/gun shows, but they are mostly Centurys and Saigas.

Maybe I'm just lucky but I've never had any problem with my Norinco SKS regardless of whether it had even been cleaned in a reasonable time. I generally clean it every time I shoot it but that's because of the nature of the ammo that's available for them. But I've shot it enough on one day (maybe 100 rounds or so) to make it dirty and it was still flawless.

It would take a lot more than 100 rounds, and a lot longer than a few weeks, to dry an SKS sufficiently to make it start bobbling; they are quite reliable, and I don't mean to imply they're not. They're very dirt tolerant, BTW, as long as they are kept well lubricated. But my wife's was set up with one of those abominable receiver-cover scope mounts that loses zero if you clean the gun, so she went a year or so, and several hundred rounds, without lubricating it so she wouldn't have to re-zero it. Eventually (last range trip), it started failing to go fully into battery, and when you cycled the action by hand, it felt like cinder blocks sliding on granite. Needless to say, it's getting a better lubrication job, and she's looking for a different scope setup that doesn't discourage regular cleaning and lubrication.

It IS possible to neglect even a properly-put-together AK to the point that it also will fail to fully go into battery, but it generally takes more time and more rounds downrange. The AK has larger clearances, more room for dirt/crud to get out of the way of the moving parts, and a considerably higher-momentum bolt carrier assembly (combination of more reciprocating mass and a longer stroke). The AK's trigger group and firing pin are also more tolerant of crud than the SKS's, though again the SKS is itself no slouch in that department.

 

[Fleetwood_Captain]

A few have pointed out my mention of the SKS being cheap in my previous post and have mentioned that the AK-47 is even cheaper to manufacture. This observation may be true today, but not when the SKS was developed. When introduced in 1947, the SKS WAS their most economical option for an interim rifle.

During WWII, the Russian troops started complaining that their 7.62 x 54 rifles were overkill in close combat and the Soviets began investigating other options for rifles. By the time the ball started rolling for the SKS, the European theatre in WWII was coming to a close. Instead of being content with what they had, they decided to go with something more desirable and the SKS was replaced by the AK-47 in 1947, giving the SKS a brief two-year service history as the official Soviet rifle.

Now being the cheapest interim-period autloading rifle the Russians had access to, the SKS wasn't bad. However, the incredibly quick turnaround and replacement of the SKS with the AK-47 should be proof enough of which weapon was more combat effective.

Although there are several knockoff manufacturers of both SKS's and AK's, the Russian AK-47's are better than the Russian SKS's. I chose to compare apples to apples in my previous post, rather than waffle around trying to compare every possible SKS vs AK-47 variant and knockoff.

 

[sarduy]

this has turn into a SKS vs AK war hehehe...

here's the solution,

GET BOTH!

or get an AR-15.

 

[ds92]

I hate to be a newb in the realm of internet jargon but it's unavoidable to somebody who's bad with computers

what does SHFT and TEOTWAWKI mean?

 

[sarduy]

what does SHFT and TEOTWAWKI mean?

SHTF = Sh*t Hit The Fan
TEOTWAWKI = The End Of The World As We Know It. (aliens attack, zombies, robots attack from japan... godzilla......)

 

[KiltedClaymore]

godzilla

LOL, my ipod just started playing "Godzilla" by Blue Oyster Cult just after i read that line.

 

[Tarvis]

The SKS is a cheaply made autoloading russian rifle.
The AK-47 is a cleverly designed piece of mechanical magic.

That must be why the action on an SKS is smoother than an AK, right? Sounds like you got your info from youtube.

Boosh.


Honestly, I think the TEOTWAKI thing is a dead horse. When you go to a firearms course or a shooting match, what is more important; your equipment or your practice/training/mindset? If you think you are better off with an AK just because of it's reputation, have fun with that. AKs fail and have problems just like any other rifle. Find a rifle that you can operate well and take a class; you will be far better off having some training than having a nice little idea to stick in your pocket.

 

[Ignition Override]

Sarduy: Yes.

Some people on gun websites define TEOT- as a steady meltdown or even collapse of western civilization. It appears very far-fetched.

The Roman Empire lasted far longer than our nation has.
But consider this: the Romans required neither electrical power, computers, nor long-distance shipments (through Arabian Gulf, Georgia...) of huge quantities of various fuels (and frozen meat, medicines etc) in order to function.

Our society requires all of those, and the segments must all be carefully coordinated.
So which type of civilization is much more fragile and vulnerable, even when financial systems are operating normally?

Mini, SKS, MN 44.

 

[gunNoob]

I have both but I just love AKs so that's my favorite regardless

 

[amprecon]

I sold my first 16" bbl Para-SKS, which shot great, and bought a SLR-95. I bought another standard length SKS because I got a steal on it. My Bulgy AK shoots better groups than the chicom 20" bbl SKS. I can't understand it and the AK has a shorter barrel. Of the two I prefer the AK over the SKS, but the SKS has taken the role of a .30-30 in my collection. It's my beater, rough and tumble crashing through the woods pig killer truck gun. The AK is the SHTF go-to carbine.

 

[Rich_Lather]

If you want a bullet hose, get an AK. If you want a cheap, accurate semi that can be converted to a bullet hose, get an sks. Both can be "fixed" to shoot FA.

AK's are popular around the world because most wielders went to the "Insha'Allah" school of marksmanship*, which is, frankly, unAmerican.

When TSHTF or TEOTWAWKI, you would want to conserve ammo, not bullet-hose it down range. While there are recipes on the internets to make black powder, I've not seen anything about making your own cordite. In the aforementioned "hell" scenarios, measuring twice and cutting once would be in order over the hail of lead.


*Insha'Allah school of marksmanship = if God wills it, the bullet shall strike my enemy

 

[Loggerlee]

Imo, sks>ak

 

[benEzra]

If you want a bullet hose, get an AK. If you want a cheap, accurate semi that can be converted to a bullet hose, get an sks. Both can be "fixed" to shoot FA.

(1) All post-1986 civilian semiautos, including civilian AK's, must be designed to be difficult to convert to full auto, or else they are considered full auto for the purposes of the National Firearms Act as amended by the McClure-Volkmer Act, even if not actually converted.

(2) With comparable ammunition, sights, and shooting technique, AK's are just as accurate as SKS's. We have a pristine 1952 Tula SKS and a Romanian AK in our household, and they shoot comparably.

If you don't care about detachable magazines and don't ever want to mount optics, go with the SKS. If you want detachable mags or might want to mount a scope, get an AK. Otherwise they are comparable, except the AK is a little more tolerant of dirt and lack of lubrication.

AK's are popular around the world because most wielders went to the "Insha'Allah" school of marksmanship*, which is, frankly, unAmerican.

When TSHTF or TEOTWAWKI, you would want to conserve ammo, not bullet-hose it down range. While there are recipes on the internets to make black powder, I've not seen anything about making your own cordite. In the aforementioned "hell" scenarios, measuring twice and cutting once would be in order over the hail of lead.

The AK is a 300-yard rifle. Any target you can hit with an SKS, you can hit with an AK, and they fire at exactly the same rate. Once and only once when the trigger is pulled.

The fact that full-auto AK's are sometimes used by irregular forces untrained in marksmanship does not mean that the platform is made to be used that way, or is not capable of being used any other way, or that civilian AK derivatives would/could be employed the same way. And those you speak of would shoot an M16 no differently.

The AK is popular around the world because the Soviet Union provided millions of them to its proxies free of charge, because it is easily manufactured with relatively low-tech equipment (unlike M16's and such), and because of its RELIABILITY even when abused. Non-automatic civilian derivatives are popular with U.S. shooters because they are reliable, they are chambered for a versatile and economical cartridge, they look cool, they are fun to shoot, and they are a great value.

 

[huntin dad]

I like the SKS for accuacy but it makes a huge differnece in which one you buy Russian and Chinesse modles are good. I wouldn't buy a Yogu. My dad had a Russian and it was realy accurate.
The AK is more realiable for bad conditions because it is built with looser tolerances. And is utterly reliable when dirty, you can drag it through sand and mud and it will still fire. I know that there are some high end AK's out there with tight tolernces that are very accurate. But if your looking for an accurate surplus rife a Russian or Chinesse SKS is the way to go.

 

[Big Daddy Grim]

+1 sks

 

[kcmarine]

The obvious answer, of course, is buy both.

 

[Frightener 88]

since when is an ak not accurate? far from a bullet hose if you know how to shoot.

 

[TheGrimReaper]

I got 2 AK's and 2 SKS. I love them both, but I tend to go to my AKs more.

 

[QuietEarp]

I love my SKS. It is semiautomatic which the platform has always been. If I had an AK I would never be able to stop thinking that I had been cheated by the fact that I couldn't have a full auto. Stripper clips are fast enough for me. I like the rifle as designed, except for the sight. The Tech-sight is a great feature for the SKS. I had an install question on the sight and I got an email back within hours. Great service from that company.

 

[G17Steve]

I have a Yugo AKs and SKS. The SKS is fun to shoot but the trigger is TERRIBLE. As said above you can hit anything with one that you could hit with the other. The AK has a slight advantage in iron sights.