SKS vs AR

[benEzra]

The SKS will win the durability and reliability contest over the AR every time in times where constant meticulous maintenance and servicing products are not available.

Based on personal experience with a 1952 Tula SKS and a 2005-ish Rock River AR, I'll have to disagree with this. That SKS does not like to run dry and carbon-y at all; lubricating with Rem-Oil, shooting a couple hundred rounds of steel case, then letting it sit for several months in the safe, then taking it back to the range and firing 50-100 more rounds converted the SKS to a straight-pull single-shot, using copper-washed Norinco steel-case. Lubricating the bolt turned it back into a semiauto. That is the only time that SKS ever jammed in the thousand rounds or two that we put through it, as I recall, but that time it jammed every shot for an entire magazine, with the same ammo it ran fine on when clean.

My AR has never jammed after a similar diet of steel-case without cleaning, but it has never been lubricated with a drying-out oil either.

Having said that, a small squirt bottle of motor oil, reapplied often enough to keep everything wet, is enough to keep an SKS/AR/AK running indefinitely without detail cleaning until the barrel wears out or you can't stand the carbon spraying out of it. Just give it the same care you'd give an SKS or an AK that you wanted to keep running no matter what.

 

[Oldschool shooter]

I have an SKS and have owned a couple of ARs, my SKS has always run well, with proper cleaning. I never have really liked the AR, cheap ones require mods to make them right- additional cost. I'm not saying the Ar is inferior to an SKS, I know it isn't. My last AR was a S&W M&P15, always went bang, but... Optics ready model, needed a set of fold down sights, some sort of optical sight, the adjustable stock was sloppy, a $600 rifle easily becomes a $1000+ rifle in no time. Now I'll admit to being a bit frugal (cheap) , but $600 for a nice Savage bolt gun and mediocre glass, it better shoot damn well out of the box! Ain't never seen a $600 AR do it.

 

[jrdolall]

I have an SKS and several AR's. I really don't see much of a comparison.
I was never military but grew up hunting with rifles with wooden stocks. The SKS "feels" more like a rifle to me. My SKS came with a plastic folding stock that I immediately converted back to wood. I like loading using the stripper clips. It just seems so old school.
I am still not 100% comfortable getting up on an AR. Something about it just doesn't seem right to me. I know it's just me but that's how I feel.
With that said I think the AR platform is the way to go. The SKS is a rifle and the AR is a platform. It's an adult Lego that can be endlessly customized (sometimes to its detriment) to fit the owner.

 

[Oldschool shooter]

Jrdolall, you aren't alone. You probably said it better than I. No doubt AR is a better choice, just not for me either.

 

[DeepSouth]

a $600 rifle easily becomes a $1000+ rifle in no time. Now I'll admit to being a bit frugal (cheap) , but $600 for a nice Savage bolt gun and mediocre glass, it better shoot damn well out of the box! Ain't never seen a $600 AR do it.

Completely understand, one of the reasons I don't care for the AR is because it is (usually) so expensive.

And now everyone will point out how you can buy one for $500, and that is true. Problem is that is not going to do for 90% of people. I work with a guy that won a DPMS at a NWTF event, he sent me a picture of it the other day and I guess he's put 5-600 dollars in it. He frequently complains about spending money on it, but he does love it, Which is good because he's not a big gun guy.
The biggest reason I sold my last AR was because I could think of several hundred dollars worth of stuff I wanted to change.
I have told several people it's the most expensive rifle to own I can think of, few have argued with me.......out side of the Internet, aka real life.

 

[ACP]

AR.

Much better sights, trigger and ergonomics. Detachable magazines. Ability to customize.

The rifles are about the same weight and length and the calibers are similarly effective against personnel within 125 meters or so.

 

[nathan]

SKS is simple and robust. Its design to go bang and kill something. KISS in its truest form.

 

[bearcreek]

SKS is simple and robust. Its design to go bang and kill something. KISS in its truest form.

If you mean simple as in fewer options to choose from then I'd agree with you. If you're talking about the firing and operation mechanism then not so much. The AR is just as simple to operate and so much faster to use, even for a novice, it's not even really fair to compare the two. I suppose there's a possibility that the full wood stock and weight of the sks would give it a slight edge on being "robust" when used as a club, and it does have a bayonet . Personally I'd rather be able to reload and fire far more accurately and 10 times faster and hopefully avoid needing to use my gun as a blunt force tool.

 

[Comrade Mike]

Completely understand, one of the reasons I don't care for the AR is because it is (usually) so expensive.



And now everyone will point out how you can buy one for $500, and that is true. Problem is that is not going to do for 90% of people. I work with a guy that won a DPMS at a NWTF event, he sent me a picture of it the other day and I guess he's put 5-600 dollars in it. He frequently complains about spending money on it, but he does love it, Which is good because he's not a big gun guy.

The biggest reason I sold my last AR was because I could think of several hundred dollars worth of stuff I wanted to change.

I have told several people it's the most expensive rifle to own I can think of, few have argued with me.......out side of the Internet, aka real life.

You do have a point but that's why you build and don't buy. My go to fighting rifle is in the 1800 dollar range but you better believe that would've been well north of two grand if Id have bought a complete rifle from the get go

 

[bearcreek]

Completely understand, one of the reasons I don't care for the AR is because it is (usually) so expensive.

The biggest reason I sold my last AR was because I could think of several hundred dollars worth of stuff I wanted to change.

It's not that much more expensive if you keep it at a similar outfit level as an SKS. At least with the AR you have the option to improve. The SKS can only get worse IMO. Crappy detachable mags that are a hassle to carry and arguably slower than the stripper clips and plastic stocks that eliminate the SKS's main advantage of being a better club.

 

[mavracer]

a $600 rifle easily becomes a $1000+ rifle in no time. Now I'll admit to being a bit frugal (cheap) , but $600 for a nice Savage bolt gun and mediocre glass, it better shoot damn well out of the box! Ain't never seen a $600 AR do it.

I'll admit that my Recce cost almost double what my Savage bolt gun did but in the end it was lighter and just as accurate, my story ends with the Savage being sold,

 

[kBob]

I think the reason there are so many SKS rifles still out there is because in the first ten years of importation, about 3 million Chinese Karbines came in the country....then the wall came down........

At the time I bought mine one could either buy an AR15, even one made in someone's garage, or three SKS with slings ammo pouches cleaning kit, and 200 rounds of ammo with stripper clips.

Now if you were to say you were going to GIVE me one or the other I would have gotten an AR15 ( oh wait a year later I did.)

-kBob

 

[czhen]

As someone has stated above, it's a no brainer, the AR wins due to many of the points listed already across this forum and in this thread. However, the only small fault may be its 223/5.45 cal. and in order to correct that "flaw", just get one AR in 300 blackout.

CZhen
FL

 

[strambo]

I can't believe "SKS vs. AR" could go 4 pages. It isn't a contest, like Mike Tyson vs. a rookie.

If it has anything to do with military/LE or self defense use, the AR wins in every category (soundly) except cost. Costs can be kept reasonable with a $590 S&W sport, $400 Aimpoint PRO and $100 light/mount. Yeah, you are now ~$1100 in, but other than looks, in real world terms (a gunfight), you are giving up nothing to a $2500 boutique AR with a $600 optic and $250 light on it.

Sub the S&W sport for a Colt 6920 or 6720 and you are ~$1400 in with go to war (and to high round count carbine courses) reliability.

The SKS can't ever get there in ergos, capacity, and integration of optics, lights and slings.