Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Sks Vs Mini 30

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by glockguy609, Oct 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. glockguy609

    glockguy609 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Which is better and why?
     
  2. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    SKS. You can find them under $100. Other than that, no idea, but price is usually my big concern,
     
  3. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,682
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    If better is defined as buying an American-made product, then the Ruger is better. If better is defined as being designed for detachable magazines, then the Ruger is better.

    If better is defined as being quite a bit less expensive than any other choice, then the SKS wins. If better is defined as being more reliable than damn near anything made, then the SKS is better. If better is defined as having a simpler manual of arms, then the SKS is better.

    I have three SKS's, but I have no Mini30's. There's a reason for that. The primary reason is that there's nothing the Mini30 does that the SKS doesn't do that I need. The seconary reason is that my three SKS's cost me less than one Mini30.
     
  4. cracked butt

    cracked butt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    6,986
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Isn't the bore dimensions on the mini-30 the wrong size for actual military surplus 7.62x39?

    A yugo SKS can be had for less than 1/3 the cost of a mini-30, can do everything a mini-30 can do, is more rugged, and has some extra value-added features like a grenade launcher and a bayonet.:D

    I'm highly biased against ruger semiauto rifles, though I can see some purpose for a mini-14, I can't think of any reason to own a mini-30.
     
  5. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,682
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Wow - I'd forgotten that.

    I seem to recall hearing that the Mini30 had a .308 barrel for a while (before AKs and SKS's were imported in numbers), but I also seem to recall hearing that they were changed to .310/.3105 sometime along the way to make them 'true 7.62x39' chamberings.
     
  6. Number 6

    Number 6 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    Messages:
    828
  7. cracked butt

    cracked butt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    6,986
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Huh, good timing. Just looked at that thread and it doesn't seem to be much of a consensus of what the actual bore dimensions are.

    If its true that they are made with a .308 bore with a long freebore, it seems like a pretty pisspoor compromise. If Ruger engineers think its just fine and dandy to be swaging oversized jacketed bullets though a barrel, then its just one more reason I will never buy one.
     
  8. Zeke Menuar

    Zeke Menuar Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,228
    Location:
    Oregon Monsoon Central
    SKS. Much less expensive, more rugged and reliable and it's not a (insert expletive here ) crummy Ruger. Right now Yugo SKS's are going for under $100.

    ZM
     
  9. schromf

    schromf Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2004
    Messages:
    559
    Heck even the collector Tulas are less than the Ruger, and the most rare with the target stamps on the sights are still less than the Ruger.

    You can be well on your way to a collection of SKS rifles for the same money as the Ruger. The other plus is SKS rifles have a abundance of parts not so with the Ruger.

    Sorry just don't see the Ruger as a desirable rifle in any way. I had a mini-14 years ago and I hated it, and this is just a 30 version of a rifle I don't ever want another of. Pure bias on my part I admit, but I owned one to have this opinion, my bad attitude developed during ownership.

    For the price of a mini 30, I can go buy a rifle that is accurate. Or go buy something that is really reliable like a AK, which also has cheap mags.

    I know I am going to PO a bunch of the Ruger fans, but there is no room in my gun safe for another Mini-14/30. The only way I would even consider one was in a trade and I wouldn't give over $100 for one, and it would be on its way out the door at the first opportunity to dump it.

    Oh I know someone is going to chime in: you can make them accurate. My reply is for the same money I can own a FAL or a G3, or an accurate sniper quality rifle, why would I want to dump money into one of these?
     
  10. JohnMc

    JohnMc Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2003
    Messages:
    368
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I have a mini-30 & I've shot a couple, so here's my $0.02:

    Accuracy - about the same (YMMV). Both are designed around minute-of-150 lb creature.

    Reliability - About the same, the mini is a rip-off of a military rifle, after all. The Chinese SKS I shot had problems with the safety, while the Yugo slam fired. My mini doesn't always touch off comblock ammo (harder primers).

    Cost - big difference, in favor of the SKS.

    Overall, I'd say if you want to plink, get an SKS.

    The Mini won't earn you odd looks from your buddies at the deer camp, with the 5 shot mag, if that's important. Plus, the ranch models come with scope rings. I'm not sure if that's worth the extra few hundred bucks, though.

    I probably wouldn't buy another Mini, but I don't think I'll sell this one.

    In any case, if you're looking for a tack driver, neither of these rifles will fill that need.

    PS: I don't have a Mini-14, but those guys on the A-Team never hit anything with theirs. :D
     
  11. Spot77

    Spot77 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,221
    Location:
    MD

    My God! THAT'S why they never hit anything!


    All these years I thought they were just bad marksmen......:evil:
     
  12. natedog

    natedog Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,634
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    This is coming from a Mini-14 owner:

    I'd take the SKS over the Mini-30 anyday. They are both equal in all respects, except that the Mini-30 has a detachable magazine (but there aren't any, or very few, reliable hi-capacity magazines for it), and is about 1.5 pounds lighter and a few inches shorter, has better sights, better trigger, and can be made more accurate with only about $100, and the Mini-30 can't shoot $60/1000 7.62x39mm, and the SKS is between $4-500 cheaper. Oh yeah, Ruger supports the AWB.

    SKS>Mini-30
     
  13. Feanaro

    Feanaro Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,661
    Location:
    Leeds, AL.
    The SKS will do anything the Mini will do, for less.

    I find stripper clips to be faster, lighter, and easier to carry/load.
     
  14. klover

    klover Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    672
    Location:
    WA
    buy and shoot an sks

    Just try it, you'll like it:D
     
  15. Doug S

    Doug S Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Another vote for the SKS.
     
  16. glockguy609

    glockguy609 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Thanks all, I already have a Norinco para, I just wanted to know if the Mini was worth looking at after these response I'd say NO. Cool that leaves more money for ammo and maybe another Para if I can find another good one.
     
  17. Not_A_Llama

    Not_A_Llama Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Messages:
    29
    SKS. Actually battle proven.

    Not to mention cheaper, more accurate (IME), and takes stripper clips.
     
  18. George S.

    George S. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,117
    Location:
    Western WA
    SKS for a C-note in OR?? Went to a gun show in Puyallup WA yesterday and saw a bunch of SKS variants and every damn one of them was anywhere from $169 to over $200 :fire:
     
  19. TimH

    TimH Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    766
    Location:
    upstate NY
    I keep reading people say non-removable mag for the SKS. I have seen SKS with 30 round mags. Whats the difference?
     
  20. Feanaro

    Feanaro Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,661
    Location:
    Leeds, AL.
    Normally an SKS has a fixed magazine. Some people make detachable versions. Most of the detachables are poorly made and "detachable" only by a stretch. They usually have a little bill that fits into the magazine well, holding it in place. Not too well either, IMO. D.C. Engineering makes an adapter but I can't say how well it works. And supposedly only variation of the SKS made by Norinco that was designed to take AK mags(or something like that) works pretty well. Again, no experiance. Besides, stripper clips are cheaper and faster. ;)
     
  21. DT Guy

    DT Guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    So you really want to give your money to a company whose founder and president said, (this is paraphrased) "No honest citizen needs a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds"?

    I sure don't.

    My SKS works great, BTW...

    Larry
     
  22. Bwana John

    Bwana John Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,897
  23. Sam Adams

    Sam Adams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    2,035
    Location:
    South Texas
    I used to own 2 Mini-14s, and I own an SKS.

    If the performance per dollar on the Mini-30 is anything like the Mini-14, then I'd say to bag it. The SKS is FAR cheaper, and is built like a brick $hithouse - so that uneducated Russian and Chinese peasants can't even mess it up. The extra money that one saves on the gun can be put into more ammo for practice (and you can shoot the cheap Commie surplus in it, which I wouldn't do in a $400+ rifle). The bayonet is a big plus also - there's almost no better way to give an anti-gun wacko heart failure than to show the pig-sticker to him/her.

    The SKS also has a wealth of parts available for it on the market for a reasonable price. Accurizing either is probably not worth it. The Commies had the right idea - being able to shoot minute-of-torso at up to 250 yards is good enough, and the SKS fits the bill perfectly for that.

    I'd also rather see people get introduced to guns via the route of a cheaper and more rugged gun, one with which they can practice more for the same price. Once they're hooked, they'll get another gun (or 6 or 10), and then be politically with us. In my experience, almost nothing turns off a potential gun owner who finds out that it will cost $500 just to get a gun (we all know that the hobby is FAR more expensive than that over the long run - and sometimes over the short run - but let them get hooked first).

    I've also had it with supporting Ruger's company. I'm sure that his heirs are no less arrogant about what we "need" then the old geezer was, and I don't like supporting people like that. There are more than enough American gun companies making good or great products with pro-gun folks running them to choose from, so that when I do buy a non-Commie or non-surplus arm of some sort I can buy from someone who's on my side.
     
  24. AZ Jeff

    AZ Jeff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    821
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Although the SKS is a fine rifle in terms of value for the dollar spent, there are two facts that cannot be denied:

    1. The iron sights on the SKS are VASTLY INFERIOR to those on the mini-14 series rifles
    2. The trigger on your average SKS is much poorer than your average Mini, and the Mini trigger can be made MUCH better MUCH more easily.
     
  25. Caliburn

    Caliburn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Messages:
    142
    Location:
    Colorado
    Wandering off topic

    Gentlemen, some perspective please...

    IMHO, the Russian and Eastern Europe surplus rifles are fair game (Yugos, Albanians, whatever), now that the Soviet Union is gone and those nations are free. Let them sell off their Soviet legacy arsenals; we get cool toys, and we support them with our cash. But during the Cold War it would have been stupid for us to support the opposition.

    Even today, I can't justify buying a ChiCom rifle (SKS, M1A or .45 clone, even the cool trench gun clones). It just seems very foolish to support the arms industry of a foreign and usually antagonistic government. (Remmber the P3 incident, and nuclear secrets?) Isn't Norinco owned by the state/party? What does the Party think is an appropriate number of rounds for an honest man? (I don't know but would guess zero.)

    (And yeah, you can't help but buy stuff from China. I'm not saying boycott them, just don't support their arms industry.)

    Anyway my point is, don't bash on Ruger (the company) too much. They're good people. I suspect that they'll clue in (eventually) to what consumers want. They make good products at good prices. S&W made some bad mistakes in their day. Colt probably has too. Let's just encourage Ruger to respond to the desires of their honest customers.

    Sorry for hijacking the thread. I just had to sound off about that.

    Back on topic - I'd vote SKS for all the reasons listed already. One from the ex-communist countries, of course.
    :D
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page