Why is it that I hear that an SKS is a good gun but they are so cheap and unmentioned

[shootistpd27]

I have shot an SKS several times but only with one that was owned by a friend. I thought they shot rather well but I have been reluctant to own one. I have been toying with the idea of getting a rifle but in doing so I dont know if I want an AR 15 or an SKS. I have always heard that the SKS has been compared to the AK 47 but not really much more. I can buy them around here for around $200. Can anyone give me some of their experiences with an SKS? The AR is highmaintenance and if the SKS is comparable to the AK then they should be almost maintenance free. But is the SKS a good gun? Thank you in advance for your thoughts.

 

[Glockman17366]

SKS Forum

More then you'll ever need to know...

 

[Average Joe]

The SKS is a great rifle, old but still very reliable. If you can get one for $200, I 'd suggest you buy one, that price is very low, most areas are going for $300-500 depending on make (Chinese, Yugo, Russian etc.)

 

[Offfhand]

Good? For what?

 

[taliv]

the answer to your question has nothing to do with guns, and everything to do with basic economics. supply > demand == cheap

 

[benEzra]

$200 is pretty much a steal these days.

They are great carbines; think of it as a 10-shot semiauto .30-30 Winchester, which it ballistically resembles. The main downsides are that (1) it is exceedingly hard to mount a scope on one if you are so inclined (the various receiver-cover mounts either don't hold zero, or lose zero when you remove them to clean the gun, which is mandatory), and (2) it's a little heavy for the caliber, but on the other hand that weight translates into less felt recoil and more stable shooting offhand.

My wife owns a 1952 Tula that she paid $99 for in the mid-90s; wish I'd have bought two or three at that price... :banghead:

 

[shootistpd27]

I was wanting to know what was wrong with an SKS. I havent heard anything bad about them but I havent really heard anything else. I was preparing to buy one but I would like to know what the cons of the weapon were. If all I was worried about was economics I would have saved the post and just bought three highpoints. When they jam after a few hundred rounds I would have three of them to throw at the bad guy.

 

[Autopistola]

I think they're great for plinking. Some don't like hollowpoints very well.

Common reasons people object to them:
Commie gun made by commie labor
There was a time people couldn't get rid of them for $70
Somewhat heavy
Gritty, creepy, heavy trigger
Crude sights
Crude machining/sloppy action

If these rifles were made in the USA at the moment, they would cost over $1,000. Many say they shoot just as good or better than a Ruger Mini 30, and chow through crappy ammo to boot.

 

[shootistpd27]

From what I am told here in Mississippi they go for around $200 all the time. I talked to a buddy of mine the other day and he bought a Norinco for just $150 and he said that he didnt really need the gun but since it was so cheap, he just bought it.

 

[-v-]

Up-sides is all the advantages of an AK, with better accuracy to boot.

Downsides? Well...Mounting a scope on an SKS can be tricky. You either have to drill and tap the side of the gun to put on a AK/SVD style rail, go for a Scout mount in place of your rear leaf sight, or settle for a rather iffy receiver mounted rail. The down-sides of the last one have been covered already.

Trigger is going to be long and can be gritty. Don't expect a clean-breaking 1# trigger on this gun.

Yugo SKS's don't have a chrome lined bore and chamber.

With good ammo or handloads, you can expect about a 2MOA gun with an SKS. Might be even able to squeez it down below that with handloading, but don't expect sub-MOA accuracy.

Because you think it doesn't need to be cleaned, EVER!, smaller working parts (*Cough* Firing pin channel*Cough*) can get fouled and lead to malfunctions (Cough* Slamfires *Cough). Yes, even an SKS needs to be thoroughly cleaned once or twice a decade!

 

[Col. Plink]

I think the SKS is one of those easy-to-find, tried-and-true designs that are drawing a variety of prices right now.

As for the things about them that don't change with price are that they are rock solid (speaking for the Yugos from experience, more the better if you can find the early ones known as M59's; made without a grenade launcher sticking off the muzzle). I find them very quick and easy to reload as well in the original configuration. If you're looking for maximum firepower get a Norinco and go hog wild with AK mags. There's not a lot of differentiation where accuracy is concerned from make to make, as the SKS just isn't made to be very accurate at or beyond 100yds (not that there aren't exceptions, good examples that shoot better, etc., I'm just giving the broad strokes on the weapon as a whole). Reliably cycles the cheap ammo, which is great because there's no point in buying the good stuff (see accuracy comments above).

Now, as to price. I can see why some pay the upper end (I'd say $300+ right now) for a Russian, Yugo M59, or maybe an unfired Norinco. Don't know about the Romanians, Poles, other rare makes. The ubiquitous Yugo M59/66 with the grenade launcher is a workhorse and shouldn't be in the 'high' range.

IMHO no need to convert to magazines (stripper clips are great) so no need to worry about all that. There are some cool Yugos that have been used in combat in the 90's and have stock carvings, checkpoint markings, etc. in some nice wood that make a good project for an original condition milsurp rifle (mine belonged to a guy named 'Dano').

 

[JN01]

They are butt ugly.
They are heavy.
They aren't particularly well balanced.
They have mediocre sights. (easily remedied with a set of Tech Sights)
They are very rugged.
They are pretty good shooters.
They are a great bargain, particularly at $200.
Buy one, you'll like it.

 

[armoredman]

Have a Yugo, got it unissued delivered for $161, great rifle, never burped, good accuracy. Heavy and long, but built in pigsticker is neat. Good solid rifle for really bad times.

 

[panrobercik]

There is nothing wrong with an SKS rifle.
It was developed around the time AK was introduced and since AK could do everything SKS could + more (full auto , removable magazines) ) it was just discontinued and replaced by AK. To civilians who can buy only semi auto AK, there is not a whole lot of difference between the two.
Main downside of SKS vs AK is the fixed magazine but if you can get good with the stripper clips than is not really downside. SKS is also pretty clumsy with the weight and non removable bayonet.
Mounting a regular scope on SKS is possible with an aftermarket mount that replaces receiver cover. I think they are around $40.

 

[MAURICE]

Good, solid rifle. Just don't try and mount a scope on it. As others have said, it is a PITA and just not worth the hassle. Don't bother with the 30 round mags, either. Get some stripper clips and learn how to use them. They are quicker than trying to change out a magazine and far more reliable. I'd also avoid trying to turn it into an uber tactical rifle. Just buy it and a case of ammo. Go shoot. You'll be glad you did.

 

[rizbunk77]

A given SKS may be more accurate than a given AK BUT... Both my Saiga 308 (AK) and my Vepr 308, are more accurate than the beautiful Russian SKS I sold a couple years ago. Mine are 1.75 MOA. I have not found an SKS that will shoot with them. Don't lump all AK's into the same group.

BTW I had the scout scope mount on mine and I think its one of the best scope mount solutions for the rifle, only down size is you need a scout scope or red dot.

 

[mljdeckard]

This is what I did to mine, but you will have to decide if it's worth it to you. I got the base rifle from a friend for $100, I'm into it for about $400 total.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=453341

The other thing I will add to it is a Tapco bolt which add a sprung firing pin and allows the magazines to be removed while the bolt is forward. (You can't with the regular bolt.) The consensus is that this is the only hi-cap that works well with the SKS, but you can't use them unless you are compliant with 922r. (If you modify the gun you must switch out ten total parts with U.S. made parts. If you switch out JUST the magazine you are breaking the law.)

I like this rifle as much as any AK pattern rifle I have ever shot.

 

[rizbunk77]

For me if you have 200, thats a good start to something a hell of a lot better than an SKS. There's a reason the russians dropped them like a prom dress when the AK was ready.

 

[svaz]

My only complaint is that they seem a bit short for me (5' 11"), but a recoil pad fixes that. The SKS is a good, cheap, general duty carbine. If you want a 'truck gun' for duty under 200 yards shooting iron sights and is a breeze to clean there are few that compare for even twice the money.

For $200, I would get one (assuming it is in serviceable shape).

 

[scythefwd]

Common reasons people object to them:
Commie gun made by commie labor
There was a time people couldn't get rid of them for $70
Somewhat heavy
Gritty, creepy, heavy trigger
Crude sights
Crude machining/sloppy action

Autopistola - (not saying you subscribe to these points of view, just providing a counter point)
1. True, doesn't make it good or bad.
2. Been a long time since that was true. Beat up yugos go for 400 here.
3. Weight = less felt recoil
4. Kivari (forum member) can fix that. He works magic on the triggers from what I hear.
5. Tech sights - basically M16 sights for the SKS.
6. Depends on the maker, don't know what you could call sloppy on mine. It functions, and there isn't much play at all in the action.

 

[jonc]

I own two sks's. A yugo and a norinco paratrooper. I enjoy them both and they are very fun affordable rifles. I Really like my yugo and its very reliable.

 

[juk]

I sold my AK because my Yugo was a better gun. It was more accurate, easier to control, quick to reload, and felt better to me. The only downside is that it is heavier than the AK. I've got around 250 in mine including the stock refinishing, new Tapco parts, and duracoat. I doubt I will ever get rid of it.

 

[ohgrady]

buy it!!

$200.00? Buy it now! You can feed the SKS a whole lot cheaper than the AR. $4 to $6 a box ammo means you will shoot more (assuming you are on a budget). I've been known to shoot 10 to 12 boxes of ammo in an afternoon trip to the range. But costs aside, the SKS is reliable shooter. My Romanian (made in 1958) is one of my favorite shooters. If I lived in a state where I could use it, I'd take it deer hunting.

If you are after a long range rifle, it is not the rifle for you.



If you are worried about slam fires, buy a spring-loaded firing pin from Murrays Guns.

 

[nathan]

Can t go wrong with any SKS. Great way to teach young shooters at an affordable price.

 

[rangerruck]

I hate them, cannot stand them. They do the job, that is it. they are front heavy, too long, ugly, and I don't feel like carrying around boomerangs for magazines.