Why the SKS is a better than the AK47 for civilian use

[xxxleafybugxxx]

Before you jump down my throat for this thread, please keep in mind that I am not stating the SKS is better than the AK47 for military purposes, I am speaking primarily to civilian use. I don't think there is any disputing that the AK is on of the, if the THE best military platform of all time.

Anyways, I am giving this review because I have owned both-A WASR 10, and Chinese type 56 SKS.

I got my AK47 about 15 years ago from JG sales. I had to have been 15 or 16 at the time (my father technically bought it) and we walked into the store and I was amazed that I could own an actual AK47 for around $350. I had the money so we ended up getting it and it was my first actual rifle. While I had that gun, I shot thousands of rounds through it with not one hiccup. It was great. The only thing did not like about it is that I was hard pressed to hit paper from 100 yards. I know that some AK's are more accurate than others but the general consensus is that they are not accurate rifles. Mine was no exception. Still, it was a fun gun to take out to the desert and shoot rocks with.
I have since traded that AK to a friend, and now own a Chinese type 56 SKS. My primary reason for getting this SKS is because since I got rid of my AK, I missed having a gun that shot the 7.62x39 more so than I missed the AK itself. As a rifle enthusiast, I fell in love with everything about this round. It powerful, it is accessible, and very cheap (relatively speaking)--which prompted me to order an SKS from AIM surplus.
Anyways, I get my SKS home and begin cleaning it. Its covered with cosmoline which is both a blessing, and a curse. It sucks to have to clean it, but at the same time I appreciate the condition the cosmoline has kept my new rifle in for the past 50 years of storage.
I was able to get my SKS out today for the first time and fire some rounds through it. Its everything my AK47 was--only much more accurate. Its an absolute blast to shoot, extreemely reliable, and its not expensive to shoot also.

There are many who call the SKS a "poor mans deer rifle", because it's exactly that. A very inexpensive firearm to buy, with dirt cheap ammunition. Many hunt with their SKS, while few hunt with Ak's. In terms of home defense, it can be everything an AK can be.

Now I felt compelled to write this mini review because when I had the AK, I thought the world of it. I couldn't imagine ever getting rid of it, and it was also my favorite rifle. However, leaving Arizona and moving to Indiana (a state where you can't just shoot in your backyard) I found myself unimpressed at the range. I hate taking a rifle to the range when my groupings are barely a pie plate from 50 yards- (yes, my AK was that inaccurate).

I wanted to post this to give my impression of my SKS vs the AK47, and hope to spark some conversation.
Thanks all for reading!

 

[PJSprog]

Here we go in three ... two ... one ...

 

[Hurricane]

They were both made for one reason - to kill men. They are plenty capable of doing so. Also, let us not forget that the true beauty of the AK was the firepower. Imagine a small group of soldiers unleashing full-auto fire as they come over a hilltop. We're all guilty of trying to take a tool that was meant for something different and complaining because it doesn't do something else better.

Many people go on about inaccuracy with an AK type rifle. When many of the samples are rebuilds from here in the states, I understand why. Try an actual factory made model such as the Norinco type 56 and you will hold a close example of what it was really meant to be- minus the select-fire.

 

[PJSprog]

No experience with a WASR, but my Norinco AK will hit a man-size silhouette out to 300 yards every time...with the stock iron sights. As Hurricane noted, it performs exactly as it was designed.

Sorry your experience wasn't better.

 

[DSAPT9]

Well first the WASR has from day one been known as one of the most inaccurate of the AKs out there although some are not too bad. I personally shoot an Arsenal SGL20 that shoots around 1.75 at a hundred with 147 grain soft point hunting ammo. And yes I do hunt deer with it.

I will admit I have several SGL20s and one SGL21 that do not shoot as well but all will stay within a 2.5 in or better at 100 with good ammo. Still accurate enough for deer at 100 yards the max ranges I can usually find where I hunt as the area is pretty brushy.

I also find the SKS a very good choice as my hunting buddy caries one and we are pretty equal on the number of animal harvested with these firearms. Being at the right place at the right time seems to be more of the issue than the firearm we have chosen

This is mine and the second is my wife’s.


My wife’s, she does not hunt but it is one of her home defense firearms the Glock 19 is here first.

 

[goon]

We just had this conversation about two weeks ago.
I don't think it went well.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Had and still have a number of both through the years. The SKS has a simpler design and is easier to maintain. A couple of weak points are the low capacity & firing pin. If I had to go into the woods and stay there for a while for whatever reason, I'd opt for the SKS. If it was a firefight, AK all the way.

 

[JHansenAK47]

Many hunt with their SKS, while few hunt with Ak's.

What are you basing that statement on?

Its everything my AK47 was--only much more accurate.

Mechanical accuracy is pretty close in my experience. IMO some people shoot the traditional stock layout better.

 

[Inebriated]

If you aren't hitting a paper plate at 50 yards, it ain't the rifle's fault.

And even if it was, saying that one rifle is better than the AK because yours is inaccurate is like saying Mini-14's are more accurate than bolt guns, because your Mosin couldn't hold 6" at 100 yards.

 

[Jackal]

They are both equal, it just depends of if you like traditional rifle styling or if you prefer pistol grip/detachable mags.

 

[Fishbed77]

Anyways, I am giving this review because I have owned both-A WASR 10, and Chinese type 56 SKS.

Using a bottom-of-the-barrel AK probably isn't the best for comparison's sake.

Besides, wasn't this same thread just locked up a few days ago?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=741512&highlight=sks

 

[C-grunt]

The inaccuracy of the AK myth goes out the window when you buy a good AK. My friends Arsenal is a solid 2-3 MOA rifle with decent ammo.

 

[NoirFan]

The SKS feels better than the AK. There are not a lot of sharp edges or protrusions sticking out of the SKS, making it more comfortable to have on or around my person. It swings up to the shoulder more smoothly, and puts the sights right at my eye level more naturally. Speaking of sights, I consider Tech-Sights a necessity, and the version made for the SKS is better than the AK47 version.

The SKS feels right when you sling up your left arm for offhand shooting. I can't get comfortable using the AK sling that way.

I like that the SKS can be top-loaded one-by-one with individual rounds; I've always preferred designs where the bullets feed right into the gun without having to fiddle with magazines. Even if you modify the SKS to take detachable mags (and there are some good options out there these days) you can still retain the top-loading function.

 

[PabloJ]

For best bang for the buck I would take Samopal 58 folder over both. Last one I have seen came with couple 30rd mags, sling and bayonet for $450. Extra steel mags are about $20 each. Not bad deal at all.

 

[barneyrw]

<<"Imagine a small group of soldiers unleashing full-auto fire as they come over a hilltop.">>

You've been watching too many movies.

From the Marine Corps Riflemans Creed:
"My rifle and I know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit.."

Here's a true story. Back in the Spring of 1969 I was a Marine Corps 2nd Lt Platoon Commander leading my platoon on a patrol through the jungle about 20 miles west of Da Nang. We were in heavy jungle and about a dozen NVA opened up on us on full auto from less than 100 feet away from the point man. They all dumped a 30 round mag on full auto at us and immediately retreated. Of course we immediately hit the ground. It sounded like the end of the world but not one casualty. They missed every one of us.
I had a rule in my platoon. The point man could carry his rifle on full auto if he wanted and at night the 2nd man back had that option also. Everyone else carried on semi auto. Well aimed fire trumps full auto most everytime. Now full auto does have it's place in certain very close in situations but certainly not "coming over a hilltop".

 

[improperlyaged]

I am an SKS man myself. I own several have owned several more and plan to own several more than I do now. I have also owned the AK and absolutely hated it. Others like it, but I couldn't stand the ergo's. Give me an SKS any day over the AK. Also it is said somewhere that the vietcong actually preferred the SKS over the AK, not sure where I got that though.

 

[Aaron1100us]

I had an SKS 20+ years ago because I couldn't afford an AK varient back then. It was pretty accurate and always worked. But I thought it was pretty ugly looking and loading the mag was a pain. Only had one 30 round mag since it was a pain to switch out the mags.

Now I have an Arsenal SLR-101S. Looks way better than the SKS IMO, works just as well, more accurate but it does have a milled reciever and I have 10 mags that change out easy.

Both are good reliable guns but I'd take a milled AK over an SKS any day.

 

[JR47]

I collect SKS rifles. I own Russian, Chinese, Romanian, Albanian, and even a pair of SKS M and D versions. I also own a Romanian WUM-1, a Russian AKM, a Chinese Type 56, and an Egyptian AK, and a few others.

I have found that they pretty much mirror each other in accuracy. Ammunition matched to the rifle seems to have more to do with accuracy than the rifles themselves. NONE of mine are parts kits turned into American rifles.

 

[yzguy87]

^^^
Nice collection of AK's!

 

[Art Eatman]

I've never owned either--but I've been reading SKS/AK threads now for some fifteen years.

Generally, overall, they seem to be about equally accurate and dependable. Varies with brand more than with the design.

Absent defensive use against some large group, I'd pick the SKS. In large part it's because I like to carry a rifle at the balance point. And, I rarely shoot more than five or so rounds before stopping to think about my hits or let a rifle cool. For whatever reason, long strings of fire haven't been all that interesting to me.

But that's just me.

 

[MistWolf]

While I find both the AK and the SKS awkward to shoot, I find the AK less so

 

[Davek1977]

I own one of each, and wouldn't feel the least bit unarmed with either. Both will do anything I could reasonably ask them to do. They are not precision weapons, but nor is either one a "bullet hose". I've killed deer out to 200 yrds with the SKS. I haven't shpot my AK for groups or long range accuracy, but its easy enough to pick off gallon jugs offhand at 100 yards without issue. Neither has any reliability issues.

 

[mac66]

The SKS was a good rifle back in the day when they were $79 which is what they are still worth IMO. Prices today make them silly.

The AK is piece of junk, made by peasants for peasants. It is designed to provide high volumes of fire in massed infantry assaults by illiterate, poorly trained troops. It is reliable as a rock however.

And no the 7.62x39 doesn't hold a candle to a 30-30 on deer. I've shot at least a dozen deer with them. It will kill them but not reliably. It sucks as a deer round. Good for war though.

So rationalize all you want. The SKS is nothing more than an interesting collectable and the AK is nothing more than a high capacity blaster.

Oh yeah, and I have too many of both AKs and SKSs.

 

[benEzra]

As I posted here, here's a cheap Romanian AK at 50 yards, messing around with super-cheap Wolf ammo:

With a little more care, keeping an entire magazine on a playing card at 50 yards, or a pizza box at 200 yards, is entirely do-able even with the cheapest AK and the cheapest imported ammo.

It's not that cheap AK's can't shoot well enough to stay in the black at 200 yards; it's that AK's in general are easy rifles to shoot badly, and due to a lot of the AK mythos on the Internet, a lot of people expect them to shoot badly....so they never try to shoot them like target rifles, and never reach the rifle's full accuracy potential.

Just as with a pistol, focus hard on the front sight, breathe in and let the breath halfway out, hold it, and squeeze the trigger slowly until the shot takes you by surprise (don't hold your breath too long; stop and take another breath if you need to). Hold the trigger back for a second before letting it reset. Take at least 5 seconds per shot, more if you need to.

AK's don't typically benchrest as well as some rifles; the barrel/receiver vibration resulting from the heavy gas piston being blasted off the cantilevered gas block can make the rifle jump off a hard rest, resulting in scatter, and resting on the magazine is worst of all. I got best results when using a soft support placed as far back under the receiver as possible (i.e., just in front of the magazine), not under the handguard or barrel, or by supporting the rifle with braced elbows only (prone or benched with support, but without the rifle resting on anything firm). You want the rifle rock-steady but able to "float" during recoil.

Also, if you have a slant brake on an AK, ditch it for a linear AK-74 style brake (if converting gas pressure into noise and slightly less recoil is important to you) or a flash suppressor, or just remove it and cap the threads with a muzzle nut; making the bullet fly through an off-axis gas jet induces nutation and can as much as double group size at range, worst-case. If your AK doesn't come with a good trigger, drop in a Tapco G2. And if you can afford it, drop a decent optic on it, which makes finer aiming a lot easier. I shot with a Kobra for years, which had a 1.8 MOA dot (and chevron, and T-bar)...

but a lot of people swear by an Aimpoint Micro or Primary Arms model on an Ultimak forward rail; either works. The AK is generally easier to scope and hold zero than the SKS, in my experience.

Also, if your AK won't group well with one load, try another. Mine seemed to like Ulyanovsk 8M3/Wolf Military Classic or Barnaul/Brown Bear better than standard Wolf, and a lot of people said they got better accuracy with 154gr softpoints (excellent hunting load BTW) than with the basic 123gr FMJ.

I personally think that for most civilian purposes, the AK and SKS are exactly equivalent. For my purposes (plinking/target shooting out to 200 yards, HD, and occasional carbine matches) and my own preferences and skillset, the AK was the superior civilian rifle, but that depends entirely on the individual; an SKS might certainly be better for you, and that's great. But saying that the AK is pointless without full auto ignores the civilian utility of a compact detachable-mag .30 caliber carbine, IMO.

 

[surfinUSA]

I had a Norinco AK47 (wish I didn't sell it) and a Norinco SKS. MY AK47 was more accurate then the SKS. But the SKS was well used, picked up the day before the 94 ban went into effect. I don't miss it now that its gone.

I never really liked the AK. It served its purpose but wasn't as accurate or did anything an AR couldn't do better.

The SKS on the other hand was a pretty good short range hunting rifle for pigs. The safety was right where it should be. You could walk through the swamp, finger outside the trigger guard as it should be. When you identified a target, your finger pushed the safety off as it went into the trigger guard and fired a round.

Right now I believe the SIG 556R second generation is the best 7.62X39 rifle on the market now. The one I shot was outrageously accurate with old surplus ammo and reliable.