AK or the SKS: Tell me

[mettle]

personally, I love my SKS. I've got a norinco, had a Yugo before that never ever failed me even after I never ever cleaned it.

The only point that I can think that is negative about the Norinco is the non-detachable mag. Otherwise I love it. Stripper clips seem to keep you shooting more than reloading mags afterwards as well.

So, your thoughts: AK or SKS.

 

[techres]

The SKS is often far more accurate than an AK. It is also easier to mount a sling and use in prone position. It's only down side is the stripper clips. And personally, I find the stock a bit too thick.

The Ak is far faster to load and use in large volume fire.

Personally, I own AK's but understand their limitations compared to the SKS. If I had been smarter, I would have bought both when I had the chance.

 

[Lars]

The SKS is often far more accurate than an AK. It is also easier to mount a sling and use in prone position. It's only down side is the stripper clips. And personally, I find the stock a bit too thick.

The Ak is far faster to load and use in large volume fire.

Personally, I own AK's but understand their limitations compared to the SKS. If I had been smarter, I would have bought both when I had the chance.

I think for it's intended purpose, "Go To War", the AK is a better rifle. I watched a video that talked about the AK-47 vs the M16 and it clearly stated the AK-47 was built as a machinegun that fires a rifle round. The M16 is a rifle that fires as a machine gun.

The 224,000 rounds in 12 days story from Tactical Response, where 10 days it rained, lead me to believe if you need your rifle to run through a 1000 round gunfight in the mud, rain, snow, whatever without a chance to stop and clean it. The AK is a tough gun to beat.

The SKS i know nothing about. I'll defer to the pros on that side.

 

[Bubbajms]

I think as a "coming of age" rifle, the SKS is a fine rifle.. it's hard to compete with the newer long guns of today, but when compared to the M1 Garand, you can see some similarities..

Having shot both, I like the SKS's feel better, but if I had the chance to pick up an AK I would..

 

[smokingman]

I have owned several of both.The sks does have the ak on accuracy and over all weight(by as little as 2 oz and as much as 1 lb depending on type).In every other way the ak wins. Reliability,reloading,maintenance is less,parts availability(granted sks parts are not "rare"),magazine capacity, I like the ak sight more than sks sight,the trigger group is very easy to replace with an American made G-2(superior to any sks trigger I ever used),and the forward grip on an ak is much better than the grip on an sks.
I have had very few problems with aks,the same can not be said for my sks's.I have had a broken extractor and failure to fire due to bent firing pin.

Sks's are not bad firearms.They are great in many ways.However there is a reason they where taken out of service and replaced with the ak.
If you can afford an AK it is what I would recommend.

 

[38special]

I've never had trouble out of an SKS any more than any AK47 I've had.

Really it depends what you want it for.

 

[Slab]

removable magazines, shorter

 

[MACHINEGUN]

Ak... for sure.

 

[karlsgunbunker]

SKS is a fine rifle, AK is Better. IMHO

 

[TheDude]

I would not feel undergunned with the SKS and is definately "enough" gun for most jobs. Saying both have been fielded exstensively is an understatement. The SKS is really pretty underestimated by a lot of people in the accuracy dept, for what it is.















Oh hell, buy both.

 

[Wabatuckian]

I prefer the SKS. I can load it faster and it's more accurate, especially with a peep sight.

The only thing I do not like is the long trigger that does not reset if you pull it halfway through or so, and decide not to fire.

Josh <><

 

[Naptown]

Huge fan of the AK. No experience with the SKS. The AK is just a thing of beauty not to mention there have been more than 100 million happy customers.

 

[Crystalship1]

SKS is a fine rifle, AK is Better. IMHO

What he said!!!!

 

[shooter521]

AK, hands down. Shorter, lighter, high-capacity detachable mag, better trigger (and for an AK, that's saying something!), and much easier to detail strip/maintain/work on. That combination of features far outweighs whatever miniscule edge the SKS has in accuracy.

I kind of regard the Saiga rifle as a modern-day SKS with a detachable mag. In fact, I'd take a Saiga over an SKS, too!

 

[Shoots4Fun]

I just bought my first Yugo SKS at the 1500 last week. From some research on the gun, it looks like it was from the mid 1970's. It is in perfect shape, but unfortunately I haven't shot it yet. I have torn it down and cleaned it though. This weekend will be the test of it...

For me, it was a good gun of this nature to start off wth in that there is a lot of information about it, most all of the feedback that I received about it has been great, and I love that it is in terrific shape. I expect it will be very reliable.

Not knowing as much about the AK's, I figured I would start cheaper and build up to an AK in the future.

With the 50 to 100 million of the AK's they have manufactured over the life of the rifle, that must say something for them as well.

 

[GetA2J]

SKS $200 give-or-take great rifle and accurate.


AK $400?? give-or-take sloppy action, mine has a great trigger! VERY reliable!

In true "gun culture" fashion..... GET BOTH!!!!

 

[paddling_man]

Crap! I had just typed a long response and hit the back button!!!

Short answer:

SKS
*On a budget
*Truck/trunk gun where fixed mag might be a bonus
*"OK" with it not being a "EBR." ie., You don't feel the burning need to swap on composite stocks and detachable 30-round mags that it may not be reliable with.

AK
*Prices doubled in the last year for both. Unfortunately, the economy of scale means you'll be paying $300 extra for the AK instead of $100 extra for the SKS.
*Do this route only if you can afford a "good" AK. Not one of the WASRs that were converted to hi-cap by some Friday afternoon gorilla at Century who used a pair of vice grips - so that the mag flops around senselessly and the sights are canted. Not all WASR's are that way, certainly, but it's still hard to stomach paying $550-600 for one when they were selling in the Northern Indiana sporting goods stores 12 months ago for $279.

Then again, only my opinion based on observation; I don't own any bloc rifles. My mil/mil-style rifles are all NATO. I do regret missing the SKS/AKs at the cheap prices of only a year ago - I just kept walking away, saving money for other things that went *bang*!

To echo TheDude and others: "Get both!"

 

[IUGradStudent]

SKS $200 give-or-take great rifle and accurate.


AK $400?? give-or-take sloppy action, mine has a great trigger! VERY reliable!

In true "gun culture" fashion..... GET BOTH!!!!

If by 200 you mean 400 and if by 400 you mean 700 then I am with you.

 

[cox7215]

I would go with the AK if it was me, but now the prices are so high.........R

 

[GetA2J]

SKS $200 give-or-take great rifle and accurate.


AK $400?? give-or-take sloppy action, mine has a great trigger! VERY reliable!

In true "gun culture" fashion..... GET BOTH!!!!

If by 200 you mean 400 and if by 400 you mean 700 then I am with you.

My first SKS was if I remember correctly around $125 or $150 so I figured they had gone up to around $200 to $250.

My AKs I traded for both and havn't priced them much at all.
I stand corrected