Is it crap?

[Yuppicide]

Let me first say... I'm an M14 "style" (especially carbine) kinda' guy....but I need to settle an argument! my homey has an SKS (not shure the maker), but isn't it a crap version of the AK?... also is the Kel-tek 223 ( that fold-up piece) . a rip of the ak or somthin' else? :huh:

[overweightelf]

sks's were made a few years before the ak, they are simailar, both great guns, the kel tech is a whole different thing

[Sniper]

The SKS evolved into the AK, if memory serves me right.

:sniper:

[TPW]

The AK47 replaced the SKS in the early 50's. Try this site.

http://www.surplusrifle.com/sks/index.aspe 50's.

[Taquito971]

As has been said the SKS came first and would technically make the AK47 a "rip" of the SKS. The Kel-Tec is a firearm that uses some of the same design characteristics as the AR15 but I wouldn't call it a "rip."

Brian

[surbat6]

The SKS, designed by Simonov is a very different action from the AK, designed by Kalashnikov. Although they're both gas- operated semi-automatics chambered for the 7.62x39 M43 round, the AK design uses a rotating bolt and the SKS a tilting bolt to lock up. The original idea of the Soviets was to use the earlier (1945) SKS as an interim weapon until they could arm their troops with the select-fire AK assault rifle in 1947.
Another story I've heard regarding the two weapons is that they were to be used together, with the SKS arming riflemen and the AK carried by squad automatic riflemen, similar to the contemporary U.S. use of the M1 Garand and the 1918A2 BAR.
So neither is a "rip-off" of the other.

[BlenderWizard]

SKS's are not a "crap" version of anything. They are moderately accurate, dependable rifles never really intended for full auto use. It is similar in many respects to the AK-47, and the SKS did come first, but they are each great rifles.

[2CoolChris]

SKS was in production before the AK. And not a rip-off of of anything, Simonov and Kalishnakov both worked for mother Russia. And not for profit. They are somewhat similar in the gas operated blow back design and caliber choice. Trigger group is very different. AK also much lighter than the SKS. (Stamped vs. milled) Milled guns are heavier.
Personally I swear by the SKS, in particular, the Russian ones. I have bought/sold, owned and dressed up A LOT of SKS's.
Remember, this is a battle rifle, not a 2200.00 Sako. I have had some real nice examples though. And with a chrome lined bore too?!?! Very nice indeed. An exceptional service gun with nice features for most situations. Excellent bang for the buck!!! Good brush gun, small deer, hogs, wild dog control, etc.
What I have found:
Russian and european "Milled" guns are usually better than the stamped Norinco guns popular in the early 90's. I have seen several stamped SKS's with black parkerized finish and sometimes just painted black.
I have owned some beautiful Russian milled examples with incredible blueing. My first Russian SKS was painted black. Carb cleaner and other heavy cleaners remove the paint. Some I stripped the paint off and did the home "cold blue" job. Not as nice as factory blue though. I have also bought several 100.00 SKS's that looked like hell. But worked fine despite apperance. And some I've seen look like they were assembled by a blind 7 year old. Dont buy that one.
I have had real good luck with the SKS. Had a few times where the bolt slams down on the spent case and pull charging handle back to free it. A few mis feeds. And sometimes the bullit didn't discharge. I've had a Russin SKS dump a 30 rd clip in seconds. KNOW YOUR RIFLE. Practice all the time. Learn your gun. If it gives you too much trouble, get it worked on or get another one. Most problems I've encountered is when you start swapping parts. Especially firing pins/block or bolt. These guns are almost hand made with lots of machine and file marks. They are very individual and often times have to be made to work at the factory. Rarely will you find identical SKS parts that just drop in any SKS. Buy 4 SKS's, take em apart and compare, you'll notice subtle to extreme differences. And swap or interchange parts and dont be surprised if your latest FrankenSKS dosn't fire at all. Or one gun did work with parts from another, but the host gun now wont work with parts from the other.
I have since sold all my SKS's and the rest were stolen.
I am looking at the new Yugo SKS offerings
Prices are coming back down and I miss my SKS. In a nut shell, SKS is a good choice. But, some are better than others. Most are fine servicible weapons though. Oh, I've done stuff on paper at 100 yards with a scope that had the old timers talking. I've "Lobbed" in 7.62 rounds on iron targets at 600yds with open sights (small pig or turkey). Kick up a little dust so raise rifle higher. LOL
You can do it! You can become very very accurate with your SKS. Practice a lot! Ammo is cheap. Know your rifle! Learn to clear mis/hang fires quickly. Learn to use the stripper clips. Try different ammo, positions, practice in the pouring rain!
I bought a Romanian AK (Romak-99) just for fun. I must say. Mine is perfect. No sight cant or misfitting parts. Absolutely beautiful wood, High gloss like my old gym floor. And it all matches. Sometimes upper hand guards dont match the rest of the gun. In which case, get a ventilated hand guard. Or synthetic stock conversion.
Anyway, my AK, HAS NEVER MISFIRED, HUNG, JAMMED, DOUBLE FED, HICCUPED, or had any ejection problems of any kind. And it's never slam fired either.
So personally I'm taking my AK into battle (so to speak) I definately feel I can depend my life on it working when I need it. And I've shot several guns that didn't fire or screwed up somehow. Not what you want to depend on when the chips are down. Stay away from cheap, small saturday night specials. .22s or .25s Raven/Bryco/Jennings and crap like that. They wont work more than they will work. And they jam alot.

Last note: I found the trigger group from the tec-9 and tec-22 are almost identical to the AK. I do like the SKS "unitized" trigger group assy. Very nice. And yes, they can be made to function full auto. Never done it but have seen the instructions before.

Well, this is my first post, hope it helped....

[R&R.45]

while the initial cost of the sks is low, over time, if you want real performance out of your rifle, a kit built AR-15 is actually cheaper. The reason is that if you install a good sound suppressor on the AR-15, it handles exactly like the .22lr conversion unit without a suppressor. So you get to get in your 5000 rds a year of practice at 2c a shot for 90+% of it. Saving 6c a shot means that in 2 years, your $600 kit built AR-15 and $150 conversion unit cost you $360 to fire 1000 223's and 9000 rds of .22. Your $150 sks cost you $700 to fire 10,000 rds, and it's probably worn out, so you need another $150 gun. The firing of the .22 unit doesn't put any wear at all on the 223 parts., You probably need another $150 .22 unit, tho. It will take another couple of years of savings to pay for the suppressor and its tax, but you will have a lot more gun in the meantime. Given a 10.5" barrel and an 8" long, 12 "oz suppressor, the shorty AR is just as handy as the .30 Carbine ever was. With the option of a .22lr with a 20 second swap of parts, and the 1/4 mile reach of the 223, it's the ideal survival rifle.

[Haukola]

The Kel-Tec SU-16 is a proprietary design as far as I can tell. It is chambered for .223, but that's about the end of the similarities to the AK or the AR. A friend of mine owns one and I did a little finishing work on it for him. It's a cheap gun that's designed to allow you to go to the range and shoot. I never said anything about accuracy or reliability. It has neither. His SU-16, out of the box, shot 7-8 inch groups at 100 yds from a bench. It also started having feed issues within 500 rounds of purchase.

If you want something that shoots .223, this would do it... that's about all though.

-HK-

[dakota kid]

Originally posted by R&R.45@Mar 15 2005, 09:42 PM
while the initial cost of the sks is low, over time, if you want real performance out of your rifle, a kit built AR-15 is actually cheaper. The reason is that if you install a good sound suppressor on the AR-15, it handles exactly like the .22lr conversion unit without a suppressor. So you get to get in your 5000 rds a year of practice at 2c a shot for 90+% of it. Saving 6c a shot means that in 2 years, your $600 kit built AR-15 and $150 conversion unit cost you $360 to fire 1000 223's and 9000 rds of .22. Your $150 sks cost you $700 to fire 10,000 rds, and it's probably worn out, so you need another $150 gun. The firing of the .22 unit doesn't put any wear at all on the 223 parts., You probably need another $150 .22 unit, tho. It will take another couple of years of savings to pay for the suppressor and its tax, but you will have a lot more gun in the meantime. Given a 10.5" barrel and an 8" long, 12 "oz suppressor, the shorty AR is just as handy as the .30 Carbine ever was. With the option of a .22lr with a 20 second swap of parts, and the 1/4 mile reach of the 223, it's the ideal survival rifle.
WTF are you talking about, The sks is quite the plinker and it's hard to find one for $150 anymore, its not about 'Shooting this many rounds for this cost" Its about owning a nice wood rifle that shoots a 7.62X39 and is a important piece of history.

[Student]

while the initial cost of the sks is low, over time, if you want real performance out of your rifle, a kit built AR-15 is actually cheaper. The reason is that if you install a good sound suppressor on the AR-15, it handles exactly like the .22lr conversion unit without a suppressor. So you get to get in your 5000 rds a year of practice at 2c a shot for 90+% of it. Saving 6c a shot means that in 2 years, your $600 kit built AR-15 and $150 conversion unit cost you $360 to fire 1000 223's and 9000 rds of .22. Your $150 sks cost you $700 to fire 10,000 rds, and it's probably worn out, so you need another $150 gun. The firing of the .22 unit doesn't put any wear at all on the 223 parts., You probably need another $150 .22 unit, tho. It will take another couple of years of savings to pay for the suppressor and its tax, but you will have a lot more gun in the meantime. Given a 10.5" barrel and an 8" long, 12 "oz suppressor, the shorty AR is just as handy as the .30 Carbine ever was. With the option of a .22lr with a 20 second swap of parts, and the 1/4 mile reach of the 223, it's the ideal survival rifle.

My God...... Gunkid is everywhere, like some kind of plague :lol: .
Although I am starting to agree that the .223 is great for survival.