Russian SKS-D vs AR15 - Page 2

GONIF · September 21, 2009, 12:51 PM

I would go with a quality AR,with good 5.56 ammo . If you start out with a quality AR ,know how to clean and lube it and feed it with quality mill spec 5.56 ammo you will be GTG.

Te Anau · September 21, 2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

In a survival situation which would you rather have, a russian sks-d that accepts ak mags or an AR15?

Personally,I'd rather have the original 10 round mag that the SKS was designed with.This along with stripper clips works great.Anyone I know that has a standard 5.56 AR has at least a dozen or so spare mags waiting in the wings to be used.I don't want to have to deal with that.

Quote:

that is the most ignorant statement I've read all week

Its all relevant to what one person likes.I don't consider an AR's magazine to be all that superior to the standard fixed SKS mag.If something has to be shot 3 times with a 55gr.,5.56 fmj to complete the job that 1 round of 122gr.,7.62x39 would do where does that get you? I personally detest the placement of the safety on an AR.The SKS safety is intuitive and works much better for me.My Norinco SKS with a 1" rubber butt pad shoulders like a dream and puts me on target instantly.I have to struggle to get a good sight picture with these collapsible stocks currently seen on most AR's.
AR owners tend to be the same as Glock fans.Most have "How dare you insult my perfect gun" syndrome.Some of us just enjoy shooting our "inferior design" guns more.

CK_32 · September 21, 2009, 02:22 PM

A good Ar and some canned jerky is all i need.

raftman · September 21, 2009, 02:36 PM

Comparing a gun designed in WWII, and quickly phased out after introduction against and AR doesn't exactly seem fair.

But then, the more obvious and fair comparison has been made and debated a billion times over.

Bartholomew Roberts · September 21, 2009, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Te Anau

If something has to be shot 3 times with a 55gr.,5.56 fmj to complete the job that 1 round of 122gr.,7.62x39 would do where does that get you?

I'm a bit confused by this hypothesis since I can't imagine too many situations where given identical shot placement, you would need three rounds of 5.56; but only one round of 7.62x39. Perhaps you can give us an example that supports this premise?

zombieslayer · September 21, 2009, 03:08 PM

If you can afford an AR, then tell the gunshop guy to make you a deal on an sks and get both!

The sks is what I'd go with on a budget, but the AR is a much more modern and ergonomic weapon.

Dwight55 · September 21, 2009, 03:24 PM

I'm with you, Bartholomew, . . . though I would not want to be shot with either one, . . . there are many more choices for bullets in the .223 than in the SK round.

Of the 5 main gun shops I frequent, . . . SK rounds are all FMJ / hardball type ammo that in many cases would just put a 7.62 size hole through the target and do nothing more, . . . whereas in the .223, . . . there are opportunities to get bullets that much more capable, . . . size or no size.

May God bless,
Dwight

ISC · September 21, 2009, 07:25 PM

There is no such thing as an "SK" rifle or "SK" round.

I usually stay away from these threads because they just rehash the same crap that's been said in dozens of other threads. I'll make an exception though and restate some things that are obvious to anyone that has used both rifles in realistic traiig environments.

1) The AR 15 has faster and smoother mag changes
2) The AR 15 is more accurate
3) The AR 15 uses a round that has almost twice the effective range of the SKS
4) AR 15/M16 rifles are more common than SKSs and much much much much more common than SKS Ds
5) Optics, parts, ammo weight, these are just a few more advantages that AR 15 rifles have over the SKS. You can believe that the strengths of the SKS outweigh the advantages of an AR 15, but failing to acknowledge them and stating that the AR 15's only advantage is its sights is ignorant.

Quote:

Main Entry: ig·no·rant
Pronunciation: \ˈig-n(ə-)rənt\
Function: adjective
Date: 14th century
1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>
2 : unaware, uninformed

johnwilliamson062 · September 21, 2009, 08:02 PM

I am not convinced ARs are all that much more prevalent than SKSs. Almost everyone I know who has an AR also has an SKS and I know quite a few who own an SKS and don't own an AR. THere may have been a lot more ARs sold and manufactured, but I thnk thhas in part due to so many people owning multiples.

MANY of the parts on an SKS and SKS-D are interchangeable with at most minimal fitting.

Stock changes etc can be done to get the SKS weight down to where it is very reasonable.

From what I know the effective range of the AR is less than 600 yards and the SKS less than 400 yards. I believe that is the range at which the rounds break the sound barrier and they are much less accurate after making that transition. They are still deadly. Not many of us are going to shoot a SHTF Carbine 600 yards from prone unsupported with much accuracy anyways.

DeathRabbit · September 21, 2009, 08:48 PM

I know that the 7.62 round has much more energy and 223 is higher velocity. I have also had problems with my sks sights until I bought a tri-rail mount. That pretty much took care of that issue. I guess my biggest concern is not technology as much as it is when all heck brakes loose and I dont have time to clean my rifle and there isnt a near by gun store for parts, when I pick up my rifle after dropping it in the mud will the thing fire and keep me alive. I did not keep this gun because it was the best on the market. I consider it my trustworthy backup. Personally, I am trying to find a replacement. The Tavor TAR-21. I dont think I will ever get rid of my sks though, it was passed down to me by my father.

ISC · September 21, 2009, 09:13 PM

Hitting anything past 300 M with an SKS is very unlikely. Much of that is due to the ballistics of the round, much of it is due to design of the operating system, and much of it is due to the sights. It's even less lekely with a 16" barrel SKS D.

I regularly hit targets out to 500 M with open sights with an M16 A2, and have engaged targets out even further and hit them.

When you include the M16s owned by the military and police into the numbers, and factor in that ARs are still being produced but SKSs are no longer being imported, I think the numbers work in the AR's favor.

I will concede that there are ALOT of SKSs out there though. I only have 4 ARs but have 7 SKSs. I don't think the ratios in my collection are that unusual, although I DO think that most higher end collections would have more AR 15s than SKSs. I know several people that don't even own one SKS.

Another thing to consider is that SKSs don't have completely interchangeable parts. I know of at least 6 different firing pin designs, and most of them can't be interchanged. Yugo gas systems are radically different and they use different barrels than anyother SKS.

Gunsmithing on an SKS requires more tools than an AR and many things that can be done to an AR with simple handtools on your workbench require a machine shop to do on an SKS.

Willie D · September 21, 2009, 09:30 PM

I'm never sure what the heck people mean by 'survival situation' on the internets.

Alone and lost in the wild? - How about a .22?

Need to worry about dangerous game? - Something bigger that's not too heavy

Katrina type thing - "What guns?" + concealed pistol

Red Dawn? - Good luck!

Zombies? - Don't Exist

Fall of Western Civilization - Keep a boat handy (and an AK and FAL belowdecks)

HorseSoldier · September 21, 2009, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Unless one of those 20 rounds hits him in the eye, you'd have a hard time taking down a mature Kodiak Grizzly...

I'm going to disagree -- 20 rounds of 5.56mm would probably kill a big Brown . . . though the guy who shot him would likely be scat by the time the septicemia did the bear in . . .

SgtMeatballs · September 22, 2009, 10:31 AM

Well, the Marine Corps issues me an M16A2 or A4 or M4 whenever they send me to a SHTF situation....so i'm comfortable with that weapon system. Furthermore, God help the soul of the enemy if we have a rifle "drill-off"!

Yet, without Chesty issuing me an AR, I do have my SKS for personal use. I guess i'd used the SKS until I can get into the armory and grab an AR.

(depending if the armorers wake up, or if I brought my rifle cards, or if they accidentaly gave my rifle to some captain who needed to qualify that week

)

jgcoastie · September 22, 2009, 11:00 AM

Quote:

I'm going to disagree -- 20 rounds of 5.56mm would probably kill a big Brown . . .

Not something I'm willing to bet my life on... These bears are 10ft tall and weigh 1600lbs... I'll stick with something a tad heavier...

zombieslayer · September 22, 2009, 12:56 PM

My main rifle is a .308, and I'd want something bigger for a bear!!

Crosshair · September 22, 2009, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Comparing a gun designed in WWII, and quickly phased out after introduction against and AR doesn't exactly seem fair.

The SKS was not phased out because it was a bad weapon. It was phased out because a better weapon was developed.

The same can be said about the Krag and the M-14.

Besides, the M-16 was first deployed in 1963. Not even 20 years after the SKS was developed. The M-16 had the advantage of better materials, but the gas system dates back to the Ljungman AG-42 in the 1940's.

HorseSoldier · September 23, 2009, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Not something I'm willing to bet my life on... These bears are 10ft tall and weigh 1600lbs... I'll stick with something a tad heavier...

I think you may have missed the point of my post. I'm not carrying 5.56 for bear defense, either.

Te Anau · September 23, 2009, 02:33 PM

Quote:

I'm a bit confused by this hypothesis since I can't imagine too many situations where given identical shot placement, you would need three rounds of 5.56; but only one round of 7.62x39. Perhaps you can give us an example that supports this premise?

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread325405/pg1

Who knows,it might have taken 30 rounds for the 5.56 to make it through the barriers tested.The 7.62x39 did it on the first round.For an urban defense gun, the 7.62x39 is the clear winner in most situations.

Quote:

The SKS was not phased out because it was a bad weapon. It was phased out because a better weapon was developed.

I tend to agree with this.
And this.

Quote:

Alone and lost in the wild? - How about a .22?

DeathRabbit · September 24, 2009, 09:12 PM

I did not realize the amount of response this question would bring. I am glad I brought it up though because I learned things from you guys. Thank you. I have decided that both weapons will have a place in my collection.

Bartholomew Roberts · September 25, 2009, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Who knows,it might have taken 30 rounds for the 5.56 to make it through the barriers tested.

So, you plan to shoot a lot of 8" pine wood barriers and don't want to have to shoot more than once? In that case, 7.62x39 makes sense since basic physics tells us a bigger bullet, although travelling somewhat slower, will be harder to stop in that particular scenario.

Of course, if we substitute a 10 gauge steel plate, then the 5.56 penetrates better than the 7.62x39.

DMK · September 25, 2009, 01:08 PM

Quote:

I did not realize the amount of response this question would bring. I am glad I brought it up though because I learned things from you guys. Thank you. I have decided that both weapons will have a place in my collection.

That is what I decided as well.

Best of luck with your new rifles.

a7mmnut · September 25, 2009, 01:36 PM

A .30 cal. steel core will also penetrate much better--apples to apples.

-7-

jgcoastie · September 25, 2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

I think you may have missed the point of my post. I'm not carrying 5.56 for bear defense, either.

No, I understood exactly what you meant, but I still stand by the fact that "probably" is not good enough for me when my life (or my family's lives) are at stake.

If it was all I had, then it's better than cussing and throwing rocks at the bear, but only marginally so when you look at the big picture... It very well may kill him, but not instantly which does me absolutely no good. I don't get any positive benefit from the bear dying from 20 5.56 wounds if it has already killed me.

HorseSoldier · September 25, 2009, 04:32 PM

Yeah -- that's actually what I said. Again, review original comment, particularly part about shooter being bear scat before the bear died from infection . . .

September 21, 2009, 12:51 PM	#26
GONIF Senior Member Join Date: July 11, 2009 Location: PHOENIX IT'S A DRY HEAT AZ Posts: 844	I would go with a quality AR,with good 5.56 ammo . If you start out with a quality AR ,know how to clean and lube it and feed it with quality mill spec 5.56 ammo you will be GTG. __________________ WHO ME ?

September 21, 2009, 02:22 PM	#28
CK_32 Senior Member Join Date: April 11, 2009 Location: Orange County, Ca Posts: 450	A good Ar and some canned jerky is all i need. __________________ Bullet placement over bullet wastement

September 21, 2009, 03:24 PM	#32
Dwight55 Senior Member Join Date: June 18, 2004 Location: Central Ohio Posts: 2,568	I'm with you, Bartholomew, . . . though I would not want to be shot with either one, . . . there are many more choices for bullets in the .223 than in the SK round. Of the 5 main gun shops I frequent, . . . SK rounds are all FMJ / hardball type ammo that in many cases would just put a 7.62 size hole through the target and do nothing more, . . . whereas in the .223, . . . there are opportunities to get bullets that much more capable, . . . size or no size. May God bless, Dwight __________________ www.dwightsgunleather.com If you can breathe, . . . thank God! If you can read, . . . thank a teacher! If you are reading this in English, . . . thank a Veteran!

September 21, 2009, 08:48 PM	#35
DeathRabbit Junior Member Join Date: September 19, 2009 Posts: 9	I know that the 7.62 round has much more energy and 223 is higher velocity. I have also had problems with my sks sights until I bought a tri-rail mount. That pretty much took care of that issue. I guess my biggest concern is not technology as much as it is when all heck brakes loose and I dont have time to clean my rifle and there isnt a near by gun store for parts, when I pick up my rifle after dropping it in the mud will the thing fire and keep me alive. I did not keep this gun because it was the best on the market. I consider it my trustworthy backup. Personally, I am trying to find a replacement. The Tavor TAR-21. I dont think I will ever get rid of my sks though, it was passed down to me by my father. __________________ Complacency in our freedom may be the end of our freedom if not for the few who stand guard.

September 22, 2009, 10:31 AM	#39
SgtMeatballs Member Join Date: August 19, 2009 Location: Ft Sill, OK Posts: 47	Well, the Marine Corps issues me an M16A2 or A4 or M4 whenever they send me to a SHTF situation....so i'm comfortable with that weapon system. Furthermore, God help the soul of the enemy if we have a rifle "drill-off"! Yet, without Chesty issuing me an AR, I do have my SKS for personal use. I guess i'd used the SKS until I can get into the armory and grab an AR. (depending if the armorers wake up, or if I brought my rifle cards, or if they accidentaly gave my rifle to some captain who needed to qualify that week ) __________________ "Semper Fidelis, Good night Chesty." "Si vis pacem, para bellum"

September 21, 2009, 02:36 PM	#29
raftman Senior Member Join Date: May 4, 2009 Location: Oregon Posts: 1,890	Comparing a gun designed in WWII, and quickly phased out after introduction against and AR doesn't exactly seem fair. But then, the more obvious and fair comparison has been made and debated a billion times over.

September 21, 2009, 03:08 PM	#31
zombieslayer Senior Member Join Date: September 11, 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,198	If you can afford an AR, then tell the gunshop guy to make you a deal on an sks and get both! The sks is what I'd go with on a budget, but the AR is a much more modern and ergonomic weapon.

September 21, 2009, 08:02 PM	#34
johnwilliamson062 Junior member Join Date: May 16, 2008 Posts: 9,995	I am not convinced ARs are all that much more prevalent than SKSs. Almost everyone I know who has an AR also has an SKS and I know quite a few who own an SKS and don't own an AR. THere may have been a lot more ARs sold and manufactured, but I thnk thhas in part due to so many people owning multiples. MANY of the parts on an SKS and SKS-D are interchangeable with at most minimal fitting. Stock changes etc can be done to get the SKS weight down to where it is very reasonable. From what I know the effective range of the AR is less than 600 yards and the SKS less than 400 yards. I believe that is the range at which the rounds break the sound barrier and they are much less accurate after making that transition. They are still deadly. Not many of us are going to shoot a SHTF Carbine 600 yards from prone unsupported with much accuracy anyways.

September 21, 2009, 09:13 PM	#36
ISC Junior member Join Date: August 5, 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 1,982	Hitting anything past 300 M with an SKS is very unlikely. Much of that is due to the ballistics of the round, much of it is due to design of the operating system, and much of it is due to the sights. It's even less lekely with a 16" barrel SKS D. I regularly hit targets out to 500 M with open sights with an M16 A2, and have engaged targets out even further and hit them. When you include the M16s owned by the military and police into the numbers, and factor in that ARs are still being produced but SKSs are no longer being imported, I think the numbers work in the AR's favor. I will concede that there are ALOT of SKSs out there though. I only have 4 ARs but have 7 SKSs. I don't think the ratios in my collection are that unusual, although I DO think that most higher end collections would have more AR 15s than SKSs. I know several people that don't even own one SKS. Another thing to consider is that SKSs don't have completely interchangeable parts. I know of at least 6 different firing pin designs, and most of them can't be interchanged. Yugo gas systems are radically different and they use different barrels than anyother SKS. Gunsmithing on an SKS requires more tools than an AR and many things that can be done to an AR with simple handtools on your workbench require a machine shop to do on an SKS.

September 21, 2009, 09:30 PM	#37
Willie D Senior Member Join Date: June 24, 2007 Posts: 1,149	I'm never sure what the heck people mean by 'survival situation' on the internets. Alone and lost in the wild? - How about a .22? Need to worry about dangerous game? - Something bigger that's not too heavy Katrina type thing - "What guns?" + concealed pistol Red Dawn? - Good luck! Zombies? - Don't Exist Fall of Western Civilization - Keep a boat handy (and an AK and FAL belowdecks)

September 22, 2009, 12:56 PM	#41
zombieslayer Senior Member Join Date: September 11, 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 3,198	My main rifle is a .308, and I'd want something bigger for a bear!!

September 24, 2009, 09:12 PM	#45
DeathRabbit Junior Member Join Date: September 19, 2009 Posts: 9	I did not realize the amount of response this question would bring. I am glad I brought it up though because I learned things from you guys. Thank you. I have decided that both weapons will have a place in my collection. __________________ Complacency in our freedom may be the end of our freedom if not for the few who stand guard.

September 25, 2009, 01:36 PM	#48
a7mmnut Junior member Join Date: February 27, 2009 Location: NC Foothills Posts: 1,150	A .30 cal. steel core will also penetrate much better--apples to apples. -7-

September 25, 2009, 04:32 PM	#50
HorseSoldier Senior Member Join Date: February 27, 2006 Location: OCONUS 61°13′06″N 149°53′57″W Posts: 2,282	Yeah -- that's actually what I said. Again, review original comment, particularly part about shooter being bear scat before the bear died from infection . . .