Would you feel comfortable with an SKS in the Alaskan wilderness.

smleno1mkIII · June 12, 2012, 12:35 AM

Even In bear territory? with 154 grain soft points by wolf if it was all you had.

Crazy88Fingers · June 12, 2012, 12:42 AM

If it's all I have then I guess I would have to learn to live with it. As they say, it's better than a sharp stick.

smleno1mkIII · June 12, 2012, 12:45 AM

I would think it would be better than a pistol. even a 44 mag.

DPris · June 12, 2012, 01:39 AM

No.
Denis

Killshot_Ben · June 12, 2012, 01:56 AM

Only if it was that, or a stick. The 7.62x39 is over hyped. It is a larger than normal round, but has awful ballistics. In terms of damage, it's smaller Successer, in the 5.45x39 is more powerful. Go with the cheaper bolt action Mosin-nagant in 7.62x54r, if price is a concern, but if not, get an AK-74. The berdan primed ammunition will put you in a better position in the cold, and Soviet arms are always rugged, an reliable. If you don't like that, get another semi auto with better ballistics.

Any gun, even a .22, is better than no gun.

In all respects, if I had only one bullet left, and I came across a mountain lion or bear, I would have to use it on myself. (figuratively, kinda)

Guns Blazing · June 12, 2012, 05:31 AM

Love my Mosin,I would trust my life to it in the wilderness an feel pretty comfy...an SKS?..i would be happy to have a weapon...sure.

madcratebuilder · June 12, 2012, 07:00 AM

Quote:

if it was all you had

Better than a sharp stick, but not by much. Your just gonna **** off a charging bear.

dean1818 · June 12, 2012, 07:13 AM

If you are hunting a bear, absolutely not
if you are just wanting soemthing for protection, yes IMHO

A 44 mag would be easier to carry.

But....... The 44 mag wont hit as hard as a 7.62x39

Many guides carry a 44 mag

Mrgunsngear · June 12, 2012, 08:44 AM

Quote:

I would think it would be better than a pistol. even a 44 mag.

Ditto.

But I'd probably rather have bear spray. The videos of that stuff are impressive.

lharrell79 · June 12, 2012, 09:48 AM

SKS with steel core ammo would be enough for any animal you might encounter.

jmr40 · June 12, 2012, 10:28 AM

It would definately be better than a 44 mag handgun with good ammo, but still wouldn't be my choice.

essohbe · June 12, 2012, 11:21 AM

Quote:

A 44 mag would be easier to carry.

But....... The 44 mag wont hit as hard as a 7.62x39

Many guides carry a 44 mag

I'd rather have a Tokarev.

Jimro · June 12, 2012, 12:45 PM

No, lets compare the numbers.

Buffalo Bore 305 gr load at 1325 fps vs Wolf 154gr at 2101 fps.

Buffalo Bore calculates a momentum of 57 which is more than the Wolf momentum of 46. If you belive in the Taylor Knockout Formula the Buffalo Bore load is 25 verses the Wolf load of 14.

Only velocity and energy are higher for the Wolf, 1507 over the Buffalo Bore 1108 ft/lbs.

The big reason for guides carrying big bore revolvers is the momentum, they penetrate deep from nearly any angle. I can't say I would trust Wolf soft point ammo to provide enough penetration to adequately protect me from a big Alaskan bear.

Jimro

arch308 · June 12, 2012, 06:56 PM

Not just no but hell no!

Sarge · June 12, 2012, 07:07 PM

It'd do. I'd leave it loaded with FMJ and save the 154 SP for making meat. Better make sure it'll run with that 154 before you depend on it, though.

HiBC · June 12, 2012, 08:14 PM

IMO,you would be better off with a cut down,lightened,common,non collectable mauser 8mm.If you can get one thats already cut,so much the better.

Check Canada's laws on min bbl length...it may be 19 in or?,I dunno,but check.Keep travel easier.

Maybe,if you were hunting modest size black bear,picking your shots,right ammo,OK

But stopping a PO'd bear? Maybe...half hour or so after he kills you.

Alaska444 · June 12, 2012, 09:30 PM

No, the 7.62x39 is not at all adequate for the animals in Alaska. Lot's of good choices other than that even in the AR platform such as the 7.62 Nato. The .308 is not considered big enough for Alaska protection, but in an AR platform, it would be much better than the SKS as above.

The 7.62x39 is just not a bear gun at all. Comparing it to the .44 magnum is an inadequate comparison as well since the .44 magnum is not considered an adequate bear gun although it is very popular for that purpose. When it comes to Alaskan bears, the .44 magnum is more of a last resort weapon in my internet expert opinion although I do carry one in Northern Idaho as well. I am under no illusions and I would need a hope and prayer against a large grizzly with my .44 magnum. It simply is not even in the minimum bear gun category of any reviews I have read.

Keep the SKS at home and get a large caliber rifle instead. What is lethal for people is not necessarily lethal for bears or moose.

B. Lahey · June 12, 2012, 10:19 PM

The 154gr SPs have pretty darn impressive terminal ballistics. Significant expansion and relatively deep penetration. I suspect they would do just fine if that's your best option.

Unfortunately brassfetcher.com seems to have done away with the page showing a ballistic-gel test, it was a sight to behold.

Doc TH · June 12, 2012, 10:21 PM

Alaska is correct. The 7.62 X 39 is not adequate for grizzly bears. Check out tests the US Forest Service has performed on a wide variety of rifle (and some pistol) calibers for protection in bear country. The smallest caliber that seemed adequate was the 30-06 220 grain. An additional benefit was that it had considerably less recoil energy than the bigger calibers.

gak · June 12, 2012, 10:43 PM

Alaska444 said
" No, the 7.62x39 is not at all adequate for the animals in Alaska. Lot's of good choices other than that even in the AR platform such as the 7.62 Nato. The .308 is not considered big enough for Alaska protection, but in an AR platform, it would be much better than the SKS as above.The 7.62x39 is just not a bear gun at all. Comparing it to the .44 magnum is an inadequate comparison as well since the .44 magnum is not considered an adequate bear gun although it is very popular for that purpose. When it comes to Alaskan bears, the .44 magnum is more of a last resort weapon in my internet expert opinion although I do carry one in Northern Idaho as well. I am under no illusions and I would need a hope and prayer against a large grizzly with my .44 magnum. It simply is not even in the minimum bear gun category of any reviews I have read.Keep the SKS at home and get a large caliber rifle instead. What is lethal for people is not necessarily lethal for bears or moose."

^^ Well said, and I'm a major .30-30 (better hunting round than the similar x39--bullet weights for one thing--but same for purposes here) and .44 Mag fan. At best, secondary backup(s) in the OP's subject environment. Leagues ahead of the x39 within SD ranges against the furry, big boned critters, I've got a .44 Mag lever carbine along with a .44 handgun as well that goes with me everywhere (stationary camping) in black bear country. And, there's a good chance if I ever actually encountered such a critter (it happens--we just had a close-call but non fatal attack here in Az), I'd probably be wishing for a .454 or better. Definitely a different ball o' wax than Alaska.

smleno1mkIII · June 12, 2012, 11:39 PM

Ok I guess my M44 Mosin with 200 grain soft points would be a better choice Or I do have a m24-47 Mauser that I could hand load some 200 grain barnes X bullets. hmm which is better.

kilimanjaro · June 12, 2012, 11:46 PM

Yes, the bayonet serves quite well as a tent peg in those high winds on the tundra....

Absent the bears, I would be fine with an SKS. With the bears, it needs to have a '4' in it.

HiBC · June 13, 2012, 12:23 AM

I'd say load up the 8mm,and look for partitions or failsafes or some such strong,deep penetrating bullet.200 gr is fine.

You are still rather lightly gunned,but a strong 8mm load will perform much like a 30-06.

You might look at a book "The Perfect Shot" Know bear anatomy.

Adamantium · June 13, 2012, 07:35 AM

I don't live in Alaska or ever plan to visit so feel free to take my advice for what it is worth. If I had to choose only one...

12 gauge pump > Bear spray > The choice not to venture into bear country > SKS > Harsh language.

Not every problem needs to be solved with a firearm but if it did I'd take a pump gun loaded with brenneke slugs over every gun mentioned so far in this thread.

lharrell79 · June 13, 2012, 08:02 AM

The SKS should be enough. If you're truly worried though, sell your SKS for $250-350 and get an 870 12 gauge and some slugs. 870's are a dime a dozen these days.

June 12, 2012, 12:35 AM	#1
smleno1mkIII Senior Member Join Date: November 5, 2009 Location: washington state Posts: 176	Would you feel comfortable with an SKS in the Alaskan wilderness. Even In bear territory? with 154 grain soft points by wolf if it was all you had. Last edited by smleno1mkIII; June 12, 2012 at 12:39 AM. Reason: more info

June 12, 2012, 12:42 AM	#2
Crazy88Fingers Senior Member Join Date: November 20, 2010 Location: WesTex Posts: 958	If it's all I have then I guess I would have to learn to live with it. As they say, it's better than a sharp stick. __________________ "And I'm tellin' you son, well it ain't no fun, staring straight down a .44" -Lynyrd Skynyrd

June 12, 2012, 12:45 AM	#3
smleno1mkIII Senior Member Join Date: November 5, 2009 Location: washington state Posts: 176	I would think it would be better than a pistol. even a 44 mag. Last edited by smleno1mkIII; June 12, 2012 at 12:48 AM. Reason: more info

June 12, 2012, 07:13 AM	#8
dean1818 Senior Member Join Date: December 5, 2009 Location: Frisco Texas Posts: 844	If you are hunting a bear, absolutely not if you are just wanting soemthing for protection, yes IMHO A 44 mag would be easier to carry. But....... The 44 mag wont hit as hard as a 7.62x39 Many guides carry a 44 mag __________________ An imperfect servant of my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Buying American made, wherever I still can

June 12, 2012, 12:45 PM	#13
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	No, lets compare the numbers. Buffalo Bore 305 gr load at 1325 fps vs Wolf 154gr at 2101 fps. Buffalo Bore calculates a momentum of 57 which is more than the Wolf momentum of 46. If you belive in the Taylor Knockout Formula the Buffalo Bore load is 25 verses the Wolf load of 14. Only velocity and energy are higher for the Wolf, 1507 over the Buffalo Bore 1108 ft/lbs. The big reason for guides carrying big bore revolvers is the momentum, they penetrate deep from nearly any angle. I can't say I would trust Wolf soft point ammo to provide enough penetration to adequately protect me from a big Alaskan bear. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

June 12, 2012, 01:39 AM	#4
DPris Member Emeritus Join Date: August 19, 2004 Posts: 7,133	No. Denis

June 12, 2012, 01:56 AM	#5
Killshot_Ben Junior Member Join Date: June 11, 2012 Location: Tupelo, MS Posts: 11	Only if it was that, or a stick. The 7.62x39 is over hyped. It is a larger than normal round, but has awful ballistics. In terms of damage, it's smaller Successer, in the 5.45x39 is more powerful. Go with the cheaper bolt action Mosin-nagant in 7.62x54r, if price is a concern, but if not, get an AK-74. The berdan primed ammunition will put you in a better position in the cold, and Soviet arms are always rugged, an reliable. If you don't like that, get another semi auto with better ballistics. Any gun, even a .22, is better than no gun. In all respects, if I had only one bullet left, and I came across a mountain lion or bear, I would have to use it on myself. (figuratively, kinda)

June 12, 2012, 05:31 AM	#6
Guns Blazing Member Join Date: June 12, 2012 Posts: 22	Love my Mosin,I would trust my life to it in the wilderness an feel pretty comfy...an SKS?..i would be happy to have a weapon...sure.

June 12, 2012, 09:48 AM	#10
lharrell79 Member Join Date: October 16, 2011 Posts: 31	SKS with steel core ammo would be enough for any animal you might encounter.

June 12, 2012, 10:28 AM	#11
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	It would definately be better than a 44 mag handgun with good ammo, but still wouldn't be my choice.

June 12, 2012, 06:56 PM	#14
arch308 Senior Member Join Date: November 6, 2011 Location: DFW, Texas Posts: 876	Not just no but hell no!

June 12, 2012, 07:07 PM	#15
Sarge Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2002 Location: MO Posts: 5,457	It'd do. I'd leave it loaded with FMJ and save the 154 SP for making meat. Better make sure it'll run with that 154 before you depend on it, though. __________________ People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice.

June 12, 2012, 08:14 PM	#16
HiBC Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2006 Posts: 8,283	IMO,you would be better off with a cut down,lightened,common,non collectable mauser 8mm.If you can get one thats already cut,so much the better. Check Canada's laws on min bbl length...it may be 19 in or?,I dunno,but check.Keep travel easier. Maybe,if you were hunting modest size black bear,picking your shots,right ammo,OK But stopping a PO'd bear? Maybe...half hour or so after he kills you.

June 12, 2012, 09:30 PM	#17
Alaska444 Junior member Join Date: April 3, 2010 Posts: 1,231	No, the 7.62x39 is not at all adequate for the animals in Alaska. Lot's of good choices other than that even in the AR platform such as the 7.62 Nato. The .308 is not considered big enough for Alaska protection, but in an AR platform, it would be much better than the SKS as above. The 7.62x39 is just not a bear gun at all. Comparing it to the .44 magnum is an inadequate comparison as well since the .44 magnum is not considered an adequate bear gun although it is very popular for that purpose. When it comes to Alaskan bears, the .44 magnum is more of a last resort weapon in my internet expert opinion although I do carry one in Northern Idaho as well. I am under no illusions and I would need a hope and prayer against a large grizzly with my .44 magnum. It simply is not even in the minimum bear gun category of any reviews I have read. Keep the SKS at home and get a large caliber rifle instead. What is lethal for people is not necessarily lethal for bears or moose.

June 12, 2012, 10:19 PM	#18
B. Lahey Senior Member Join Date: March 17, 2008 Location: Indiana Posts: 2,857	The 154gr SPs have pretty darn impressive terminal ballistics. Significant expansion and relatively deep penetration. I suspect they would do just fine if that's your best option. Unfortunately brassfetcher.com seems to have done away with the page showing a ballistic-gel test, it was a sight to behold. __________________ "A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards." -George Orwell Last edited by B. Lahey; June 12, 2012 at 10:27 PM.

June 12, 2012, 10:21 PM	#19
Doc TH Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2005 Posts: 633	Alaska is correct. The 7.62 X 39 is not adequate for grizzly bears. Check out tests the US Forest Service has performed on a wide variety of rifle (and some pistol) calibers for protection in bear country. The smallest caliber that seemed adequate was the 30-06 220 grain. An additional benefit was that it had considerably less recoil energy than the bigger calibers.

June 12, 2012, 10:43 PM	#20
gak Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2005 Location: Aridzona Posts: 2,767	Alaska444 said " No, the 7.62x39 is not at all adequate for the animals in Alaska. Lot's of good choices other than that even in the AR platform such as the 7.62 Nato. The .308 is not considered big enough for Alaska protection, but in an AR platform, it would be much better than the SKS as above.The 7.62x39 is just not a bear gun at all. Comparing it to the .44 magnum is an inadequate comparison as well since the .44 magnum is not considered an adequate bear gun although it is very popular for that purpose. When it comes to Alaskan bears, the .44 magnum is more of a last resort weapon in my internet expert opinion although I do carry one in Northern Idaho as well. I am under no illusions and I would need a hope and prayer against a large grizzly with my .44 magnum. It simply is not even in the minimum bear gun category of any reviews I have read.Keep the SKS at home and get a large caliber rifle instead. What is lethal for people is not necessarily lethal for bears or moose." ^^ Well said, and I'm a major .30-30 (better hunting round than the similar x39--bullet weights for one thing--but same for purposes here) and .44 Mag fan. At best, secondary backup(s) in the OP's subject environment. Leagues ahead of the x39 within SD ranges against the furry, big boned critters, I've got a .44 Mag lever carbine along with a .44 handgun as well that goes with me everywhere (stationary camping) in black bear country. And, there's a good chance if I ever actually encountered such a critter (it happens--we just had a close-call but non fatal attack here in Az), I'd probably be wishing for a .454 or better. Definitely a different ball o' wax than Alaska.

June 12, 2012, 11:39 PM	#21
smleno1mkIII Senior Member Join Date: November 5, 2009 Location: washington state Posts: 176	Ok I guess my M44 Mosin with 200 grain soft points would be a better choice Or I do have a m24-47 Mauser that I could hand load some 200 grain barnes X bullets. hmm which is better.

June 12, 2012, 11:46 PM	#22
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Yes, the bayonet serves quite well as a tent peg in those high winds on the tundra.... Absent the bears, I would be fine with an SKS. With the bears, it needs to have a '4' in it.

June 13, 2012, 12:23 AM	#23
HiBC Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2006 Posts: 8,283	I'd say load up the 8mm,and look for partitions or failsafes or some such strong,deep penetrating bullet.200 gr is fine. You are still rather lightly gunned,but a strong 8mm load will perform much like a 30-06. You might look at a book "The Perfect Shot" Know bear anatomy.

June 13, 2012, 07:35 AM	#24
Adamantium Senior Member Join Date: June 6, 1999 Location: El Paso, TX Posts: 1,021	I don't live in Alaska or ever plan to visit so feel free to take my advice for what it is worth. If I had to choose only one... 12 gauge pump > Bear spray > The choice not to venture into bear country > SKS > Harsh language. Not every problem needs to be solved with a firearm but if it did I'd take a pump gun loaded with brenneke slugs over every gun mentioned so far in this thread. __________________ New gun, same ol' shot.

June 13, 2012, 08:02 AM	#25
lharrell79 Member Join Date: October 16, 2011 Posts: 31	The SKS should be enough. If you're truly worried though, sell your SKS for $250-350 and get an 870 12 gauge and some slugs. 870's are a dime a dozen these days.