Stupid Q but why so spendy?

sksfan22 · February 9, 2013, 03:18 AM

My pops,nam vet,wants to know why an M14 costs so much? My SkS has pretty much the same wood/metal... Just as reliable... Is the Gov. to blame or what??? Should'nt cost almost two grand for it... They should be cheaper than the AR's... **** match nonsense.

Appreciate any help.

jason_iowa · February 9, 2013, 03:52 AM

They are much higher quality then any sks and 90% of AR's imho.

kozak6 · February 9, 2013, 05:03 AM

The SKS was manufactured decades ago and dumped as unwanted and obsolete by a government that didn't want them anymore, and at yard sale prices at that.

If you had to actually pay an American to cut one out of a block of steel instead of scooping up Cold War leftovers, it would cost a little more.

Ben Towe · February 9, 2013, 08:18 AM

Quote:

My pops,nam vet,wants to know why an M14 costs so much? My SkS has pretty much the same wood/metal... Just as reliable... Is the Gov. to blame or what??? Should'nt cost almost two grand for it... They should be cheaper than the AR's... **** match nonsense.

How could it be made cheaper than an AR? It is a far more complicated design. An AR is an extremely simple modular design that is relatively easy to machine and build, as well as using plastic furniture. Also everyone and their brother builds ARs, and competition keeps prices lower. If you want an M14, Springfield Armory's M1A is the only show in town as far as I know. That alone ensures the price will be higher, even without the sheer extra cost of building one.

An SKS is an even older design, and virtually all were built in Communist countries. They don't cost much to build when you can pay your workers in ration cards and throw them in the Gulag if they don't show up for work. Check out some of the American built AKs, they cost quite a bit more than their Combloc counterparts. At least they did before the panic.

kraigwy · February 9, 2013, 09:19 AM

Thats like asking why a Rolls Royce cost more then a Yugo.

Take a M1A and a SKS to the firing line. Shoot a couple strings out of each rifle at a 1000 yards.

I think you'll see a big difference.

Even at 100-200 yards. I'm a CMP GSM Master Instructor and put on GSM Clinics and matches. You always get people showing up with SKSs or AKs.......ONCE. They can't compete even a short ranges (100-200 yards) with Garands, M1As or ARs.

I agree that not everyone can afford a M1A or AR. There are cheap rifles out there that do work. Cheaper then the SKS. Get a Mosin.

They certainly used Mosins in Vietnam. We had an joke, if some one was sniping at us at 300 yards or so with an SKS or AK........leave them alone, they might replace the sniper with a Mosin.

**4V50 Gary** · February 9, 2013, 09:36 AM

What's the difference? Not designed as a selective fire weapon, the SKS could be imported as a surplus arm. Because of its selective fire capability and a government disdaining of selling them to the public, the M-14 could not be released in large numbers to We The People. The tools and dies to make the M-14 were sold off to Taiwan, thus requiring anyone wanting to make them to do so from scratch. While surplus parts were available, that dried up and became more expensive. Having to fabricate parts drove up expenses to manufacturers which was passed onto consumers.

I wish the Taiwanese would make M-14s for us. I don't know if they still have the tools and dies though.

Edward429451 · February 10, 2013, 12:19 AM

You can't compare an SKS to an M1A! You have never shot an M1A have you?
It's well worth the money. Sure I wish they were cheaper too but they are worth it. As long as you're not the type to slap the trigger, it is very hard to miss with one with any ammo.

StukaJU87 · February 10, 2013, 01:00 AM

Quote:

it is very hard to miss with one with any ammo.

There is some truth to that.
I remember the first time my father-in-law ever shot one, he put it dead center. Granted he was a little shy of 100 yards away but it was still impressive. The funny thing was that he was trying to sight it in and figured he would have to "walk it in". At first he thought he missed the target since be didnt see a hole towards any of the corners of the target. That rifle was really accurate right out of the box. He was able to keep all his rounds in the bullseye. The WASR 10 we tried the same day was only able to throw a pattern the size of a dinner plate. While fun, it just wasn't as impressive. Lol

Auto426 · February 10, 2013, 01:42 AM

As the others have said, the current prices for SKS's don't reflect what it actually costs to make one. They were made long ago in Eastern Bloc countries and stored away for a ground war that never came. When the Soviet Union fell, they were exported to the U.S. civilain market and sold for rock bottom prices, as the governments selling them didn't care what they cost to make 30 to 40 years ago.

M14's on the other hand are almost all new production today, since the government never sold complete rifles as surplus due to their selective fire capabilities. They did sell parts kits from some of the rifles, which consisted of almost everything but the receiver, but those have all but dried up. Forged steel and walnut are also more expensive than aluminum and plastic, and since the demand for M14's isn't nearly as large as the demand for AR's, prices stay high.

Orlando · February 16, 2013, 08:56 PM

My SkS has pretty much the same wood/metal... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

saitek · February 16, 2013, 11:45 PM

there is no comparison between cheap funcitional (hah) and expensive quality .
we come from a nation of riflemen ,were you have to count on the weapon for life,and it don't hurt to have a bit of pride in your workmanship.
my dad brought back a sks from vietnam with a few others from guy's that did not have a need for it any more.
the sks is a decent short range weapon but more than 200 yard's is hope and poke .my carryed a m14 and they tryed to give him a m16 and he left the m16 in the armory the m14 reached out and touched someone .
his sks sit's and collect dust bunny's ,he has a m1a now and shoots it at cmp matches to this date ,it get's the job done .

kilimanjaro · February 17, 2013, 03:39 AM

The M14 is a much, much better quality weapon, starting with the wood, the steel, the machining, tooling, and the design and efficiency of the rifle itself. It's probably the world's best and last of the classic wood-framed battle rifles.

LGS here has two M1As right now, owner says the price is about $700 too high at $2000. Same with the other AR, AK, etc., overpriced. Sit back and wait a bit, I guess.

By the time they were ready to surplus the M14, the GCA of 1968 had happened and the gun control movement was strong, so just the parts came out, and some NFA items.

February 9, 2013, 03:18 AM	#1
sksfan22 Member Join Date: January 25, 2006 Location: OR Posts: 28	Stupid Q but why so spendy? My pops,nam vet,wants to know why an M14 costs so much? My SkS has pretty much the same wood/metal... Just as reliable... Is the Gov. to blame or what??? Should'nt cost almost two grand for it... They should be cheaper than the AR's... **** match nonsense. Appreciate any help.

February 9, 2013, 09:19 AM	#5
kraigwy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2008 Location: Wyoming Posts: 11,061	Thats like asking why a Rolls Royce cost more then a Yugo. Take a M1A and a SKS to the firing line. Shoot a couple strings out of each rifle at a 1000 yards. I think you'll see a big difference. Even at 100-200 yards. I'm a CMP GSM Master Instructor and put on GSM Clinics and matches. You always get people showing up with SKSs or AKs.......ONCE. They can't compete even a short ranges (100-200 yards) with Garands, M1As or ARs. I agree that not everyone can afford a M1A or AR. There are cheap rifles out there that do work. Cheaper then the SKS. Get a Mosin. They certainly used Mosins in Vietnam. We had an joke, if some one was sniping at us at 300 yards or so with an SKS or AK........leave them alone, they might replace the sniper with a Mosin. __________________ Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071

February 9, 2013, 09:36 AM	#6
4V50 Gary Staff Join Date: November 2, 1998 Location: Colorado Posts: 21,841	What's the difference? Not designed as a selective fire weapon, the SKS could be imported as a surplus arm. Because of its selective fire capability and a government disdaining of selling them to the public, the M-14 could not be released in large numbers to We The People. The tools and dies to make the M-14 were sold off to Taiwan, thus requiring anyone wanting to make them to do so from scratch. While surplus parts were available, that dried up and became more expensive. Having to fabricate parts drove up expenses to manufacturers which was passed onto consumers. I wish the Taiwanese would make M-14s for us. I don't know if they still have the tools and dies though. __________________ Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. *Molon Labe!*

February 10, 2013, 01:42 AM	#9
Auto426 Senior Member Join Date: November 24, 2007 Location: South Louisiana Posts: 1,323	As the others have said, the current prices for SKS's don't reflect what it actually costs to make one. They were made long ago in Eastern Bloc countries and stored away for a ground war that never came. When the Soviet Union fell, they were exported to the U.S. civilain market and sold for rock bottom prices, as the governments selling them didn't care what they cost to make 30 to 40 years ago. M14's on the other hand are almost all new production today, since the government never sold complete rifles as surplus due to their selective fire capabilities. They did sell parts kits from some of the rifles, which consisted of almost everything but the receiver, but those have all but dried up. Forged steel and walnut are also more expensive than aluminum and plastic, and since the demand for M14's isn't nearly as large as the demand for AR's, prices stay high. __________________ *"Si vis pacem, para bellum"* - If you want peace, prepare for war.

February 16, 2013, 11:45 PM	#11
saitek Senior Member Join Date: October 30, 2011 Location: iowa Posts: 100	why the price there is no comparison between cheap funcitional (hah) and expensive quality . we come from a nation of riflemen ,were you have to count on the weapon for life,and it don't hurt to have a bit of pride in your workmanship. my dad brought back a sks from vietnam with a few others from guy's that did not have a need for it any more. the sks is a decent short range weapon but more than 200 yard's is hope and poke .my carryed a m14 and they tryed to give him a m16 and he left the m16 in the armory the m14 reached out and touched someone . his sks sit's and collect dust bunny's ,he has a m1a now and shoots it at cmp matches to this date ,it get's the job done .

February 9, 2013, 03:52 AM	#2
jason_iowa Senior Member Join Date: July 30, 2011 Posts: 686	They are much higher quality then any sks and 90% of AR's imho.

February 9, 2013, 05:03 AM	#3
kozak6 Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2005 Location: AZ Posts: 3,113	The SKS was manufactured decades ago and dumped as unwanted and obsolete by a government that didn't want them anymore, and at yard sale prices at that. If you had to actually pay an American to cut one out of a block of steel instead of scooping up Cold War leftovers, it would cost a little more.

February 10, 2013, 12:19 AM	#7
Edward429451 Junior member Join Date: November 12, 2000 Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado Posts: 9,494	You can't compare an SKS to an M1A! You have never shot an M1A have you? It's well worth the money. Sure I wish they were cheaper too but they are worth it. As long as you're not the type to slap the trigger, it is very hard to miss with one with any ammo.

February 16, 2013, 08:56 PM	#10
Orlando Senior Member Join Date: May 2, 2009 Posts: 352	My SkS has pretty much the same wood/metal... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

February 17, 2013, 03:39 AM	#12
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	The M14 is a much, much better quality weapon, starting with the wood, the steel, the machining, tooling, and the design and efficiency of the rifle itself. It's probably the world's best and last of the classic wood-framed battle rifles. LGS here has two M1As right now, owner says the price is about $700 too high at $2000. Same with the other AR, AK, etc., overpriced. Sit back and wait a bit, I guess. By the time they were ready to surplus the M14, the GCA of 1968 had happened and the gun control movement was strong, so just the parts came out, and some NFA items.