I never shot an SKS but I do own a Saiga 7.62 and am very happy with it.

You're right, Mr Bond. The Cross-Breed is a comfortable, functional holster. I'm trying to get comfortable wearing it at appendix with that big old XD-40.

[ar15.com] Get both[/ar15.com]

But seriously, you should get both.

The SKS is a rugged, reliable, fairly accurate*, and pretty inexpensive rifle. It's easy to field strip and maintain, it's not overly heavy, and the ammo is still somewhat affordable and easy to find.

The AK is rugged, reliable, fairly accurate*, and rapidly rising in cost. It's easy to field strip and maintain, it's very light, and ammo, well...see above.

Which to buy? Well, that depends, doesn't it? You won't be ill served by either in most cases.

The AK has the potential to be "banned" sooner than the SKS. The detachable 30 rd mags and the "scary" look make it a target of the gun grabbers. Prices on AK's have jumped since Obama's election. If you're going to buy an AK, buy it now (or more appropriately, you should have bought one by now...)

The SKS is a more benign looking rifle. It's not as "Scary" and as such, it avoided the last AWB. If there is another AWB, I wouldn't count on it being missed this time. Prices are still somewhat reasonable for the SKS, but you can't really find them for under $100 like you could just a few years ago.

I generally find the SKS pleasant to shoot, but it's kind of boring. The 10 rd. capacity doesn't bother me (oh, btw, don't mess with detachable mags for an SKS unless you have an SKS-M or SKS-d designed to take AK mags...it isn't worth teh trouble or reduced reliability), but it's sort of ho-hum shooting. If you're tall, you may find the length of pull too short (you can get butt pads for the stock). Accuracy is generally 3"-6" at 100 yds, depending on the ammo. My Russian SKS is a bit more accurate than my Yugo SKS's.

The AK can suffer from the same LOP shortness. The underfolding stocks aren't really comfortable, but the AK is more "fun" to shoot. They aren't good "bench" guns as most mags protrude quite a bit, and accuracy is about the same as the SKS.

Prices? SKS's cane be found between $200-$350 in most variations. You can find them for less if you really look, but prices are rising.

AK's have been going for $500-$2000 depending on the vintage, manufacturer, pre-ban status, etc. Prices have risen several hundred dollars since November. Century built WASR rifles that were $375 now routinely sell for $500-$600 or more.

Anyway, the final choice is yours. Do you want a traditional style rifle with a 10 rd capacity or do you want an "evil assault rifle"?

Like I said, I have both. My first rifle was a Russian SKS that I bought in 1995. Since then I've added 90+ rifles to my collection, including several SKS's and AK's. I would not hesitate to count on either should a SHTF or survival scenario occur. Add to that that both rifles were made for uneducated peasants to fire and maintain, and you've got perfect guns for new shooters too.


My Russian SKS I think it cost me ~$100 with accessories.




Yugo SKS. I bought two from AIM Surplus a few years back for $165 for the pair delivered (2002-2003). They're slightly more expensive now.


Another Yugo



Polish underfolder build. I bought the kit at Knob Creek from Sarco for $150 in '07, and I've got about $250 in the build, refinish, compliance parts, and receiver.



I didn't like the original Romanian furniture...so I bought a new handguard and refinished the wood a bit.

A 2008 Romanian kit build on a NoDakSpud receiver. I spent $99 on the kit and about $200 on the receiver, build, and compliance parts. This is my knockaround AK that cost less than a Century WASR-10

This is sort of an "AK" but kinda not... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

It's a Finnish Valmet M76 folder. Based on the Kalashnikov action, but with many improvements, it's a 5.56/.223 rifle that is the Rolls Royce of AK's. It does an honest 2 MOA at 100 with surplus ammo and shoots close to MOA with handloads. It's my baby <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Good luck with your search. Personally, I'm in the market for a nice AK74 clone in 5.45....

you guys rock.this info has been extremely helpful and exactly what i needed.

a friend of mine got an AK74 clone.problem was it had a 7.62 shell extractor or something.basically they take AK47's and switch the internal parts and barrel.

on the side of the receiver it had 7.62 scratched off and 5.45 scratched into the metal.

another friend had a SAIGA in 5.56 and what i liked was that it didnt look like a traditional AK therefor it wouldnt carry that astigmatism.i am going to look further into the SAIGA high-cap mag mod.

the gun show is coming up here in a couple weeks so we'll see what happens.

so is it safe to say that CENTURY ARMS WASR AK's are a good quality AK??

also,am i correct that as far as country of origin is concerned BULGARIA and ROMANIA are some of the better ones where CHINA and EGYPT arent as good??

WASR's are serviceable. They're not "great" but they do, by and large function fine. They are Romanian in origin, and were imported as single stack guns; that is they only take single stack magazines. Century modifies them in the US by opening up the mag well to take double stack, std AK mags.

My brother has one, and it's a decent shooter. Not gorgeous, but functional and reasonably accurate.

Romanian AK's are decent quality, but aren't thought of as "top tier" in most cases, but all depends on who did the build.

Bulgarian AK's generally are nice, particularly the pre ban milled guns.

Chinese guns are generally top shelf.

Egypt, not so much, but still a Maadi is not a gun I'd turn my nose up at.

Polish AK's are my favorite kit build guns. The Polish kits were all in spectacular condition, whether the PKMS or the Tantal guns...they were nice.

I've owned both, and I would go with the AK. The Saiga's aren't bad, but I don't think that they will accept a standard AK magazine, without work. If you can find an Arsenal AK that would be the one to get. I've had two, and they're one of the best AKs on the market. Good luck!

I should have bought one when they were cheap.

I did not take the time to read through all the posts in this thread so I am sorry if I repeat something that has already been said. I currently own both guns and from a reliability standpoint the AK-47is far superior to the SKS. I find that my SKS using surplus ammo is prone to jamming every 5 rounds or so. The internal mag has been adjusted many times and I have tried many different aftermarket detachable mags and still run into this problem. The AK-47 on the other hand is one of the finest assault rifles I have ever run across. its not nearly as accurate or flashy as many of the other rifles in this category but it packs plenty of punch and I a situation where your life counted on your rifle performing I would want an AK-47.
Justin Ellis

Hm. I find your experience with the SKS far from typical. By and large, most SKS feeding issues are tracked back to aftermarket magazines.

What kind of SKS do you have? What ammo are you using? Is the rifle fully cleaned of cosmolene and storage grease? Is the chamber clean? The extractor in good repair? The ejector? If it is a Yugo SKS, is the gas system tight (no leaks)?

Most folks find the SKS to be dead nuts reliable...maybe we can find your problem?

I've seen several SKS jam while I have never seen an AK jam. I'm not around either much though.

I've never seen a mini-14 jam either which now I consider a good buy stacked next to an AK.

Before it was ever fired it was field stripped and cleaned. It DID come with an aftermarket mag and if have since removed the stock box mag has been replaced. The tips on the ammo I have been is quite soft and I think that could be part of the issue. Honestly I have been slack as of late and not taking it to the range and probably could have had some of these issues worked out.
Justin