SKS—a
lot of bang for the buck from the former evil empire
by Jack Corbett
A few years ago one could buy an SKS rifle and several hundred rounds of ammunition for a hundred bucks. This was just a taste of what was to come from the former Evil Empire–cheap utilitarian weapons that would include rifles, pistols, shotguns, scopes, and night vision sighting devices from Russia, our former Cold War antagonist. Aside from the fact that today a man can buy 1000 rounds of 7:62-39 mm ammo, which is pretty inexpensive stuff to fire from 30-30 power level SKS's and AK-47's, just what is the historical role played by the SKS and how does it compare to other military rifles of the same time period to shoot?
During the Second World War, most Soviet troops were armed with short ranged submachine guns and bolt action 1891 model Moisin Nagants along with smaller quantities of Tolkarev semi automatic rifles firing the full powered 7:62-51 mm round originally intended for the Moisin Nagant. The Tolkarev, however, proved far inferior to the American M-1 on the battlefield, which pretty much left the Russians with the choice of very short range firepower or the long range capable but slow firing bolt action.
The
Soviet answer to the was Soviet Weapons Designer Sergei Simonov's SKS which
went into full production in 1949. It was similar to the M-1 since it had a
10 shot internal magazine that could be recharged with stripper clips whereas
the M-1 used 8 
round
clips. But whereas the M-1 used full power 30-06 ammunition that could easily
drop a man at ranges of up to a thousand yards, the SKS fully embraced the new
concept of the medium range assault rifle cartridge first introduced by the
Germans in the waning months of WWII. This cartridge would later be used in
the AK-47 that would enter production in Soviet factories a scant two years
after production started of the SKS.
Had American troops ever gone to war against the Soviets in Europe during the early 1950's, we would have pitted our M-1's against the other side's SKS's. By the mid 1950's with the AK-47 having replaced the SKS as Russia's battle rifle, Russia had its arms engineers helping the Chinese set up arms production for the SKS in China. Less than ten years later, American soldiers would be fighting a new enemy in Vietnam, who would be armed with both the SKS and the AK-47. Meanwhile other Communist nations started producing their own versions of first the SKS, then the AK-47.
In general, Americans who have purchased SKS rifles like them. Accuracy is reportedly anywhere from marginal to good, although hardly anyone will argue that the SKS wins any long range accuracy awards. Depending on the country of origin, construction and the quality of its metal parts and stock runs from indifferent to excellent with most Russian specimens being the most highly touted. Yugoslavian versions are also well regarded for their quality, but are significantly heavier than SKS's from other former Communist block nations. Since I would be shooting pictures of Lollitops, a well regarded and very popular feature entertainer you can book through Universal Talent, only one of the best specimens would do-- a well put together Chinese SKS with a synthetic stock.
Ironically
although I still have it (until Saturday when I return it to its owner) I would
never shoot it. Leaving it at home I went to the gun range with my Hungarian
AK-47 and a new 
.357
magnum I wanted try out. Unbelievably one of the guys shooting downrange from
me just happened to be firing two SKS's. Before I even told him I was doing
a gun article on the SKS he offered to let me shoot both of them.
The first, his favorite of the two, was a shortened paratrooper version of the full size rifle. Pulling the rifle's trigger reminded me of trying to open a can with a Kabar knife. The full size rifle he handed me next was much easier on the trigger, something akin to lifting a barbell with one finger. My impression from firing the rifle was that it had good power with minimal recoil. The gun's owner assured me that neither weapon had never jammed and that he liked shooting both of them very much. I later found out that the paratrooper model had never been manufactured to be the battle rifle for any nation but had been produced only for the export market.
I then turned to my AK-47, which looks much cooler than any Uzi with its black Dragnunov style synthetic stock, jet black finish, and flash suppressor. At twenty-five yards I proceeded to put 25 rounds all into the black, shredding the center of the target. For a still relatively inexpensive rifle, its trigger was simply magnificent in comparison to the two SKS rifles.
Disappointed
with my shooting experiences with the SKS, I returned home, and went over the
weapon I had borrowed from my friend. Its fit and finish were clearly superior
to the two I had just fired. I tried its trigger and found it to be infinitely
superior. An interesting feature of the SKS is a clever integral bayonet that
folds under the rifles for end out of the way, which can be instantly pulled
into position for proper impalement of one's enemies.
The SKS never was designed to have nearly the range of either the M-1 or the M-14–M-1 A. However, like the AK-47, it was designed to fire a new generation of medium powered ammunition, deadly out to several hundred yards but not much more. However, a soldier could carry a lot more of it. Although later models of SKS's could use much larger capacity magazines such as the AK-47's, such magazines are reportedly not nearly as reliable and are best left in their original configuration. A fair assessment of the SKS is that is was an evolutionary weapon whose capabilities were roughly equal to but still inferior to the M-1 that would soon give way to one of the finest weapons of the twentieth century–the AK-47.