are AR 15 rifles better than SKS rifles?

Question

AR 15 .223, SKS 7.62/39

Answer 1

Bound's hubby here:

In my opinion, the AR-15 is, by and large, a superior rifle than the SKS. This is because of my views on marksmanship.

The SKS is loosely fitted so it is very reliable under adverse conditions. It does fire a larger diameter round, which can be more lethal, but I wouldn't use it for deer sized game. While the SKS is reliable, it is far from accurate. In many instances it can be difficult to keep all shots on a 6 foot by 6 foot target at 300 yards. The SKS lends itself to "spray and pray" shooting.

Meanwhile, the Ar-15 is more expensive, you get what you pay for. If you do not clean it, it can jam. The .223 round as a hunting round should be limited to varmint. It wounds humans well, and can be lethal. If you know how to shoot an AR, it is extremely accurate [most shooters at the National Championships that shoot the service rifle, shoot an AR... with the right load it is very accurate].

In a combat role, I would rather drop my enemy at a distance than let him get close and become a threat. The AR does this well. For target accuracy, the AR will never be beat by the SKS. To get match grade accuracy out of an SKS would be like asking your pet chihuahua to pull a fully loaded railroad boxcar.

As a footnote: I have found, if you pay extra special attention to the chamber, bolt and carrier and AR will not jam.

Good luck.

Answer 2

Oh Lord yes. SKS rifles are basically post WWII technology, and Are very crudely made by American standards. AR-15 rifles may have been born in the 50's, but have continued to grow into their own even to this day. The Ar-15 is anything but crude. AR15's are built to far higher standards and tolerances than SKS's were, and are consequently far more accurate as well.The SKS's sucessor, the AK47. was already being designed as the SKS was first being issued! It couldnt grow to meet the changing needs of the Soviet army, and rapidly went out of service, into storage, and eventually they came here through importation from Russia and several former-Soviet states to die.
The SKS was a short lived service rifle, because of it's many deficiencies of design curtailed it's usefullness when detachable-magazine assault rifles began replacing battle-rifles as the weapons necessary for a different style of waging war.

Answer 3

I don't know how you compare the two but I personally prefer the SKS.

First of all, it's way cheaper, around $150-200
Low maintenance, very reliable
Ammunition is more powerful

The standard SKS holds 10 rounds in the gun but it can be modified to use AK-47 magazines, as well as many different types of stocks available to make it look more like an assault rifle.

The AR-15 is a good rifle, but I'd rather use an SKS than a poodle-shooter.

Answer 4

The AR 15 .223 is better for distance than the SKS. It's also more expensive.

Answer 5

What are you doing with it? If you want a rifle to toss in the back of your pickup, beat it around, not clean it for years on end, not pay much for ammo and just have fun, get the SKS.

If you want a quality weapon that you will take care of, clean it regular and don't mind paying a little more go with an AR. If you don't clean it right and care for it it will not work well, the SKS will function no matter how hard you beat it.

Answer 6

Depends. Depends what you want to do with it, what your budget is, how much you are going to shoot it.

The SKS is cheap but powerful, it packs much more punch than the AR. But if all you are doing is punching holes in stuff then the AR is cheaper to run, 223 is much more available than 7.62.

There are lots of good AR manufacturers, if you decide that's what you want then shop around. The latest innovation dumps the gas mechanism of the AR which results in crud buildup and overheated bolts and replaces it with a much more conventional and reliable piston operated mechanism. The AR still looks the same but works much better, H&K are the top name for this but several domestic manufacturers are giving it a go too.

Answer 7

As a firearm, a well made AR15, like a Bushmaster or Colt, is a much better weapon than an SKS, of course it also costs 5 to 10 times more.

But it also depends on what you are hunting. Either could be used for coyote hunting, but the .223 would be better for longer range. A 7.62x39 can be used for something larger up to whitetail deer.

Answer 8

the ar is a nice gun accurate (depending on price and add ons) light, 50 or 60 gr. bullet too small for any ethical hunting. its a lot easier to carry the small rectangular magazines for the ar, the sks magazines have a 3 " chunk of metal that juts out at the top which makes carrying more than two a pain. but the sks is inexpensive you can buy 4 for the price of an ar. it carrys a 123-+gr bullet which i took my first deer with (jumped straight up and landed on its antlers) that was a trip. and you can field strip an ar with the extra dissassembly tool set, whereas you can field strip the sks with one of its own bullets.

Answer 9

By any comparison, the AR is better. And all you people using 7.62x39 for deer should be ashamed. This is not an ethical deer cartridge, and as you gain experience you'll understand that fact. It'll work on occasion, as will the high-velocity 22's, but if you use it long it'll fail you, If your budget's so restricted you can't afford a deer rifle, search the shops for a beat-up trapdoor Springfield, for God's sake, or a cheap shotgun you can load with slugs.

Answer 10

If price doesn't matter, the AR is leaps an bounds better than the SKS. It is more accurate, more comfortable to fire, better made and has more accessories. The SKS has a poor trigger, crappy safe, poor sights, and an inconsistant chamber.