SKS or AR-15? Which is better for defense?

Apples and oranges.

If you're on a budget, go with the SKS. A great rifle. I have several and love them.

If you're not on a budget, the AR15 is an overall better rifle for many reasons.

Ferrari308 said:

What is moa?

Click to expand...

I definately wouldn't be worried about snipers if I were you

The Moa was a large, flightless bird native to New Zealand which became extinct several hundred years ago or so. Scientists generally believe they were killed off by humans, in hunting and land clearing operations. Genetically they're related to the emu.




Yes, I know I deserve to be smacked for this.

i own both, for home defense i like the AR. they are handier, lighter, higher cap yada yada.

if buggin out in rought terrain i'd like one of my sks's. i just think they stand up to abuse better because of their simplicity, and i think they are a better fall back hunting arm.

This is actually a tougher question for me than it should have been. I voted SKS just because I've never seen a non-ammo related malfunction in any of at least half a dozen of them that I have fired. I could hit a five gallon bucket at 250 yards with my old 1954 Russian and with my current Yugo and TechSights, I know I could do at least that well. It is more accurate than anyone has a right to expect a $190 rifle to be, absolutely reliable, tough as nails, and I happen to prefer the stubby Russian cartridge to the 5.56.

By Christmas I should have a good deal of experience with the M16A2, and then I might change my vote. But for now I know and trust the Simonov.

MOA is Minute Of Angle, which is a measure of accuracy. I believe there are 60 minutes to a degree.

Yeah it was covered briefly above.

MOA stands for Minute Of Angle. My trig is a little rusty, but I believe it has to do with 1/60 of a degree extended outwards for infinity. If you do the math, 1 MOA equal about 1.047 inch at 100 yards and increases linearly so that it is twice that at 200 yards, and so on.

It is used to measure accuracy. 2 MOA means a group of 'X' number of rounds measured center to center of the farthest rounds measures less than 2 MOA, or 2 inches at 100 yards, 4 inches at 200 yards, ect.

It is also used to measure windage or elevation. Your scope probably adjusts in 1/4 MOA or 1/8 MOA clicks. A spotter might call say, 3 minutes of wind for his shooter, ect.

sks my choice

I have 3 sks's rugged take abuse easy to break down and replace parts and I can get any accessories I want including a 75 rnd drum.

I agree that the 223 is an easier round to get but more expensive. If I was worried about tshf I can stock pile ammo when available.

I have a couple friends w/ the ar they paided 8 to 10 times what I paid for any of my sks's.

For accuracy in a SHTF scenario I would take the AR but if that happens it will probably be 100 yrds or less.

Off the subject of the two choices for accuracy and calibre size I have an AK74. This ammo is hard to get some time so when I find it I buy a couple thousand rnds at a time just for the range mind you

I voted sks on the poll
I didn't mean that one is better than the other IMO.
I meant to say I would choose the sks according to my previous post

So a sniper will pass on someone who is not experienced? Good. Whew! I thought the BG snipers would target anything they could. I'm gald you cleared that up for me!

Click to expand...

Just some good natured chiding

RISE , RISE from the dead Oh SHTF Related Thread. I invoke thee
(flames, chants, and tribal drum beats)





Kidding. I voted AR.

By the time you invest enough time and money for the SKS to become a 2MOA rifle (shoot rounds into 2" at 100 yards), you may as well just get a more accurate rifle anyway. While you may be considering this for the end of the world, the SKS has numerous legality issues which must be satisfied until that day comes- just do a search, and you'll find that the rules are pretty involved and ambiguous. I like the SKS, but it's only worth the trouble in stock configuration.

It does seem like you are worried about the most unlikely of conditions: if somebody really wanted to pop you for your supplies, they won't tell you about it first, and your first knowledge will be incoming fire. If you really want to do long range shooting, just get yourself a good bolt action deer rifle, or for the REAL long range stuff, go ask Barrett for something.

SKS. Sorry.

Yeah, I'd go with the SKS.

Before you blackstick people come out of your chair, let's be fair here.

The question was "defense" not "assault rifle." SKS wins.

"Defense" vs "Assault Rifle" to me means you might have to use it in your house or yard ONCE againse a SMALL number (maybe 1) bad folk, not participate in an urban scenario like Baghdad.

I carried an M16 for three years in the Army. The onlyl thing I liked about it was I had the M203 40mm grenade launcher on mine so I could count on ONE weapon. I could hit very well with my M16, no sweat, but to me, life begins at thirty (caliber!) and the SKS wins. I own three, and have shot 'em for 20-odd years. No, they're NOT pretty, they're NOT as tight and accurate as an M16 - they're just NOT. However, they're reliable as dirt, and if the magazine bothers you, you can get a 20-round fixed mag that's very good and reliable. If you can't do what you want for "defense" with 20 rounds of ammo, you don't need to be here. That kinda also touches the ammo deal - if you can't stockpile enough ammo (like a couple of boxes) you shouldn't be worrying about availability. Again - original question - we're talking defense here, not some SHTF broken planet scenario where you somehow think the National Guard or somebody is going to be air dropping ammo to you in M16 mags. Neither round is legendary for lethality, but let's stick with the question the way it was asked.

I can keep strangers off my property with my SKS, thanks. Oh, by the way - they're reasonably effective with a red dot sight mounted, kinda like a beefy Ruger 10/22. I know, if somebody's beating on your front door in the middle of the night, you won't need to turn it on anyway - you'll be point shooting.

Okay. I'm gonna jump off my soapbox here so you AR15 lovers can start beating on me

jjohnson described what I was thinking on the SKS. I was thinking about home defense situations. If I had to go walking, I think I would end up taking my AR due to lighter weight of gun and ammo.

1911JMB said:

Then again, I'd be a lot more worried about weapons of mass destruction than a paranoid shtf scenerio. Who in the world would be stupid enough to invade the US? A foreign country could nuke the US or use bio weapons, but theres no way US citizens will be fighting off a foreign invader on US soil any time soon.

Click to expand...

+1

It's hard to imagine a scenario in which any of us will be fighting off trained soldiers, snipers, etc. That's just silly. The most likely SHTF scenario would be another large-scale terrorist attack. Even nukes and/or biological weapons would be FAR more likely than invasion.

If you'll actually be shooting at anyone, it will be Katrina-style looters, thugs, and assorted ne'er-do-wells. It's hard to see how 500yd shooting would be necessary. Most problems would probably still be best left to a good 12ga.

Like other posters have suggested -- if you're defensive rifle budget is only $200 or so, go with the SKS.

Otherwise, AR hands down and no real comparison. It may have been an accidental bit of coincedence or deliberate design, but the AR with 16" or shorter barrel is one of, if not the finest, gunfighter's long gun for CQB. One might want to tweak with caliber or operating system, but in terms of ergonomics the controls are all just about perfect. SKS is not even in the same league. Debating AR vs AK vs FAL vs M14 and such I can see, but the SKS is a pretty big generation or two behind the state of the art.

It may be behind in technology... but when I flip out that big'ol bayonet on my Yogo SKS... I'd be scrambling for the hills if I was a bad guy...

Hi All

I own or have owned a MAK-90, NHM-90 (Chinese AKs) an SKS and an AR.

As far as ability to put stuff on it and buy accessories the AR hands down.

Now a days as far as geting ammo for it the AR wins (darn wolf ammo inavailability)

As far as going bang every time the trigger is pulled the AR does not win.

I like my AR. it fits me well and points nice. But I have never owned a rifle that was so hard to clear a misfire or jam in my life.

I had some ammo issues. My own fault I forgot to trim the brass. Also had a time that I was firing some wolf through it and the gun was dirty and it failed to eject.

Please no stories about wolf ammo. No offense but in my opinion a gun that is designed for war or LEO stuff needs to not be finicky about what it shoots and also needs to clear jams easy. The AR does neither. I like my AR but will probably use my mini in TEOTWAKI

Later
Kid

I would take either one of them. If you need to get off more than a couple rounds your are already in deep doo doo.

Some guy will probably take you out with a bolt action rifle 500+ yards away anyway, so I wouldn't be to picky between the AR or the SKS.

Consider a SHTF scenario where WWIII hits and there is anarchy. You're alone on your 10 acres in the middle of nowhere with a small cabin and no neighbors for miles. You have family to protect. Which gun would you rather have to defend your property?

Click to expand...

Actually, in that situation, I'd prefer my FAL. However, my AR would be preferable to any of my SKS.

Of course, if the SKS was all I had, I wouldn't feel too bad.

My AR has been more reliable than my SKS, FWIW...

On my budget? The SKS.

For aimed fire, ten rounds with strippers isn't that much of a disadvantage over 30 rounds with mags. If I'm just spraying, well, I'll waste less ammo if I have to calm down enough to reload.

My SKS will do 2MOA. Under combat conditions, it will be more accurate than me.

Without optics, I can't really target anything past about 200m, which is (incidentally) right about the 7.62x39 round's max point-blank range.

***

I could put down $900 on an Entry Tactical, and feed it 68gr OTMs. But that's a lot of money for not a lot of useful performance envelope.

SHTF gun, protecting my few acres and little house againse...what? Marauding bands of starving rabble? Wild Dogs? Government agents nbent on "policing armed citizens?

AR-15