|
Accurate ??? In the eyes of the beholder fer sure. For the purpose that it was designed........sure 'nuf. Remember we are talkin' true battle rifles. Not paper punchers or woodchuck hunters.
I have had expierance with both. Limited with SKS and lots with the AK's. My vote is for the AK. I've seen the AK "in action" and they are very well designed,as is the ammo that goes thru them.
Let me also say that you do not need to pay the "extra" money for a milled rcvr. Sure they are better (sometimes) ......but,how much better. Re-read para #1.
We have carbine matches in our "club". One of the guys always shoots a AK and I do 75% of the time. Three weeks ago we had a stage of fire that was putting 10 shots on a plastic(35~ gal) drum. With the standard sights we were able to put shot after shot on the drums at 400 meters from the sitting position. A 10" steel plate was "dead" every shot at 200 meters. This, shooting the 122gr. FMJ military stuff.
The SKS and the AK have all kinds of after market add ons. The AK probably has a few more. As a rule the AK will cost you more.
If you want a weapon simply to carry in your trunk for the distances and firepower needed that is beyond what a pistol can deliver you would probably better be served by a, closely looked at before buying, SKS. If you want a weapon as a bug out weapon or a home defense weapon,or even as a around the farm weapon,I'd reccomend the(closely looked at before buying)AK.
If you decide to purchase either weapon,start hitting all the gunshows in search of good deals on ammo and aftermarket goodies. --------
|