SKS thread

How did the SKS become associated with Canada?

No

The only reason the SKS got so popular was because it was cheap and so was the ammo. None of this stands anymore.

its heavy and overpriced

>>31541376
>$340
>semi-auto with 10 rd, can accept higher if bubba'd
>cheap steel case ammo
>not worth it anymore

>>31541367
Because it's still cheap here, so is the ammo.

>>31541391
>>31541376
Oh boy the classic sks battle, let's see who wins this one

>>31541391
The one in OP's pic is $430

File: com.jpg (33KB, 641x273px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 641x273px

>>31541408
>classicfirearms
>good pricing

>>31541355
I managed to get a Tula 1951 for 350. I've had to put some money in restoring it, but all the parts that mattered were matching.

If you're in Canada, go to Canadian Tire or Cabellas. They go for no more then 200$. I got mine out of the Russian grease for 150$

>>31541452
Which site is that?

>>31541367
Because even today you can still buy Russian made SKS's for $225 and the surplus doesn't look like it's gonna start drying up anytime soon.

File: tops.jpg (237KB, 396x1114px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 396x1114px

>>31541491
J&G
unless you have a hard on for yugo SKS or something, the chinese 56 is what they sell.
They also have single C&R stock of other rifles as well.
Mine had a pretty banged up stock and less than half bluing left, but I bought this gun with using it in mind and proper maintenance anyways.

File: 1402208299939.jpg (115KB, 678x800px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 678x800px

>Trump gets elected
>Improves ties with Russia, lifting the import ban
>$200 SKS's flood back into the country, SKS once again becomes the holy grail of poorfag guns in America
>On top of that we also get sub-$1000 SVD's

File: onlyt.jpg (179KB, 232x1348px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 232x1348px

>>31541508
I bought a tapco timberland stock (not the best, but I didn't mind sanding down the fore end to fit the furrels and dremeling a bayonet cut) for a better cheek weld and my own personal grey wood fetish. Laminate so it's heavier, but I saved my original stock anyways so I can always switch back.

>>31541452
ironic part is that the SKS I bought was from classic for half the price
good lord prices have jumped in such a short time

My grandad got a box of 10 Tula SKS's for $900 back in 1999. He sold 8 of em for $150 each, kept one for himself and gave the other one to his dad. Sounds like an amazing deal.

I personally had a Russian SKS for a little while before it went all weird on me. Started jamming up all the time, would go to rack the charging handle on a full mag and the round would be outside the whole gun with the bolt closed on the bullet all sideways and shit. Paid $350 for it back in 2013 and hated having to take it back but I was broke at the time and didn't know what I was supposed to do with a gun that couldn't chamber a single round.

>>31541529
I want this to happen very much

Is there even a designated poorfag gun anymore in this current age?

>>31541534
I think classic is just getting more exposure, so they crank up their prices. You hardly hear J&G recommend vs. the amount of recommendation for classicfirearms, both on here and outside of /k/.

>>31541544
>hi-point
>Maverick shotgun

>>31541391
which ones are $340, the beat to shit chinks?

decent sks runs around $400 now, and ARs can be gotten for $500. unless you specifically want a SKS there isn't much point in getting one anymore.

>>31541355
>>$430 sks
I paid $200 for mine, crate of ammo was $350 for 1400 rounds, and thats canadian pesos, All form the cambodian tire.

>>31541580
>decent sks are $400
Look, even my beat to shit chink sks with horrible dings and almost no-bluing >>31541508 shoots great and pretty accurate depending on ammo.
But if you're looking to an sks, a surplus at sub-$400 for a safe queen, then that's you.

I wanted a gun that my ancestor probably held and used, semi-auto, and works, the type 56 SKS was it and at $340 for the bare minimum.

File: skscosmo.jpg (794KB, 2398x702px) Image search: [Google]

794KB, 2398x702px

>>31541598
and to add, I'm actually not too keen to show this to my grandfather, since he had bad experiences with Mao's China. Don't want to show him that his grandson now owns a gun that probably buttstroked him in the head.

>340 (BTW fucking where can you find one at this price)
>for an sks
>cheap

You must be new here. I'm from the days of 80$ mosins and $150 sks'. For the price they're selling at you can buy a modern sporting rifle

>>31541628
Meant to quote this faggot
>>31541391

>>31541628
>buy a modern sporting rifle
I guess you're not shooting with a scope then? on your modern sporting rifle that probably doesn't even have irons?

>>31541628
>80$ mosins and $150 sks'

Is there any equivalent of that today?

>>31541598
>>31541613
it's fine if it's worth it to you, but it doesn't change the fact that it's beat to shit rifle and a SKS is longer worth it unless you specifically want a SKS.

in mid 2000s when you could get a yugo for $150 and the next cheapest centerfire semi-auto would be a ~$500 WASR-10 then sure the SKS was a great choice. hell, even in 2011 cabela's was clearing out yugos at $200 and that too was a great deal. now when sks prices are getting within $100 of the low tier AKs and ARs it's hardly considered a good deal.

also, how much was the timberland stock, over 100 right? congratulations, in total you paid as much as for a yugo.

>>31541687
why are you so triggered?

>>31541687
if you got a suggestion for a centerfire semi-auto that works well at $350, I'm all ears.

>>31541697
>>31541705
you mean $500 with your shitty tapco stock, right?

yeah, an AR-15.

>>31541741
no, without my tapco stock, smart guy.
I already said my $340 chink SKS works well and the stock, although beat up, still functions and is solid. The tapco was my own personal choice.

So at $340, what's a centerfire semi-auto I can get because you seem very knowledgeable and very proud of that knowledge of a good comparable sporting rifle of same price and performance?

>>31541765
a hi-point carbine.

>>31541780
So I'll go along with your implication that a 9mm carbine is on par with a 7.62x39 rifle.

So what else?

>>31541832
>let me keep moving the goal posts
you're fucking retarded. how about you put in more hours at your mcjob and get a lower tier AR or AK instead of having a hard budget limit of $340, dipshit.

in fact, it was never my argument that there are better alternatives at $340, but that a decent SKS costs around $400 and for $100 bucks you have better alternatives available. so take your shitty stawman arguments and fuck off to arfcom or whatever trash website you crawled out of.

>>31541854
and for $100 bucks more*

>>31541854
I do have an AR. But you seemed very mad and proud about buying a gun at much lower prices years ago and now trying to come off as that asshole who thinks everything isn't worth it like they were in your time.
At $340, you get a working center fire semi-auto in an intermediate cartridge. The quality of the gun varies, but a lot of people online have said the chink sks from J&G works as is. Me included, without the shitty tapco stock.

I have no idea why someone else buying an SKS for that price makes you go into a whole post about how it's so overpriced from when you paid and how you can get better comparable sporting rifles.