SKS Vs. Cz858?

They seem to show in the black rifle forum in packs. One person will post one, then a day later two more will appear. You can get them for $600 still wrapped on a good day, with the accessories. Just need to keep an eye out and wait.
 
Skippy said:
You're a moron, the last 100 years does not equal "the history."
Click to expand...

And so do I think you're too. You're now living in a world laid out by the wars during the last 100 years. But if I happened to step on your toe I really don't feel sorry about that given your attitude.

BTW, same calibre, almost the same accuracy, but one was proven in various wars all over the world and is only one third or even one fourth of the other one's price.
 
rollingrock said:
I don't buy old guns made in a country which couldn't win a war in the history, such as Czek, France, or Italy.
Click to expand...


Italy- Roman Empire, laid the foundations of a modern states in Europe and developed the first proper army with a complete logistical system to maintain, plus was light years ahead of it’s rivals in terms of military techonolgy.

France- Napoleon, Conquered most of Europe, could have held it if he hadn’t pursued war against Russia. French military technology was heavily sought after, including their famous 75mm field gun.

Czech-Part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. When they were free became a noted provider of top notch military equipment. Their Pz35T was the best light tank at the beginning of the war and vehicles based on it served in several armies until the late 80’s Including what is likely the first Modern APC.

Time to go back to your books for some reading young Jedi.
 
rollingrock said:
And so do I think you're too. You're now living in a world laid out by the wars during the last 100 years. But if I happened to step on your toe I really don't feel sorry about that given your attitude.

BTW, same calibre, almost the same accuracy, but one was proven in various wars all over the world and is only one third or even one fourth of the other one's price.
Click to expand...

You didn't step on my toes, you just betrayed your lack of education and I called you on it.
 
Colin said:
Italy- Roman Empire, laid the foundations of a modern states in Europe and developed the first proper army with a complete logistical system to maintain, plus was light years ahead of it’s rivals in terms of military techonolgy.

France- Napoleon, Conquered most of Europe, could have held it if he hadn’t pursued war against Russia. French military technology was heavily sought after, including their famous 75mm field gun.

Czech-Part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. When they were free became a noted provider of top notch military equipment. Their Pz35T was the best light tank at the beginning of the war and vehicles based on it served in several armies until the late 80’s Including what is likely the first Modern APC.

Time to go back to your books for some reading young Jedi.
Click to expand...

On the contrary I think you need some more reading in regard with acient history.

Roman Empire - logistics system.

If you look into Chinese history, the first empire, Qin Dynasty (started 221 B.C. after Qin conquered all the other countried on mainland China), had already formed a completely perfect weaponary logistics system by having developed and applied weaponary manufacturing standards even before they united China. Their arrow heads, spear or even swords were totally identical and exchangable. Look at Terracotta Army, and you wonder how they could complete a project like that? And Great Wall too. Qin's succeeding empire, Han Dynasty, also defeated a Roman Army in Mid-Asia.

And when was the most recent military victory did the Italians celebrate for?

France - Other than Napolean, France really has nothing to brag about themselves except perfume and women, I think? Ask them who they fear the most, they'll tell you "GERMANY". During WWII how long did it take for France to completely surrender?

And Napolean himself could have saved a little bit face for France, I guess.

Czek - That country makes me laugh. Yes they make very good small arms. But seems they've never won a single war with their own excellent small arms. They were either taken by one country or another over one night in history. Look at Finnland. Why M39 will be my next acquisition? By the way I hate CZ corrosive ammo. :evil:
 
Colin said:
Czech-Part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Click to expand...

:)

While I understand where you are coming from regarding the first two, this one causes a smile. Nothing agains Czechs- those are excellent rifles and pistols they make. If you want to know more about that "glorious" time of Czech military, you can read Yaroslav Gashek famous "The Good Soldier Švejk". Highly recommend to read if you can find it in English.

BTW, you of course know that they issue rifle in Czech army was the Mannlicher then, right?

Edited : And Czechs themselves are not very militant people. Very nice people, but not very militant. And for the invention of Pilsner alone they deserved our eternal gratitude..
 
Last edited:
rollingrock said:
France - Other than Napolean, France really has nothing to brag about themselves except perfume and women, I think? Ask them who they fear the most, they'll tell you "GERMANY". During WWII how long did it take for France to completely surrender?
Click to expand...

First consider that they where invaded, which the proponents of said myth tend to overlook from their comfy chairs in a country that wasn't.

Second loosing over half a million troops does tend to break the willpower, and capabilities a country.

Imagine you go into battle with 10 of your friends in order to repulse the Nazi invasion of your country, and before you can say WTF, 8 of your buddies are dead.

Remembrance day coming up folks, lest we forget.
 
Agreed that China always had a excellent weapons program, I have to wonder how efficient their logistical supporting arms were. The Romans never had the equivalent manpower to call upon. However the Roman strength was in the professionalism of it’s legions. The Chinese military seem to be able to mass large quantities of men but it appears to me that they were not meshed as tightly as the Romans. I think also the Romans had to be more adaptive the Chinese as they could never bring as many men to bear at one time. Chinese had more access to cavalry which was a Roman weakness. Again though it appears that Chinese Cavalry never gained the cohesion that European Cavalry attained. However the main failing that China had which cost it most of the late 18th century, the 19th and most of the 20th century was the lack of an effective navy. This was a trait that almost cost Rome as well and it was the Carthage wars that forced them to build a capable navy.

France had nothing to be ashamed about regarding the Napoleonic wars other than biting off more than they could chew. France biggest problem was not being able to train an effective navy even though their ships were generally better designed than the English.

Finland survived mainly because it was off the main invasion routes, Czech is right in the middle of some very dramatic historical events.

I still think using your opinions of historical events to choose a modern firearm rather odd. Considering most firearms share some connection as most of the major designers ended up working for the great designers.

Mind you I look forward to you explaining to me how the event in 1805 effected the development of polymer use in firearms.
 
What was this thread about again?? :confused:


Oh right.... :D


-Utmost ruggedness/longevity
Well they are both built simple and strong. Can't say which would fail first.

-Utmost reliability
CZ for me.

-Inherent accuracy
CZ hands down.

-Ease of maintenance/cleaning
CZ ftw.


I have had 0 mag issues or gremlins with my CZ.

I love both rifles but the CZ fits me MUCH better then the sks.

My obviously preference aside you should buy what feels best in your hands and a case of ammo from our sponsor and get to plinking!
 
Last edited:
I would agree i have a couple sks's and just recently recieved my cz (Thanks Marstar!) The cz fit my frame so much nicer for a shorter firearm. However the price makes the sks a great deal and allows me to buy a couple every now and then for customiztion, and i always start off a coming of age nephew /niece with a sks as it is really a simple rifle to learn to shoot /clean and maintain. Also both have very cheap ammo if you take advantage of the odd sale (canadaammo.com)
Regards,Shaky
 
Last edited:
stokka said:
My vote goes for SKS with no hesitation.

Consider the following. USSR, unlike Chehoslovakia, had an option and did test the weapon in many different climatic zones - from the far North to the sands of middle Asia. USSR, unlike Chehoslovakia, had an option and did test SKS in the battles of WWII (and later China was supplying Vietnam, which was another big test for SKS). While VZ is a fine rifle, it did not see such an action as SKS did.
Click to expand...

You left out the part about the USSR dropping the SKS model of 1945 to adopt the AK model of 1947 and selling the tooling to China, and China adopting the AK as soon as they could, and that the VZ remains the service rifle of a NATO country. ;)

.... and how Napoleon or the Roman Empire of 100AD plays into a SKS vz VZ discussion is beyond me.
 
dangertree said:
You left out the part about the USSR dropping the SKS model of 1945 to adopt the AK model of 1947 and selling the tooling to China, and China adopting the AK as soon as they could, and that the VZ remains the service rifle of a NATO country. ;)
Click to expand...

FYI - SKS was issued in the Soviet Army until the mid 80-s. Friend of mine served in 1982 with SKS. And it was produced in USSR in Tula and Izevsk long after the sale to China you are talking about.
 
As a parade/drill rifle? If so, they still do!

In the mid-80's the USSR was using the AK74, I can't imagine that any combat arms units were using the SKS as general issue in the USSR in the mid-80s.

Is this like saying the CF still uses the Lee Enfield in 2007?
 
dangertree said:
As a parade/drill rifle? If so, they still do!
Click to expand...

Dude, I really appreciate what you think, but do not tell me what was used in the Soviet Army in 80-s. I have served there that time. Just so you know - missile air defence forces (ground to air missiles)were armed with SKS (that is where friend of mine served). Some NAVY personal too. Not for parades/drills. As a service rifle. This is in 80ies, while the majority of the army was on different modifications of AK. I am personally was issued an AKM. I know people who served with AK-74S. Some with AKSU. Some with AK-74. Some with SKS.

cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom