Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
Looking forward to that post Ganderite!
7.62x39- How accurate is it really?
- Thread starter GunNewb
- Start date
Naughty Vicar
Regular
- Location
- Central Ontario
Kayser Sose
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Van Isle
Aye
hairygrump
Regular
- Location
- Calgary, AB
At 100m I can shoot a 4" group. At 200m all my rounds will hit a chest sized target so in my mind the round is plenty accurate. If i want precision, I'm looking for a different rifle but as a cheap, reliable, SHTF tool and plinker, the sks does everything it's supposed too.
- Location
- Steel Town
Think "walking dead" and you will know the SKS's place in your home arsenal. 
Big JD-From the hills
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Saskatchewan.
If the trigger wasn't so crappy the in the field accuracy of the sks would be allot better I think too. another milsurpluss rifle that would be more suitable for hunting would be the m91/30, milsupluss ammo is a little less common but still available. My tikka m91 has taken many deer, coyote, fox. I actually used this rifle for 5 years strait wile by browning, remington, savage ect ect all sat in the safe.
"no to hunting"? Lots of people use the SKS for hunting, and responsibly. at least on medium size game like Deer. But...like anything, you need to: keep your shots under 100m, so your accuracy is within the "clean kill" area, use quality expanding ammo as legally required. The short description is that it's like a .30-30 carbine lever action that's been used since before yer Gramps was born, to hunt deer.
As for accuracy and the CZ858, IMO that's a much more accurate rifle, both mechanically and from the practical ergonomics: the trigger is FAR better, the barrel seems to be quite good.
With "el cheapo" old surplus rounds, iron sights only, I've been able to do 100% hits on a 10" gong at 200m. Consistently. No red dots, no optical zooms, just stock front and rear iron sights, zeroed properly, range setting at 200m, and squeeze the trigger. I was getting about 50% hits at 125m on a 5" plate too, from STANDING position, also with iron sights. So it's all capable.
Throttle_monkey1
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I would never feel undergunned in the bush with an 858. A Barnes tsx out of a 7.62x39 rifle would kill a moose out to 150 yards. The 7.62 x39 is not too little gun for hunting. In this day and age everyone thinks they need a 300 RUM for deer.
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
///
Last edited:
I have read all the posts. Most are from informed members. This is NOT!!
I am not a well respected gun writer. I am merely a hunter and a sport shooter, so I will let Mr. Frank C. Barnes speak for me.
" While previous military cartridges generally made suitable hunting rounds with proper bullets, many writers condemn the 7.62x39mm out of hand as being unsuited for anything beyond small game. In short, they claim it is very much like the M1 Carbine cartridge - fine for military use, but useless for hunting. However, the best 125-and 150-grain spitzer loads in this cartridge typically match best .30-30 FP or RN load energy at 100 yards, and at 200 yards, there is no comparison - this little round bests the .30-30 by 20 percent.
Still, the 7.62x39mm id definitely a close-range number suitable for deer, javelina, and the like. With the best handloads and the proper bullet, it can do even better. It can be loaded to good advantage with 150-grain bullets and then becomes a very good .30-30 class deer rifle."
Cartridges of the World, 11th Ed, pg 58.
Further to this, if you actually do the math, the 150gn bullet runs out of steam for deer just over 300yds while the neither the 150- or 170gn .30-30 even make it to 300yds.
But what is math? Out of my own 4 SKS's I can easily get an avg of 2MOA with handloads or PRVI ammo. However, I have cleaned up the triggers, re-crowned the barrels, and restocked them so that they actually fit my length of pull. And I use 4X scopes.
3 deer have fallen to an SKS using 123gn Hornady bullets between 70 and 150yds (but that one was with my most accurate rifle).
Same PRVI rounds in my Remington 799 give me MOA all day. Neck shot a large doe at 212yds last year with it and another at 130yds. Both 123gn loads. Both accurate enough and powerful enough.
That same rifle throws 150gn rounds handloads sub-MOA.
The question here is not about the power of the cartridge, but about the ability to deliver it accurately. That is what reduces the SKS to a sub-200yd rifle.
See, an informed opinion. I totally agree.
I've seen 7.62x39 XCR-L shots 1 - 1.5 MOA 5 shot groups at 100m with Czech surplus ammo, so it seem that the problem are inaccurate rifles not a inaccurate round.
As for lethality, 7.62x39 is effective at 300m but remember than 5.56 NATO is also effective at that range and the 7.62 is effective at 600m!
No bad but nothing to brag about.
Alex
As for lethality, 7.62x39 is effective at 300m but remember than 5.56 NATO is also effective at that range and the 7.62 is effective at 600m!
No bad but nothing to brag about.
Alex
- Location
- Lethbridge
I have to agree. I've only used mine for plinking, but we smack clay targets at 100m. That's what, 2 MOA from a box stock 60 year old rifle?
Me and my bud were shooting his SKS and my 858 last weekend. SKS seemed to be a bit better for accuracy, Im not sure why, but it felt steadier offhand. The CZ makes me lean in a bit too far, so its not as comfortable, and produces wider groups for me.
I like the m43 round, and with a rest I think the SKS and 858 would group about 2moa.
I wish I would have spent a bit more time tightening my groups, but I brought a pidgeon slinger and my Grizzly MAG so we were working on moving targets for most of the day.
I like the m43 round, and with a rest I think the SKS and 858 would group about 2moa.
I wish I would have spent a bit more time tightening my groups, but I brought a pidgeon slinger and my Grizzly MAG so we were working on moving targets for most of the day.
Aye.
Huge range on an sks, afterall, the box of ammo I bought warned that it was dangerous up to a mile away! Plus I get one hole, one shot groups at all ranges! One night while drinking vodka, I took a shot at the moon, and I'm pretty sure you could see where I hit it.
Huge range on an sks, afterall, the box of ammo I bought warned that it was dangerous up to a mile away! Plus I get one hole, one shot groups at all ranges! One night while drinking vodka, I took a shot at the moon, and I'm pretty sure you could see where I hit it.
I think when some people on here are reffering to M.O.A. they mean "Marginal Opportunity of Accuracy".
16 inches or less @ 300 meter's after that it's a gong show. That is with reloading no b.s. in a semi-auto. After 300 meter's this round drops like a brick.
As for lethality this round has enough pep under 300 meter's to blow a whole threw a concreate cinder block. As for the only round I like the balistics more in the under 300 meter "danger close" range would be the 300 BlackOut. But then again it's like this rounds projectile slammed with the samme amount of powder as on the 223.
As for the 150gr bullets. They were designed to be used with suppresor's. Hence why they are rated for no further than 200 meter's and have such a wierd trajectory.
