7.62x39

The win super x deer load has a .308 bullet I think. I'm not 100% on that but the things were spitting everywhere from my zastava.

22-250 and 7.62x39 are good deer loads, for small deer. My first rifle deer was on VI with a 22-250 and handloaded ammo.

Out of curiousity I looked up some 120 grain loads for he 257 roberts a "small/marginal" deer cartridge from before I was born. It is whoopin' the 7.62x39's ass.
 
Since it was pointed out the thread was about 7.62x39 and not SKS. I'll rephrase '7.62x39 is good to go, know you're limits, stay within them'. It's funny how this round is kind of synonymous with SKS in Canada. Actually, I remember getting poked fun of when getting reloading dies and components for 7.62x39 in a hunting good store ... with regards to using an SKS for hunting. *meh* I like them, to each their own.
xdmer said:
SKS are good to go, know you're limits, stay within them.
Click to expand...
 
Right now there is a CZ chambered in 7.62x39 on the EE for $1000....and I'm sure that is a very fine rifle.My original question is ,given the 7.62 x39 is only an 'adequite ' deer rifle,with less capability than the venerable 30/30,unless you had unlimited funds,why would you buy a $1000 rifle chambered in 7.62x39 when for the same money, you could get your CZ in something like a 65x55 which would not be 'marginable' ...one of the distinct advantages of shooting a 7.62x39 is cheap ammunition,fine for an $150 SKS , but would you really want to shoot corrosive stuff in your $1000 CZ rifle ? ..so 'cheap ammo ' is not a reason

I'm not downgrading either the 7.62 x39 or an SKS ,I think they are made for each other....my question was, given the ballistics and limitations of the 7.62 x39 why would you buy a $1000 rifle to shoot it out of?( other than 'just because' ,or you just won the lotto 649 and had money to burn , which arec perfectly valid reasons )
 
No clue, from most practical perspectives that I can think of. I have considered getting a M85 7.62x39 Sporting Rifle for fun in trying different loads, and just being different. I don't understand why someone would be jumping on the CZ .. maybe someone else will chime in.
ratherbefishin said:
Right now there is a CZ chambered in 7.62x39 on the EE for $1000....and I'm sure that is a very fine rifle.My original question is ,given the 7.62 x39 is only an 'adequite ' deer rifle,with less capability than the venerable 30/30,unless you had unlimited funds,why would you buy a $1000 rifle chambered in 7.62x39 when for the same money, you could get your CZ in something like a 65x55 which would not be 'marginable' ...one of the distinct advantages of shooting a 7.62x39 is cheap ammunition,fine for an $150 SKS , but would you really want to shoot corrosive stuff in your $1000 CZ rifle?

I'm not downgrading either the 7.62 x39 or an SKS ,I think they are made for each other....my question was, given the ballistics and limitations of the 7.62 x39 why would you buy a $1000 rifle to shoot it out of?( other than 'just because' ,or you just won the lotto 649 and had money to burn , which arec perfectly valid reasons )
Click to expand...
 
^ lightweight, shorter action, cheap plinking ammo.

You can carry a lot of ammo on a trapline, zombie fantasy range run etc.

Some 30-30's cost disturbingly close to 1000 dollars and will probably not approach the CZ in accuracy. I think zastava would be a serviceable cheaper option. Mine was a bit rough around the edges but still had the feel of an old world hand made gun. Great to carry too, and with a reasonable mag capacity. Nowhere near as smooth as the CZ but I strongly prefer it's magazine.

So in practice I got rid of my 7.62x39 but I think the bolts have a place in a hunting battery for close range work and target shooting.
 
madashell said:
As stated above the CZ and other bolt actions are almost always going to be quite a bit more accurate than an SKS. There's really no discussion to be had on that point.

As for the capability of the 7.62 x 39 round I think it gets underrated all the time. Sure, it's a bit lower velocity than some others but within its realistic effective range a round like the Hornady 123 gr SST can do a lot of damage.

For hunting with it's usually about deer. However, given the typical ranges a high percentage of hunting shots are taken I suspect it would do much better on black bear and moose than people think. I wouldn't shoot a moose at say 350 yards with one but at 100, sure. As always shot placement is key.

Given that, I can hit what I want out to 250 with an SKS so I don't see why many get their pants in a bunch about an SKS at 100 for larger animals than deer.

Flame away .....
Click to expand...

I tried using my SKS for deer this year....cost me a big buck...just not enough juice to punch through some twigs and stay on course. But in the right environment I would say it would be fine with good shot placement. Probably wouldn't want to try it on anything bigger though. :/
 
Not sure how many of the previous "snobbery" comments were aimed at what I posted earlier about an SKS being a poor choice, even if it was all one had to take hunting. Why would anyone purchase an SKS as their first and only CF rifle, and then decide they may wish to take up hunting.........like I said poor previous choices. Note I did not say anything disparaging about the 7.62X39 cartridge, I have to do some more work with it before I would recommend or dismiss it as a game cartridge. I have 2 SKSs and a Zastava full stock carbine in this little Rusky number, and so far I am not impressed with either of the rifles nor the accuracy............but like I said the jury is still out and more work is needed. Would I personally hunt with it..........absolutely not in the SKS platform, and not very likely even in the Zastava.......maybe blacktail on H.G............I value my hunts too much to curse myself with such an anemic cartridge when I have so many superior hunting cartridges and rifles........when I feel a need to challenge myself I have a choice of 1/2 dozen of my bows to dust off and head out with...............Why anyone would choose to handicap themselves with such a cartridge and platform as the SKS is beyond my understanding............One thing no one has said on any of these threads, and there have been many, I do not feel the least bit handicapped with my 300 magnum at 25 mtrs, or 50 or at any range which you decide the 7.62X39 is adequate to.......my meaning being that just because a rifle and cartridge are perfectly suited and useable at 500 mtrs does not necessarily mean that they are in any way handicapped at 25 or 50 mtrs either. Seeing as my crystal ball reveals absolutely nothing of value to me (most likely operator error) it means I never know when I go hunting if my quarry will reveal itself at 50 mtrs or 500 mtrs so I feel it prudent to take a rifle and cartridge which will work at either range with equal aplomb, possibly not all agree, but this is my thinking.
 
c-fbmi said:
Not sure how many of the previous "snobbery" comments were aimed at what I posted earlier about an SKS being a poor choice, even if it was all one had to take hunting. Why would anyone purchase an SKS as their first and only CF rifle, and then decide they may wish to take up hunting.........like I said poor previous choices. Note I did not say anything disparaging about the 7.62X39 cartridge, I have to do some more work with it before I would recommend or dismiss it as a game cartridge. I have 2 SKSs and a Zastava full stock carbine in this little Rusky number, and so far I am not impressed with either of the rifles nor the accuracy............but like I said the jury is still out and more work is needed. Would I personally hunt with it..........absolutely not in the SKS platform, and not very likely even in the Zastava.......maybe blacktail on H.G............I value my hunts too much to curse myself with such an anemic cartridge when I have so many superior hunting cartridges and rifles........when I feel a need to challenge myself I have a choice of 1/2 dozen of my bows to dust off and head out with...............Why anyone would choose to handicap themselves with such a cartridge and platform as the SKS is beyond my understanding............One thing no one has said on any of these threads, and there have been many, I do not feel the least bit handicapped with my 300 magnum at 25 mtrs, or 50 or at any range which you decide the 7.62X39 is adequate to.......my meaning being that just because a rifle and cartridge are perfectly suited and useable at 500 mtrs does not necessarily mean that they are in any way handicapped at 25 or 50 mtrs either. Seeing as my crystal ball reveals absolutely nothing of value to me (most likely operator error) it means I never know when I go hunting if my quarry will reveal itself at 50 mtrs or 500 mtrs so I feel it prudent to take a rifle and cartridge which will work at either range with equal aplomb, possibly not all agree, but this is my thinking.
Click to expand...

Evan on Haida Gwaii with our small blacktail deer The preferred calibers are 30-06 , 243 and 22 LR in that order just a small hand full of guys will use a 7.62x39 would I use it on Haida Gwaii Absolutely Yes !
I would not use 7.62x39 hunting In the Yukon or BC interior fore that matter
 
If I were short of cash ,or just starting out target shooting of hunting ,I sure as heck wouldn't be buying ANY rifle chambered in 7.62x39 when for $100 you can pick up a Lee Enfield sporter and go hunting in confidence...or for about the same money as buying an SKS buy one of Tradeex's fine swedes...but for pure fun,and cheap shooting,the 7.62 x39 fits the bill...one point that hadn't been mentioned here is what if you took your shot at a nice buck with a 7.62x39 and failed to recover it?....people talk about 'limiting' themselves but what about the huge buck or bear they come across at a range they 'think' they can make....whereas the 303 or 65x55 would take it handily
 
Superbrad said:
All a matter of perspective..... Those guys dump more time and money into a sloppily chambered sub $200 surplus rifle than I care to.... But if they enjoy their hobby, then good for them.....

As to myself, I don't see the point in spending a truck full of cash and effort to make something almost as good as a finely machined bolt action hunting rifle..... Only to have a poor carry gun.....

I liken it to saying a Chevy Cruze is a perfectly capable off road vehicle within limitations...... Sure it could likely do some walking trails and "grass down the middle roads".....

In the end, if the SKS guys want a better response, they would be best to post in the milsurp forum and not the hunting and sporting one..... That is where the SKS belongs.....
Click to expand...


All of this ranting, you get an SKS to put $0.00 in it... Comes with a sling, now your good to go. The rifle from a rest can shoot 2-3 inch groups. Honestly, ive seen guys with $1000 to $3000 scoped 308's,30-06, 30-30 ect bolt actions NOT be able to shoot a 3 inch group from the bench with sand bags... They hunt more then I do, but damn I can out shoot them and their fancy "Finely machined bolt action hunting rifle" with an sks.

"those guys" enjoy having project and working on making sub moa rifles. The majority of people get an sks to have a great solid bush beater gun that goes bang when the buck comes.

Something everyone on here forgets, its up to the rifleman not the rifle.

If you want to use an SKS for deer go for it! It will work! Know your ability, if your ability is better then what the rifle can achieve "for all you sub moa standing hunter types" know its limits. Make a good shot, fill the freezer, repeat.

All for 200 bucks ;)

Or as mentioned above, a sported 303 ! Ammo is a bit more and the accuracy is likely the same but a bit more punch behind it and you have a bolt action...
 
I wonder how many hunters are ready for that short window of opportunity in thick bush? I see many hunters at the range with a magnum
strapped into a "lead sled" sighting in their scope, then unstrapping it and packing it away! SKS shooters are, probably, ready for anything.
I'm sure that any CGNer will have spent some time getting familiar with their hunting rifle but the SKS encourages plenty of practice!
 
Robert Nicholson said:
I wonder how many hunters are ready for that short window of opportunity in thick bush? I see many hunters at the range with a magnum
strapped into a "lead sled" sighting in their scope, then unstrapping it and packing it away! SKS shooters are, probably, ready for anything.
I'm sure that any CGNer will have spent some time getting familiar with their hunting rifle but the SKS encourages plenty of practice!
Click to expand...

This x1000 Everyone forgets that most people arnt CGN certified marksmen and every one would shoot 5 shots one hole if the rifle would let them!
 
Still waiting for the SKS guys to try this:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...ter-Marksman-Challenge-use-your-hunting-rifle!

If your rifles are as accurate as you say they are and are suitable hunting rifles you should all excel..... Semi Auto, no bolt racking time.... 5 round mags (and your rifles are so cheap you probably have two, so reloading should be quick, worst case you use stripper clips.... And, with your cheap available ammo equaling lots of practice time, there is really no reason not to try it....
 
IMO... all SKS threads should be; "state your opinion and then move along."

Invariably, both camps have their minds staunchly made up... and no amount of back and forth makes one bit of difference... or so it appears to me... I call it the ".223 for deer" phenomenon.
 
I don't think there is anything wrong with the sks in 7.62x39 but not sure I understand buying an expensive rifle in this caliber. There is a lot more available in better calibers. It has its place as a cheap rifle with cheap ammo no different than with the lee enfields of yore. Decent cartridge in a decent rifle for a decent price. Kinda like 30-30 bolt actions, sure they work but if I'm buying a bolt action why limit myself to 30-30? Also why don't we see new bolts chambered for 303 british? I love my 303 but if I was buying a bolt for target or hunting then there are better options available for what they would charge for a new 303. (however just to spite myself and out of nostalgia I would probably be all over a new 303 rifle like white on rice!). But if it is something you like go for it! I'm sure I have guns that people ask why? but I have them for me not to impress someone else.
 
Droopy78 said:
I don't think there is anything wrong with the sks in 7.62x39 but not sure I understand buying an expensive rifle in this caliber. There is a lot more available in better calibers. It has its place as a cheap rifle with cheap ammo no different than with the lee enfields of yore. Decent cartridge in a decent rifle for a decent price. Kinda like 30-30 bolt actions, sure they work but if I'm buying a bolt action why limit myself to 30-30? Also why don't we see new bolts chambered for 303 british? I love my 303 but if I was buying a bolt for target or hunting then there are better options available for what they would charge for a new 303. (however just to spite myself and out of nostalgia I would probably be all over a new 303 rifle like white on rice!). But if it is something you like go for it! I'm sure I have guns that people ask why? but I have them for me not to impress someone else.
Click to expand...

Different strokes for different folks, if we all enjoyed the same thing it would be a boring world. I enjoy shooting 7.62X39 but choose to hunt with a .308.
I enjoy shooting all types of guns and all types of cartridges though..... about the only thing I don't enjoy is recoil levels that rattle the brain or wrench on the wrists to an uncomfortable level.

This topic has gone from "why would anyone want a quality built rifle chambered in 7.62X39 over an SKS?" .... and morphed into "there are many better rifles and calibers to hunt large game with at longer distances then 150 yards then an SKS".

I agree with Hoyt about people's minds being made up about it....... even if someone posted some HD footage banging off 10 shots in 30 seconds on an 8 inch gong or target as per Brobee's challenge, Brad would still not be impressed with an SKS as a hunting tool, and would maintain his correct position that the SKS is not the best choice for an all round hunting gun. Might be fine from a stand over bait, might be fine for stalking deer under 100 yards in the hands of a patient hunter, not so good for other scenarios and longer range shooting. Fine, it is what it is. A fun shooting caliber that can harvest some food within it's limitations.
 
hoytcanon said:
IMO... all SKS threads should be; "state your opinion and then move along."

Invariably, both camps have their minds staunchly made up... and no amount of back and forth makes one bit of difference... or so it appears to me... I call it the ".223 for deer" phenomenon.
Click to expand...

AKA, "my poo don't stink" phenomenon.
:)
 
silver69 said:
I tried using my SKS for deer this year....cost me a big buck...just not enough juice to punch through some twigs and stay on course. But in the right environment I would say it would be fine with good shot placement. Probably wouldn't want to try it on anything bigger though. :/
Click to expand...



Your poor shooting decision cost you a buck, not your calibre.
 
pete dobinson said:
Snobbery or not, its sound advice, an SKS isn't a good hunting rifle. You would be better off searching for a used parker hale or husky chambered in 308 or 30-06. If all you got is an SKS that shoots 4moa off the bench at 100 yds, then keep your shots at deer less than 100 or you will be in for a few surprises.
Click to expand...

I'm always surprised when people say that the sks is only a "4 moa" rifle. I've owed two and shot them both a fair bit. I think that they get a bad rap because often the bullets in surplus ammo are too small for the bore. With a properly sized bullet they are as accurate as the next $200 rifle. My first sks experience was as follows. Bought the rifle, cleaned out the cosmoline, took it to the range, they had just put up the gong at 300 yards so I figured what the heck. Moved the rear sight to the 300 mark and managed to hit the 8" steel plate half the time standing and almost every time off the bench. It was a pretty windy day but I was impressed none the less. The second SKS I got had a tapco stock, a wartak rail and I mounted a burris fullfield 2. It shot about 2 " groups at 100 yards once I sighted it in. I used it for deer hunting that year but didn't see a deer, so I can't comment on the terminal performance, but I wouldn't have been concerned about it. I had a bear tag as well and wouldn't have hesitated to shoot at a black bear with the Hornady SST hunting rounds I had. I believe that its as important to have confidence in your rifle as the ballistic performance of the gun itself. That being said, the firearm does need to be sufficient for the task at hand and the only way to be confident in your ability with a firearm is to use it enough to know it. Anyways, that's my two cents, and I have traded both of them away and now hunt deer mostly with my 92 in .44 mag. Skokie.
 
Can-down said:
Different strokes for different folks, if we all enjoyed the same thing it would be a boring world. I enjoy shooting 7.62X39 but choose to hunt with a .308.
I enjoy shooting all types of guns and all types of cartridges though..... about the only thing I don't enjoy is recoil levels that rattle the brain or wrench on the wrists to an uncomfortable level.

This topic has gone from "why would anyone want a quality built rifle chambered in 7.62X39 over an SKS?" .... and morphed into "there are many better rifles and calibers to hunt large game with at longer distances then 150 yards then an SKS".

I agree with Hoyt about people's minds being made up about it....... even if someone posted some HD footage banging off 10 shots in 30 seconds on an 8 inch gong or target as per Brobee's challenge, Brad would still not be impressed with an SKS as a hunting tool, and would maintain his correct position that the SKS is not the best choice for an all round hunting gun. Might be fine from a stand over bait, might be fine for stalking deer under 100 yards in the hands of a patient hunter, not so good for other scenarios and longer range shooting. Fine, it is what it is. A fun shooting caliber that can harvest some food within it's limitations.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. You are correct different strokes for different folks and diversity is what is nice about this sport.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom