858 0r sks?

Claven2 said:
Also as per wikipedia:



So by the "still used today" criteria, China, Vietnam and "several" African, Asian and Middle-Eastern countries still issue the SKS as standard (note that China is arguably a super-power!) compared to TWO for the VZ58.

I think the VZ58 is a far better modern battle implement in it's assault-rifle select fire configuration and standard capacity magazines, but still, food for thought.
Click to expand...

The reason for spreading the SKS in the third world is :The Combloc offered huge quantity of small guns as a free gift to governs and guerillas friendly to Communism.
Is one of the reason that URSS economy colapsed;,because was unable to continue to sustain military programs of helping all the world to became communist
 
Very awesome posts Claven2 very well noted.

But those places you it because they upgraded from muskets a few years ago :)

All kidding aside the SKS and VZ argument is comparing apples to oranges imo because even though you can upgrade the SKS to a 'mag fed' design, you can upgrade an AR-15 with a .50 beowulf upper so it wins the AR vs AK argument.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CrUARlmqso

And more so the stock or issued configuation is more important in the 'service rifle' argument.

Both are awesome guns, personally I am still divided on which I am going to buy :)
 
Also from Wikipedia, for interest's sake:

A successor to the vz. 58 was proposed in the 1990s; the 5.56x45mm NATO ČZ 2000 assault rifle has been suggested as a possible replacement but due to a general lack of defense funds within the Czech Republic, the program was postponed.
 
858-2 vs SKS

Is one more accurate than the other, im comparing the 858-2 (19") and the Russian SKS-45. What is the length of pull like on the 858 compared to the SKS? I am interested in the CZ 858-2 for a range plinker, which one would be more accurate at say 100yrds and 200yrds?

I have never held an 858-2, I do own an SKS and feel that it is a heavy rifle for the caliber it shoots. I think it may be a wash if we are talking quality here because they both use good steel and great designs.

I am just wondering if the SKS being a carbine rifle and the 858-2 being an assault rifle design, which one would be better handling for range plinking and learning to shoot various positions out to 200yrds? How is the trigger on the 858-2, I know my trigger on my Tula SKS is gawd awfull but I guess thats the norm.
 
Max-4:

individual rifles vary, but in general, the VZ58 and SKS are designed to shoot accurately out to the same range as they use the same military caliber with similar sight graduations.

Neither rifle is match grade, so don't expect that. The 858-2 and the SKS barrels are approximately the same length as well.

Some SKS's are chrome lined, which is desireable for shooting surplus ammo but can affect accuracy slightly for the worse. Some SKS rifles are not chrome lined though and should in theory perform equally to the non-chromed bore in the 858-2.

Neither rifle has a great trigger right ouf of the box. The SKS trigger is argueably easier to tune though since the machined sear is relatively easy to remove and stone.

Sight radius is about equal between the two rifles, and weight is not significantly different between the rifles.

I suspect in most cases, the shooter and the thick iron sights will be the limiting factors more so than the rifles, which are going to group about 2" at 100 yards off the bench if held in a vise (on average).
 
Max-4 said:
Is one more accurate than the other, im comparing the 858-2 (19") and the Russian SKS-45. What is the length of pull like on the 858 compared to the SKS? I am interested in the CZ 858-2 for a range plinker, which one would be more accurate at say 100yrds and 200yrds?

I have never held an 858-2, I do own an SKS and feel that it is a heavy rifle for the caliber it shoots. I think it may be a wash if we are talking quality here because they both use good steel and great designs.

I am just wondering if the SKS being a carbine rifle and the 858-2 being an assault rifle design, which one would be better handling for range plinking and learning to shoot various positions out to 200yrds? How is the trigger on the 858-2, I know my trigger on my Tula SKS is gawd awfull but I guess thats the norm.
Click to expand...

My 858's trigger isn't too spectacular. It has a lot of take up and reset. I would swap it in a heart beat with something that had a clean break. I have shot my friends SKS and it has a little bit better trigger.
 
TDC said:
Tapco is pure sh*t. Oh, and modifying your SKS to accept removable magazines is nothing more than an attempt at having the advantages offered by the VZ/CZ. So why not get a VZ/CZ instead of wasting time and money on crap accessories?

TDC
Click to expand...


Just curious why you feel this way about the Tapco stock? I have an SKS with one and one without. I like both. I shot a 3-gun last Saturday and used the SKS with the Tapco for the carbine. I have had this setup for two years now. Nothing rattles, fits me better than the regular SKS laminate I have and shoots fine.
 
Hey Guys! I finally got my CZ858 today! Damn I was so excited, just about did the moonwalk in the gunstore. Anyways I got the thing home (with a crate a surplus ammo) and my brother and I went right to the gun range to fire it off.
We had a blast!
The 858 is just so fun to fire, had a few issues with inserting magazine at first, but we got the hang of it eventually.

Of course, now this brings me to another issue. Cleaning the darn thing. Can someone please point me to a helpful step by step guide on how to clean the 858? I tried a "cleaning" search on the forum but it came back empty.
 
The ONLY reason I bought an SKS is for fun.. I could give a $h!t what the mid to long range ballistics of the 7.62 ammo garners..... fools and their keyboards....
 
858 or SKS

After owning and handling both pretty extensively I can honestly say I like the 858 better for a couple reasons. I truely do not beleive the 7.62X39 round requires a 8.8lb rifle to fire it. The SKS seemed very "front heavy" to me with its integrated bayonette. I am not a collector of guns so the history and value of the SKS is wasted on me. I am a SHOOTER and a bayonette on my rifle is useless and just adding weight that I dont need.

My new CZ 858 handles and shoulders really well and it is a dream to field strip! It took me all of 20 mins and a youtube video and I have got it down. I dont even mind the "beaver barf" stocks on the 858, infact I kind of like them and will be leaving them on. My sole reason for choosing the 858 over the SKS is weight and handling, to me the SKS is heavy and never really pointed well for me due to its weight towards the front. The painted metal is about the only thing I do not like about the 858 and only time will tell if it holds up, I would rather it was blued but whatever. I have 3000 rounds of surplus for the next few years so this 858 will be put to the test.

As far as quality goes this is a WASH the SKS is a damn fine rifle and built like a tank, the fact that they are $300 now is irrelevant because the would cost more than twice that to make nowadays. The SKS would make a wonderful rifle for the new shooter or the shooter on a budget! I just love the handling and pointing characteristics of the 858 alot more, so it will be my shooter!!!

Winner!!!
IMG_1283.jpg

Close Second...
IMG_1241.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom