So you think the SKS isn't accurate?

Wogger

Wogger

Regular
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Location
Ontario
Well I was out shooting my 1953 Tula SKS and my Savage 111 .270 today. I had targets set up at 100 and 250 yards, and clay pigeons from 60 to 150 yards.
I was hammering the 4" clays out to 150 with the SKS and getting some pretty decent groups at 100 on the target. Fist sized groups, which at 100 yards with iron sights I thought was pretty good.

So I had two rounds of 7.62x39 left that I brought with me today and thought what the hell, might as well try the target at 250 yards.
I adjusted the rear sight for 300 yards and took two shots laying prone with the front of the stock resting on a bag.
Went to check out if I even hit the target and this is what I see.

657DD91A-23A6-4840-AC50-DF69436AF6FF-63712-00000C198AC9B9C4.jpg


Just over 1.5" group at 250 yards!

I know, I know, it's not a three or five shot group. And I probably can't repeat that group over and over. (But I bet I could get close)

I was pretty happy when I got to the target, so I just thought I would share. The old SKS can shoot pretty damn good for what it is.


I had a buddy with me so I have a witness, lol. I have shot bricks out to 200 yards many times before with it so I'm not really too surprised with the accuracy. Pretty damn impressed though.

My point of aim was roughly 5" lower than point of impact. Rear sight was set for 300 yards so it was hitting high at 250. But pretty well dead center.


The rifle,
C4EC91D4-29FE-4ECA-A1B7-CF078AC4D10D-63712-00000C270025B91D.jpg
 
I never understood the whole SKS are inaccurate thing, My (Chinese and Russian) shoot great at 100 yards 3-4 inch grouping with open sights.
Good shooting by the way.
 
Yep reasonable accuracy can be expected from these old things. I have two, and they both shoot just fine. Some people refuse to believe that a sub $200 gun could hit anything at all. Others like to blame the equipment. Not bench rest guns but I've put rounds on paper at 400 yards with one. :stirthepot2:
 
I don't think I could even see that target at 250 yards. I'm more of a 50 m beer can shooter myself. Good shooting I couldn't do that.
 
Methinks that because of the normal cost and availability of the sks when compared against the number of quality shooters that shoot them... well... I think it's already been stated... right up there^^^
 
I think if the sights were a little more refined, one can expect a bit better accuracy. For my iron sight rifles, I tend to shoot at 50 yards as my benchmark. The real problem as i see it, at 100 yards the front post on an SKS is wider than the target itself. THe SKS was designed only to shoot a man sized target up to 300 meters. Most of them are capable of doing just that. A 3 or 4 inch group at 100 yards is a reasonable accuracy to expect.

With no discredit to anyone's shooting, if you fire enough rounds at 250 yards, you will get a few that appear grouped. I've done it. However, if you really want to speak of group accuracy at 250 yards, use a 4 x 4 foot piece of cardboard and fire only 5 rounds. That would be the proper group at 250. Not a measurement of the closest two random shots.
 
Great shooting! I agree - they aren't precision shooters by any stretch, but they are definitely not given their due respect.
 
fiddler said:
With no discredit to anyone's shooting, if you fire enough rounds at 250 yards, you will get a few that appear grouped. I've done it. However, if you really want to speak of group accuracy at 250 yards, use a 4 x 4 foot piece of cardboard and fire only 5 rounds. That would be the proper group at 250. Not a measurement of the closest two random shots.
Click to expand...

I don't claim to be an amazing shooter or anything but I didn't "fire enough rounds at 250 yards".

I fired two rounds at 250 yards and those two rounds are on target and just over 1.5" apart. This wasn't two random holes that happen to be close together after slinging 100 rounds down range. It is what it is.
 
Im a fairly new shooter. As for the sks I mean from 100 yards 5 outa five will hit the 16 inch target. (I was not on a bench or in a supported position)...

I think my sights are DICKED tho... I spent 80 rounds sighting them in... Took forever. I think my post is bent so when adjusting the hight of the front post it would move the wind left or right... It was a night mare....

I wouldn't even bother shooting this from farther then 200 yards... Even around 150 I would want to be on a bench or supported.
 
the stigma is probably related to the sights, the rear sight is pretty wide which can make it hard for some people. and of course it probably being their first rifle, since its cheap and shoots cheap ammo but isnt small and puny like a 22, the lack of actual shooting experience leads them to the conclusion that an SKS is inherently innacurate
 
Wogger said:
I fired two rounds at 250 yards and those two rounds are on target and just over 1.5" apart. This wasn't two random holes that happen to be close together after slinging 100 rounds down range. It is what it is.
Click to expand...



And you wasted such good luck on m43 rounds? You shoulda bought a 6/49 ticket instead. Excuse me while I open a window, its getting really ripe in this post.
 
I have found the SKS is ammo sensitive. The Czech ammo is worse than most of the Chinese ammo I've tried. The Norinco softpoint was only slightly better than the FMJ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom