The Great Debate
>Entered service in 59, 20 round mag, still in use with many militarys today, chambered in a fuck you cartridge.
>Entered service in 45, 10 round clip fed, a quintessential guerilla rifle found all over third world shit holes, reasonably reliable.
>Entered service in 43, 10 round mag/clip fed, uber rare these days rushed into production and suffers numerous teething problems.
I like all 3 for different reasons, though if stuck and i had to carry one into combat I would choose the SKS, it's tough, durable, you can get those chink 20 round extended magazines or an AK mag adapter. 7.62x39mm is a respectable caliber, and if you go for a Yugo SKS you have the option of rifle grenades albeit no chrome lined barrel.
M14 or SKS.
I’d give it up to SKS just because of use
And there's me writing a fucking blog post when i could have just said this...
You’re doing great champ, I enjoyed your post.
Thanks dude
>of the previous mellinia
Put down the monster 0 and get with the times boomer.
which one of these rifles has shot in and won the National Match Service Rifle competition? Only one.
If you want a cheap piece of shit made to be used by illiterate mongoloids pick the lower two. Rich history, can literally take a shit in the mag well with the bolt pulled back, and they will still function. Function meaning make a bang noise and go downrange somewhere, though not in the same general area even if clamped in a vise.
PS the barrels in the lower two rifles will always be black and pitted with very little rifling left. But still they couldn't shoot an 8" group at 100 meters when brand new and sandbagged in a lead sled.
All equally heavy, therefore all equally shit
If it's not under 8 lbs, it belongs in the trash
The G43 can't compete with the other two. It's just a half-baked design that wasn't ready and never got a chance to be fully developed.
The debate is more between the SKS and the M14. Seems obvious because there's a strong bias against the M14 as being "the worst service rifle ever used by anyone" and strong bias favoring the SKS because a lot of anons bought one when they were cheap.
I think the M14 beats the SKS by a mile. Sure the SKS is a bit more robust and reliable, but the M14 is no Chauchat either. Sure you take it into a sandstorm or shove it into a mud hole it'll choke, but a lot of guns will. A bit of dust or sand won't affect it.
Past that it's substantially more powerful, more accurate, better sights, more range (because no rainbow trajectory past 300m), designed for box magazines, better magazine release (assuming sks using detachable magazines which mess with reliability), better bayonet mounting system in that you aren't forced to keep it on the gun, has a flash suppressor, has a shoulder brace, and takes optics better. Also if it's a military M14 yyou can go full-auto, which is perhaps of dubious value but it's there. It's hardly even a fair comparison.
SKS is also a bit lighter and easier to field strip, but I still think you'd have to be crazy to take it into battle over an M14.
They're all shit.
The SKS has an advantage in that its cartridge makes it easier to shoot, but at the same time it's unnecessarily long and heavy for its cartridge. The bayonet is also unnecessary, and adds needless weight.
M1 > SKS > SVT-40 > G41/43
Can we all agree to that?
SKS all the way for aesthetics alone
I'd rather have an SVT than an SKS if nothing else because of price alone.
I'd go with the M14 just for the extra range and accuracy.
The SKS is good for the same reason the Mosin (was) good. It's cheap, and ammo is cheap. If an SKS were anywhere near the price of a M1A, or if 7.62x39 were anywhere near the cost-per-round of .308/7.62x51, no one would even sniff at it.
Being inexpensive makes people rationalize that a thing is better than it is. Make the two things the same price in your head, and then make a choice. The answer may surprise you, even if you scream bloody murder otherwise on Jow Forums.
I love how retarded Jow Forums is. They have threads shitting themselves over Garands yet lump the M14 in with the SKS.
To be fair, it's difficult to think of a US counterpart to the SKS that you can commonly see on gun store shelves.
The M1 Carbine is tempting, but the .30 Carbine is just completely outclassed by 7.62x39. The SVT-40 is probably closer than the SKS, but those show up only very rarely, and the guy usually wants waaaay more than it's worth for it just because of scarcity.
>made to fight the last war, ignored innovation for nationalist reasons
>rushed through development, horrible
>outdated the second it was made, only considered 'good' because it was once cheap.
I'll take the first one.
This,only this
>t.
>Old but good rifle
>Updated old rifle with better magazines and a giggle switch
>that rifle everyone round here uses to hunt durr and upgrade into a Tapco snaper ryfle
Em Farteen cause it don't use no Commie round
How is this even a debate??? The m14 wins.
>SKS
>rare
Svt is better. Change my mind.
SKS' may not be rare, but reading comprehension is.
Obviously he's talking about the gewehr 43...
Most countries don't have an SKS analogue. Russia was a little unique in making an old style carbine in an intermediate cartridge. In the US the closest thing would be the Mini-14, which has seen military service with smaller countries.
2 and 3 are out of order but it's the sks hands down cause of the intermediate cartridge and the toughness of the rifle, also there is a good chance you'll find replacement parts for the sks rather than the m14.
>I see you are a man of culture as well.
>not getting the joke
>which one of these rifles has shot in and won the National Match Service Rifle competition?
Which one of these rifles is even eligible to compete in this competition, simply because of where it came from? Only one. If you know anything about M14 accuracy, you'd know it sucks compared to modern AR-15 derivatives. The M14 is extremely hard to get sub-MOA, and it rattles itself so much that it doesn't even stay MOA if you want it to. Also,
>Germans
>Illiterate mongoloids
It really depends on the situation. Am I going into a scenario alone or with friends? Will we be hiking through woods to get somewhere? If I was alone I would go with the m14, but with friends ill take the sks
>I was merely pretending
>implying im the same user
I'd personally take the M-14 for the accuracy, but the SKS is a close second.
Comparing POS SKS to Patrician Tier M-14
My sides!
GL permanently fixed, designed to fight the previous war
SVT > all of the above
Shoot themselves loose. Magazines are fit to the specific rifle and may as well not be detachable. Buying a second magazine costs almost as much as a whole new rifle and has a good chance of not feeding properly. Pain in the ass, comparatively, to maintain.
All the good points of the SKS plus detachable mags.