Rechamber an SKS?

[dakota.potts]

I like the idea of an SKS. I'm going to save up and buy one because I believe in owning a fighting rifle for various reasons. I had been planning on turning it into a 100-300 yard rifle with accuracy hopefully at least marginally better than minute of man, deer, or hog at those distances. 300 yards isn't bad, but with the way 7.62X39 rainbows, I found myself wondering if there wasn't a better way.

Thinking and reading about it, I've heard that a 6.5 Grendel closest fits the current chamber. This is the direction I was thinking about taking with the round anyways. Apparently the case size is the same as the 7.62 so feeding would be fairly straightforward. As far as I remember, the only obstacles were replacing the barrel and that the 6.5 Grendel has a longer overall length than the 7.62, so it won't feed in the internal magazine.

Has anybody thought about or tried a similar thing? I'd be interested in a semi automatic rifle with some decent range fed with clips rather than magazines and housed in a rugged action. My goal would be to take the SKS rifle and see if I couldn't get 600-800 yard capabilities out of it. Maybe not necessarily 1 MOA groups, but the ability to hit targets of size at that distance.

What does TFL think?

 

[kraigwy]

Its the gun more then the ammo that is the limiting factor.

First off you cant just re-chamber an SKS to 6.5, you have to re-barrel it, that is going to be a spendy project which still wont produce the results you want.

You have a rifle that shoots wash tube size groups at 300 yards. If you take that $300 rifle and add a grand or more to get a match 6.5 barrel, assuming to can match it to the gas system, you'll end up with a $1300 rifle that shoots wash tube size groups.

I run CMP GSM matches which has a "modern military" category where SKS' and AK's can be used. We shoot 100 and 200 yards. The 10-X ring is 3.5 MOA. You cant get a SKS or AK to come close to that.

People try to compete with SKS's and AK's but they can't. The tinker with the ammo, and even attempt some (illegal per rules) modifications to the rifle. They just cannot compete with AR, M1As and FALs.

They can't even come close to their grandfather, Mr. Mosin.

From your post you indicate you want accuracy. You're not gonna get it with an SKS.

You're not going to get a 300 yard target rifle and certainly not going to get a rifle that shoots 600-800 yards.

COL T, Whelen said "only accurate rifles are interesting". When he said that you can bet he didn't have the SKS in mind.

 

[dakota.potts]

Interesting, I had heard some... different things in regard to the SKS accuracy. Have you ever sen if these rifles can be accurized? I've heard reports of between 1.5-2.5 MOA out of good rifles and that would be plenty for what I am considering.

I also wasn't aware a decent 6.5mm barrel could cost as much as a grand. I'm not looking for a record-breaker.

 

[kraigwy]

Well I too have "heard" lots of things since the internet came out. But I haven't seen anything.

The NRA and CMP post scores on their respective web sites. You don't see any of these rifles winning their matches.

I guarantee you if you had a 1.5-2 MOA rifle you'd be at the top of the list.

I have seen people show up at the CMP GSM matches with AK/SKS's, What I haven't seen is a guy showing up TWICE with a SKS/AK.

I'm just not one that believes what I hear on the internet, I'm one of the "show me guys".

 

[iraiam]

Although I never competed with it, I regularly get accuracy out of my SKS that is fully capable of hitting human sized targets out to 200+ meters. Out to 200 yards I can maintain somewhere around 2.5 MOA (with quality ammo).

My 7.62X39 Hand loads with 1680 powder, brass cases, and commercial primers are much more accurate than Tula or Wolf ammo.

Prvi Partisan commercial 7.62X39 ammo is also much more accurate than Tula or Wolf ammo, also about twice the cost.

I will also say that not all SKS rifles are equal, I used to have more than one, this is the only one I kept, it was the highest quality and most accurate of the 3.

 

[Willie Lowman]

Not all SKS are created equal. If you can find one with a trigger that's less crappy than the others and buy about 3000 rounds of ammo.

Shoot it at 50 yard targets.

Shoot it at 150 yard targets.

And shoot it some more at 200+ yard targets.

Then keep shooting the dang thing. Learn to use the sights, learn the right hold over or adjustment for longer shots. Forget about trying to make the SKS something it isn't.

 

[kraigwy]

I'm with Whelen, only accurate rifles are interesting.

I want to shoot my service rifles at 200, 300, 600 and 1000 yards. I can and have done it with my AR, M1A, and Garand.

I wouldn't have attempted it with the SKS I had at one time.

Even my M1 Carbine will out shoot any SKS/AK I've seen.

 

[Gunplummer]

I have to agree. I built a short bolt gun in 7.62x39 years back before there were any around. You have to do some fancy reloading once you go past 200 yards. I like it as a short range deer round, but it never was designed as a long range cartridge. Therefore, it was put in a rifle that really was not up to distance. Good enough for what it is, but that is about all.

 

[Bake]

I believe the SKS is (at best) an affordable substitute for the old M-1 Carbine. No one ever called a Carbine a target rifle, or a main line battle rifle. If memory serves, the Air Force called the Carbine "A 300 yards gun" and at the same time, the Army said "250 yards".

The LGS around here are asking way too much for beat up carbines, just to sit behind the seat in the pickup.

 

[James K]

I have shot a few SKS rifles and they are reasonably accurate within the limitations of the rifle and cartridge. The best I actually fired was a Russian rifle that shot about 1.5" at 100 yards. Most of the others seemed to go 2-4", usually considered adequate for a military rifle.

IIRC, the U.S. maximum acceptance standard for the M4 is 4" at 100 yards, exactly the same as the maximum acceptance standard for the 1861 rifle musket. Ain't progress wonderful?

Jim

 

[ndking1126]

I've never heard of someone trying to accurize an SKS (other than trigger work).. although it would be a fun project. I think the reason no one has is because you'd easily be $800-$1000 before you got in it and best case scenario it wouldn't be anymore accurate than other options you could buy for roughly the same price. Most likely scanario it would be better than before, but not as accurate as what you were wanting.

If you try or hear of someone who does, I'd love to follow the progress!

I had an SKS that shot 5-6" groups at 50 yards no matter what I fed it.. it was a Romanian that looked to be in very good condition, but I couldn't stay interested in it with that type of accuracy.

 

[10-96]

Dakota- suffice it to say that you could easily swing an AR in 6.5, 6.8, or whatever you choose way sooner than you'll squeeze even remotely satisfactory performance out of the SKS. Yes, it would be an interesting project to attempt (and expensive)- but I think it would just end up being a huge investment with minimal returns. Speaking of minimal returns- it would be interesting to see what would happen with a 7.62x39AI.

 

[Willie Lowman]

But are those apples and oranges organic?

James K mentioned 4" accuracy being the maximum acceptable group size for standard military rifle accuracy.

It has been my experience that the quality of ammo has a great deal to do with the accuracy we find in our service rifles. For example, for a very short time I had a 16" AR15 with a free floated barrel and a Leupold scope.
When I fed it 69 grain match ammo from the bench, it would shoot these nice little dime sized groups at 100 yards.
When I fed it Federal Premium varmint 55 grain it shot nice little dime sized groups.
When I fed it PMC or Federal xm193 it would shoot 3" to 4" inch groups at 100 yards. It didn't matter that it said Wilson Combat on the side of the rifle, it shot just the same as my Noveske. Honestly my Noveske doesn't shoot much better than my Colt.


My point is while SKS and top shelf AR15s are apples and oranges. But ammo quality and consistency is a limiting factor for any rifle. If a person found some good quality x39 (or loaded it themselves) that old SKS may start to impress.

Improve the trigger and irons a bit, find some good ammo, and the ole SKS may begin to really shine.


But that doesn't address the OP post about the trajectory of the x39 or converting a SKS to 6.5. The 6.5 case does not have the taper of the x39 so there could be some feeding issues from the stock SKS mag. The taper of the 6.5 grendel matches 5.56 soooo... Why not rebarrel a 5.56 AK to 6.5 Grendel??
...Other than the fact that the trigger would still be crap and ejected brass would be hard to find to reload...