Talk:SKS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Citations[edit]

We really need some citations in this article. I'd appreciate help in improving it. CynicalMe 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I'm concerned where this "800 million" number comes from, considering that only around 100 million AK-47s have been produced and that is one of the most common guns in the world. I could see 50-80 million Chinese SKS rifles being manufactured.--71.187.14.89 23:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a citation that links to http://www.sff.net/people/sanders/sks4.html indicating the SKS' use in the 1992 LA riots. The referenced article DOES NOT reference the SKS being used in any way during the riots. The confusion seems to arise from the paragraphs that read: "At a less extreme level, people in some urban areas may worry about outbreaks of mass violence. The pictures of the Korean shopkeepers during the Los Angeles riots, resolutely defending their turf with personal firearms, made an impression on a lot of Americans. And then too one might think in terms of some natural disaster such as an earthquake or hurricane - depending on where one lives - causing a temporary breakdown in law and order.

(Sometimes, it must be admitted, the paranoia gets distinctly weird. SKS sales, and prices, soared in the US during the last part of 1999, spurred by widespread fears of an imagined Y2K catastrophe.)"

As you can see if you read it carefully, the cited article mentions only that civilians used personal firearms, not specifically the SKS. The second paragraph refers to SKS' being bought in large numbers in response to the Y2K scare. It does not mean or say that any SKS' were bought specifically for the riots. I removed this once before for those same reasons--and I even gave them--but someone reverted it. I was under the impression that references should give evidence to back someone's claim, and this reference does not. Anyone care to step in and settle this? BHenry1969 (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

800 million does seem abnormal. As one of the most produced rifles ever made, the Mosin-Nagant comes in at 37 million since 1897.
As for the SKS, a big YES. SKS's, M14's, Uzi's, wheel guns, bolt action hunting rifles with scopes were on those roofs in Los Angeles. I can personally attest to those reports. 2601:646:C500:18D0:C09C:E44C:8933:F395 (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Carbine[edit]

Is this weapon the same as the SKS Carbine? Lefty 15:55, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)

I think the SKS Carbine is a variant. Need to research further. Lord Bodak 20:50, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There is no SKS Carbine. Some of the producers of the SKS call it a carbine (Type 56 Carbine)


Why was the mergefrom SKS Carbine removed? They are the same rifle and should be combined into one article. Lord Bodak 15:43, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've brought over everything good and wholesome from SKS Carbine and turned that page into a redirect here. A lot of it was copied straight from an external website, however, so I have rewritten, chopped, expanded and so forth. -Ashley Pomeroy 23:04, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

WHY do we need redundant technical specs?

I added Albanian and North Vietnam to the variants list, which is now complete (I think), but I don't know the proper designations (if any) for either of them. If anyone does please contribute.--Bgeer 20:53, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)


As bgeer said, why do we have two specs?
Clyde frogg 08:07, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Secondary specs wiped out, primary specs modified to show that these are from a Chinese Type 56.

I took out the sentence about accuracy. Show me an SKS that shoots 1" groups at 100 yards and I will happily eat it. I also removed the sentence about the SKS replacing traditional deer rifles in the South. I live here/hunt here, and haven't seen an SKS in the woods in North Florida, Alabama, or NOrth Carolina.Wesbo 01:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have proof that Poland adopted the SKS rifle? While most persons list it as the Wz. 49, no site seems to have an actual picture or any other information on the rifle. Carbinesforcollectors.com disputes that Poland ever adopted them & says that they received the AK47 and SKS about the same time and refused to adopt the SKS in favor of the AK47.

Poland at least adopted it as a cermimonial rifle. There are plenty of photos of it being used in parades:
http://www.detnews.com/pix/2001/06/16/bushtroops360.jpg "President Bush, right, and President Aleksander Kwasniewski, review the honor guard during an arrival ceremony in the courtyard of the presidential palace in Warsaw Friday. " Serellan

"As with the British Lee-Enfield, the rifle's ten-round box magazine is fed from stripper clips, and can be removed only for the sake of cleaning and maintenance." The last piece isn't entirely accurate. The factory-standard integral magazine can be removed and replaced with higher-capacity "duckbill" magazines (and, with a slight modification, they can accept AK-47 magazines). http://carnival.saysuncle.com/003085.html: "While the SKS-D accepts AK47 magazines, standard SKSs have only the standard integral magazine. Duckbill magazines were designed as a "quick-fix". They replace the existing integral magazine assembly and can be removed and replaced using the magazine release catch." Is is Is

"As with the British Lee-Enfield, the rifle's ten-round box magazine is fed from stripper clips, and can be removed only for the sake of cleaning and maintenance." The British SMLE actually can be fed from above with stripper clips, or from below with a very removable magazine. They are expensive and not easy to find, but my No. 4 Mk. I* SMLE is indeed fed from below with removable magazines. As for the SKS, the duckbills are illegal in the US per 18 USC 922(r) and most SKS enthusiasts will tell you they don't feed well at all. The duckbills are a novelty. The only SKS you will find that does a good job of accepting AK mags would be the Norinco SKS-D or SKS-M, which was made for civilians and not military use. Their importation into the US is now illegal under the same legislation that restricts the use of duckbills. Magnus 14:33, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find anything about duckbills in 18 USC 922(r). If you're referring to the American 1994 assault weapons ban, that was repealed: you can lock and load with 30-round mags all you want–hell, you can even use C-mags. However, I won't deny that duckbills feed terribly.Is is Is 19:34, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

18 USC 922(r) has nothing to do with the 1994 assault weapons ban, which primarily impacted only domestic rifles (contrary to popular misconception). Legislation enacted in 1989 and 1990 by George H.W. Bush banned importation of assault weapons and parts. It also made it illegal to build a rifle that would be illegal to import. Putting a detachable magazine onto an SKS makes it fall into the category of a weapon that would be illegal to import, and nullifies any protections you enjoyed under the C&R designation. The BATFE has made determinations that adding a detachable magazine does indeed run afoul of 18 USC 922(r) and as such would be a felonious modification to the SKS. The import assault weapons ban is still very much in effect (this is why you still can't import a semi-auto AK47!) Magnus 15:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The law is ambiguous, but in general, if you modify a C&R rifle like the SKS, you lose C&R status and thus the rifle is illegal to possess unless it qualifies under 18 USC 922(r). Since that law requires a certain number of American parts, a stock SKS with one part change will not qualify. Lord Bodak 23:45, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The technical specification stating that Chinese versions were manufactured with 20 round magazines is incorrect. The 20 round fixed "star" magazines are aftermarket magazines. Edited.--Serellan 04:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get some clarity on the 'dirty wars' reference under the Service section? Rather ambiguous; possible POV issue. Sidmystic 01:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation needed[edit]

Since SKS is a TLA, isn't some kind of disambiguation needed? I can think of at least one other use of SKS - synchronised key server in OpenPGP. Alphax τεχ 03:40, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Some Clarifications[edit]

The SKS is indeed a carbine. The only variants that can be considered rifles are the Yugoslav M59/66 and M59/66A1 due to the length of the flash suppressor/muzzle brake/grenade launcher attachment. I have changed "rifle" to "carbine". I have also updated a few facts... mainly about it being used as a hunting rifle. There are now reloading components and brand name ammunition available that are suitable for hunting. I have also corrected the misnomer about it being an assault rifle because it does not meet all the requirements for being a true assault rifle. (IMHO - call it as it is...If it doesn't meet all the criteria for the terminology, then it doesnt' fit and the terminology shouldn't be used)

The length of the weapon has nothing to do with its classification as a rifle or carbine. A carbine is defined as a small arm that fires a round intermediate between a traditional rifle cartridge and a pistol round. 99.232.219.131 (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The length of the weapon has nothing to do with its classification as a rifle or carbine. A carbine is defined as a small arm that fires a round intermediate between a traditional rifle cartridge and a pistol round." What the hell are you talking about? You have got it exactly backwards. A Carbine is a shortened version of a rifle, or sometimes a gun developed specifically to be a short rifle, with no long "normal" variant. They were originally developed for cavalry and artillery crew defense use, and they were being made in full service-strength cartridges a couple hundred years before there was such a thing as an "intermediate cartridge". For example, a Mauser Kar98 is a "Karbine" (carbine) version of the Mauser G98. Both are chambered in 8x57mm Mauser. There are Mannlicher rifles and carbines in identical chamberings. Carcanos, Enfields, Shmicht-Rubins, all made in both long rifle and short "carbine" version, and chambered in the same cartridges in all cases. Perhaps you are simply confused by the US "M1 Carbine". That is indeed chambered in an intermediate cartridge, but the title "carbine" only refers to it's small size, not the cartridge, which was one of the very first intermediate cartridges ever fielded (and really more like a "hot" pistol round than an intermediate, really). There are certainly "carbine" versions or rifles chambered for intermediates, such as the M4 carbine, but again, that only refers to its length. Off the top of my head, I can only think of three carbines developed specifically for intermediate cartridges...the SKS, the M1 Carbine, and the Mini-14 family. And again, the "carbine" designation has NOTHING to do with the chambering. It only refers to the length of the weapon, period. And even that is a grey area. When the M1903 Springfield was developed, it was not much larger than a typical "carbine" version of a service rifle. Later on the Kar98 was developed as a carbine version of the G98, after noting the US success with the "short rifle" concept. Thus, what would have once been called a "carbine" now became a standard rifle, and carbines grew even shorter. In summary, a length of a weapon is EVERYTHING and the ONLY thing to do with whether it's called a "carbine" or not. The cartridge is absolutely irrelevant. That's why one can buy carbines in everything from powerful hunting rounds to intermediate chamberings to pistol rounds (i.e. Mini-14's and lever action Winchesters chambered in .44 Magnum and .357 Magnum...there are even 9mm carbines made by companies such as Kel-Tec.).45Colt 22:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Civilian use[edit]

The 2nd paragraph under this heading is clumsy and seems to confuse the cartridge with the rifle.

Please, include again the photos of the International versions of the SKS (Soviet, Yugoslavian, Romanian, etc.)

This article needs some clean-up. Also, where the hell comes the claim that it's based on Stg-44? It sure as heck is not. --Mikoyan21 21:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK, the basic design was copied from a self-loading anti-tank rifle of the time; the PTRS-41 if memory serves. It had nothing to do w/ the StG44.

Selective-Fire Variants[edit]

According to the Jane's Guides, there is a production selective-fire variant that was issued to the Chinese military in the 1980s. It's more than the "rumor" referenced to in the article.

Editing[edit]

7/14/2006 - Extensive edit. CynicalMe 15:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC) 10/31/2006- Fixed a number of small historical errors, namely removing the reference to the SKS as based on the MP42/43/STG44 design, and improving the sections of the article about intermediate cartidges.[reply]

07/10/2010 - There's a contradiction in the article regarding Chinese bayonets. Earlier sentence reads "Early versions of Chinese Type 56s (produced 1965–71) used a spike bayonet, whereas the majority use a vertically-aligned blade." and later says "Type 56 carbines with serial numbers below 9,000,000 have the Russian-style blade-type folding bayonet, while those 9,000,000 and higher have a "spike" type folding bayonet". BogWhomper (talk) 15:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Info about N. Korean & Vietnamese[edit]

I have just (within the past hour) seen pictures here showing two different N. Korean SKS models (one standard, one designed for use with a detachable grenade launcher) and also pictures of Vietnamese SKSs. I have added this information to those listings under variants. Exciting stuff! CumbiaDude 09:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I made a mistake on part of this, the "Vietnamese" model was actually a third type of North Korean. I have edited the page to reflect this. CumbiaDude 22:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Enough with the revert war!!![edit]

Stop reverting and rereverting picture of Vietcong with an SKS. Personally, I think the picture is totally relevant and interesting; moreover, I do not see any "anti-Vietnamese propaganda" in it. --Alexander Ivashkin 12:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There is nothing racist about a picture of a soldier carrying a military rifle. It's completely relevant to the article. If someone doesn't agree with it they need to come talk about it here instead of playing revert games. Lord Bodak 13:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well hello there unsourced statements! Unchromed Yugo SKS barrels.[edit]

"Yugoslav models do not have chrome lined barrels since the country lacked large chromium deposits. Yugoslavia produced M95 and M85 AK derivative rifles that had chrome lined barrels, so this is quite peculiar. Even though Yugoslavia was governed by communists at one time, it had unreliable relations with the USSR. The USSR was one of the largest exporters of chromium."

Let's try to rectify this, starting here: http://www.sksboards.com/smf/index.php?topic=25489.0

192.52.41.66 00:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyvios[edit]

If anyone is wondering why this article is so awful now, it's because I had to cull the article of direct word-for-word copyright violations from here. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 17:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked a little deeper into this, and it looks like they copied us. If you look at our article on the M14 rifle and compare it to theirs, you'll also see similarities. Now, I don't think that we could have possibly copied two articles without finding out, so I'd say it's a bigger possibility that they copied our articles. For that reason I've restored the article back to before it was culled. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 18:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shaocaholica, what supplies / process did you use for your redone SKS?[edit]

-Thanks Reddog1083 (talk) 21:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslavian SKS M59/66 Caption[edit]

The picture of the Yugoslavian SKS M59/66 whose caption says it has a folding bayonet and a grenade launcher does not appear to actually have a grenade launcher. I've adjusted the caption accordingly. If I'm mistaken and somehow missing it, please revert. I inadvertently submitted the edit before I fixed the comments, so they won't be much use to you. --Nuncio (talk) 23:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has a rifle grenade launcher attached to the muzzle. I fixed the caption to reflect this. — DanMP5 05:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

¿Does anyone here know what they Hell they’re talking about?[edit]

At 4Ø inches, ¿how on earth (or anywhere else) can you possible call an SKS a “Carbine”? The AK-47 (which is considered a full-fledge rifle, if ‘only’ and assault rifle) is only 34 inches (with wooden stock), making it SHORTER than the SKS, yet the SKS is a “carbine”? Explain this to me. Use small words. A REDDSON —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.235.112 (talk) 00:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have an Norinco SKS carbine. 29.8 inches... - 4twenty42o (talk) 08:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Something seriously stinks here, but anyways… The article itself says “4Ø Inches” (even the barrel length is described as “2Ø inches”, which sounds about the same as my own, more or less), so again the same question. If it’s barrel lenth is almost as long as it’s successor’s overall length (2Ø inches to the AK’s 34 overall), then you could only call it a “Carbine” compared to a much longer rifle. It most certainly is NOT an “assault rifle” by conventional standards, but it’s LONGER than current standard assault rifles; “Carbines” are definition are short-barreled rifles; 20 inches hardly counts as short by any definition.97.120.235.112 (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)A REDDSON[reply]
Well no one is claiming it is an assault rifle. By definition the SKS is a battle rifle..
No it isn't. 7.62x39 is an intermediate cartridge. Sorry. Faceless Enemy (talk) 12:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not positive on this but classification of the SKS as a carbine comes from the back that the predecessor rifles were full length Mosin-Nagant battle rifles.. However since you brought it up maybe you could take a look here [[1]] and find some insight. - 4twenty42o (talk) 18:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try to keep it polite. The SKS is a carbine because it is smaller, lighter and fires a reduced-power cartridge (40 inches, 8 1/2 lbs and firing 7.62x39) compared to the weapons it was designed to replace/supplement (Mosin-Nagant, SVT-40, AVS-36 - each at least 48 inches long, weighing over 9 lbs and firing 7.62x54mm), not compared to the weapons that came after it.

The AK family are "assault rifles" because that is the translation of the name given to the German StG-44, which pioneered the category (StG being an abbreviation for Sturmgewehr, literally "storm rifle", but more accurately "assault rifle").

From the article on the StG-44, it was originally called a Maschinenpistole, and was "developed from the Mkb 42(H) "machine carbine", the StG44 combined the characteristics of a carbine, submachine gun and automatic rifle. StG is an abbreviation of Sturmgewehr. The name was chosen for propaganda reasons and literally means storm rifle as in "to storm an enemy position" (i.e. "assault", leading to the modern terminology "assault rifle"). After the adoption of the StG 44, the English translation "assault rifle" became the accepted designation for this type of infantry small arm." So, it too was classified as a carbine before they coined a new name for it.

Hope the words were small enough. ;-) Good Skoda (talk) 16:13, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • “The SKS is a carbine because it is smaller, lighter and fires a reduced-power cartridge (40 inches, 8 1/2 lbs and firing 7.62x39) compared to the weapons it was designed to replace/supplement (Mosin-Nagant, SVT-40, AVS-36 - each at least 48 inches long, weighing over 9 lbs and firing 7.62x54mm), not compared to the weapons that came after it.” There. Perhaps that should be intergrated into the article. (I still think, by modern classifications, it does not meet the definition of “carbine” but that’s fairly irrelevant, since it was originally classified as such.) And he used small words. :) 174.25.99.225 (talk) 15:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)A REDDSON[reply]

The SKS is labelled a carbine in the article, because that is what both the Soviet design bureau and Simonov himself called the rifle. There are two definitions of "rifle", one based on length and one based on its role. A gun which is standard issue to all troops would usually be considered a rifle, because that is the role it is fulfilling; a rifle can also be a designation of length, which is where we get such terms as "long rifle" "short rifle" and "carbine" to denote their size. Sometimes those terms collide, such as Germany's Kar98k or, indeed, Russia's SKS: two carbine-length guns, and officially designated as such, but also fulfilling the role of a rifle, and so is born the very odd term "carbine-length rifle". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.132.161 (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ceremonial use in Cuba[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Santiago_de_Cuba_-_Garde_au_Mausol%C3%A9e_Jos%C3%A9_Marti.JPG

Maybe I incorrectly identified those guns, but they look like SKS and Cuba is not listed as SKS user.

88.118.111.39 (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but Wikipedia cannot use itself as a source. In order to be an appropriate source, the photograph would need to be attributed to a reliable external source with a caption identifying them as Cuban soldiers. ROG5728 (talk) 23:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.johnthecamera.net/Cuba/camcorder/index1.htm
DSC00544.JPG to DSC00547.JPG, Santiago de Cuba, Jose Marti, guards with guns. I though that guns might be vz52, but vz52 forend stock is different. I don't know what you call credible source and merely pointed that SKS might be used in Cuba just like in any other Soviet block country.
I am not gun expert and I can't prove use of SKS in Cuba. That's why I put it on discussion page and let others decide or dig up some facts about it.
88.118.111.39 (talk) 12:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's an SKS, alright. Faceless Enemy (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviation vs Acronym[edit]

The second sentence in this article reads, "SKS is an acronym for Samozaryadnyj Karabin sistemy Simonova..."; however, the letters "SKS" actually form an **abbreviation** rather than "a word created from the first letters of each word in a series of words" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym_and_initialism). I do not feel comfortable editing the original verbiage and ask that the author or other authorized editor make this correction. Keep up the good work. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.117.26.151 (talk) 04:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the link you gave, BBC: British Broadcasting Corporation, DNA: deoxyribonucleic acid, OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer, are all acronyms, so why not SKS? (Hohum @) 10:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lineage of the SKS - SVT-40 vs. PTRS-41[edit]

There seems to be a bit of an edit war on whether the SKS is a "scaled down version" of the SVT-40 or the PTRS-41. The fact is, all three rifles were designed by Simonov.

I propose that this sentence remain removed from this entry. If it is to be re-included, please cite an authoritative source showing that the design of the SKS was derived from the design of the SVT-40 or PTRS-41. Lwsimon (talk) 15:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's the others opinions about moving this article to SKS (Semi-automatic Rifle) ?[edit]

Based on the SKS (disambiguation) page content, it seems that "SKS" is a widely-used acronym across different fields. So I suggest to move it to SKS (Semi-automatic Rifle) and pointing SKS to the disambiguation page. (TNX to L1A1 FAL)

Cheers, Mjdtjm (talk) 12:08, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong oppose. The other pages from the disambiguation page all have names of their own, none of which require "SKS" be used in them. When somebody says "SKS" in English, this is usually what they mean. Just because Google has a disambiguation page does not mean that the Google page should instantly redirect to the disambiguation page. None of the other pages in the SKS disambiguation page would logically be moved here, even if the SKS rifle did not exist. I could understand it if, for example, Saks went by "SKS" in normal language. But it doesn't. It goes by Saks. So "SKS" is, at best, a secondary article title for all of these other articles. It is the most logical name for this article. Faceless Enemy (talk) 15:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as per above. If it is to be moved anywhere though, the appropriate location would be SKS (rifle) though. The disambiguation doesn't need to be overly complex.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose. SKS is the common name. The disambiguation link at the beginning of the article is sufficient to take the (relatively) few users looking for something else to the appropriate place. Miguel Escopeta (talk) 21:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose. I agree with Miguel Escopeta...SKS is the common name. The disambiguation link at the beginning of the article is sufficient to take the (relatively) few users looking for something else to the appropriate place.--71.22.156.40 (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wax figure[edit]

I believe that this photo was taken of a wax figure at a museum exhibit. While I don't think that this alone disqualifies this image...it should be discussed and the caption should state so. If you look closely you will see that the face is too shiny and there is no loose soil on the ground or walls. Also, the hands, feet, knees and elbows are clean...which is not possible for someone crawling around tunnels. And, the bolt is locked open which would only allow dirt into the action in this environment.--71.22.156.40 (talk) 01:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the source is the US Army Signal Corps and it is part of a series of 37 contemporary photos (and I've looked at most) which are genuine, I would say that isn't the case. His feet and clothes are dirty. The bolt may be locked because that is the way the US soldiers handed the empty rifle to the prisoner while they took the photo. In any event, unless there is a source for this being wax that would fall under original research to challenge that source.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 22:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. I can live with that explanation…Would you happen to have a link to the other photos? Maybe we can use some of them in other articles. --71.22.156.40 (talk) 23:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are here.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I’m afraid that site is not working for me…All I got was the following message “Search Not Available ARC cannot find the search or search results that you requested.”…What search request should I manually input? --71.22.156.40 (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Use this link first and then click on "Part Of: Series: Color Photographs of Signal Corps Activity, compiled 1944 - 1981" after which you should click on "Includes: 37 items described in ARC Search within this Series". Hopefully that helps,
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got it...it takes a few clicks but it works...Thanks--71.22.156.40 (talk) 00:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The SKS is NOT an assault rifle[edit]

The SKS is NOT an assault rifle. The vast majority of SKS rifles are semi-auto with a 10 shot non-detachable magazines. Full-auto select-fire models were nothing more than prototypes. And, after the AK-47 was introduced there was no longer a need to develop a select-fire SKS. Only a handful of Chinese models were made for the U.S. commercial market with the ability to use AK-47 magazines and are discussed in the "Variants section". Also, after-market American detachable magazine conversion kits are not relevent in the "Design section" and are discussed in the "Civilian use section".--71.22.156.40 (talk) 22:43, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

so where did you find this definition of "Assault Rifle"? Don't get me wrong I find it interesting you stipulate these requirements but many would conciser a weapon like this an example of one of the FIRST assault rifles, this weapon features is gas operated and not simple gas blowback operation like an SMG. It fires the same round as the AK-47 (most peoples definition of the Assault rifle).
So I completely disagree, I guess I see things from a more technical viewpoint and see the "gas operation" not gas blowback operation (like say an MP40 or semi automatic handgun) but the employment of the gas piston and the tube that taps gasses from the barrel, it allowed the cambering larger round for an automatic hand held weapon. I see this as the key difference between an "assault rifle" and a "sub machine gun".
I can't really understand how "magazines" and "selective fire" are anything other than subsequent and logical improvements to the idea. Sure this weapon has been limited to semi automatic operation and clips, due to what was the norm at the time... however it is an assault rifle basically.
Obviously the problem with Wikipedia, it ultimately comes down to what the world opinion of an "assault rifle" is... however I'd say you need a better reason than that... more like my reason, a fundamental and key bit of technology that enabled a weapon firing a 7.62 round to reload automatically.
By the way the Thompson submachine gun has select fire and clips. DarkShroom (talk) 18:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you read the Assault rifle page and present your arguments there.--71.22.156.40 (talk) 21:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name Question[edit]

Perhaps we should change the name to "SKS-45" as this is the Soviet designation. Agree? SKS without the 45 was probably made up by civilian shooters because it's so much easier to say "SKS" rather than "SKS-45".

74.51.57.78 (talk) 06:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial design date[edit]

In the introductional text to the rifle the design is dated for the year 1943, the infobox says 1944 and a link this page is referring to(SKS rifle history and pictures) states that it was developed 1946. Can someone clearify this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarendas (talk • contribs) 18:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] 

To add on to this confusion I have found articles saying that the rifle was designed in 1941, under the names SKS-30 and SKS-31, with the SKS-31 being field-trialed in 1944 in Karelia- well after the 1943 date stated in the wiki article. (Russian source from Kalashinkov group: https://www.kalashnikov.ru/wp-content/cache/all/sks-kotoryj-tak-i-ne-vstupil-v-boj//index.html) (and an English article based on the previous: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/08/13/sks-31-the-7-62x54mmr-predecessor-of-the-7-62x39mm-sks/)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.132.161 (talk) 21:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts/Wars[edit]

Is there a particular reason why there are no wars listed under | wars = in the infobox? M11rtinb (talk) 15:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on SKS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese variants[edit]

The Type 63 deviates significantly enough from the standard SKS that it might be considered more of an SKS inspired design than a variant of the SKS, regardless of what consensus is reached on this point, a link to the "Type 63 Assault Rifle" page would probably be helpful. The Type 68 is just another name for the Type 63, from what I have read outside this article, and should not appear in the same list, unless a source pertaining to the differences between the Type 63 and 68 is brought forward. (If such information exists, the page "Type 63 Assault Rifle" should be edited to reflect this information.) There is no Chinese small arm called the Type 73 that I am aware of, and the body of the text fails to describe what is meant by the Type 73. The Type 81 is even further removed from the SKS than the Type 63 was, and the page "Type 81 Assault Rifle" should be linked to. The Type 84 is definitely an SKS variant, but does not have a rotating bolt and is semiautomatic only, and should not be grouped with the rotary bolt SKS derivatives. The Type 84S (not listed) does belong with the rotary bolt derivatives, as it is a 5.56 NATO semiautomatic version of the Type 81. 173.67.18.172 (talk) 00:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in SKS[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of SKS's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Bishop":

  • From StG 44: Bishop, Chris (1998), The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II, New York: Orbis Publishing Ltd., ISBN 0-7607-1022-8 [page needed]
  • From Automatic rifle: Bishop, Chris (2002). The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II. Sterling Publishing. p. 217.

Reference named "Walter":

  • From Vz. 52 rifle: Walter, John: Rifles of the World (3rd ed.), page 229. Krause Publications, 2006.
  • From Beech: Walter J. (2006) Rifles of the World, 3rd edition. Krause Publicatioins, Wisconsin US

Reference named "Jowett":

Reference named "Smith":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AK's are inaccurate?[edit]

"Rifles of the AK family (including both the Chinese army’s Type 56 auto and the Vietnamese army’s AK-47s and AKM) are for structural reasons relatively inaccurate." What source is this assertion based on and what are the supposed structural reasons? There is nothing in the AK's structure that would make it inherently inaccurate. Particularly the original AKs with milled receiver are very sturdy, as are the barrel, gas piston/bolt carrier and bolt of all models if compared to, say, AR-15/M-16 derivatives. The AK family includes weapons like the Finnish Rk 62 and the Israeli Galil series, and it is difficult to imagine either of these countries adopting a design that is inherently inaccurate. I could see shoddy 3rd World production with poor quality control turning out inaccurate examples, but this has nothing to do with the structure itself, nor can it be extended to the whole "family".--Death Bredon (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a claim that for certain needs references. However, I think the remark is meant to refer to the piston-driven action of the AK family and the perception/belief that the overall greater reciprocating mass (i.e. bolt+bolt carrier+piston) leads to greater muzzle climb and greater difficulty of keeping shots on target, compared to, say, AR-style gas-operated rifles (whose reciprocating mass is composed basically of bolt+bolt carrier). This, however, is still perception; in the hands of trained users (e.g. Russian operators, many well-trained military personnel from Western countries who possess AKs as personal firearms, and so on) the AK is capable of great accuracy/precision to the extent that I believe such a remark is either unnecessary or requires documentation indicating that this perception existed among the Chinese military hierarchy in the context of the article. Ecthelion83 (talk) 15:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in SKS[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of SKS's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "TG":

Reference named "Gazette":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 05:37, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ak and sks you need to quit describing them as assault weapons[edit]

Need to quit describing rifles of any caliber as assault weapons. It's a total lie and it needs to stop 2600:1008:B010:AB39:E91B:4CF3:FDB6:5640 (talk) 00:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SKS&oldid=1214108198"