Historical comparison: M1 carbine vs SKS

General Firearms Other Semi-Automatic Rifles
1

Several of the guys I know own one or the other of these carbines. We had a discussion the other day as to what could be considered the more successful of the two. Considering the numbers manufactured and the worldwide employment of both over decades of service, I doubt that one could be considered a more successful design than the other.

As far as a very general conensus, the advantages of one over the other:

Accuracy: M1

Reliability under adverse conditions: unknown. (maybe SKS?)

Effectiveness of cartridge: SKS

Most produced: Unknown, since the SKS was produced in a number of different countries.

Ergonomics: I think the M1 got the nod here, for being more lightweight.

Durability: unknown, but the SKS is a pretty rugged design.

Effective range: SKS (?)

Ease of maintenance: None of us really knew if one was better than the other.

Other points: M1 has a greater magazine capacity

As stated, this was just a nothing-better-to-do-over-lunch discussion, so no really scientific comparisons. Opinions/thoughts?

2

I have an SKS, but not an M1, so I can only really speak about the SKS. The two carbines are rather different in their roles, which affects their capabilities. We can still compare them, tho :smiley:

I’d say the effective range of the SKS is definitely longer than the M1 Carbine. The M1 Carbine was a replacement pistol for people who have better things to do than learn to shoot (people like, say MEDICS :D). As a result, it’s smaller, lighter, and less powerful. SKS has a true intermediate cartridge, but is much bigger, heavier, longer. Except for the intermediate round, it’s much more like the Garand.

Accuracy, I don’t know. I imagine they’re both acceptable (is an M1 Carbine that has no zip left at 300 m better than an SKS that still has some, even if it has “less accurate” sights?)

From what I can find, there were 6.5 million M1 Carbines made (serving with 6 million Garands and 2 million Thompsons), compared to 15 million SKSs (according to Jane’s).

Ergonomics, that’s just a fancy way of saying “comfortable”. I’m always amused when people praise or condemn ergonomics on something :smiley:

Durability, the SKS is definitely durable. I imagine the M1 Carbine is also very durable. I’d imagine they’re both about the same.

Maintenance: The SKS is definitely easy to maintain (except for that trigger pack, ho boy…).

Mag capacity, obviously huge in favor of the M1 Carbine. You can reload a new mag quicker, too, but the SKS works well with stripper clips. They’re probably a little slower but they’re also lighter than an equivalent mag.

Another interesting thing to look at might be to compare the subsequent variants. The M2 Carbine (select fire, perhaps one of the first true assault rifles, except for the tiny round) and some Chinese derivatives of the SKS like the Type 63 (SKS layout but with AK influence).

Fun thing to talk about when screwing around :slight_smile:

3

Effectiveness of cartidge is a wash. With FMJs they are both going to put a .30 hole. With commercial wxpanding ammo, both enjoy far better performance, but look to perform about the same.

You can carry more ammo with the M1/M2 carbine, and its easier to reload.

M1/M2 is lighter and shorter, especially with a paratrooper stock.

M1/M2 had a longer service life

That said its hard to take a country’s PDW and put it against another country’s battle rifle. The M1/M2 is still the best PDW ever built, IMO

4

Yeah a GI MBR vs a PDW for rear line troops. Both have their place and they aren’t designed for the same role. A closer comparison would be the garand vs the SKS and I think it’s clear who the winner would be there.

I like the M1 carbine and the SKS. Both good guns.

5

Also, important to note, that by the time the SKS really saw much combat the M1 was being replaced enmasse with the M2.

6

What a cool comparison. actually I think they compare very favorably to each other. the SKS is heavier and has a bit more power, where the M1 is lighter and easier to live with in general.

Both are a barrel of laughs to play with (wish I had more time with an M1 myself).

some of the shorter chinese SKS with a 20 round fixed mag are quite capable little rifles and very handy, but still suffer weight and speed of reload to the M1 carbine

Actually I find that the Manual of arms for the SKS is very efficient when run similar to the M1 Garand. treat strippers similar to clips and you have the idea. When you add feild gear into the equation a center mass mounted bandoleer or chest pouch setup and a dump pouch for strippers and loose rounds makes proactive reloads easy with the SKS. add a 20 round fixed and you can almost always fit at least 1 10 round stripper in on a reload.

I think that the M1 carbine and SKS do actually compare very favorably to each other in actual abilities in the feild what M1 loses in ballistics, it gains back in rate of fire. as an M2 It would be really awesome and fun. I’d love to shoot one full auto one day, that would actually be a lifetime bucket list item for me.

7

I thought the fixed 20rd magazines for the SKS were commercial only, and never fielded militarily, much less in actual battle. The short SKSs were commercial, what were they called, “Cowboy Companion” or something like that?

The M2 is super fun to shoot! Virtually no recoil at all, but it has some muzzle climb. My friend that owns one said the problem is it fires so fast that the 15rd mags are expended very quickly, and the 30rd mags have a high fail/success rate. That said when they work, they work, and if you have the ammo, they are fun to shoot.

8

I’d feel better about an SKS if I had to carry one or the other into battle. I owned one a few years back and found it very reliable and more accurate than the AK’s I had at the time. Reloads arent as quick, but the gun can essentially operate as a standalone system (no mags, stripper clips) if necessary and thats kind of nice

9

Speaking of the SKS, I picked this up today from a local seller. Beautiful, all matching Romanian with a mint bore. I added the Romanian SKS sling, which was one I’d bought at a gunshow around 10 years ago just because it “looked cool”. From what I’m told ,Romanian SKS’s are actually easier to find than this particular sling nowadays:

10

Rightly or wrongly, both the SKS and the M1 are generally referred to as “carbines”. Is this correct for the SKS or is “Main Battle Rifle” a more accurate description?

11

SKS uses an intermediate cartridge, its not a MBR

12

I think on a sliding scale between SMG and Rifle. The SKS is closer to the rifle end and the M1 Carbine is closer to the SMG end.

13

This is correct. Military SKSs all have 10rd magazines. The short ones are commercial (but could still be handy and useful, especially if you can ditch the bayonet). There were other Chinese weapons like I mentioned before, based on the SKS and using 20rd detachable magazines.

Like Nguyen and Heavy Metal said, it’s an intermediate power cartridge in the SKS, so it’s not a full battle rifle, but it really is like a Communist Garand in most respects, aside from power (though it’s 10rds of intermediate instead of 8rds of full power, so that somewhat makes up for it).

14

You forgot one huge area. Its far easier to reload a detachable magazine system of the M1 vs the stripper clip system of the SKS.

Not sure which one I would pick. The power of the SKS is nice compared to the pistol ballistics of the .30 carbine. But rapid reloads are also far better than using stripper clips. Hmm.
Pat

15

If I were using it in a built-up area, I would take the Carbine, If I were in an open area, the SKS.

The Carbine is a 150M weapon. The SKS I would rate a 250M weapon, a tad more than an AK.

16

So, we don’t consider the Type 63 (aka Type 68) an SKS?

Different bolt and detachable mags, but I’ve always considered it part of the SKS family.

17

at first glance, i’d agree… but doesn’t the type 63 utilize a rotating bolt?

18

Without being a historian or technical expert on either weapon, I think that if the SKS were fielded in WWII at the same time the M1 Carbine was, it would have been much more of a game changer for its respective military user.

That may sound like an obvious statement, but some of you may actually disagree.

19

From what I’ve read, Limited production/ developmental type SKS carbines saw combat testing in 1944 and 1945 and were used in small numbers by troops in the Battle of Berlin.

It was certainly a better received weapon then the SVT-38/40 series rifles. That design never did work out saisfactorily.

20

You can if you want :slight_smile: There is the original Russian SKS, there are modifications like the Albanian design (different stock) and Yugoslavian M59/66 (grenade launcher and gas cutoff). The Type 63 is farther than those (gas regulator, select fire, rotating bolt). Still very SKS-like though. Just a matter of where you draw the line :slight_smile: