[dodge]

which would you rather have in combat?? chinese,russian,romanian,yugo, etc. vs the U.S. M-1 carbine, M-1, not the M-2 that could fire in brusts(because the SKS cant fire bursts) I've shot my grandpa's M-1 carbine and I really like the pep sights! to be honest im not even sure which one I'd want myself.

 

[JohnD]

SKS, more range, power, Altough I do not own an m1 but according to people I have talked to the sks is more accurate with good ammo.

If I could choose I would have a uzi and a .308 AR10 or G3 with a scope.

 

[Jesse]

Matchup

Ok, I've shot both and I really have to say the SKS is more powerful and accurate. Both are quick to reload... although you can tactically reload the M1 carbine...forget that on an SKS. Weight/carry on weapon goes to M1 carbine... ammo/carry both are even. I love the M1 carbine and the SKS. For the money a really nice SKS is around $250.00-$300.00 less than a nice M1 carbine shooter.


Jesse

 

[militarianut]

I would like to have . . . .

My personal setup that I have that I would use is a Romanian Ak with a M1 Carbine as my "backup" and a S&W .40 as my sidearm. I don't own a SKS yet. . . but am looking at one. What do yugaslovian (sp) ones run for and which are the best/better. . . There is a yugaslovian (agian sp) at the yocal gun shop for about $150 or so. Deal or what comes with blade bayonet.
- myers

 

[Gyrene]

I have SKS's and an M1 Carbine. I have 3 different SKS's (Russian - unissued all matching numbers; Chinese - basically a parts gun but most of the parts are very well finished [early Chinese built with Russian guidance]; and Romanian - also unissued with all matching numbers).

I have an IBM M1 Carbine and it is a fairly accurate, though somewhat weak, carbine. A neighbor of mine, when I lived in Idaho, used to go bear hunting with his M1 Carbine, and always got his bear with one shot. When I shoot the M1 Carbine, I feel like you do when the garden hose gets a kink and the water kind of slowly cuts back to a trickle, you know, inadequate! (Kind of like talking the old lady into it and then not really feeling up to it, for a change). Audie Murphy was stuck on M1 Carbines as long as he had his Thompson nearby.

My choice from these two would very definitely be the SKS!

 

[Dennis]

From a pure technical point of view the SKS would be my choice
On the other hand I have been raised on
good ol merican whar movies.
The M1 Carbine has a place in my heart. as long as no bullets go there I will allways love the M1 carbine
Actually I love them both

 

[Calvin]

I would have to give the nod to the SKS. More effective range, reliable, and idiot-proof. I love my carbine, but the SKS is just too tough to beat. It's probably the most forgiving rifle ever made.

 

[AR-tim]

I would choose the SKS just for the simple fact it shoots the better of the two rounds. I have heard "war" stories about the
M-1 carbine not being able to shoot through heavier (like a big winter jacket) coats in battle. Then again, I don't know at what distances or any other condition of when and where these stories came from. I have never fired an M-1 carbine but I think I would use my SKS, hopefully I would have some ammo stored up for it.....

 

[Skippy9821]

Originally posted by AR-tim
I would choose the SKS just for the simple fact it shoots the better of the two rounds. I have heard "war" stories about the
M-1 carbine not being able to shoot through heavier (like a big winter jacket) coats in battle. Then again, I don't know at what distances or any other condition of when and where these stories came from. I have never fired an M-1 carbine but I think I would use my SKS, hopefully I would have some ammo stored up for it.....

I've heard the same stories. In Korea the Chinese had very thick winter coats and the US troops reported minimal penetration with the .30 carbine round. The weapon of choice in that arena was the Garand.

 

[Calvin]

Thinking about this a little more, I don't think it's fair to the carbine to compare it to the SKS. The carbine fires a modified pistol cartridge, and was originally designed for a defensive role, not offensive. The troops in WW2 could maximize the effectiveness of the carbine as they were in battles that were close-up. Also, there was a lot of urban warfare, and the carbine excelled because it was lightweight, held more rounds than the Garand, and was easily manipulated when clearing buildings. Then, you have Korea, where the distances involved were at the upper end of the carbines' effectiveness. Add to it the thick clothes the Communists wore, and no wonder no one liked the carbine.
In other words, I would not discount the carbine at ranges out to 200 yards. Past that, and I would have to still say the SKS. But, for house and building sweeps, I would take the carbine first. JMHO

 

[psycho dad]

i think calvin outlined it pretty accurate. my father used a m-1 carbine in WW II, in belgium and france and he swore by it. even in civilian life he owned one the last one he bought was in 1968 in response to the recently passed gun control legislation. he was a firm beleiver in marksmanship and shot placement.

 

[dodge]

m-1 carbine

My grandpa was issed a M-1 carbine on the ship he was on, he never had to use it though, today he has M1 carbine he bought at a gunshow for $500(ww2 dated) I love it myself, I'd rather have it then a SKS in combat,(and I have a chinese SKS at that) for these reasons: 1 the mag hold's 15 rounds, not 10 like the SKS, 2 you can reload it faster then the SKS(just pop out the old mag, stick in a new, and oull back the bolt, unlike the SKS you have to screw around with stripper clips, I trust a mag more) 3 the I(myself anyway) love the peep sights on the M1, I dont like the SKS V-notch sight's that much. but thats just me. what we need is a M1 chamberd for 7.62x39 then well have the best of both worlds

 

[LOBO]

My friend's dad fought in WW2 told me in the up close and personal combat he was in M1 Carbine worked very well.
Anyway the SKS does have a better round than the m1.
BUT the M1 is a better built firearm.
Different SKS parts wont interchange. A Yugo bolt wont fit a Norinco or a Romanian and those spare parts are getting a little harder to find.
While a M1 is a M1, IBM barrel will mount on a Smith Corona reciever with a winchester bolt. ANd you cant deny the quick magazine changes in the M1.

Anyways I have both and while the SKS is fun and cheap to shoot and will "reach out" better than the carbine it will not replace my m1 carbine. Chances are some GI carried my m1 into combat one day lond ago.

 

[LOCKnLOAD]

I own 2 sks, a early un-issued Chinese and a new Romanian. I converted the romainian to accept a Norinco bipod, changes to a black synthetic stock, ak muzzle break and a red dot scope. I like the way it shoots, and puts good groups at 100yds. In fact I am pretty satisfied with the 7.62x39 round in gereral. My ak's shoot 1.5moa at 100yds, that suprized even me.

I would carry my SKS into battle as well as my 98k sniper to take out long range threats.

I have never owned an M1 since NJ banned then otherwise I wopuld have one, but the round is good for what it was designed for, whereas the SKS was better than the Tokerov that was in service in the early 40's.

As far as sights is concerned, the M! has better sights, but my red dot scope does my SKS just fine. I was going to fabricate a rear round peep for the tanget sight, but I don't have the time right now. I saw one in a mag recently that had the rear peep, thats what gave me the idea.

 

[Zardoz]

I'd have to go with an M1. They will work with USGI 30-rd magazines, as long as you put an M2 magazine catch in it. The thing weighs next to nothing (which is a big plus-anybody who has carried a rifle/carbine for a living can tell ya that), it's a lot shorter than an SKS (also a big plus). I think that a lot of the stories I've heard/read about it's (M1) lack of power is probably because the shooter THOUGHT he was hitting the target, but wasn't. You'd be surprised at how difficult it is to hit a moving target-even with a belt-fed MG, it ain't the easiest thing in the world to do.

 

[Robert C]

for urban stuff.. i'd have to take my M1 Carbien over my SKS... M1 Carbine is lighter, and less recoil for faster follow up shots.. as for penetration.. when was the last time anyone went up against Chi-com troops....??????

 

[Dennis]

i have gotten the Mojo rear sight installed on my SKS and it works just fine. If you like the peep rear sight on the M1carbine get a MOJO sight and install it on your SKS. It is well made and a perfect fit. they have a web site MOJO .com I think. Good stuff for SKS,Mosin Nagants Mauser's and Kalashnikov rifles.

 

[Rave]

I must say,this is an interesting thread,comparing the M-1 Carbine to the SKS.
I have owned and shot both a bit and feel that the SKS will outperform the M-1 anytime.
The m-1 is small and light and handy.It is also finiky and fragile in comparison to the SKS.
Since both are available I would not even consider it a contest.
The SKS is very reliable,very durable,very simple,and accurite as the m-1 for practicle shooting.A good .22 will be more accurite than either one for that matter,but the SKS WILL get the job done,in that I feel very confident.
I like them both,but when a serious weapon is needed the SKS is the one.

 

[Skippy9821]

Originally posted by Robert C
as for penetration.. when was the last time anyone went up against Chi-com troops....??????

It seems to me that Afghan winters are pretty cold and those little bastards are probably dressed in big, thick, warm clothing. Just a thought!

 

[Skippy9821]

Sorry, double post!