I get angry when I read about people who dismiss the SKS as a junk rifle; They equate price with value.
The rifle was exceptionally designed. It was in every sense of the word, a winter warfare rifle. The stock was short because it was designed to be worn with a thick winter coat, the ammo was corrosive because non-corrosive offerings might not reliably ignite in -30 weather. As I will detail later, it was over-gassed to compensate for ice. In a climate such as Canada's I would put my faith readily in the venerable SKS.
If we were to manufacture a SKS today it would cost about $600 to manufacture with the materials, labor and machine time. The industry standard is a markup of about 20% from the manufacturer and another 20% if it comes through a distributor. That means if the SKS was manufactured today it would retail at around $800.
The next complaint is accuracy. You need to understand why the SKS is not very accurate. The big reason is the gas system. The gas port is much larger then what is actually needed to cycle the gun. Its ejections are forceful. This is to compensate for potential reliability issues from mud, dust, ice and other messy battlefield conditions. Just look to Canada's WW1 rifle, the Ross; it was a great, accurate rifle but when exposed to dirt and mud, it failed miserably putting lives at risk. The SKS will work when it needs to work. No questions asked.
But there is also the cultural difference in definition of accuracy. In the west accuracy is defined in groups. So-and-So rifle is a 1.5 MOA rifle, this-and-that is a 2 MOA rifle. Soviet accuracy is based on the realistic expectation that it will hit a man sized target at infantry ranges. For a rifle of war, what can you reasonably expect? It does exactly what it needs to do. The Soviets did not build it so Canadian and Americans could use it to "dick measure" with their arbitrary bench shot, MOA measured, groups. MOA is irrelevant in the real world.
The ballistics of the round are similar to a 30-30. Nobody expects the 30-30 to be a sniper rifle or to shoot distances over 200m so I find it disingenuous that people get angry that the SKS can not.
The SKS was replaced in all the militaries that adopted it...with a similar gun. The AK47 in Russia and the Type 81 in China. Both the AK and T81 were made with the same thoughts in mind as the SKS; the main difference between their old rifles and their new ones was detachable magazines, cheaper to build and ergonomics. Arguably all things that are available after-market for the SKS nowadays.
So the SKS is not a "cheap" rifle. It is a steal for what you actually get from that low price tag.
