PDA

View Full Version : Kel-Tec Su-16 = .223 version of SKS?


Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 12:26 PM
Just pondering,

As a former Kel-Tec Su16CA owner, I'm beginning to see this rifle in the same 'tier' as the SKS rifle.

Way I see it, Su16's are definitely not in the same class as AR's.
Same with how an SKS can't exactly hold a candle to an AK (in terms of cost, value of the gun, function, purpose, etc).
Assuming all these firearms are of decent or better make (AK's, SKS, AR),
AK's and AR's are in one tier, and the SKS and SU-16 are both in another.

An SKS costs like $200-350 max.

A SU-16 costs around $350, give or take.


Is the SU-16 to the AR as the SKS is to the AK?

I think it is.

Merc1138
02-25-2011, 12:45 PM
Just pondering,

As a former Kel-Tec Su16CA owner, I'm beginning to see this rifle in the same 'tier' as the SKS rifle.

Way I see it, Su16's are definitely not in the same class as AR's.
Same with how an SKS can't exactly hold a candle to an AK (in terms of cost, value of the gun, function, purpose, etc).
Assuming all these firearms are of decent or better make (AK's, SKS, AR),
AK's and AR's are in one tier, and the SKS and SU-16 are both in another.

An SKS costs like $200-350 max.

A SU-16 costs around $350, give or take.


Is the SU-16 to the AR as the SKS is to the AK?

I think it is.

SKS runs $399 at big 5 sporting goods, and that's only when it's on sale. Your pricing seems a little out of date. There are also some AKs being sold now that aren't even close to what a quality AK should be(century wasr, io casar). You should really be a little more specific(there are crappy ARs these days now as well).

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 12:52 PM
SKS runs $399 at big 5 sporting goods, and that's only when it's on sale. Your pricing seems a little out of date. There are also some AKs being sold now that aren't even close to what a quality AK should be(century wasr, io casar). You should really be a little more specific(there are crappy ARs these days now as well).

The thing is, most firearms from Big 5 are nowhere close to the actual MSRP, they are often way above, not even counting sales tax.

My references for the prices of SKS and SU-16 rifles are from online sources which have them in stock and sell them, such as gunbroker and even the marketplace here in CGN.

There are plenty-o-SKS's for sale on gb, which can be had for about $200-350 or LESS (even counting shipping), and a fair share of SU-16's as well, Big 5 is not a very valid meter stick to measure the selling price of firearms.

Also, yes, I am very aware of the crappy AK's such as IO Casar and WASR's, thats why I said all decent manufacture or better, such as VEPR, Arsenal, or an AK smith that knows what he's doing, etc. for AK's and such.

Squidward
02-25-2011, 12:55 PM
The SKS and SU-16 are to Ca as the AR and the AK are to free America.

mif_slim
02-25-2011, 1:03 PM
Their not the same in any class. Ak is a Ak, AR is a AR etc etc. When they made them they didn't think of making it like one another. Althoughaybe similar, not the same.

With that said, a Su the product when a AR, AK and a polymer gun have a three-some.

Sturnovik
02-25-2011, 1:06 PM
The thing is, most firearms from Big 5 are nowhere close to the actual MSRP, they are often way above, not even counting sales tax.

My references for the prices of SKS and SU-16 rifles are from online sources which have them in stock and sell them, such as gunbroker and even the marketplace here in CGN.

There are plenty-o-SKS's for sale on gb, which can be had for about $200-350 or LESS (even counting shipping), and a fair share of SU-16's as well, Big 5 is not a very valid meter stick to measure the selling price of firearms.

Also, yes, I am very aware of the crappy AK's such as IO Casar and WASR's, thats why I said all decent manufacture or better, such as VEPR, Arsenal, or an AK smith that knows what he's doing, etc. for AK's and such.


Just my recommendation. I've put almost 1k rounds through my keltec Su16ca. I really havent been hugely pleased with its performance or design frankly. For the money its decent but honestly I really recommend you go for a different rifle. The SKS, I've shot but dont know to much about them. Keltec's are neat and have some neat features but honestly mines had way to many jams and terrible (I mean damn terrible) Sights that come stock for the money. If you use an optic there decent but eh I woudlnt bother putting that much money into one.

I've seen SKS's around quite a bit, there good buys from what I hear.

Merc1138
02-25-2011, 1:24 PM
The thing is, most firearms from Big 5 are nowhere close to the actual MSRP, they are often way above, not even counting sales tax.

My references for the prices of SKS and SU-16 rifles are from online sources which have them in stock and sell them, such as gunbroker and even the marketplace here in CGN.

There are plenty-o-SKS's for sale on gb, which can be had for about $200-350 or LESS (even counting shipping), and a fair share of SU-16's as well, Big 5 is not a very valid meter stick to measure the selling price of firearms.

Also, yes, I am very aware of the crappy AK's such as IO Casar and WASR's, thats why I said all decent manufacture or better, such as VEPR, Arsenal, or an AK smith that knows what he's doing, etc. for AK's and such.

You also need to start tacking on shipping and transfer fees when you're buying online. $50 transfer fee from your FFL for something on gunbroker brings a $350 gun right up to $400(not including shipping). A lot of people ignore this when trying to find deals and then get surprised when they're paying just as much as if they had bought the thing locally. Sometimes you can find great deals online(a guy in the shotgun forum recently saved around $500), sometimes not so much(and you're still having to stare at pictures that may not be so great when trying to determine the condition of something, especially if that item is used)

You're right about big-5 not being the best measuring tool, but it's still a pretty big retailer and can't really just be "ignored" for the sake of convenience.

mif_slim, he wasn't comparing the AR to the AK at all.

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 1:54 PM
The SKS and SU-16 are to Ca as the AR and the AK are to free America.

Interesting observation. I see where you are coming from with that idea.

The SKS and SU-16 in their "stock" configurations are totally CA legal (as long as it's not a 'listed' SKS and it's not the folding stock SU-16).

I fell for a SU-16 thinking it was the best option I could get to use old pre-ban AR mags since I couldn't get an AR-15 here in the PRK.

I was dead wrong (thank god).

I promptly sold my SU-16Ca.

Like Sturnovik said, they're OK for the money as long as you didn't spend over $400 to get one, and it fills a sort of 'niche' role as a lightweight camper/truck gun/patrol/backup rifle, but it lacks the 'main battle rifle' feel, function, and accountability that an AR-15, Ak-47, FAL, Sig550, etc has.

If I were to rely on only one rifle as a SHTF weapon if I get stranded on Mars fighting aliens, it wouldn't be the SU-16 is what I'm saying. But I'm quite sure the SU-16 has it's purposes where it shines, esp. since most models are capable of folding into a briefcase without dis-assembly.

Sturnovik
02-25-2011, 1:58 PM
Like Sturnovik said, they're OK for the money as long as you didn't spend over $400 to get one, and it fills a sort of 'niche' role as a lightweight camper/truck gun/patrol/backup rifle, but it lacks the 'main battle rifle' feel, function, and accountability that an AR-15, Ak-47, FAL, Sig550, etc has.

If I were to rely on only one rifle as a SHTF weapon if I get stranded on Mars fighting aliens, it wouldn't be the SU-16 is what I'm saying. But I'm quite sure the SU-16 has it's purposes where it shines, esp. since most models are capable of folding into a briefcase without dis-assembly.[/QUOTE]

Haha, yup my first semi-automatic rifle and I really regretted it. For a hiking rifle its perfectly fine. And honestly if given the proper attention and cleaning its just fine for its price range, and its still with me but the damn compact forend drove me crazy. Took off that thing and tried to put on the old bipod one and now I have a rifle with no shield haha.

I learned my lesson, my dad kept saying go for the mini 14 or AR series. For what they are though, most will be content with them.

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 2:10 PM
You also need to start tacking on shipping and transfer fees when you're buying online. $50 transfer fee from your FFL for something on gunbroker brings a $350 gun right up to $400(not including shipping).

Wait, so if you buy a firearm that a local dealer already has in stock, then you don't pay the $50 transfer fee, only the $25 DROS? That's great, except that you end up paying sales tax, which comes close to 10% the cost of what you're buying ends up going directly to the State to ironically fund gun rights oppression even further.


A lot of people ignore this when trying to find deals and then get surprised when they're paying just as much as if they had bought the thing locally. Sometimes you can find great deals online(a guy in the shotgun forum recently saved around $500), sometimes not so much(and you're still having to stare at pictures that may not be so great when trying to determine the condition of something, especially if that item is used)

Totally agree with you there, when buying online, you have to choose carefully and you don't have the option to inspect what you buy in person (although some GB dealers allow returns within a few days of personal inspection). Also, there is always the risk of falling for a lemon online, so once again, gotta choose carefully, look at seller's history and feedback rating, and weigh your options.
Gunbroker has, for the most part, been the source of the majority of my best firearms, and has saved me money compared to buying locally, and gotten me things unavailable locally.

YMMV.

Merc1138
02-25-2011, 2:19 PM
Wait, so if you buy a firearm that a local dealer already has in stock, then you don't pay the $50 transfer fee, only the $25 DROS? That's great, except that you end up paying sales tax, which comes close to 10% the cost of what you're buying ends up going directly to the State to ironically fund gun rights oppression even further.


You have to pay the sales tax when buying a firearm out of state when you get it from your local FFL now also.

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 2:30 PM
You have to pay the sales tax when buying a firearm out of state when you get it from your local FFL now also.

Since when? Did another farking anti-gun law just pass recently? There was no sales tax when I took possession of out-of-state transfers this January.

Merc1138
02-25-2011, 2:32 PM
Since when? Did another farking anti-gun law just pass recently? There was no sales tax when I took possession of out-of-state transfers this January.

According to the various FFLs on this forum they've been collecting sales tax for a while now. It might not apply to a PPT. It wouldn't be an anti-gun law either, rather a "Wait a minute, we already know people keep buying crap online from out of state and don't report it on their tax returns like they should, at least we can nail 'em for this" law.

ZombieTactics
02-25-2011, 2:53 PM
My own perspective, just a data point:

My SU16CA has been rock solid. I just blazed through a 2-day rifle course and shot over 1500 rounds rolling around in the dirt and running it hard ... not a hitch. I didn't even clean it.


Several carefully maintained rifles failed. A Sig556 was mucked up several times, an Arsenal AK74 had big problems with double-feeds. An AR15 went down HARD and required disassembly. Another guy just went to his "backup AR" for reasons unknown.

I have no means to determine if I "just got a good one", but I'm not parting with it anytime soon.

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 3:01 PM
My own perspective, just a data point:

My SU16CA has been rock solid. I just blazed through a 2-day rifle course and shot over 1500 rounds rolling around in the dirt and running it hard ... not a hitch. I didn't even clean it.


Several carefully maintained rifles failed. A Sig556 was mucked up several times, an Arsenal AK74 had big problems with double-feeds. An AR15 went down HARD and required disassembly. Another guy just went to his "backup AR" for reasons unknown.

I have no means to determine if I "just got a good one", but I'm not parting with it anytime soon.

I've subscribed to your channel on YT, you have a good speaking voice and make excellent reviews and commentary on your videos.
I can see the SU-16 being a fairly reliable weapon. I don't want to give the other "battle rifles" all the credit simply because of their hyped up brand names. Function is the most important. If it works, then use it.

The problems that people may have with their weapons have to be analyzed carefully to determine what caused the faults.
Was it the ammo?
Was it the magazines?
Was it the weapon?
Was it operator error?
Any combination of the above?

So no simple matter blaming a Sig 556 for not working when it could have been ammo, mags, etc.

But great perspective on your experience!

Webologist
02-25-2011, 3:31 PM
I've subscribed to your channel on YT, you have a good speaking voice and make excellent reviews and commentary on your videos.
I can see the SU-16 being a fairly reliable weapon. I don't want to give the other "battle rifles" all the credit simply because of their hyped up brand names. Function is the most important. If it works, then use it.

The problems that people may have with their weapons have to be analyzed carefully to determine what caused the faults.
Was it the ammo?
Was it the magazines?
Was it the weapon?
Was it operator error?
Any combination of the above?

So no simple matter blaming a Sig 556 for not working when it could have been ammo, mags, etc.

But great perspective on your experience!

Same experience. My SU16-CA is a crowd favorite and runs through about 400 rounds each of the 10 times it's been to the range. Totally reliable, so far. I did change a few features I didn't care for. I've added the compact forestock which improves the feel immensely and allows you to use a real bi-pod that doesn't fold when you use it. I also put a muzzle brake, optics (I agree about the standard sight, but I don't run standard irons on any of my rifles), thicker butt pad, sling, etc. The compact plastic mags are difficult to seat and don't drop free on their own. They're nice for carrying extra ammo in the shoulder stock, but I use AR-15 mags that are way more pleasurable to handle, drop free when you push the mag release and seat easily.

It's been awesome and I certainly haven't rethought my purchase in the least. I've spent way more on ammo than on the gun.

My CASAR on the other hand, started strong for two range visits and is in the shop now after two miserable range days.

Cali-Shooter
02-25-2011, 3:38 PM
When I had my SU-16Ca, I attached a YHM 5.56 muzzle brake at the end of it.
The recoil was incredibly soft, and the gun was accurate. The main thing that I hated about it was it's somewhat tacky stock rear sight. I wished there were a better quality rear sight that I could replace the stock one with.

ulv
02-25-2011, 3:44 PM
I did not buy the su16 as a replacement for an ar15. It's like comparing a jet to a helicopter, they both have their different functions. I'm kinda beating a dead horse though =).

ulv
02-25-2011, 3:45 PM
When I had my SU-16Ca, I attached a YHM 5.56 muzzle brake at the end of it.
The recoil was incredibly soft, and the gun was accurate. The main thing that I hated about it was it's somewhat tacky stock rear sight. I wished there were a better quality rear sight that I could replace the stock one with.

http://www.keltecweapons.com/product/buckhorn-sight-kit/

ZombieTactics
02-25-2011, 6:36 PM
... The problems that people may have with their weapons have to be analyzed carefully to determine what caused the faults.
Was it the ammo?
Was it the magazines?
Was it the weapon?
Was it operator error?
Any combination of the above?

So no simple matter blaming a Sig 556 for not working when it could have been ammo, mags, etc.
...

Absolutely. I know that I have personally witnessed guys bobbling a mag change or failing to operate the charging handle with authority ... and then blame the gun. My earlier comments should not be confused with a genuine review or opinion about the guns in question, just an observation about what happened at the time.

Lots of factors come into play, and that's why I don't claim my experience is anything other than a limited set of observations. I feel similarly whenever I see someone complain about some well-known product. There is often a lot unsaid (or assumed) which really needs to be known before jumping to conclusions based on isolated incidents.

Sturnovik
02-25-2011, 6:48 PM
When I had my SU-16Ca, I attached a YHM 5.56 muzzle brake at the end of it.
The recoil was incredibly soft, and the gun was accurate. The main thing that I hated about it was it's somewhat tacky stock rear sight. I wished there were a better quality rear sight that I could replace the stock one with.

I totally agree. I couldn't believe they let a rear sight leave the factory that leaves a shadow as you aim. Its just a crappy sight. Optics can cure that, but frankly I'm old fashioned, iron sights make or break a rifle.

bombadillo
02-25-2011, 6:55 PM
I am just curious on your relating SKS's to AK's and how the SKS is not up to par in comparison. What is your theory behind this statement?

railroader
02-25-2011, 8:19 PM
I am just curious on your relating SKS's to AK's and how the SKS is not up to par in comparison. What is your theory behind this statement?

I kinda got to agree. I've owned 5 sks rifles and all have been super reliable and at least as accurate as an AK. Sks rifles aren't very easy to scope but they do fine with open sights in comparison with AKs.

Cokebottle
02-25-2011, 8:30 PM
are also some AKs being sold now that aren't even close to what a quality AK should be(century wasr, io casar). You should really be a little more specific(there are crappy ARs these days now as well).
+10,000!

Right now, with the trash that's available, there are only two pathways that I would consider for an AK.

1 - Home build. Who knows if it'll be better than a CenturyIoincLancaster, but if it's not, I know which shaved monkey to blame.

2 - Saiga conversion. $400 plus another $100-$200 for the conversion (depending on how complete you want the conversion), and any shaved monkey can do the conversion.
The Saiga is a mixed bag of win/fail. Win? It is an actual AK47, made in the Izmash factory that's been making AK47s ever since... well... 1947 ;)
Fail? The current Saiga does not have a threaded barrel or bayo lug, and the FSB is not set up to accept the pin to hold the slant brake.
The gas block is also a slightly different design than the original AK, so it will never look quite right, even if you replace the gas tube and handguards with the correct parts.

So, from a reliability/functionality standpoint, the Saiga conversion wins. From a "It's a real AK" standpoint, that is unobtainable. Get one that looks like a real AK, and there's no telling the build quality of the receiver, or you're stuck with single-stack mags, etc....

1911su16b870
02-25-2011, 9:40 PM
My own perspective, just a data point:

My SU16CA has been rock solid. I just blazed through a 2-day rifle course and shot over 1500 rounds rolling around in the dirt and running it hard ... not a hitch. I didn't even clean it.


...I have no means to determine if I "just got a good one", but I'm not parting with it anytime soon.

+1 My experience is exactly the same when I took a carbine course back in 2005 with my SU16B!

UFO hunter
02-25-2011, 11:41 PM
SKS is an older design than AK, it was never meant to be a full auto assault rifle, it's a traditional rifle like a M1 garand... its made of all forged parts not cheap stampings like AK... SKS is *more* accurate than an AK, not less!

rimfire78
02-25-2011, 11:51 PM
I agree

Cali-Shooter
02-26-2011, 2:38 AM
I am just curious on your relating SKS's to AK's and how the SKS is not up to par in comparison. What is your theory behind this statement?

I kinda got to agree. I've owned 5 sks rifles and all have been super reliable and at least as accurate as an AK. Sks rifles aren't very easy to scope but they do fine with open sights in comparison with AKs.

Ok, I don't necessarily mean that SKS rifles are not up to par because there are many ways to debate that they are or are not (disregard what I posted earlier about that) to the AK-47 (assuming a decent SKS mfg'd and a decent AK build), I mean that those two rifles are in my opinion, two different classes of rifles.

Like UFO hunter mentioned, the SKS is more like an Russian amalgam of semi-auto curio/relic rifles like the M1 garand and M1 carbine (although the SKS is a post-WWII design, though the SKS and M1 garands and carbines faced each other in the Korean War).

Part of the reason I opt to consider the AK and SKS in different categories is partly due to their traditional roles (AK's almost always were FA, SKS almost always semi), innovations and aftermarket support (AK aftermarket items/accessory options > than SKS aftermarket items/accessory options), weapon cost and popularity (AK's are usually more expensive than SKS rifles, and most gunman around the world wield AK's instead of SKS rifles).

If opting for a fixed 10 rd mag build ONLY (if I didn't have a few pre-ban ak mags to go featureless), I'd go with the SKS over a neutered AK. To me, it is almost pointless to take not be to take advantage of the AK's "standard" capacity mags to go the 10 rd route, so might as well go SKS, since the rifle is cheaper in most cases, hella reliable, and more accurate with irons.

But since I go featureless, I prefer to be able to use the standard capacity magazines, so I prefer the AK-47 over a fixed 10 round SKS. Reloading with detachable magazines is more tactically sound and easier than thru stripper clips (although practice with stripper clips can make you reload expertly). Just my 2 cents.

Plus, there is nothing more badass than telling people you have an AK-47 and there's nothing illegal about it. People still go :eek: over it :43::D

Cali-Shooter
02-26-2011, 2:43 AM
I did not buy the su16 as a replacement for an ar15. It's like comparing a jet to a helicopter, they both have their different functions. I'm kinda beating a dead horse though =).

Big AMEN to that. I made a mistake in assuming that a Kel-Tec Su-16 could take the place of an AR, mostly because the SU is capable of taking AR mags. The SU-16 and AR are like oranges and apples, or like copters and jet fighters, they BOTH have niche functions, not meant to directly compete against each other.

http://www.keltecweapons.com/product/buckhorn-sight-kit/

Man, I kinda regret selling my SU now. Why the heck can't they make that sight factory stock with SU-16's?! Might pick up another SU down the line.

drclark
02-26-2011, 10:24 AM
I disagree with the basic premise of the OP. The only reason the SKS are/were cheap is that the commies made millions of them in the past and they are now availabe and importable as surplus.
The AK is actually a cheaper rifle w.r.t to materials and machining than the SKS. If it weren't for various import bans on chinese guns NFA act and the "sporting purpose" clause, I bet AK's could be sub-$200 range (I was able to build my Romy on an NDS receiver for less than $250 excluding tools). Likewise, a new mfgr US made sks would be much more expensive than an su16. The sks is actually a quality made gun that is more akin to the M1 carbine but with a fixed mag and better round.

A used mini14 (or mini30) is a better comparison to the sks in my opinion than an su16. The su16 was pretty much designed to fill the niche role of being capable of accepting an AR mag and be legal for sale in states that had an AW ban in place. Until the OLLs there really weren't any other realistic options for AR mag comptible semi-auto rifles that were not AWs. The polymer construction and folding feature allows it to be marketed as a lightweight camping/survival rifle at a price point where it can still sell in free states as well.

If it weren't for all the AW laws and legal regulations surrounding the importation and manufacture of firearms one has to wonder what the landscape would look like today. I bet a chinese AR-15 clone could be had for less than $400 and there would be vitually no US firearms mfgrs left today.

Prince50
02-26-2011, 10:37 AM
CS,

I know you clarified your SKS remarks, but I need to point out a few mistakes, not major ones, but my love of the SKS makes me do it! LOL

The SKS is not a Post WWII design it is actually a WWII design and was feilded by Russian Troops on the Belorussian Front in the final days of WWII with wonderful combat reviews.

The SKS is really a far more expensive to produce design than the AK-47, which was designed in the days following WWII.

The main deficit to the SKS is the fixed magazine, which is great for us in California, but was not part of the first SKS design. Simonov designed the SKS with a detachable magazine, but was ordered to replace it with a fixed style magazine along the lines of the Mosin rifles.

If Simonov had been allowed to produce the SKS as he wanted, it would have been infinitely more popular. It is however still in front line use in several third world countries, which gives it a combat service life longer than the AK-47 and the AR-15/M-16 platform rifles.

Admittedly, it was obsolete about a year after being released, and is dwarfed in number by AK-47 untis worldwide.

It has however, served it's purpose and fought in theaters around the globe. To compare it with the SU-16 is not a fair comparison. The SU-16 is a rifle designed to be constructed inexpensively, the SKS was deigned without regard to cost of manufacture, and is very labor intensive to produce.

The Chinese started to reduce the cost of manufacture, when the rifle became a commercial endevor. The intial design is a top quality, well made, robust, and fairly easy to use system.

Fun to collect too!

Darin

Grumpyoldretiredcop
02-26-2011, 12:38 PM
Is the SU-16 the .223 version of the SKS? No. The SU-16 is a "sport utility" rifle and the SKS is a battle rifle. Having both, I agree with previous posters who said that comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

They are similar in one way, though... they're both fun to shoot. :D

5.56Geo
02-26-2011, 5:59 PM
Is the SU-16 the .223 version of the SKS? No. The SU-16 is a "sport utility" rifle and the SKS is a battle rifle. Having both, I agree with previous posters who said that comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges.

They are similar in one way, though... they're both fun to shoot. :D

I agree, On another note I have seen a few broken/cracked frame SU-16's but never seen a broken/ cracked SKS! I could use my SKS as a crowbar that how sturdy they are built. If Mr. Simonov would have designed the SKS with a detachable mag maybe things would have been a little different. Here is a picture of my Russian 54' Izzy SKS. Oh I like SKS's better than AK's:D.
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/turbogeo/SKS004.jpg