Which would you pick Accuracy or Reliability for your weapon?

As you say, the simplicity and inherint reliability of a breech loader like you describe is wonderful (especially those with exposed hammers), but I think you may be selling lever-actions short. Just look into the history of the legendary Winchester model 94 and other equally or better made lever-actions, you may change your mind.

I actually like lever actions. I own a Marlin .35 Remington caliber Lever action. It is a very good rifle and within the range limits of this cartridge fairly accurate. It is not in the league of my 1903 springfield but it was not designed to be so. The .35 REmington Caliber is a very powerful medium range cartridge and well suited to hunting. This rifle I got from a guy at work who needed the moneys. $100 for that price I couldn't turn it down.
I am aware that the early models were basically pistol cartridges and it took some time for the rifles to be beefed up to handle the heaver cartridges of today. No doubt that they have overcome the early problems. I do not however consider them in the field with proven combat weapons. They are wonderful hunting tools..no doubt. I have actually looked at the Marlin 38/357 caliber series and like them very much though many other companys make them in lever actions the same caliber. Cowboy action shooting has moved the variety of these rifles along tremendously. I opted for simplicity and will eventually get one of the single shots.

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

Just a quick word of warning to those of you who have posted about "Bubba'izing" your SKS'.

Most (but not all) SKS rifles have been imported under the Curio & Relic regulations. This allows the guns to be imported for sale with features that would otherwise make them illegal (night sights, bayonet lug, grenade launcher, threaded barrel). If you make ANY changes to a C&R SKS, and most recently this means a Yugoslavian SKS, then you remove the gun from C&R status and render it assessable under the BATF 922 (r) regulations.

Ok how about an example to illustrate

Hmmm nice looking 59/66A1 (Yugo SKS with night sights) - but I want one of dem dere 30 round "clips".

Screw, screw, grind, grind, CLICK ! There, she's a finished.
(Knock at door) May we please speak to a Mr. Dale Earnhardt Junior please.
That's me.
Sir, having modified your Curio & Relic SKS by the addition of an aftermarket 30 round magazine, you render it liable to assessment under 922(r) and therefore your bayonet, grenade launcher, and night sights are all now illegal. As this constitutes a felony punishable by a 10 year jail term, we'd be very grateful if you would accompany us to the local pokey for processing.

DON'T MESS WITH SKS RIFLES UNLESS YOU KNOW, AND I MEAN REALLY KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE GETTING YOURSELF INTO.

Leave them as stock and enjoy them in the form that God intended.

If you doubt me, I suggest you do a search on "Survivor's SKS gun boards" and do some reading.

[edit on 12-10-2005 by Winchester Ranger T]

Originally posted by Nathabeanz
When you are talking about the differences between reliability and accuracy you are almost talking about the same thing. Your gun isn't reliable if you can't hit anything no matter if it never breaks down or not. On the other face of things, if you could hit everything you shoot at, when your weapon feels like working, you still don't have a reliable weapon. A reliable weapon in my definition is going to be rust proof, warp proof, jam proof, accurate, light weight, and inhibate single shot bursts and 3 round bursts, now that is reliability. But for the sake of the thread i'm going to have to vote for accuracy. Its doesn't matter what your shooting at if you can't hit it anyway.

Thank you.....................

I was going to say the same thing. Someone can have a HK PSG1 Sniper Rifle and still not hit the broad side of a barn if they do not know how to use it properly, site it in and deffinitely know how to shoot.

It all depends on what you want your weapon for.

In combat - Iraq for example, you require a wpn that is reliable and one that functions correctly in desert conditions. (This was not the case with our L85A1 in GWI)

No matter how accurate your wpn is, if it cannot function with a few grains of sand it it, it aint no good.

All wpns leave the factory bench tested - by that I mean it is clamped to a firing platform and usually has about 100 rounds fired to 'prove' the zero and accuracy. This, I suspect, is done at close range out to perhaps 300-500 metres. If the wpn fails to hit the MPI, then it's barrel is usually binned.

Sniper wpns are tested in much the same way, but the tests are much more rigorous.

Having taught people to fire military firearms of all types, I can tell you that most people can, with a little coaching, be turned from a poor shot into a very good shot.

Even people who were 'gunshy', can become 'expert' or 'marksman'. All it takes is a little patience (from the instructor/coach), the will to succeed (from the person being taught) and a large quantity of ammo.

I have found that if you start with .22 and steadily work up to 7.62mm, then the trainee will see that he or she has improved no end.

I think accuracy is coupled with the ability to shoot correctly (marksmanship principles) and confidence in both your weapon and it's reliability.

Nothing however, can beat practicle experience. Whether it comes on a range or the battlefield.

Believe it or not, I have discovered that cadets who play shoot 'em ups, on their computers or X-Boxes, turn out to be better shots than those who pick up a weapon for the first time.

Strange, is it not?

So to answere your question, I'll choose reliability over accuracy any day.

If it doesn't go BANG who cares how accurate it is.

I stand with a comment made by the leader of the SAS patrol Bravo Two Zero (Andy McNab I think).

Quote - "All that a soldier asks of his weapon is that it goes bang every time you pull the trigger".