Hey guys, before I get started try to forgive any ignorance I may have regarding California law, I attempted to read as much as I could but my eyes have officially glazed over . Just to get right too it I have been interested in making new model SKS rifles for years, and with the surplus supply drying up and the prices going north I figure the time is almost here to get serious about the business. With that said let me make my pitch to you guys and you tell me if its a rifle you'd be interested in because y'all out there in California are my target market.

The idea is to produce semi-faithful reproductions of the trusty old Simonov with some minor upgrades, most notably would be the shorter 16" barrel, polymer stock, trigger improvements and an optional sighting system with integrated scout style pic rail and flip up sights. Also for the classic types the rifles would be able to accept current SKS stocks, sights, trigger parts and gas system parts so it would be possible to give it an original feel if you desired it. Initial models would be available in 5.56 and 7.62x39 models with the possibility of a 7.62 51 model later on. The guns would be fixed 10rd mags, but in the future I would offer mag adaptors for the 5.56 versions which would also work on milsurps.

Right now I am in the middle of finishing up drafting of the original designs and upgraded parts designs. If you'd be interested I'd just like to know also if you have any input i'd be happy to hear it. Otherwise this is a dream of mine and a pure labor of love and hope to bring a solid rifle option into ban states.

Thanks in advance everyone.

Just one man's opinion:

The allure of the SKS was as a sub-$100 service rifle that fired a (what was then) cheap, mid-range cartridge.

Now, 7.62 X 39 ammo isn't as cheap.  For sure, the SKS itself is no longer a cheap, twenty-of-them-in-a-trashcan rifle found in every gun shop.

In California, the money you've listed in your poll buys me an AR15, a rifle that (again, in my opinion) is an order of magnitude better, in every way.

Additionally, you've removed the allure of 'history' that is often attributed to these rifles by collectors (the ones who are still paying $500 or more for them).

So, no--I don't see a market for them, at anything near the prices you have listed.

I was really hoping to get the opinion of someone who feels the way you do. I pled my ignorance to California law when I posted but I wanted to see just how capable a California legal AR is and if it isn't comparable to the SKS I wanted to offer. Now you made a great point that the AR is a more refined gun and there is no denying that but I felt strongly that the stripper clips that can feed an SKS would make it a good option in CA. With a scout style rail for an optic and sights that were made to cowitness with a red dot I figured I could at least close the gap between the AR and the SKS.

I don't want to give too much away about potential designs for the scout rail, but do you believe that given the viable option for mounting a red dot and the retained ability to use stripper clips would change your mind?

With the new laws, you simply won't be able to buy a practical AR-15, while something like this could still be practical. Pretty much the only AR options are those funky stocks that go under and up behind the buffer tube or the redesigned one that has more of a FAL-style recoil system, a relocated trigger, and a traditional style buttstock.

Regarding a 7.62 NATO version, it'd be good and preferable to have 10 round chargers that actually work. It would also have to be cheaper than doing a FAL build, as you can do a fixed-mag FAL with a charger guide for $700-800 if you shop around for parts and do the build yourself. They both use the same bolt-locking mechanism.

The weapon of the enemy = no go

10 rounds of 7.62X39 or 8 rounds of 30-06 = M1 Garand wins (both mags replenished from above)

True SHTF = AR-15 all the way (bans be damned).  

Have too many AR's already.

Already have more rifles than can be used, so I'm not in the market to buy another.


I can think of other reasons, too.  These are just off the top of my head and apply only to me..

5.56 sks would interest me or a 308.

I don't think it would be a good idea, with how you describe it.

IM inbound.

I would prefer a rifle length, but carbine is OK . For a nicely built made in the USA rifle, I'd be interested.

I'm interested.

No. Too much aftermarket support for the AR15.  While a CA modified AR15 just flat out sucks, the truth is that it can be restored to its intended configuration as soon as I move to a free state.  The SKS will still be an SKS.  It lacks the same aftermarket support, and when zombies come, I'm more comfortable with swapping box mags than stripper clips. We own three SKSs in my house, and while we love them, they're loved as (what used to be) a fun, cheap, tough little shooter...but I built my wife an AR last year, and she prefers it over the SKS--which was formerly her favorite weapon.

I like my modularity, optics position and security, and box magazine.  If I had to go back to a stripper-fed rifle, I suppose I'd suck it up and buy a Garand, but I'd hate it.  Love the history, hate the weight.

I get this--I really do. My suspicions are that given the popularity of the AR and its price range, ARs will be viable for some time in CA.  The workarounds that are being discussed will hopefully ensure that rifles that could be returned to original configurations when sold in another state will still be available.

I don't know that there will be much call for an updated SKS in CA  given your price, and I definitely don't see it outside of the state.  Will CA shooters buy expensive rifles that have no resale value outside the State's borders?  I would think that fact would kill a lot of sales: Is there much call for bullet-button or otherwise modded ARs out of this state?  

Additionally, I would fear that the product would be one shooting away from banishment, as any sort of rapid reloading here is considered evil...and the chance to recoup the outlay for development nixed.  

I suspect that--if the AR product is sufficiently banned to where no possibility exists of buying or building some sort of CA legal version, shooters won't spend AR money on lesser solutions (given the prevalence of the platform outside the state).  Instead, we'll see many more shotguns and pistols sold...at least, those that are legally available for purchase.  I'm thinking semi-auto shotguns are next.

I'm interested.  Let me know if you'll be debuting at Shot Show or NRA.