TexasCHLforum.com

I really appreciate you guys advising me on the previous thread about which rifle to buy for my first rifle. I am still sort of on the fence but now come up with all kinds of additional questions. But now this is questions on rifle #2.

The question of which .22LR to buy was kind of easy. Everyone said the same thing. Ruger 10-22. No problem. It's on my list.

For the budget of $300-500, I am looking at these three...

1. Kel-Tec SU-16B - under $500, a lot to like
2. Saiga .223 - $300, better on the budget than the SU-16B, but ???
3. Saiga 7.62x39

So my questions are thus:

- does anyone care to discuss the relative merits of the Kel-Tec SU16B vs. a Saiga .223 rifle? What I really like about the Kel-Tec is the light weight, foldability, compact transport and storage, cheap AR magazines, and of course Kel-Tec has an excellent service and warranty reputation. According to Kel-Tec, the SU-16 is a 5.56 NATO chambering, and I think the Saiga probably is .223 only. The Saiga on the other hand uses much more expensive magazines and lacks a lot of the compact/portability features of the Kel-Tec, however it is a more traditional, tried-and-true design (AK), and just over half the price.

- If I decided on a Saiga, what are the merits of .223 vs. 7.62x39? I understand the basics of the ballistic differences but what's the difference in real-world application? Is the 7.62 ammo cheaper in the same quality? Is 7.62x39 ammo as commonly available (like, at Wal Mart) as .223?

So I guess it comes down to, .223 or 7.62x39? And if .223, then Kel-Tec or Saiga?

At the moment I am still leaning heavily in favor of the SU16B.

If you're going to buy a ruger 10/22 and or the Keltec at $500
You should pool that money together and get an AR. You can get Delton rifle at http://www.aimsurplus.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for under $700 (your total budget for the ruger and keltec) It will give you a better rifle than any of the ones you are looking it. You can get a conversion kit for the AR to fire .22lr

The 10/22 is an average .22lr out of the box, it will take more $$$ to make it a great rifle.


As far as between the siaga or the keltec, get the keltec for the mag reasons. It takes standard AR mags which are easy to find and cheap. AK mags in.223 or 5.56 are more expensive and harder to find.

Mr.Scott wrote: . . . You can get Delton rifle at http://www.aimsurplus.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for under $700 (your total budget for the ruger and keltec) It will give you a better rifle than any of the ones you are looking it.

If you buy a stripped lower receiver at a local gun show (decent ones ought to be available for $110 - $150) you can buy a complete rifle kit from Delton for $465 and have a functional AR for around $600.

Mr.72,
I found the video I was looking for: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKhMOfaY ... re=related" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It shows the penetration capabilities of 7.62 x 39(AK-47) and 5.56/.223(M-16/AR-15). Based on these tests I would suggest the 7.62 x 39.
I would recommend an AK style rifle other than a Saiga. Saigas take a single stack magazine that is hard to find and expensive.

Here is the entry level AK-47: http://www.aimsurplus.com/acatalog/NEW_ ... Break.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is one good place to buy double stack AK-47 magazines: http://www.copesdistributing.net/index. ... h=32_34_80" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Steel AK magazines made in 'commie' countries are your friend! ProMag plastic made in USA, NOT!!!!!

AKs work when they are dirty, they will shoot cheap steel cased ammo and you can get parts. A surplus SKS would be cheaper but they don't use detachable magazines.
If you are only going to have one, Il'd go for the AK!! And soon!!

Regards, OE

That's interesting. There's a lot to think about.

Just to clarify a little bit more, I really think I prefer the "sporter" stock arrangement of the Saiga over a regular AK with a pistol grip. I am interested in knowing about the benefit of a pistol grip. Also, I kind of want my girls to go out and shoot with me, so the reduced recoil of .223/5.56 might be a difference maker.

If I understand correctly (and that's a BIG "if"), then the 7.62x39 is similar to a .30-.30 ... I hate shooting my dad's .30-.30 because of the excessive recoil. I get about four shots and I'm done for the day. If a 7.62 AK is anything like that, then I am definitely going with 5.56.

The .30-30 has as larger powder charge, I think, but the difference in recoil is due to gun design. The .30-30 transfers all the recoil to your shoulder. The AK-47 will absorb some of it through the gas system semi-auto functioning.
The recoil on an AR (5.56) is probably milder. But the 5.56 won't punch thru a brick wall nor a concrete block wall either.

You could go for the Saiga and deal with the hard to find high priced mags or convert it to use AK-47 double stack mags. Easily done.
Or get an AK and go for a 'Thumbhole stock" or a 'Dragunov' style stock:
http://www.parts4ak47.com/ak-47_accesso ... tocks.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The stock labled "Mak-90 Maddi" is the Dragunov style.
Other people:
http://www.parts4ak47.com/ak-47_accesso ... tocks.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
have nicer looking wood Dragunov style stocks.

I still think the AK is cheaper, packs more of a punch and is not as ammo sensitive or dirt sensitive as an AR.
Regards, OE