Obviously he has not "seen" very many Yugo SKS rifles. A complete lack of knowledge about them shows he certainly has never owned one. Most Yugos I still see around are in very good to excellent condition. Function perfectly, and are as accurate as any SKS.
Maybe a little education could help this internet expert.
I would have to agree with this. I have never seen a yugo SKS that was beat up that wasn't done intentionally(IE bubba'd)
The SKS was designed as a stopgap/fallback to the MUCH superior AK series rifles,
I suggest you double check your information, the SKS PREDATES the AK47, it was originally field tested against the Nazis, the AK47, as denoted by the 47, wasn't even tested until after WWII ended, no less accepted, the two were competing designs, the AK just made more sense as a front line combat rifle.
it's like an M1 Garand but in an underpowered cartridge that drops like a rock after 250 yards
actually, it was a perfection of a concept that was started with the SVT38 and subsequent SVT40 rifles. the two were semi automatic rifles with 10 round box mags(not 8 round enbloc clips). the russians liked taking concepts that worked and sticking with them. the SVTs were long, heavy, and fired heavily recoiling 7.62x54R. the russians took the idea and compressed it into a smaller, lighter recoiling, and shorter design. it is much the same concept as the train of thought that led the M1 garand to be redesigned into the M14 after being lightened, given a lighter cartridge and had the clip feed changed to a mag fed design.
not a perfect transition as the SKS and SVTs look nothing alike but it's definitely closer to say the sks was a lighter SVT40 with a lighter recoiling cartridge than an M1 garand with a underpowered cartridge.
Also reloading one with a stock magazine is not fun from what I've seen.
can you please elaborate on that? I know that you have a norinco, or more likely a type 56 chicom(hopefully you know the difference), the two are made to almost identical specs, especially the pre66 models.
It weighs about ten pounds
actually, in it's stock form it weighs less than 9, the M1 garand however weighs 10.
and just how short is it needed to be? it's an 18 inch barrel and usually has a very short length of pull, not really anything unrealistic considering that the US didn't use anything with a barrel shorter than 20 inches until the M4 carbine.
and typically much worse accuracy, perhaps due to the poor sights on the SKS
this is an overgeneralization which serves to weaken your argument. I've seen M1 garands that can't group inside a paper plate at 100 yards and I personally own an SKS that will go toe to toe with my M1 garand any day of the week.
The stripper clips work poorly, and are prone to shedding rounds
I'm sorry I have to laugh at that one. I own dozens, perhaps hundreds of SKS strippers, none of them "shed rounds" any worse than any other stripper clip and even better than some enblocs. none of them work any more poorly than any other stripper from that era, considering the SKS is one of few semi designs that loads with stripper without the use of an adapter. at this point you are grasping at straws for anything that you can say to shed the SKS in a poor light.
today totally obsolete for defensive much less combat purposes
unless you are able to get a fully automatic rifle then there is nothing at all that makes it obsolete for self defense. I find it hilarious that you think the SKS is heavy, long, and obsolete with a magazine/stripper system that is prone to finicky behavior and then say you would rather use a mosin nagant which is all of those things but with a 31 inch barrel, 5 round mag, and has a funny tendency of acting like a flashbang in enclosed spaces or at night.