Side note, don't side rail mounted optics on AKs hold a zero better than top mounted ones? If true then I don't blame Cuck for getting one, but I mean, its going to be heavier, no free lunch and all.
The receiver cover on the AK was only ever meant to cover the receiver, so yeah, it's just never been a good place to mount sights and optics unless you build a new AK rifle with an altered design to address it. Some of the railed covers can hold zero somewhat, but don't expect them to do it flawlessly, they typically do not return to zero after being removed and replaced, and they will get looser over time as you wear away the surfaces.
If your Kalashnikov wasn't built around a railed cover, the mount on the side of the receiver is the only solid approach.
and for even more asthetics give me the original carry handle rear sight. now that would be an ideal ar for me.
Patrolling the Mojave etc, etc.
It's why I bought it with the funds I had at the time; either buy a questionable AR or buy something that works. I chose the latter haven't regretted it. If I want a light, tape it on, and I don't need a add on for a bayonet, I got my spike built in lol.
Well proven rifle, and a bayonet is never a bad thing. By the way, does your SKS have a return spring for the firing-pin? They did those for the SKS for a while but then decided they didn't need them, so most don't. Strictly, not necessary, but if the gun gets real gummy and dirty, it can make the firing-pin stick forward, which can have various exciting consequences.
There's aftermarket solutions for that, such as a kit which adds a spring, as well as firing-pins made out of titanium, I think either are worthwhile to consider at some point since it's a gun you may depend on.