Dragunov (fpk) vs SVT 40


PDA






Slowbra01
October 13, 2008, 12:51 AM
What are the advantage and disadvantages of both against each other. Which would you pick and for what reasons?

I currently am deciding between these two rifles. I would LOVE to get both but i can only get one at the moment.

As for the SVT 40. I found a guy who is asking for $900. Is that a reasonable price? I do not see these rifles on sale at most gun sites or gun shops for that matter.

For the Dragunov, the only place i have seen it online so far is from atlanticfirearms.com commanding a price of $790.

Are there other sources out there that sell the dragunov or svt for less?

If you enjoyed reading about "Dragunov (fpk) vs SVT 40" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ROMAK IV
October 13, 2008, 01:55 AM
I have both, and like both. The SVT-40 is a historic arm, but in the time it was made, it seems a little less robust, and is certainly less available. The FPK, PSL, or ROMAKIII, whatever you wish to call it, is basically an upsized AK. $900 isn't a bad price for a SVT-40, mine was a bit over $700, but that was a few years ago. As for which one to get, that's really your decision. I bought an SVT-40, because I collect surplus battle rifles. It is a Russian refurb, and has the correct scope, but on a Moison Nagant mount, but it is stll an SVT. It is difficult to disassemble, but not the gas system, which is a concern with corrosive ammunition.

I bought my ROMAKIII to take advantage od cheap 7.62 x 54R. I wanted a rifel in that caliber that I could use that would be somewhat more common. Although their import has been spotty, the FPK's seem to keep flooding in. Kit guns, (almost all the current rifles will be kit guns) sometimes have issues. On mine the bolt carrier would bind up on the hammer. The BHO device was also missing. I filed down the hammer, and the rifle cycles just fine now. I also went back to the store and they gave me the parts for the BHO, and now the Bolt stays open when the magazine is empty. I still haven't done any serious accuracy work, but the rifel seems accurate enough using the Czech light ball. I have always heard, never use heavy ball in an FPK. Compared to other rifles in its class, the FPK will save money based upon savings on ammunition.

Most of the bigger distributors carry FPK's and SVT-40's are spotty, except on gunbroker where the seem rather common. I bought the first one I saw in person, and I have only seen two or three at the most.

The only thing to be concerned with might be the results of the election. One candidate has pledged to make the AWB reinstated and permanant, which would prevent the import of more FPK's. In that event, the supply of SVT-40's would stay constant, but they would likely go up in price.

Slowbra01
October 13, 2008, 01:37 PM
which would you say between the two is more accurate?

Illeix
October 13, 2008, 03:52 PM
were not talking precision, but i would bet on the dragunov. contrary to public opinion, the SVD was not meant to be a sniper rifle, rather a SDMR. the SVT-40 was merely an infantry rifle (albeit a very good one)

both are accurate, but i suspect the SVD slightly more so.

wally
October 13, 2008, 04:10 PM
I'm still kicking myself for not buying the first SVT-40 I ever saw at $250 way back when. But it only had one magazine and to be honest, I've never seen another SVT mag for sale in the years since.

I'd certainly consider the SVT a better collectible, and the PSL/FPK/Romak more practical if you plan to shoot it much.

--wally.

col_tapiocca
October 13, 2008, 04:38 PM
900 USD for a SVT 40? It seems a little overpriced.
Here Switzerland I can get SVT 40 for CHF 625 it's approx US$ 550.
Usually guns are cheeper in the US.

Ash
October 13, 2008, 05:16 PM
The SVT-40 was indeed a sniper's rifle. The SVD is indeed intended to be a sniper's rifle. The PSL is indeed intended to be a sniper's rifle.

Ash

Dr. Peter Venkman
October 13, 2008, 05:33 PM
The SVT-40 is very pleasant to shoot. Very moderate recoil and it will get looks at the range (I imagine a PSL would too). The only problem is the gas system and surplus ammunition problems. I've had case heads ripped off when external inspections revealed no faults, leaving the other half of the case stuck to the chamber walls. I've had the same thing happen with a loaded round being slammed into a stuck case; during this particular instance when I pulled the bolt back, the new round came out with the half spent casing stuck as a sabot! Take down is not the best in regards to the gas system (it just takes some time and the proper tool to do take down without marring anything) but the bolt is very, very easy.

$900 for an SVT-40 is not too bad, but perhaps a little high. Mine was $800 plus shipping. Gunbroker has a few in the $700+ range, so I suggest starting there. There are a few variations and it's up to you to decide what you want- Tula, Izsvhesk, or Kovrov (I think? I know it starts with a K) Arsenals. Sniper rails or no sniper rails. AVT Stock (the fully automatic version that was not a big hit), Naval Stock, Regular stock. Late-war muzzle break with a few big slits, early-war version with many small slits.

I am in the process of getting a PSL (beyond the guy not sending me my rifle after paying for it two weeks ago, small claims here I come....). They are somewhat seperate beasts. I am a collector first and foremost, and an avid participant of having fun at the range as well! They both fit within my desires for their history and having fun. I suggest saving up for both. When it comes to firearms (as with all hobbies), if you want it, that's justification in itself.

That being said, the PSL is going to come with all of the goodies (namely a mount and a scope) for less than an SVT-40 with reproduction mount and scope, and a heck of a lot less than authentic ones from the war. Pick your poison.

elmerfudd
October 13, 2008, 05:35 PM
I have no experience with the SVT-40, but I do have a PSL and in my experience it's only as accurate as a decent AK. You can probably expect about 3 MOA out of it. That's what I get using 7N1. Most of my Saiga's deliver better accuracy and all of them ran 100% out of the box. When I first got my PSL, I ran a bore snake down the barrel a few times, wiped everything off inside and out and gave it a spray of CLP. It was a jammomatic though until I thoroughly disassembled everything, (mags and trigger group included), thoroughly cleaned everything and then polished the rails and rough surfaces on the mags, followers and receiver. Then it worked alright, until the spring fell out of the BHO. At that point the BHO would engage randomly whether the mag was empty or not. Solved that by removing the BHO. Now it's reliable. The trigger originally felt like a long gravel road. I polished it up and that improved it, then I swapped it out for a RSA trigger.

At this point however, it is reliable, has a great trigger and delivers accuracy on par with a decent AK, but it's really not up to snuff as a sniper rifle. It's saving grace was that I got it very cheap. $650 for the rifle, scope, sling, 4 mags and a hard case in like new condition.

24kshooter
October 13, 2008, 06:26 PM
Make sure you try fitting the Romak to your face with the scope on - if you are a larger individual typically they don't fit very well. It is a squad support rifle and capable of decent accuracy to 500 yards. The SVT is more of a classic rifle - some have scope rail some don't. They were designed to compete with the M1. Mags are available but expensive. Make sure the cleaning rod is with the rifle. If you don't have an M1 that is what I would recommend over the other 2.

Ash
October 13, 2008, 06:34 PM
No, they were designed to compete with the K98k...

Ash

Evil Monkey
October 13, 2008, 06:37 PM
If a person is not into the firearm because of it's history or other emotional reasons; with the firearms being similar to one another in operation and purpose, the firearm with the best logistical support behind it wins.

ROMAK IV
October 13, 2008, 09:12 PM
I wouls give the edge to a PSL for accuracy. Like I said, I haven't done serious accuracy work on either, but your PSL is going to have a new barrel, and the scope is better.

I also don't understand the above reference about the gas system being difficult to disassemble on the SVT 40. You press a little button, remove the cleaning rod, Press the little latch for the front barrel band and slide it forward enough to pull the two piece metal barrel shroud off. The piston, which is a cup shaped piece over the short gas system, will move off easily if the bolt is open. And actually, the PSL is a legitimate surplus rifel as it is a Romanian military rifle with the barest minimum of modifications to allow its import.

Recoil is mild on both rifles, because both have muzzle brakes, with an edge to the SVT, because it weighs a bit more. A Saiga would be comparable, but only if they were available in 7.62 x 54R. I'm not slamming the Saiga, I have had one for years, even when all you could get was 8 round magazines, and then only if you could find them.

MachIVshooter
October 13, 2008, 09:58 PM
I have both, the PSL is probably more appropriate if you simply want a decent autoloader to launch 7.62x54.

PS-I only paid $200 for the SVT :neener:

Toklat
October 13, 2008, 10:01 PM
A question about the SVT 40. I have what I guess is one but there is a date stamped on the receiver of 1939. Does anyone know if it is a SVT 40. The only thing I ever called it was a Tokarev.

Thanks

Scott7891
October 13, 2008, 10:36 PM
A question about the SVT 40. I have what I guess is one but there is a date stamped on the receiver of 1939. Does anyone know if it is a SVT 40. The only thing I ever called it was a Tokarev.

If it has a tiny metal handguard, a very long wooden one, 5 vent holes on each side, and the cleaning rod is on the right side embedded into a retention groove then you have the much rarer SVT-38. Those are worth way more than your standard SVT-40.

However if it doesn't have those features mentioned plus has a square above the star and the date you mentioned, then its a re-arsenal SVT-38 that was upgraded to the SVT-40.

http://www.mosinnagant.net/ussr/Svt-Photos1.asp

Toklat
October 14, 2008, 12:07 AM
Many Many Thanks for the information and reference to the web site.

Yes my rifle is a SVT 38. Two piece stock, cleaning rod in groove on right side, long wooden handguard with 5 cutouts, short steel handguard. However it looks as if the magazine is from the SVT 40 series.

I do not recall just when I bought the rifle but it must have been before 1952.

I do wish I had one of the scopes though. That would be something to have along with my G-43 with its scope.

Dr. Peter Venkman
October 14, 2008, 01:25 AM
I also don't understand the above reference about the gas system being difficult to disassemble on the SVT 40. You press a little button, remove the cleaning rod, Press the little latch for the front barrel band and slide it forward enough to pull the two piece metal barrel shroud off. The piston, which is a cup shaped piece over the short gas system, will move off easily if the bolt is open.

If the tolerances are tight (like they are on my hand), it takes a lot more effort. Getting the barrel band off takes some light tapping. The piston does not move freely. It has to be screwed off, and like I said, with tight tolerances it is a hassle holding back the rod while unscrewing the piston from the gas cylinder cup. The bolt being open is a necessity given that the rod cannot move otherwise. It takes longer to do it then describe it; not the case with anything remotely based off of a Kalashnikov design...even Simonov.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dragunov (fpk) vs SVT 40" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!