What is it about Soviet Rifles...

[tmccray45]

I too have a few Russian rifles (three 91/30's, 2 M44's, 2 SKS's, and one Makarov pistol. I really enjoy taking them all to the range.

"Stubbicatt" triggered a memory from my childhood having to do with the Soviet Union.
I too remember having the "duck 'n cover" drills in elementary school. "If you see a bright flash, get under your desk as quickly as you can and link your hands behind your neck." As I recall, the Soviet Union was this nebulous unseen hoard of people who had nothing but hatred of everything that the bright and virtuous United States stood for.

Then, in 5th grade, my eyes were opened a bit. Mrs. Lewis was the teacher that will always be my favorite teacher - the teacher that believed in questioning everything. She taught us French, we watched advanced science movies, she taught a bit of algebra and geometry, and we were all encouraged to read much beyond our grade level. She even went out in the woods, picked some wild mushrooms, and cooked them in class so that we could experience "foreign" foods. (I lived in a fairly poor area of a county outside Washington, DC.)

One day, Mrs. Lewis announced a class trip. We were going to take a school bus into Washington DC and were going to visit the embassy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - the USSR. (This would have been in 1955 - McCarthyism was still running strong. The worst thing you could be was a "commie".)

I remember walking down the street with the rest of the class and turning into the grounds of the embassy. We went through the doors of a rather imposing Victorian building and the whole time I was thinking that all of us were going to be kidnapped, taken to the Soviet Union, forced into a labor camp, and we would never see our parents again.

A member of the embassy staff came out, gave us a brief talk and handed out copies of a big magazine called "Soviet Life". Inside were pictures of happy peasants harvesting wheat, happy factory workers making stoves and refrigerators, happy children in school. Not a picture of a jet or tank could be seen. He served cookies to our class - again, I was sure that they were laced with a drug that would make us compliant with their wishes. (Remember this was 5th grade and my imagination knew no bounds. . .)

After we finished our cookies, the embassy finally "released" us and after the bus ride back, we returned to the embrace of our mothers and fathers. I kept my copy of "Soviet Life" for many years, but during one of my moves, it was misplaced. (Because it was 1955, I'm sure that the entire class was photographed as we made our way into, and then out of, the embassy. Some "government man" had to wonder why those kids were going to visit the Soviet embassy. Perhaps it was a mass defection.)

 

[YZ]

Stubbicatt
I appreciate your thoughtful comments. As you discard a lot of old wash, just be careful not to toss away the baby. It seems easy today to poopoo the soviet threat back in the 60s or early 80's but it was real. Most of the propaganda I have read was largely true, if not in every detail. How do I know? Trust me.
--------------
Born in the USSR
Grew up in Leningrad
Junior lieutenant Navy Reserve
Uncle was born in 1923, gravely wounded in the spine. One of the 3% I guess.
Dad also fought in WW2, wounded lightly. Both are alive today.

 

[-v-]

An other one that's left out: The TT33 handgun. For anyone who has ever disassembled one: simplicity personified. Truth be told, I'm always more then a little surprised that little guy can even function, considering the entire trigger pack is 6 parts counting the 2 pins, spring, and housing. Yet, it somehow provides a relatively good trigger pull and a rather ingenious safety method for a service pistol: Half cock locks the trigger and the sear, and moving it to full cock unlocks everything. Other neat features: integrating the magazine feed lips directly into the gun. No worries abut damaged magazines that way.

 

[YZ]

Yep, that's modularity, ahead of its time. This refined simplicity is born out of ingenuity. In the Soviet times, when much of everything else lingered in mediocrity, the best and the brightest were drawn to weapon engineering. Their efforts were underwritten and ultimately rewarded by their employer, the state with no checks or balances.
Feodor Tokarev of the TT was imperial Russia's legacy. He improved on a classic JM Browning design (1908 if I remember correctly?) -enough said.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I've always liked Soviet weapon design, especially the way the cartridges use the same casings (necked down) to save in production costs. It's something I think we could learn from to save manufacturing costs. Easier to produce one size and cut it than multiple different sizes.

 

[Robert]

The PPSH43 I shot was pretty neat. Other than that, meh.

 

[Pointshoot]

I first got interested in eastern Bloc rifles many years ago when I read an article on putting a scout rifle together with a Mosin carbine. The attraction was that the guns were very cheap, ammo was very cheap, and you could work on them without fear of damaging a valuable gun. I came to appreciate the simplicity & ruggedness of the Russian designs. A lot of people in the West put down these guns. The designs aren't as refined as ours. Like Soviet type military equipment designs in general, - they went with simple/reliable/tough/make a lot of 'em as a philosophy.

 

[YZ]

Soviet firearms are what they are. Clever designs, originality, uneven workmanship, unforgiving ergonomics (AK, no bolt stop), optics as an afterthought. For their mechanical engineering, they are fun to study. They are also historic artifacts. Not everyone's cup of tea, nor should it be.

 

[stubbicatt]

YZ did I understand you to have served in the armed forces of the Soviet Union? I'll bet that was an experience.

As far as throwing the baby out with the bathwater, I'll heed your suggestions. I am happy your uncle and father are still alive, a remarkable feat in longevity to be sure.

I know nothing of Soviet crew served weapons other than initially their automatic grenade launcher had a bad reputation of exploding one in the breach, killing the crew, and sympdet of the remaining ordnance.

Would be a treat to hear of your experiences some day.

I still think the SVT 40 is an elegant and thoughtful design with many forward thinking features, which remains unparalleled, and even more remarkable that it was produced in that day and age in that economy. Remarkable.

 

[YZ]

I was never in active duty. Escaped it just narrowly. Was on a boat one summer as a student, then used to get pulled off work once or twice a year for some dumb exercises, a rough equivalent of the National Guard duty plus a lot of booze. My weapons experience was limited to AK, even that not much because of the assignment. Learned the Mosin actually after I left the USSR in late 80's. Firearm ownership was limited to single shot or double barrel shotguns. Never touched the SVT but your opinion of it rings true.

 

[undeRGRound]

@YZ: You are an interesting fellow! Love to hear more of your experiences,
and even second hand stories from your father and uncle... Would be a very
enlightening session to be sure!

 

[philoe]

There is a certain allure to their weapons.

Kalashnikov creating the AK-47? Probably pure propaganda. Look up Hugo Schmeisser.

 

[YZ]

An interesting story above described a field trip to the Soviet Embassy. The US Consulate in Leningrad was a few blocks away from my elementary school. No visits there. The mansion was guarded by the KGB dressed as plain policemen, ostensibly to protect it from intrusion. The real goal was to block any contact with the population.

Our school had English as foreign language, but nobody would even suggest that, hey, let's drop by the neighbors' some time. The Consulate had a billboard outside with photos and the most innocent depictions of life in America. People just walked by, maybe slowing down to take a glance. The very few who would stop and spend time reading, took their chances of being photographed, ID'd, possibly questioned later... maybe not.

Americans, on the other hand, visited our school often. Mostly teachers. I remember singing and tapping with my class to entertain a bunch of delighted American schoolteachers sitting in the back. They gave us little gifts like Wrigley's chewing gum. That was no small deal. It was currency, real trade value, not sold anywhere legally. But we boys knew better. Everyone knew about poisoned candy distributed by spies and saboteurs in the movies. We decided to test the gift on a black beetle found in the schoolyard. The beetle refused to eat Wrigley's gum. I wish I could remember whether it was Doublemint or Juicy Fruit. We tried our best to make the beetle have it. Finally the beetle died. Aha. The evidence was clear.

Another highlight was a visiting teacher from Seattle. Cultural exchange, I think, so we could send our people accredited by the KGB to America. It was the time of Nixon-Brezhnev de-escalation policies. She was very enthusiastic and optimistic (especially compared to our folks) She had a wild laughter. She showed us a documentary about the Moon trip by Apollo 11. I was older then. It was awesome. No such footage had ever been shown on TV or in theaters.

I was in high school when a delegation of American students came. I had fought rarely, but just happened to have a black eye that day. I didn't want to embarrass my teachers and stood back. The Americans spotted me, and all of a sudden I was in the center of attention. They wanted to know how I got it. I was shy and could only mutter 'boxing" to their great delight. (It was really an accidental briefcase hit).

Things get pulled out of memory like ribbons from a hat.

p.s. i strayed away from the topic. will tell some ww2 stuff as time permits. appreciate your interest really

 

[YZ]

There is a certain allure to their weapons.

Kalashnikov creating the AK-47? Probably pure propaganda. Look up Hugo Schmeisser.

I thought so, too, for a long time. Schmeisser was interned in Russia (basically, detained) for several years after WW2. He worked with Kalashnikov. When he finally was allowed to return to West Germany, he kept mum about his Soviet years. Refused to talk. It is easy to surmise that he had been told to keep his mouth shut, or the long arm of the KGB would reach him anywhere.

Not so simple with Kalashnikov. He did design some improvements to the existing weapons even before WW2, and was talent-spotted by Marshal Zhukov himself. To this day he also hasn't muttered a word on Schmeisser's contribution to the AK project except just recently stating that he had "helped". That doesn't mean anything, but in the 90's, when the floodgates of information opened in the former USSR, not one person stepped forward and told the real story. That was the time when everyone tried to get rich, or at leqast not remain poor, by all means possible. The KGB had weakened its control temporarily. Larger monuments crumbled, yet nobody disavowed Kalashnikov. This much we do know.

 

[MachIVshooter]

I like the SVT and the Drag. Other than that, not a huge fan of Russky guns. I do have a Mosin and a nice Tula laminate SKS, but they're really just a necessary part of the collection, not favorites.

I prefer the M1 Garand to the SVT. It is a more solid, more robust firearm, and a bit more compact.

The Mosin is my least favorite bolt action milsurp. It's crude and lacking in ergonomics.

The Dragunov is a neat rifle, but performance-wise, it really can't hold a candle to the AR-10, so exotic looks and exclusivity are really the only things it has going for it compared to other DMR type rifles.

I will give the Russians that their stuff works, but is almost universally lacking in refinement.

 

[-v-]

YZ - That and looking at the various iterations of Kalashnikov's and the other designer's firearms during the trials to create what became the AK-47, and intermixing evolutionary approach can be seen. Kalashnikov's original rifle had more in common with a FN-FAL (minus the bolt) then it does with what we know of as the AKM.

At that time, since intellectual property was property of the people, each design team was encouraged to adapt any successful elements from other design groups' designs. If I recall, Schmeiser's main contribution could be traced back to figuring out how to properly heat treat stamped AK receiver without having it warp. After all, he was the world expert on manufacturing stamped firearms.

The very high rejection rate of the old approach to heat-treating AK receivers is the reason for the milled AK. I think I recall figures as high as a 50% rejection rate on the original stamped receivers .

I haven't read in detail, but I suspect what Shmeiser contributed to the AK was the approach of heat treating only the holes in the receiver as well as the rails that are then riveted in. This actually produced a better design as the receiver now had an ideal mixture of harder metal around the pins to withstand the direct force, and softer more flexible metal throughout to flex under the stress of firing. Literally the best of both worlds.

I know nothing of Soviet crew served weapons other than initially their automatic grenade launcher had a bad reputation of exploding one in the breach, killing the crew, and sympdet of the remaining ordnance.

Can't comment on their AGLs, but I frequently hear that the PKM machine gun is the best GPMG ever made. Very accurate and lighter then a M249, and with the legendary Russian reliability to boot.

 

[YZ]

UnderGRound
There have been people of my background who made it pretty far. There was a guy in the apartment building where I grew up with the wood burning stoves. He wrote dissident poetry, was convicted, exiled, ended up in the US, became congressional poet laureate, and won a Nobel. Josef Brodsky. Another one actually went to a military academy in Leningrad, and retired recently as department chairman at Harvard. A few former spetznaz are around making a living by teaching classes. My Soviet past still confounds some people, and I am not in the business where it's a plus. Makes it fun to have conversations here. Not like some blogs I read previously. The acrimony, the anger, the childish arguments to no end. Good to be taking the high road.

 

[aka108]

Their weapons are strong built, simple, reliable and accurate enough for their intended use. Not much is going to break and no small parts to lose in the field.

 

[YZ]

Speaking of Russian rifles, there is one rarely mentioned anywhere. It isn't military or soviet. It is a .22lr semiauto with a 10 round banana clip named Baikal m161 or close. Molded polymer body resembles the cx4 beretta carbines. No rifle has better fit my shoulder. You know that feeling -hey, this one is for me. It has a tall blade front sight, and a fully adjustablee pistol target rear sight. It is held together by a single well hidden screw. With the screw out, it comes apart to reveal an improved 10/22 action. The recoil spring is in the rear, and the receiver opens up in the back, again by removing one pin. Then the bolt assembly falls out. Compare to the 10/22 where the bolt assembly must be removed and reinserted from the top, against the spring pressure. Also, the charge handle is positively secured to the bolt, no chance of just ripping it out. If you are famiar with AK you would recognize the style - simplify. It is not without flaws. The bolt stop lever spring is flimsy and prone to failure. Not by design, mind it, by the built quality. Still a reliable and accurate shooter. My second one cost me $280+shipping.

 

[68wj]

Not by design, mind it, by the built quality.

I think that is the heart of any pro/con discussion of Russian designs (firearms or otherwise). It really shows the robustness of the design when it can overcome poor manufacturing and still perform as needed.

 

[nathan]

They just plainly works.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Speaking of Russian rifles...

When I was browsing around the internet looking for my first 22lr rifle, I somehow discovered the Tula TO3 line, and despite being rather humble looking rifles, I chose the TO3 78-01. I will never part with that rifle if I am at all able. Not quite as consistent as the CZ452, but at 1/3rd the price and significantly lighter, i still like my rifle better. Russia makes some fine shooters, even if you look beyond the military arms.

I have developed a taste for Russian designed weapons. I only have the TO3 78, TO3 99 (semi auto version of the 78), m91/30, and Saiga AK, but i hope to expand my collection as time goes on. I am no fan of Communist philosophy, but they can produce some mighty enjoyable weapons.

YZ I really enjoy reading your stories. I hope you feel comfortable and continue to share

 

[hang fire]

I have a soft spot for Russian guns, but mainly those that were captured by the Finnish.

Double dittos on that.

 

[YZ]

Ready for this? Dad fought the Finns.
It was the Continuation War of 1941-44.
Finland had recoiled from Frozen Hell, the Soviet conquest in the winter of 1939-40.
Note the timeline. The USSR was in a friendly pact with Hitler. Poland had been divided in the fall, and Germany had been at war against England and France. Then the Red Army attacked Finland, sustained enormous casualties, and finally overwhelmed the Finns with all its weight. The Nazis gave Finland no support. The Molotov-Ribbentrop nonaggression pact was at work.
The French and the British denounced the aggression but did nothing.
In 1941 came the reversal. Germany invaded the USSR. The Finns recaptured their territory and helped seal Leningrad from the north. They were not allied with Germany. They were co-belligerents, fighting their own war. Strange bedfellows, but as the Russian saying goes, can't strike one verse from the song. It happened. The US never declared war on Finland, the only non-axis power fighting their Russian ally. That was likely the reason the Russians did not capture or lay waste the whole country this time.
In 1944, the siege of Leningrad had been lifted, the Soviets went on the summer offensive. Dad was in the Red Army unit that forced a strategic river. The most dangerous moment of reckoning was when his commander ordered him, a young teenage private, to walk near the front line. The officer wanted to see if there were Finnish snipers hiding in the trees. My Dad was not shot at. He survived, and with him my future life. He never got a medal, just a "good job".
Other than that, he recalls running or marching ahead in a bombed-out forest, already flattened by Soviet artillery and tanks. Dead Finns were everywhere. When the troops sat down for a meal, the bodies were right next to them. So they marched and fired their PPSh until the order came to stop. Finland sued for a seizefire. Stalin was surprisingly willing to accept, apparently to placate the Allies.
My Dad has always reserved admiration for the resilient, hard working Finns. He visited as a tourist during Khruschev's temporary thaw in soviet policies. He also says they were vicious marksmen. They used to stay behind up in the trees as the enemy advanced, and picked out officers. Many red army commanders wore the enlisted men's uniforms.

 

[Cosmoline]

It isn't just a Communist thing. Remember the Mosin-Nagant was designed in 1891, long before the rise of Lenin. The Russian philosophy of arms is different from the American. They tend to favor weapons that embody the old proverb, "the best is the enemy of the good." They don't go in for the switches, levers and gadgets that Americans tend to prefer.

That philosophy produces arms that are renowned for reliability in extreme conditions, easy to field strip and repair, and rarely "improved" with changes. There's a lot to admire about them.

If you want to see what happens when you combine the stalwart Russian designs with adaptive and innovative western approaches, you just look to the Finnish variants. Dozens of sub-types, many design changes and accurizing experiments. Some of the experiments like the "wings" in the M27 were a real failure. Others worked well. But in the span of a few decades the Finns made more changes to the Mosin than the Russians did over a century. It's a telling difference.

You can take this sort of thing too far of course, but I also think you can tell a lot about the British from the SMLE. That constant class warfare is embodied in the magazine cutoff. The rifle is a technical marvel but absolutely not friendly to field stripping. So there's a built-in hierarchy within the design. Yet at the same time it's a design the users took and ran with, learning how to shoot it in unorthodox ways to increase the rate of fire. And the cutoff was pulled in the middle of the war, something of an admission that the soldiers would need to be trusted.