svt40 vs m14 as sniper?
- Thread starter jabberjaw112
- Start date
Da gospodin !!
Larger shell size meant that Russian snipers (both male and female) reached out and touched many Germans officers and troopers alike !!
Arloashean
CGN Regular
- Location
- People's Republic of Toronto
Um, haven't tried but the Soviets gave up on the SVT-40 as a sniper and went back to the Mosin. Only the 1941 and previous years have scope rails for a particularly tricky-to-find scope setup. Aftermarket versions seem pretty rare and not particularly reliable. And welding on a scope or mount just seems like heresy.
Wiki says: "In service, SVTs frequently suffered from vertical shot dispersion. These rifles were reported to be of "flimsey construction and the(re were) difficulties experienced in their repair and maintenance."[6] Many rifles were poorly seated in their stocks allowing the receiver to shift upon firing, though selective shimming with birch chips was practiced as a field modification. For a sniper rifle, this was unacceptable, and production of the specialized sniper variant of the SVT was terminated in 1942.[1] At the same time, the milling of scope rails in the receivers of standard SVT rifles was also discontinued. Other production changes included a new, simpler muzzle brake design."
Might all be apocryphal but seems consistent with many shooters' experiences. The Germans and Finns certainly liked them and may have had better results with some shimming and tuning. As you say, a great cartridge, but not if it hits the wrong place.
Some suppliers (like Corwin) have fully set-up snipers with repro scopes. Might be worth a try but the combined cost isn't as attractive.
See also httx://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=45971 and httx://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=46071.
Wiki says: "In service, SVTs frequently suffered from vertical shot dispersion. These rifles were reported to be of "flimsey construction and the(re were) difficulties experienced in their repair and maintenance."[6] Many rifles were poorly seated in their stocks allowing the receiver to shift upon firing, though selective shimming with birch chips was practiced as a field modification. For a sniper rifle, this was unacceptable, and production of the specialized sniper variant of the SVT was terminated in 1942.[1] At the same time, the milling of scope rails in the receivers of standard SVT rifles was also discontinued. Other production changes included a new, simpler muzzle brake design."
Might all be apocryphal but seems consistent with many shooters' experiences. The Germans and Finns certainly liked them and may have had better results with some shimming and tuning. As you say, a great cartridge, but not if it hits the wrong place.
Some suppliers (like Corwin) have fully set-up snipers with repro scopes. Might be worth a try but the combined cost isn't as attractive.
See also httx://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=45971 and httx://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=46071.
Last edited:
Only have a couple hundred rounds through my SVT (1940 Tula with the old style brake, and matching stock # to the receiver), but I'm getting 4-5 inch groups at 100 yards out of it with the battle sights and surplus ammo quite consistently. That's about all I can get from ANYTHING with open sights, so that's telling me the rifle itself is more accurate that my 43 year old eyes can pull off.
The accuracy problems, from what I can tell, seem mostly related to poorly bedded receivers, and that's a fixable problem. If you're not worried about retaining the historical value, glass bedding the receiver is not particularly hard, and does wonders with most rifles for getting rid of the vertical stringing and shrinking group sizes down considerably. I'm very tempted, but have already signed on for a vintage rifle shoot with it later this summer, so can't muck the history on it. I expect to get my butt handed to me by the K-31 crowd, but I'm going to put some practice in and at least show respectably in the open sight class.
As for being "flimsy and unreliable" - hogwash. The main reliability problems the SVT faced were operator related. While some soldiers received above average training and got results (ref: Lyudmila Pavlichenko, 309 kills with the SVT sniper variant), the vast bulk of soviet training during the war was little more than "This is your rifle. This is the dangerous end. The enemy is over there. Go to it." And that just doesn't cut it with ANY semi auto weapon.
The Germans loved the SVT, couldn't capture enough of them to keep the front line troops happy. They had training manuals for them, and even an acceptance standard for captured ones. The German G41 was a complete bust, as far as reliability, and so they copied the gas system wholesale from the SVT when they came out with the G43, which says a lot.
In the end, while there aren't as many accessories for the SVT (and never will be, because they practically don't exist in the US, thanks to f#cking Clinton and the "Trade in Military Arms" agreement) as there are for the M14 platform rifles, you're going to be up against a lot of the same problems with both. Both rifles require you to "get to know them", learn their idiosyncrasies, tune and tweak.
You're going to come across SVT lovers and haters on here. For the cost of them, pick one up, clean it, get to know it, fire it, and figure out which camp you'll fall into.
Also, for scope mounting, there are more and more who are coming up with way of mounting the POSP/Dragunov style scopes on them. Requires removing a small amount of wood from the left side of the receiver, and drilling and tapping the side for the POSP rail. Historical value = gone once you go that route, so make sure you know the rifle and whether you figure it's something your going to want to keep and maintain.
The accuracy problems, from what I can tell, seem mostly related to poorly bedded receivers, and that's a fixable problem. If you're not worried about retaining the historical value, glass bedding the receiver is not particularly hard, and does wonders with most rifles for getting rid of the vertical stringing and shrinking group sizes down considerably. I'm very tempted, but have already signed on for a vintage rifle shoot with it later this summer, so can't muck the history on it. I expect to get my butt handed to me by the K-31 crowd, but I'm going to put some practice in and at least show respectably in the open sight class.
As for being "flimsy and unreliable" - hogwash. The main reliability problems the SVT faced were operator related. While some soldiers received above average training and got results (ref: Lyudmila Pavlichenko, 309 kills with the SVT sniper variant), the vast bulk of soviet training during the war was little more than "This is your rifle. This is the dangerous end. The enemy is over there. Go to it." And that just doesn't cut it with ANY semi auto weapon.
The Germans loved the SVT, couldn't capture enough of them to keep the front line troops happy. They had training manuals for them, and even an acceptance standard for captured ones. The German G41 was a complete bust, as far as reliability, and so they copied the gas system wholesale from the SVT when they came out with the G43, which says a lot.
In the end, while there aren't as many accessories for the SVT (and never will be, because they practically don't exist in the US, thanks to f#cking Clinton and the "Trade in Military Arms" agreement) as there are for the M14 platform rifles, you're going to be up against a lot of the same problems with both. Both rifles require you to "get to know them", learn their idiosyncrasies, tune and tweak.
You're going to come across SVT lovers and haters on here. For the cost of them, pick one up, clean it, get to know it, fire it, and figure out which camp you'll fall into.
Also, for scope mounting, there are more and more who are coming up with way of mounting the POSP/Dragunov style scopes on them. Requires removing a small amount of wood from the left side of the receiver, and drilling and tapping the side for the POSP rail. Historical value = gone once you go that route, so make sure you know the rifle and whether you figure it's something your going to want to keep and maintain.
The SVT40 was a big rifle, but relatively lightweight. As mentioned, it flexed a lot because the stock was too flimsy to absorb the recoil. I used to own a Norinco M305S that I mounted a scope on, the accuracy was pretty decent and consistent. Lots of mounts availaible for that platform.
I think there is a reason why the US Army went back to using the M14 as a sniper rifle in Iraq and Afghanistan, whereas the Russians did not bring back the SVT into service during their Afghan War.....Just a thought!!!
Then again the Druganov Sniper was semi-auto and handled the same round as the SVT.
Then again the Druganov Sniper was semi-auto and handled the same round as the SVT.
-----------------------------------------------------------Mosin wins 
- Location
- Central AB
I own and love both. Both have good optics mounted. Both benefit from the use of match quality ammo. M14 weighs a ton more. But in the end, SVT40 can't come close to what you can squeeze out of an M14 for accuracy. Not really in the same league.
Ok, a coworker was asking me if I knew where to get a scope for his SVT... who in Canada sells em, and mounts for SVT40?
I have no idea if he's got the side thingy to take a mount...could he drill/tap a rail on the side of reciever the way some SKS guys do?
I've never shot, held or even seen one of these up close, but they do look intriguing! And LOTS of guys bought beautiful SVT's at the Calgary show...one guy's stock was a beauty!
I think I'll have to try out my coworker's SVT!
I have no idea if he's got the side thingy to take a mount...could he drill/tap a rail on the side of reciever the way some SKS guys do?
I've never shot, held or even seen one of these up close, but they do look intriguing! And LOTS of guys bought beautiful SVT's at the Calgary show...one guy's stock was a beauty!
I think I'll have to try out my coworker's SVT!
Either drill and tap for the POSP/Dragunov style mount, or get a repro mount/scope, both available here:
http://corwin-arms.com/catalogue/accessories
Keep in mind, even if he has the receiver grooves, for a really fit with the SVT style mount, it needs the "sniper notch" at the top rear of the receiver, although it isn't 100% necessary, it helps.
Really, honestly, Martin isn't paying me to schill for Corwin arms (seems like once a day I post a link to his site lately), I've just gotten good service from him, love my red rifles, and he's got all the gear to go with them.
He also sells a complete SVT-40 "repro" sniper - my guess is he carves the sniper notch into a 1940/early 41 that already had the side grooves, and then mounts the optics. $680 may seem steep, but when you add the going rate for an SVT + the scope/mount, it's a pretty fair deal (you'd be easily $750-$800 all in to buy seperately, and that's shopping for deals). And $680 all in for a scoped semi-auto full power rifle? Tough to beat. Although I would like options for better scopes than 3.5power. Not sure of the tube diameter on those scopes, and whether you can fit something else to it.
As desporterizer says, finding a truly mint bore is rare. With some effort I've manged to find a couple. The other thing about these refurbs is that the bedding quality seems all over the page. My impression from the design is that there should be significant pressure at the forend tip but one out of three seem to have a "floating" barrel. Some are snug in their stocks others really loose. To meaningfully assess these as accurate rifles you need one with a perfect bore and perfect bedding (whatever that is!). I've managed to put together two complete "snipers", '41, and '42, with the aftermarket replica mount and authentic scopes. They both have bores that I would describe as good but not perfect and I've shimmed them up for tight fit. Plan to give them both a real good workout and use one at a friendly battle rifle competition in June.
Milsurpo
Milsurpo
I love SVT,everybody here know that but as sniper rifle,there's better options. The SVT sniper would have probably been better with a good and solid mount for an optic. The standard mount worked ok for minute of man target but for better accuracy,that's not the good setup. If someone want to take the time, improving bedding can be done for sure, like any rifle. As Desporterizer said,an accurate rifle need a excellent bore. I am fortunate because my SVT's 1942,1943,1944 and 1945 have virtually new bore but i will not mess with anys of them(particulary the 1945 because they are rare as hell!) to mount a scope,i love them the way they are,end of the story. I have an M14,didnt shot it much because of lack of time and i dont have an optic on it and dont plan to install one either.If someone want to invest to make a sniper,the M14 is a better way to go because they are more choice of mounts and scope and with somes tweaking, an M14 can be very accurate.
Joce
Joce
I bought the SVT for the price and fell in love with it the moment I pulled the trigger for the first time. I can easily see myself buying another one before I go the M305 route. It's unbelievably fun to shoot and fairly accurate.
As a sniper, it might be better to go with the M305 and tweak the living hell out of it. That, combined with hand loads can put out a fairly accurate rifle, but it comes at a cost.
As a sniper, it might be better to go with the M305 and tweak the living hell out of it. That, combined with hand loads can put out a fairly accurate rifle, but it comes at a cost.
Another question to ask, and few enough people seem to bother asking, is how do you define "sniper".
By WWII standards, a 500 yard "minute of center of mass" rifle would most likely qualify. Nowadays, that would be, at best, a DMR.
I love my SVT, and and considering picking up one of the pre-built "repro-snipers" rather than go through the hassle of making my own (it all depends on what I have more of when I make the jump - time or money). But I doubt I would ever get it much past being a 600 yard rifle.
A good M14 you can tweak and tune into the 800-1000 yard range, based on what I've seen others do. That's somewhat less important to me, because even if the rifle is good enough for it, I'm not sure my skills will ever really be up to the task. Although that may change, because I've only within the past year started to stretch myself much past 100 yards.
I really like the SVT, I think it gets a worse rap than it deserves from many people. But it does have its limitations, and we're talking about a 70 year old, no longer produced platform.
At some point, I'm going to pick up an M14 variant, and work on that as well. But in the short term (the next year or so), the SVT scratches the itch I have for full power, semi auto battle rifle. And I'm finding it plenty accurate for my needs with open sights.
It would be awesome if someone made a drop in Dragunov style stock. If they did, I'd seriously consider going with a side mounted CommBlock style optic mount to allow for 30MM tubes. But that's a bit of a dream. The SVT is turning into a bit of a "Canada common" surplus gun, and not common anywhere else. So the odds of a good supply of aftermarket stocks etc. are pretty slim.
By WWII standards, a 500 yard "minute of center of mass" rifle would most likely qualify. Nowadays, that would be, at best, a DMR.
I love my SVT, and and considering picking up one of the pre-built "repro-snipers" rather than go through the hassle of making my own (it all depends on what I have more of when I make the jump - time or money). But I doubt I would ever get it much past being a 600 yard rifle.
A good M14 you can tweak and tune into the 800-1000 yard range, based on what I've seen others do. That's somewhat less important to me, because even if the rifle is good enough for it, I'm not sure my skills will ever really be up to the task. Although that may change, because I've only within the past year started to stretch myself much past 100 yards.
I really like the SVT, I think it gets a worse rap than it deserves from many people. But it does have its limitations, and we're talking about a 70 year old, no longer produced platform.
At some point, I'm going to pick up an M14 variant, and work on that as well. But in the short term (the next year or so), the SVT scratches the itch I have for full power, semi auto battle rifle. And I'm finding it plenty accurate for my needs with open sights.
It would be awesome if someone made a drop in Dragunov style stock. If they did, I'd seriously consider going with a side mounted CommBlock style optic mount to allow for 30MM tubes. But that's a bit of a dream. The SVT is turning into a bit of a "Canada common" surplus gun, and not common anywhere else. So the odds of a good supply of aftermarket stocks etc. are pretty slim.
The SVT faces a few issues for accuracy. First off there is the tilting block action rather than a rotating locking bolt. Think FN FAL, RFB. Both also known for verticle stringing. Second is the ammo choice. Just over 24" barrel with 1:10 twist. Yet it was setup to shoot 145 grain ammo that I read was unique as it had an oglive like a 220 round. Accuracy tests with RFB greatly improved using non brass cased ammo or shortening the OAL when reloading. It's suspected this gives a better straighter start for the bullet. The stock is another issue as it's light but not always as secure as it should be. Finally there is the scope attachment issues. I have a mediocre aftermarket rail that is suspect for staying in place. I also have a SVT sniper with repro mount/scope. With the notch it seems pretty secure. Frankly this seems to be the only way to go for a scope without wrecking/bubba your rifle.
I really like the SVT40. Accuracy for the most part will be battle rifle and can be tweaked. The M14 can be made more accurate far easier. However it's labour intensive and expensive. Get an AR10 for precision work. It has the most accuracy potential, requires the least work including maintaining and is ready to go out of the box.
I would classify the SVT40 "sniper" along with the scoped M14 as DM rifles. The Russians were at the forefront of designated marksman and sniper use. Also in terms of trying to equip most of their infantry with semi auto rifles.
The SVT40 was fairly advanced for it's time. Fairly reliable semi auto, adjustable gas block, detachable mag, muzzle brake, 24" (24.5?) barrel with 1:10 twist. On paper it holds it's own with modern rifles. Again very advanced for it's time. Both the Finns and Germans liked reissuing captured SVT to their own troops.
While I know some won't like this, I definately prefer the SVT40 over the SKS.
I really like the SVT40. Accuracy for the most part will be battle rifle and can be tweaked. The M14 can be made more accurate far easier. However it's labour intensive and expensive. Get an AR10 for precision work. It has the most accuracy potential, requires the least work including maintaining and is ready to go out of the box.
I would classify the SVT40 "sniper" along with the scoped M14 as DM rifles. The Russians were at the forefront of designated marksman and sniper use. Also in terms of trying to equip most of their infantry with semi auto rifles.
The SVT40 was fairly advanced for it's time. Fairly reliable semi auto, adjustable gas block, detachable mag, muzzle brake, 24" (24.5?) barrel with 1:10 twist. On paper it holds it's own with modern rifles. Again very advanced for it's time. Both the Finns and Germans liked reissuing captured SVT to their own troops.
While I know some won't like this, I definately prefer the SVT40 over the SKS.
Last edited:
I would also love to see a Dragonuv stock for these. That being said I originally bought a SVT40 with the idea of making a Dragonuv clone. I couldn't do it. I liked the riflecin historically correct form too much. Six SVT40 later and the same result. Fireball who often does Valmet to Galli etc conversions also bought one to make a clone. He came to the same conclusion I did and his SVT remains stock.
With the super cheap ones out there now I could see doing it. Although I've already been down that path a few times and didn't have the heart to follow through. They look right in their natural form.
With the super cheap ones out there now I could see doing it. Although I've already been down that path a few times and didn't have the heart to follow through. They look right in their natural form.
Some interesting points Epoxy7. If you've read the Vasilai Zaitsef autobiography you'll have noticed that he specifically mentioned the SVT in a favorable light in his description of an action where he and a few other snipers were assigned to go after a larger number of attacking Germans. It wasn't long range "sniping" per se but accurate shooting with the enhanced firepower of the SVT. I admire the design of the SVT- extremely simple and functional. As to it's maximum accuracy potential, I'm still hoping to find out what, if any, enhanced bedding techniques were used by the Russians with the sniper variants. I can't believe with their practical approach that the SVT sniper program would have gone as far as it did if they hadn't showed at least the potential for good long range accuracy. But that doesn't mean MOA. Look at the armourers dispersion limits for the much vaunted No. 4 T- you may be surprised.
Indeed they do !!!
Love my SVT-40 to bits... so much I think I'll be buying another within the year.
