SVT-40 sniper list

milsurpo said:
Ratnik: Sorry for the delay. Decided to join "team gunnutz" for easy photo uploading. So, if it worked, the attached photos show the non-standard notch on this '42 Tula. Obviously either field conversion or aftermarket? Of posssible significance is a shallow "C" above the date and a small "C" on the left side of the rear of the receiver. Have put a hundred rounds or so through this and it functions very well but isn't terribly accurate. In addition to your knowledge about sniper conversions, do you have any thoughts about how SVT's were originally stocked up? Of my dozen or so, the majority have some contact with measurable up-pressure at the tip of the forend although I do have a couple that with virtually free floating barrels. Thanks again for sharing your knowledge.

milsurpo
Click to expand...

I think the notch is too far back for the mount to work as it should.
 
Lyman: I compared the position of the notch with one of my genuine snipers and the rear of the cut is at precisely the same distance from the rear of the receiver. Of course the notch on this '42 is too narrow to allow any movement in recoil- it's a very snug fit. So the mount sits at exactly the same location as on a real one but won't recoil against the spring the small amount that is allowed by the real one. My aftermarket Russian mount fits it very well but much to my surprise I couldn't shoot as good groups as with the iron sights using the aftermarket scope that came with the mount. This one has significant up-pressure at the tip of the forend so, based on your comments on another thread, I think I'm going to try free-floating it and see what happens.

milsurpo
 
milsurpo said:
Lyman: I compared the position of the notch with one of my genuine snipers and the rear of the cut is at precisely the same distance from the rear of the receiver. Of course the notch on this '42 is too narrow to allow any movement in recoil- it's a very snug fit. So the mount sits at exactly the same location as on a real one but won't recoil against the spring the small amount that is allowed by the real one. My aftermarket Russian mount fits it very well but much to my surprise I couldn't shoot as good groups as with the iron sights using the aftermarket scope that came with the mount. This one has significant up-pressure at the tip of the forend so, based on your comments on another thread, I think I'm going to try free-floating it and see what happens.

milsurpo
Click to expand...
What aftermarket scope were you using ?

Free floating will certainly not hurt.
 
Lyman: The brand appears to be "BOMZ" but all the material supplied is in Russian. As to the bedding, my main experience is with Lee Enfields and Enfields (P14, Model 1917) that like up-pressure at the front of the forend. It will be interesting to shoot one free of the forend and then to repeat with strong contact at the front. Presumably these refurbs were done by workers with knowledge of factory guidelines for stocking up and, as indicated, the vast majority of mine appear to have been intentionally set up with the barrel contacting the tip of the forend.

milsurpo
 
milsurpo said:
Ratnik: Sorry for the delay. Decided to join "team gunnutz" for easy photo uploading. So, if it worked, the attached photos show the non-standard notch on this '42 Tula. Obviously either field conversion or aftermarket? Of posssible significance is a shallow "C" above the date and a small "C" on the left side of the rear of the receiver. Have put a hundred rounds or so through this and it functions very well but isn't terribly accurate. In addition to your knowledge about sniper conversions, do you have any thoughts about how SVT's were originally stocked up? Of my dozen or so, the majority have some contact with measurable up-pressure at the tip of the forend although I do have a couple that with virtually free floating barrels. Thanks again for sharing your knowledge.

milsurpo
Click to expand...

Thanks for pictures. Currently I can't fins at least one reason, that confirm that this is factory made notch.
So my thought is that this is field added notch. Only things that confuse me, are rails. They are amost non existant at those late 1942 rifles. But ФА is supposed sniper prefix, and regular rifles with rails are observed there.
Now to notch shape. If it was used with original mount, we will see this. After some number of shotts with attached mount, notch loose his shape from recoil.
C proofmarks do not mean anything, they are also observed at regular rifles.
Everything above is only my opinion, I also have few more reasons to say this, but I cannot share with them at this moment

5c4bc8e4938f.jpg
 
Decided to re-post in in this thread to keep everything in single place.

Field made PU mount for SVT-40
This scope and mount were found in the old house near Kyiv, Ukraine, where the defensive line of 1941 was. Of course it's not the best solution, but hey, at least it's historically accurate and you don't have to bubba your rifle.

IMGP0840.JPG

IMGP0815.JPG

IMGP0830.JPG

IMGP0831.JPG

IMGP0832.JPG

IMGP0834.JPG

IMGP0835.JPG

IMGP0837.JPG

IMGP0838.JPG
 
Hopefully somone can help me . I founded SVT 40, 41 Tula sniper but I don't see this prefix on the sniper list. the prefix is C and what looks like double K back to back and number below 1000, no C mark. Notch is flat with rounded corners. Im wondering if this is legitimate sniper.
 
andycal said:
Hopefully somone can help me . I founded SVT 40, 41 Tula sniper but I don't see this prefix on the sniper list. the prefix is C and what looks like double K back to back and number below 1000, no C mark. Notch is flat with rounded corners. Im wondering if this is legitimate sniper.
Click to expand...

Post a pic please.
 
I checked this gun again and looks like I was too excited to see it ,but there is big "C" mark on right side of receiver.
 
Last edited:
ajagcapt said:
Here is my new 1941 Tula.

Is there anyway to tell if this is the original stock?
Click to expand...

At refurbs only barrel, sight leaf base and in most cases muzzle break are original to rifle. All other parts are mismatched. Soviet procces of refurb was the next - they take some quantity of rifles (for example 100), disassembled them, repaired\refurbed them, and assembled in random order
 
I see.

So the sniper rifles that exist now have no better barrel (or any other parts) than any other refurbed Svt-40. It is simply that receiver matched up with whatever other parts were on-hand.

Do you know why some stocks had the new serial numbers stamped on them while others did not? Or was that also the luck of the draw.

Thank you.
 
Barrel usually original to receiver.
About stocks - different refurb facilities, different periods. Some stocks were sanded better, and have no evidences of old serial numbers. Some have visible rests of old number. In some cases old number was striked wit X marks
 
Ratnik,

I have another question for you.

You'll see in the pictures I have attached that just below the receiver near the sniper notch that it looks like different wood was attached to the stock. It looks like a piece on both sides that then wraps around and almost meets behind the notch.

It is too linear to be natural and you'll note the resemblance to the shape of the scope mount.

What is the significance, if any, of this? Or is it simply a stock repair?

Thanks for your help.







 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom