I've seen this. The guy with the SVT-40 really fumbled his mags changes. He would have been better off using stripper clips. Not a meaningful comparison
Greatest battle implement ever devised - SVT-40? Stg44? .. or M1 Garand
- Thread starter steelgray
- Start date
- Status
I've seen this. The guy with the SVT-40 really fumbled his mags changes. He would have been better off using stripper clips. Not a meaningful comparison
But it was also jamming. Which ive noticed alot tend to do if u dont have the gas absolutely cranked. I think its an accurate comparison. Garand> SVT40 even the Soviets knew the gun had cycling problems. Even going so far as to flute the guns chamber to aid in extraction. Did they have to do radical stuff like this to the Garands design? I dont believe so!
Actually didn't they issue the Garand with a gas trap and then go to a hole-in-the barrel design? Isn't that radical? They also dumped the mag feed design before issuance. Isn't that radical? Besides John Garand was a Canadian - so maybe just not that radical a guy ...eh?
Psychological warfare has always been an underappreciated weapon of war. Felix Dumpenbutt was one person who saw that for what is was. Shown circled in these two photos, he is the only guy known to have defecated in Hitler's personal Volkswagen. RIP Felix - that was one courageous dump for freedom!
Not the slightest (doesnt pretty much every auto loader have a hole in the barrel? Lol ). Pushing the notion that the SVT 40 was a better firearm then the M1 Garand will always result in loss. So just accept it.
Yup ^^^ Yes they did.
I will also add that actual full scale production wasn't until early 1940 with the modified gas system. The SVT40 was already in combat as the SVT38 and the SVT40 by then. Plus the sVT40 design effectively has a dust/mud cover. The Garand doesn't. I also wonder how it would have done on the Eastern front, where the other two contenders were being utilized.
Don't get me wrong I like the Garand. It's a good rifle. At the time it was able to be made in mass and provided the firepower that was needed. Was it the best weapon at the time being utilized? No. As we all know the best often came later, or couldn't be made quickly enough due to the war conditions. The Eastern front lost more lives than all the other theatres of WWII combined. It was the ultimate testing grounds and loss of people along with weapons was so great that production of the more sophisticated weapons couldn't keep up with the need. Cheaper and easier/quicker to build had a big advantage under those circumstances. Good enough often won the battle and the war. I stand by my earlier designations for the reasons I listed, including how the design lived on after in other firearms.
For what it's worth Steelgray, using that photo in the manner you are is rather distasteful. There are two possibilities on the fellows identity, one being Gustav Wegert who worked at Blohm and Voss (died in 1959) and the other which is more likely is August Landmesser - who was arrested a number of times prior to the War due to his marriage/relationship with a Jewish woman. August eventually ended up in a penal battalion and was thought to have been killed in combat somewhere in Croatia in 1944.
It was a better weapon. Mag fed, adjustable gas block with tilting block (FN FAL style) design. Compensator which made it easy to shoot including follow up shots. Frankly it was a very modern design for the time and even stands up to some current firearms in terms of features/design. Plus It was generally liked more by the enemy troops trying to capture as many as possible to reissue to to their lines. The Germans created their own manual for it.
Nope. Every auto loader didn't have a hole in the barrel at that time. In fact the American and German armies mandated that an auto loader couldn't have a hole in the barrel for a gas system. Things changed when they realized their systems didn't work and that gas tapped from a hole in the barrel did work very well. The German G41 like the early Garand used a gas trap. However like the Garand it had lots of problems. The Germans resorted to copying the gas system from captured SVT40 rifles and in 1943 they had the Gewehr 43 with a piston gas system tapped of the barrel.
Doesnt matter if the rifle brought good theory and novel features to the field if they overall failed. Mag fed? ha more like issued a singular detachable mag then that was to be fed with stripper clips... adjustable gas block? yah so the soldiers probably had some hope to make the finicky gun work but yet not completely club its fragile self to death with vigorous cycling. Tilting block bolt? not bad, but generally regarded as sloppy and not a good platform to offer precision. Compensator? yah, not only does it bark flames in every direction signalling your position to the enemy, but it also blows out Comrade Yuri's ear drums in the process. Outside of competition shooting situations and full auto is a comp a worth while accessory to issue? apparently not since many combat rifles dont have one. The Soviets probably incorporated one into the design for better full auto control and to reduce chances of the fragile birch stock breaking. But soon realized full auto was mental and broke the gun, and the 6 port brake was too timely to machine.... they dumbed it down to 2 port and does the later following SKS and SVD have a comp? no.
Yes, the desperate Germans picked up SVT 40s, SOOooooo ? im sure a desperate German on the eastern front wouldve picked up a M1 Garand too! (probably more likely then the SVT 40 since they so hated the Soviets).
The Soviets adapted, and moved on...Just like all the sides. But I dont hear or see many Soviets worshiping the SVT 40 and tattooing it across their back quite like the Americans do to this day with the M1 Garand.
M1 Garand>SVT 40 once again
They issued 3 mags and stripper clips. The reason the Garand had the en bloc clip was because it was significantly cheaper to produce. They went cheap to issue them to as many soldiers as quickly and inexpensively as possible. Do you see modern firearms continuing with that design?
Adjustable gas system, tilting block, mag fed all describe the FN FAL. A very successful and much loved rifle in the common wealth countries I might add. A design that Canada used until 1980s.
The muzzle brake was to give it the characterstics of handling that was later achieved with smaller rounds in weapons such as the STG44 etc. It was basically a bridge before going to the smaller caliber. It worked fairly well. Yes there are disadvantages for sure. But it provided fast follow up shots similar to a much smaller caliber firearm. The fragile birch stock was also to keep it light and handy. Which it is. The AVT came later as an attempt for full auto support. It failed. The muzzle brake was in semi autos since the beginning. The design was simplified for production ie the muzzle brake. Ultimately as the war was on the Soviets door steps they had to go back to the Mosin since the losses were huge and they needed weapons as quickly as possible and with as little training or experience necessary to use. They were literally rolling tanks off the assembly lines and driving them to the front to fight the Germans.
The Germans didn't just pick up SVT40's. The Fins during the Winter war also captured as many as they could and reissued the SVT38. The Germans actually put the SVT40 into their arsenal as the 259r printed operation manuals and I've even read that they produced ammunition for them. So a lot more than just using what was laying around on the battle field. They integrated them into their own military. Until they were able to actually produce their own decent semi autos in 43 (after copying the SVT40 gas system)
I've seen a lot more AR15 tattoos than Garand. Think maybe it's a time period / culture thing rather than a which weapon was best at the time issue? The fact you would even use that to justify your answer is fairly strange.
You aren't getting this. Yup, pretty much every auto loader has a hole in the barrel BUT the Garand didn't start that way. A fair no. were actually issued with gas traps instead. Look it up. As for the Garand being better in every way you never heard of Garand thumb? Saving Private Ryan comes up a bit short on some aspects of representing guns accurately, but the movie gets one thing right. Just about ever shot that shows a guy from the squad who shoots a Garand seems to depict that guy have a nice big blacken thumb nail on their right hand. Know why? Hint: OUCH!
Eaglelord17
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Sault Ste. Marie
The SVT 40 is in no way better than a M1 Garand.
Yes it was issued with 3 magazines and stripper clips. However they are only 10rd magazines, and realistically you can load a Garand quicker than those detachable magazines (and that doesn't even include when you run out of full magazines and have to rely on those stripper clips).
SVT-40 loading process-
Magazine empty, Remove magazine, place old magazine in poorly designed webbing (or fight to remove new magazine to make space for old magazine from poorly designed webbing), grab new magazine from poorly designed webbing, install new magazine, run the bolt
M1 Garand loading process-
Rifle is empty it just discharged the clip, grab new 8 round clip from better webbing than the Soviet designs, insert new clip in rifle bolt more or less runs itself and if it doesn't run the bolt.
M1 Garand is much simpler, faster, and you don't have to worry about magazines afterwards when loading. The whole 10rd vs 8rd thing doesn't really matter much, especially when you consider with the SVT-40 your lucky to make it through 10rds without issue.
In terms of reliability, the M1 Garand is more reliable. I have never had a stoppage with a M1 Garand, every SVT-40 I have used has more or less been a jam-o-matic. The few days you get ammo it likes its fun, but otherwise it really does have reliability issues. Adjustable gas systems are fail able, and take a long time to set up right, and then your ammo can change and now your back to square 1. Don't forget that the SVT-40 is rimmed, and if you have ever had rimlock in a SVT-40 it is a miserable time to try and fix. If I can have it happen in a nice safe clean shooting environment, it can 100% happen in a war zone.
In terms of accuracy the M1 Garand is more accurate. They did make a sniper version and it wasn't plagued with anywhere near the same issues as the SVT-40 snipers.
In terms of ease of maintenance, the M1 Garand is much easier to maintain. The SVT-40 is a nightmare to properly clean and take care of, that's all that needs to be said.
And my disclosure, I own neither rifle anymore as I personally don't care to much for either one.
Yes it was issued with 3 magazines and stripper clips. However they are only 10rd magazines, and realistically you can load a Garand quicker than those detachable magazines (and that doesn't even include when you run out of full magazines and have to rely on those stripper clips).
SVT-40 loading process-
Magazine empty, Remove magazine, place old magazine in poorly designed webbing (or fight to remove new magazine to make space for old magazine from poorly designed webbing), grab new magazine from poorly designed webbing, install new magazine, run the bolt
M1 Garand loading process-
Rifle is empty it just discharged the clip, grab new 8 round clip from better webbing than the Soviet designs, insert new clip in rifle bolt more or less runs itself and if it doesn't run the bolt.
M1 Garand is much simpler, faster, and you don't have to worry about magazines afterwards when loading. The whole 10rd vs 8rd thing doesn't really matter much, especially when you consider with the SVT-40 your lucky to make it through 10rds without issue.
In terms of reliability, the M1 Garand is more reliable. I have never had a stoppage with a M1 Garand, every SVT-40 I have used has more or less been a jam-o-matic. The few days you get ammo it likes its fun, but otherwise it really does have reliability issues. Adjustable gas systems are fail able, and take a long time to set up right, and then your ammo can change and now your back to square 1. Don't forget that the SVT-40 is rimmed, and if you have ever had rimlock in a SVT-40 it is a miserable time to try and fix. If I can have it happen in a nice safe clean shooting environment, it can 100% happen in a war zone.
In terms of accuracy the M1 Garand is more accurate. They did make a sniper version and it wasn't plagued with anywhere near the same issues as the SVT-40 snipers.
In terms of ease of maintenance, the M1 Garand is much easier to maintain. The SVT-40 is a nightmare to properly clean and take care of, that's all that needs to be said.
And my disclosure, I own neither rifle anymore as I personally don't care to much for either one.
stg
speaking to someone who used one in the last weeks of the war Government sector berlin
He said stg was an excellent weapon semi auto or full auto mild recoil outranged subguns accuracy wise
usefully in holding positions or covering your withdraw
ammunition was is very sort supply (all was in those days) issued 120 rnds
better then other weapons available k98 mp40 (was told full auto was in short supply except light mg)
speaking to someone who used one in the last weeks of the war Government sector berlin
He said stg was an excellent weapon semi auto or full auto mild recoil outranged subguns accuracy wise
usefully in holding positions or covering your withdraw
ammunition was is very sort supply (all was in those days) issued 120 rnds
better then other weapons available k98 mp40 (was told full auto was in short supply except light mg)
Of course im not getting it, im not getting how people can honestly suggest the SVT 40 was a better gun then the M1 Garand lol
Didnt say the Garand was better in everyway, nor did i say it was perfect. But im willing to bet most vets wouldve chose the occasional pinched thumb over occasional jams, broken birch stocks, none existent part support, springs flying everywhere during dissembly and extreme vertical shot dispersion.
Go post a debate like this on an American gun forum and see how one sided this argument becomes haha!
Garand FTW.
The STG-44 was great in concept but the implementation was meh, as in poorly built and heavy.
SVT-40 was pretty much a flop.
There's also the question of magazines, as in many if not most WW2 arms weren't issued with a sufficient number of them, which left the end user either often having to load mags in direct combat, and to try to acquire more if they could.
Garand didn't have these issues with its cheap and abundant en-bloc clips.
The STG-44 was great in concept but the implementation was meh, as in poorly built and heavy.
SVT-40 was pretty much a flop.
There's also the question of magazines, as in many if not most WW2 arms weren't issued with a sufficient number of them, which left the end user either often having to load mags in direct combat, and to try to acquire more if they could.
Garand didn't have these issues with its cheap and abundant en-bloc clips.
- Status
