''American'' SVT-40's

cyclone

cyclone

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
379   0   0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
.


I've noticed that a fair number of American "YouTubers" claim their SVT-40's are unreliable; is it possible that they just have access to fewer, rougher-shape SVT-40's down there?.... :yingyang:




I've had a number of SVT-40's, and have yet to encounter any of the "horror stories" they seem to go on about.... :wave:
 
If you treat ww2 semi auto as modern ar15 as in "shoot and dump into your safe with no cleaning", then yes, extremely unreliable. Then also I suspect some Americans learned that attitudw from poor uneducated Russians that were dumping svts to pick up mosin nagants in WW2.

Sources of their Svts are same: Soviet refurb surplus, Finnish surplus, and a bit of Bulgarian refurbs from Canada.
 
Last edited:
Ive owned 3, and would not trust my life to them. Maybe back in WWII when they were new out of the factory they functioned better ? But i can still see many short comings to the rifle.

My first one had a heavily pitted bore, and I presume the chamber and its flutes were corroded as well. The gun was always having FTE. With all walks of ammo and on all settings. Even on 1.7. I noticed the gas piston and cup were heavily corroded as well and in result would bind up fairly easily. So i ordered a stainless steel piston cup set and new action springs from PPSH 41.com and that made a remarkable difference to the guns cycling. It went from not cycling on 1.7 to cycling 70% of the time.

Second One was hand picked by Corwin Arms. Bore was in excellent shape. Never shot it with stock gas system. Out of the box the first thing i did was installed the PPSH 41 parts from the other crappy SVT 40. This SVT 40 ran like a top on 1.5, but the cycling at that setting felt a little to aggressive. On 1.3 it felt softer, but would occasionally get a FTE.

My last SVT 40 that i had picked from Lever Arms was also in great shape. With the stock gas system it cycles along with reasonable reliability on setting 1.5. FTE are rare, but not anywhere near SKS rare. The gun however does occasionally get light primer strikes on surplus ammo. Ive swapped out the hammer spring with one purchased from Numrichgunparts but that hasn't totally eliminated the problem.

Moral of the story, considering the condition of the SVT 40s bought these days.... its hardly a platform id trust my life to. They come off as finicky and fragile guns to shoot. But at the same time I think there one of the nicest looking guns produced and they are very fun and comfortable to shoot!
 
They have a weird bias toward anything Russian. Disagree with someone on twitter? Russian bot. Get caught using an insecure server for classified emails? Russians hacked it.
 
SVT is reliable. Accuracy is not great but rifle functions well if maintained properly. It does take some time to learn how to operate/take care of SVT though, so I can see why some people say it's not reliable. My first gave me so much grief but than I figured it out.
 
Yep. What VuDu666 said 100%.
There's a reason the SVT was never pursued as a standard military issue rifle for the USSR. They were simply too hard for the average peasant soldier to maintain and use properly.
Proper cleaning is paramount, as well as other things like making sure you're on the right gas setting for the ammo you're using and little things like making sure the mark on your gas regulator lines up with the mark on the gas block. Adjusting the gas in the field is a PITA. Making sure you load the magazines properly to ensure reliable feeding is important, too.
All that being said, my SVT is probably one of my favorite rifles. I bought it in 2010 at a gun show for $300. An arsenal refurb 1941 Tula, no provision to accept a scope mount. The first couple times I took it out to the range it gave me nothing but grief and I thought it was the biggest POS ever fielded by any military. I wasn't sure if they were all like that or if I bought a lemon. But after watching lots of YouTube videos, reading lots of internet articles and with lots of patience I got mine to work properly and have never looked back. Don't get me wrong, every once in awhile it gives me grief and I keep a rubber mallet in my range bag for a reason. Having the reproduction gas tool is nice, too. A 5mm box end wrench with fit the gas reg nicely if you don't have one but don't apply too much torque or use the wrong size or you'll round off your gas regulator. I have a reproduction parade bayonet that looks sharp on the rifle and makes a good utility knife in the field.
I have American friends and relatives that drool over my SVT. Apparently they're somewhat rare and go for big $$$ down there.
 
I had one SVT40 that rocked in the stock about 1/2cm or more with hand presure. Never fired that rifle and sold it shortly after. Other SVT40'S have been solid rifles. I haven't shot them all yet but may as wel clean them all up from their cosmoline and use them while i can.

Very solid rifle, only issue i have ever had is a tendency to stovepipe every once and a while. This is easily cleared by cycling the bolt and off you go again.
 
Strictly speaking SVT was a rifle that Tokarev never had a chance to fully develop. In 1941 all development stopped because Soviet dearest ally decided it was time to invade. No changes that could affect manufacturing were allowed. And Soviet quality was quite abysmal, only by the end of 1944 they cranked up fist rifles that fully satisfied Army acceptance officers, I.e. made fully to original Tokarev specs in terms of types of materials used, parts quality and tolerances. By that time it was too late, Soviets were drooling over 7.62 kurz, and altogether it was understood from the war experience that full size rifle cartridge is no go for fully automatic rifles. Race for assault rifles started.
Another thing to consider is that quality of refurbs is very bad, yet they still work fine if you feed them com bloc ammo. Fit of original rifles was better, just grab light Bulgarian refurb that has all original parts and feel the difference. So despite being unfinished project rifle was totally adecvate for ww2 semi.
 
Just recent quote from American owner about his SVT and it's "unreliability": "If its messing with gas port that is a bunch of bull#### you shouldn't have to do."
So guy buys a rifle with adjustable gas system and expects not to clean, not to adjust... amazing ppl...
 
I mean there is some truth to his point.... why does a battle rifle need adjustable gas settings other then an off position for rifle grenades ? It basically translates to the gun is finicky and needs to run at a fine line where it cycles, but not too vigorously otherwise parts start to break. Kindov a fail design.

Going forward most trailing gun designs incorporated a very reliable overgassed system and just beefed up the extractor and action to handle the vigorous cycling.

Guns like the type 81, type 97 and SVD have adjustable positions as well, but those consist of NORMAL/FOULED and nobody is ever really expected to play with it to make the gun cycle under everyday use. SVTs on the other hand have settings 1.1-1.7 lol and people are always dicking with them to keep the rifle cycling reliably.
 
Murray 3-D said:
I mean there is some truth to his point.... why does a battle rifle need adjustable gas settings other then an off position for rifle grenades ? It basically translates to the gun is finicky and needs to run at a fine line where it cycles, but not too vigorously otherwise parts start to break. Kindov a fail design.

Going forward most trailing gun designs incorporated a very reliable overgassed system and just beefed up the extractor and action to handle the vigorous cycling.

Guns like the type 81, type 97 and SVD have adjustable positions as well, but those consist of NORMAL/FOULED and nobody is ever really expected to play with it to make the gun cycle under everyday use. SVTs on the other hand have settings 1.1-1.7 lol and people are always dicking with them to keep the rifle cycling reliably.
Click to expand...

Your modern thinking is the result of decades of accumulated military experience with semi-autos. Back then nobody knew a chit. Allow me to remind you that in 1930 there were no theoretical calculations for gas systems, previous experience was limited to a couple of models none of each were true success. Allow me to remind you that US and Germany went with gas trap system in M1 Garand and G41 (stupid, eh from modern perspective?). All that we know now would not been possible without all those designs created and tried in different conditions.
 
Murray 3-D said:
I mean there is some truth to his point.... why does a battle rifle need adjustable gas settings other then an off position for rifle grenades ? It basically translates to the gun is finicky and needs to run at a fine line where it cycles, but not too vigorously otherwise parts start to break. Kindov a fail design.
Click to expand...
"Rifle firing, rifle stops. #### hook and look. Rounds in mag, no round in chamber, gas stoppage. Safety on, adjust gas regulator 2 clicks, safety off, go on." The L1A1 wasn't a fail design.
 
Horilka said:
Your modern thinking is the result of decades of accumulated military experience with semi-autos. Back then nobody knew a chit. Allow me to remind you that in 1930 there were no theoretical calculations for gas systems, previous experience was limited to a couple of models none of each were true success. Allow me to remind you that US and Germany went with gas trap system in M1 Garand and G41 (stupid, eh from modern perspective?). All that we know now would not been possible without all those designs created and tried in different conditions.
Click to expand...

DECADES hey ? the AK 47 came out when? A few years later ? And it had a non adjustable gas system as we all know. Probably the most successful rifle ever created.

This discussion isnt about whether or not the SVT 40 was reliable for its time, its about if its reliable period ? Which I personally view it as not.
 
Juster said:
"Rifle firing, rifle stops. #### hook and look. Rounds in mag, no round in chamber, gas stoppage. Safety on, adjust gas regulator 2 clicks, safety off, go on." The L1A1 wasn't a fail design.
Click to expand...

SVT 40 fires, trigger is stiff, empty casing not fully extracted from chamber, awkwardly beat on CH, bust loose casing, clear, chamber new round, oops it didnt have enough spring power to go into full battery... carefully try again.. oh there it goes! safety on, crank weird pentagon nob with special wrench, hope it doesnt jam for a while....

My personal SVT40 favorite is finger fuking stovepipes clear and burning my finger tips on the boiling hot casings due to the guns fluted chamber haha
 
Last edited:
Murray 3-D said:
DECADES hey ? the AK 47 came out when? A few years later ? And it had a non adjustable gas system as we all know. Probably the most successful rifle ever created.

This discussion isnt about whether or not the SVT 40 was reliable for its time, its about if its reliable period ? Which I personally view it as not.
Click to expand...

"What we've got here is failure to communicate." (c)
AK accepted same year as SKS - in 1949, actually both were accepted with same directive. And both of them were also result of experience with AVS, SVT, DP, StG and many other things. And I was talking about you speaking on what had to be done in past. It's easy to be smart now about what happened in the past.

Discussion is about some ppl not having enough IQ to strip down simple gas system from 1930x and even not willing to do it. About some ppl not being able to operate the rifle at the luxury of home and range when 70 years ago Finnish and German and many Soviet soldiers were able to use it in the war. Of course there could be defective rifle, but it's mostly about "defective" operators what what I see in the forums.
You want modern reliability? A run of the mill 120 y.o. Mosin Nagant is more reliable then run of the mill modern AR15. Does it make MN more effective or more fun or better or being able to fire more rounds per minute? Each rifle is the product of its time and circumstances. Criticizing flaws of the historical rifle is stupid. Understanding limitations and being able to use old rifle is smart.
 
Last edited:
Horilka said:
"What we've got here is failure to communicate." (c)
AK accepted same year as SKS - in 1949, actually both were accepted with same directive. And both of them were also result of experience with AVS, SVT, DP, StG and many other things. And I was talking about you speaking on what had to be done in past. It's easy to be smart now about what happened in the past.

Discussion is about some ppl not having enough IQ to strip down simple gas system from 1930x and even not willing to do it. About some ppl not being able to operate the rifle at the luxury of home and range when 70 years ago Finnish and German and many Soviet soldiers were able to use it in the war. Of course there could be defective rifle, but it's mostly about "defective" operators what what I see in the forums.
You want modern reliability? A run of the mill 120 y.o. Mosin Nagant is more reliable then run of the mill modern AR15. Does it make MN more effective or more fun or better or being able to fire more rounds per minute? Each rifle is the product of its time and circumstances. Criticizing flaws of the historical rifle is stupid. Understanding limitations and being able to use old rifle is smart.
Click to expand...

The final part of ur argument completely contradicts the first part... criticizing flaws of a historical rifle is like u said how the technology progresses. Its necessary, theres nothing stupid about it. The SVT 40 may be 80yrs old. But that doesnt change the fact that it had flaws. One of them being flaky reliability. And the gas system with like 5+ positions is some evidence of that haha
 
At the same time firearm's of that period were built with sights out to 600-1000 metres, they would add "features" it wouldn't necessarily need, that's my opinion of the 5 gas positions
 
Geezes guys, what are you arguing about? Just place your semi-autos by the front door and Justine will be there shortly to collect them as a prohibited assault weapons. Problem solved! Lol!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom