SVT decision?
- Thread starter rattus
- Start date
Good job admins, ruining the milsurp section.
Edit:
After cooling down for a bit I realize that ruin is a little harsh. However, it seems that whenever something is used, and it works fine, and people like how it works, someone else has to go and change things for no apparent reason, upsetting a lot of people in the process.
Yes the SVT40 was designed and used during the Communist rein on much of Eur-Asia, making it a red rifle. HOWEVER, its primary use was during the Great Patriotic War (WWII), and by the forum descriptors, it fits within this (milsurp) section. Also, as discussed in another thread within this section, the definition of a milsurp is an item that was once part of the regular order of battle for a nation, but has since become surplus to their needs. Well by this definition the SVT40 also fits within this (milsurp) section.
I like browsing thought the CGN milsurp section b/c it is general in nature. It lets you see and read about a plethora of varying former military rifles. If the moderators want to start breaking up the general nature of this section by segregating early communist era weapons from the rest, then why not segregate everything into subgroups and make a Mauser Section, and a Lee Enfield section and so on and so forth.
Edit:
After cooling down for a bit I realize that ruin is a little harsh. However, it seems that whenever something is used, and it works fine, and people like how it works, someone else has to go and change things for no apparent reason, upsetting a lot of people in the process.
Yes the SVT40 was designed and used during the Communist rein on much of Eur-Asia, making it a red rifle. HOWEVER, its primary use was during the Great Patriotic War (WWII), and by the forum descriptors, it fits within this (milsurp) section. Also, as discussed in another thread within this section, the definition of a milsurp is an item that was once part of the regular order of battle for a nation, but has since become surplus to their needs. Well by this definition the SVT40 also fits within this (milsurp) section.
I like browsing thought the CGN milsurp section b/c it is general in nature. It lets you see and read about a plethora of varying former military rifles. If the moderators want to start breaking up the general nature of this section by segregating early communist era weapons from the rest, then why not segregate everything into subgroups and make a Mauser Section, and a Lee Enfield section and so on and so forth.
Last edited:
Whoa, let's not jump overboard! I want to keep SVTs here but if the decision sticks it won't ruin the section. We'll still have Smellie, Louthepou, Nabs, Desporterizer, Buffdog, Cantom, Andy, SVT1940... Oh, damn, scratch SVT1940
Quick question, has anyone contacted one of the mods to respectfully explain what we milsurp guys see in the SVT that make us want to keep chatting about it in this forum, for different reasons that some other folks may want to discuss it elsewhere?
I was thinking about that. I figured as long as we kept it respectful discussing it would make our argument. That, I wasn't sure when I started the thread if I was out to lunch on this one, and it should probably come from one of the "senior members" here. I'm still a milsurp noob.
Blastattack
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Winnipeg MB
As far as milsurp goes, i beleive it should be defined as follows:
Milsurp:
Any Rifle, Shotgun or Handgun (vehicle, accessory, etc.), whose date of design, manufacture and issuance pre-date the termination of the second world war shall be considered a milsurp. The firearm(s) in question must have been officially or unofficially adopted and were employed, or intended for deployment, by a military power. The firearm(s) must also have some history of combat; preferably on the field of battle, though training purposes are also acceptable. Firearms must also be manufactured with traditional materials, namely steel and wood. The definition of a milsurp (for the purposes of this forum) also extends to all original main battle rifles and any military issue firearm whose service history predates the second world war. For example; this definition permits topics discussing M14s, provided they are original (H&R, Winchester etc) and not reproductions. This would also allow any original M1911A1 issued between 1911 ans 1986 to be discussed. Most importantly, anything Milsurp must have been owned by the state, produced for the state and utilized, sold or stolen from the state, and eventually general issue suspended by the state.
I think that's a pretty fair definition. By definition it excludes anything considered a red rifle (SKS, SVD, AK, RPD etc) as none are battle rifles or can trace their service history before WWII. It also effectively excludes just about anything in the black rifle section, as nearly 100% of black rifles are made of various synthetic materials and/or aluminum alloys, and none have a history traceable before the end of WWII. There are exceptions of course, but i think this accounts for just about everything. Maybe a little convoluted, but all the pertinent info is there.
Milsurp:
Any Rifle, Shotgun or Handgun (vehicle, accessory, etc.), whose date of design, manufacture and issuance pre-date the termination of the second world war shall be considered a milsurp. The firearm(s) in question must have been officially or unofficially adopted and were employed, or intended for deployment, by a military power. The firearm(s) must also have some history of combat; preferably on the field of battle, though training purposes are also acceptable. Firearms must also be manufactured with traditional materials, namely steel and wood. The definition of a milsurp (for the purposes of this forum) also extends to all original main battle rifles and any military issue firearm whose service history predates the second world war. For example; this definition permits topics discussing M14s, provided they are original (H&R, Winchester etc) and not reproductions. This would also allow any original M1911A1 issued between 1911 ans 1986 to be discussed. Most importantly, anything Milsurp must have been owned by the state, produced for the state and utilized, sold or stolen from the state, and eventually general issue suspended by the state.
I think that's a pretty fair definition. By definition it excludes anything considered a red rifle (SKS, SVD, AK, RPD etc) as none are battle rifles or can trace their service history before WWII. It also effectively excludes just about anything in the black rifle section, as nearly 100% of black rifles are made of various synthetic materials and/or aluminum alloys, and none have a history traceable before the end of WWII. There are exceptions of course, but i think this accounts for just about everything. Maybe a little convoluted, but all the pertinent info is there.
Why not allow it in both sections? I think there are questions that are relevant/irrelevant to both. Milsurp guys may wish to talk about the history of the gun or it's use, while red rifle enthusiasts want to make them into Dragunovs. To me, objectively, it seems like we should have the choice to do both in separate forums, no? The decision to segregate the two seems a little bit like an answer in search of a question to me. Hopefully the mods will see fit, which also makes me wonder the same thing that louthepou already asked; has anyone asked the mods to kindly reconsider before we all got our collective cleaning patches in a bunch?
what we are trying to do is simplify the definition of CGN firearms categories, we found too many members were confused with the meaning of RR and milsurp bcos technically speaking a SKS is also a milsurp . mods have been moving too many threads between the two.
the subtitle of milsurp should have been changed when the red rifles was incorporated a few years ago but it wasnt, the RR was meant to have all the military firearms developed by the communists .
we dont mix red with black nor do we mix red with MBR so we shouldnt mix red (SVT) with milsurp. its that simply.
we are not talking about pistol, no problem with ppsh in RR and as for the rest , i already explained that the original werent developed by the reds .
the subtitle of milsurp should have been changed when the red rifles was incorporated a few years ago but it wasnt, the RR was meant to have all the military firearms developed by the communists .
we dont mix red with black nor do we mix red with MBR so we shouldnt mix red (SVT) with milsurp. its that simply.
we are not talking about pistol, no problem with ppsh in RR and as for the rest , i already explained that the original werent developed by the reds .
It was used during World War 2 by the Russians, Germans and Finns etc. Any discussion of its history deals with events that took place during World War 2. It should remain in the Milsurp section IMHO.
Will threads about SVT-38s and AVTs also be moved to Red Rifles?
Will threads about SVT-38s and AVTs also be moved to Red Rifles?
I don't think that when I post a question about a Finnish captured SVT40 in the red rifle forum, I'd get as much as a response as I would in the Milsurp section. Honestly, I'd like to hear from a guy who has some interest and exposure collecting WW2 era firearms, than a guy who pops off 1000 rounds on the weekend with his SKS.
What about considering reclassifying the Milsurp section as for pre 46 firearms. Everything beyound that can go into Main Battle rifles or Red Rifles?
Listen to the People, we are speaking
What about considering reclassifying the Milsurp section as for pre 46 firearms. Everything beyound that can go into Main Battle rifles or Red Rifles?
Listen to the People, we are speaking
- Location
- Leduc County, Alberta
joe n said:
I agree somewhat... but, asking about an SAFN49, Hakim, FR8, M954, BM59, etc in the MBR Forum will probably get some sparse answers as well...
I almost don't mind having the guy who busts off a crate of M43 Corrosive in a weekend through his $189 Simonov asking questions in the Milsurp forum! He may just start getting interested in other Milsurps in his reading as well!
Again, it's all IMHO, and I am sure the Powers that be will decide what they feel is best, but a Milsurp is a Milsurp...
Commercial made "Military Style" firearms can go to the respective subforums (Black = Ar15's/Swiss Arms/AR180B/etc, Red = CZ858/TAPCO SKS/etc, MBR = M305... what else is there??
) Whereas the AR18/AR180, Colt M16, Vz58, AK47, Military Issue SKS, Garand, M14, BM59, etc can all go to Milsurps.Only problem is... where do guns like the new made repros of the MP40, StG44, FG42, MG34, M1919, etc go???
Milsurps IMO.Again, this is just my opinion... Either way, I will still scan the other forums for lost Milsurps as I have always done.
Cheers!
I agree somewhat... but, asking about an SAFN49, Hakim, FR8, M954, BM59, etc in the MBR Forum will probably get some sparse answers as well...
I almost don't mind having the guy who busts off a crate of M43 Corrosive in a weekend through his $189 Simonov asking questions in the Milsurp forum! He may just start getting interested in other Milsurps in his reading as well!
Again, it's all IMHO, and I am sure the Powers that be will decide what they feel is best, but a Milsurp is a Milsurp... :
thats a good point , if the milsurp members are true to the subtitle of the milsurp "Old stuff buried in the backyard since WW1 and WW2" then SAFN and others dont belong in milsurp. this is what im trying to say, its confusing and when members are confused , they put them in the wrong categories and we end up moving them.
most newbies begins with a SKS in RR and when they get more knowledge and experience they move on to other rifles , some who like tacticals will move on to VZ58 , others who like the original SKS will move to SVT . very few members stay in RR long term, that is what i noticed. having SVT in RR introduces them to SVT sooner .
Ar180shooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ottawa, ON
Garand shouldn't be in the MBR section, which is for post WW2 .30 cal rifles. The Garand is not post WW2, so shouldn't be included.
- Location
- Leduc County, Alberta
What about Post War made Garands???
Yup! Very confusing!
Curtton said:
PS: My first rifle was an SAFN49!!!
What about Post War made Garands???
it depends on when it was first introduced , i already explained in the sticky that mosin was first introduced when russia wasnt red so subsequent models like M38 and M44 will be considered as such, a milsurp.
garand was introduced pre1945 therefore post war garands will be considered the same , pre1945 so it shouldnt be in MBR.
haretrigger
CGN Regular
- Location
- Lower Mainland, BC
Why fix what wasn't broken? Can't wait to read about some guys picatinny rail infested SVT 40 with a front grip and bedliner'd stock set! I don't agree with or understand how this is necessary?
