![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is a PU Scope? Avriette 17:00, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Check http://www.russian-mosin-nagant.com/9130sniper.htm for a discussion on Soviet Scopes -- Zebadoba 23:39, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
It seems to me that there should be a reference to the SVD (Dragunov) rifle in this article, as it uses the same cartridge and fills approximately the same role (designated marksman / battle rifle). 74.7.55.66 ( talk) 16:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
This article has long stated (since 2005 [1]) that around 1.6 million SVT-38/40 rifles were made. However, User:Uzz75 recently changed this, stating exactly 5,823,795 million rifles were made. He then proceeded to back this up with the book The SKS Carabine by Steve Kehaya and Joe Poyer. Needless to say this is a very large discrepency, and this is the only source I can find claiming production of over 2 million rifles. I can not find a reliable source stating there was 1.6 million rifles made, but Modern firearms says there was over one million made before 1945 [2]. Any input or more reliable sources? — Dan MP5 15:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I will try to read and find more info from the source of the book.(Also I know that is not a valid source, but i have one svt and its number is 2'227'514 Tula 1942)- Uzz75
From http://www.tokarev.net/ .... According to E. C. Ezell, in the book, "Small Arms of the World" (12th Ed.), 1,322,085 SVT-40's were made in the USSR, as compared to 4,450,000 SVT-38's. Only 51,710 sniper versions of the SVT-40 were made..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uzz75 ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Sooo.... at the moment the article states both 5,772,085 and 1,600,000 made in total, even using the same sources on both claims! Could anyone knowledgeable perhaps research this issue and possibly even add a statement explaining that there is this huge disagreement in available litterature? 83.227.64.234 ( talk) 16:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
It says on SAFN page that 1st working implementation of Saive's designs appeared in 1937. SVT participated in 1935 design competition (albeit unsuccessfully). Anyone cares to explain how "What was earlier, 1935 or 1937" could be a subject for a discussion, as stated in the article's body? 206.186.8.130 ( talk) 22:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
It's suggested that, since Russia was quite closed at the time, most of all regarding new armaments, they might have simply found similar solutions for similar problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.234.189 ( talk) 00:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
The text suggests that the SVT was used by only a few countries other than the USSR, mostly it's neighbors and close allies, and that it was completely out of use by ~1960. The users section though lists modern Russia and several states that would only have obtained it for military use through cold war imports (e.g. Egypt) and if the Russians weren't using it during the 80s, how did the Afghans get any? Do we have any evidence that the Russian military has used them? Does this mean they used them as parade or honor guard rifles the way the USA uses special M14s? I'm pretty sure they haven't issued them as service rifles.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 18:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Although the G43 was based on the SVT40 in design, can it really be considered a variant? It is quite different aesthetically and was manufactured by a different country. We might as well call the FN FAL a SVT40 variant because it uses a similar design.-- Martin ( talk) 06:15, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
This crops up every time the Soviet weapons are discussed. I call for an unbiased opinion by an expert. True, the approach to grunt-level firearms in the Russian army was "lofty", including the Russian Empire army (pre-1917). This stemmed from the army's late transition to modern magazine firearms, from the reality of the draft system... BUT most of all from the prejudice towards ordinary soldiers compared to officers, who were traditionally viewed as aristocrats (and often were, more so than in other large armies). For example, the decision for single-action Nagant "soldier-type" revolver compared to the "officer-type" double-action was made based on this prejudice towards "stupid" and "cowardly" rank and file. And even then, the design itself was chosen based on its "round economy" due to the slow reload - overall conservative approach to infantry weapons that carried itself further.
This prejudice obviously was just that - a prejudice, because Russian army was always characterized by the relatively high morale, stubborness, resourcefulness and skill of its soldiers. And yes, until 1930s most of the conscripts were from rural areas and not machine workers; but their percentage steadily grew thanks to rigorously-forced industrialization.
Nevertheless, the prejudice, it seems, seeped deeply even into modern historic records. The notion of WWII-era Soviet soldiers being "poorly educated and poorly equipped", moreso "poorly trained", remains to be proven on a case by case basis, compared with the analogous training and education level in other major countries. Of course, often it will be correct - mass drafts and equipment shortages were a reality for Soviet warfare. But equally widespread was discipline, proper training and efficient application of available technology - or the war could take a whole new direction there.
In the case of SVT, there are accounts in literature that show: "quality" troops (reconnaisance for example) preferred them for their purposes, and dismiss the rifle's reputation for unreliability as coming from the people that don't maintain their weapons properly.
Again, I ask for an unbiased view of the SVT partially unsuccessful inception in the Soviet army, like it was done manyfold with the original fielding of the M16 rifle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.73.12.199 ( talk) 00:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Recently all of the Russian/Soviet gun articles have switched over to pictures taken at the Army Museum in Stockholm. While they are good, an SVT-40 without a magazine just looks stupid, and is in no way representative of the design. I own an SVT and could take a better one myself, or someone else could contribute one. Just so long as it has a magazine in it. 74.51.57.78 ( talk) 06:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of SVT-40's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Miller":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is a PU Scope? Avriette 17:00, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Check http://www.russian-mosin-nagant.com/9130sniper.htm for a discussion on Soviet Scopes -- Zebadoba 23:39, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
It seems to me that there should be a reference to the SVD (Dragunov) rifle in this article, as it uses the same cartridge and fills approximately the same role (designated marksman / battle rifle). 74.7.55.66 ( talk) 16:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
This article has long stated (since 2005 [1]) that around 1.6 million SVT-38/40 rifles were made. However, User:Uzz75 recently changed this, stating exactly 5,823,795 million rifles were made. He then proceeded to back this up with the book The SKS Carabine by Steve Kehaya and Joe Poyer. Needless to say this is a very large discrepency, and this is the only source I can find claiming production of over 2 million rifles. I can not find a reliable source stating there was 1.6 million rifles made, but Modern firearms says there was over one million made before 1945 [2]. Any input or more reliable sources? — Dan MP5 15:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
I will try to read and find more info from the source of the book.(Also I know that is not a valid source, but i have one svt and its number is 2'227'514 Tula 1942)- Uzz75
From http://www.tokarev.net/ .... According to E. C. Ezell, in the book, "Small Arms of the World" (12th Ed.), 1,322,085 SVT-40's were made in the USSR, as compared to 4,450,000 SVT-38's. Only 51,710 sniper versions of the SVT-40 were made..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uzz75 ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Sooo.... at the moment the article states both 5,772,085 and 1,600,000 made in total, even using the same sources on both claims! Could anyone knowledgeable perhaps research this issue and possibly even add a statement explaining that there is this huge disagreement in available litterature? 83.227.64.234 ( talk) 16:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
It says on SAFN page that 1st working implementation of Saive's designs appeared in 1937. SVT participated in 1935 design competition (albeit unsuccessfully). Anyone cares to explain how "What was earlier, 1935 or 1937" could be a subject for a discussion, as stated in the article's body? 206.186.8.130 ( talk) 22:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
It's suggested that, since Russia was quite closed at the time, most of all regarding new armaments, they might have simply found similar solutions for similar problems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.232.234.189 ( talk) 00:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
The text suggests that the SVT was used by only a few countries other than the USSR, mostly it's neighbors and close allies, and that it was completely out of use by ~1960. The users section though lists modern Russia and several states that would only have obtained it for military use through cold war imports (e.g. Egypt) and if the Russians weren't using it during the 80s, how did the Afghans get any? Do we have any evidence that the Russian military has used them? Does this mean they used them as parade or honor guard rifles the way the USA uses special M14s? I'm pretty sure they haven't issued them as service rifles.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 18:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Although the G43 was based on the SVT40 in design, can it really be considered a variant? It is quite different aesthetically and was manufactured by a different country. We might as well call the FN FAL a SVT40 variant because it uses a similar design.-- Martin ( talk) 06:15, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
This crops up every time the Soviet weapons are discussed. I call for an unbiased opinion by an expert. True, the approach to grunt-level firearms in the Russian army was "lofty", including the Russian Empire army (pre-1917). This stemmed from the army's late transition to modern magazine firearms, from the reality of the draft system... BUT most of all from the prejudice towards ordinary soldiers compared to officers, who were traditionally viewed as aristocrats (and often were, more so than in other large armies). For example, the decision for single-action Nagant "soldier-type" revolver compared to the "officer-type" double-action was made based on this prejudice towards "stupid" and "cowardly" rank and file. And even then, the design itself was chosen based on its "round economy" due to the slow reload - overall conservative approach to infantry weapons that carried itself further.
This prejudice obviously was just that - a prejudice, because Russian army was always characterized by the relatively high morale, stubborness, resourcefulness and skill of its soldiers. And yes, until 1930s most of the conscripts were from rural areas and not machine workers; but their percentage steadily grew thanks to rigorously-forced industrialization.
Nevertheless, the prejudice, it seems, seeped deeply even into modern historic records. The notion of WWII-era Soviet soldiers being "poorly educated and poorly equipped", moreso "poorly trained", remains to be proven on a case by case basis, compared with the analogous training and education level in other major countries. Of course, often it will be correct - mass drafts and equipment shortages were a reality for Soviet warfare. But equally widespread was discipline, proper training and efficient application of available technology - or the war could take a whole new direction there.
In the case of SVT, there are accounts in literature that show: "quality" troops (reconnaisance for example) preferred them for their purposes, and dismiss the rifle's reputation for unreliability as coming from the people that don't maintain their weapons properly.
Again, I ask for an unbiased view of the SVT partially unsuccessful inception in the Soviet army, like it was done manyfold with the original fielding of the M16 rifle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.73.12.199 ( talk) 00:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Recently all of the Russian/Soviet gun articles have switched over to pictures taken at the Army Museum in Stockholm. While they are good, an SVT-40 without a magazine just looks stupid, and is in no way representative of the design. I own an SVT and could take a better one myself, or someone else could contribute one. Just so long as it has a magazine in it. 74.51.57.78 ( talk) 06:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of SVT-40's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Miller":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)