The Russian Mosin Nagant Forum

Howdy,

I bought this SVT40 several years ago at a gun show. It has more marks in the wood than I (in my limited experience) have seen before. Any info would be appreciated about the marks and the gun.

Thanks,
Too Slow

1941 Izhevsk, but like the Mosins 99.9% of the small markings are unknown, and likely inspection stamps. Nice SVT40

Junk Yard Dog wrote:1941 Izhevsk, but like the Mosins 99.9% of the small markings are unknown, and likely inspection stamps. Nice SVT40

Izhevsk?

Seriously poor picture quality, but that rifle is made by Podolsk arsenal, not Izhevsk.

Kovrov arsenal. Nice pickup man. The rarer arsenal of all of them.

Correct, I can't remember for shit.

The rear part of the mark is faint or the picture doesn't show it good. I have not seen a kovrov here but there are a few Tulas at the gun shows.

desdem12 wrote:Kovrov arsenal. Nice pickup man. The rarer arsenal of all of them.

It's actually Podolsk arsenal. Not Kovrov as it has been thought to be. Kovrov did not manufacture any SVT-40s.

Thanks for the info guys. Got two answers as to the arsenal that made it. Which one is correct? Does anyone know how many were made by the correct arsenal?

Too Sow

SVT-40s were made by Tula (from fall 1941 to 1944 plant operated in Mednogorsk) , Izhevsk and Podolsk (plant no.460 to be exact). Kovrov did produce machine guns, aircraft cannons etc. but no SVT-40s. Misconseption probably begun from the similarities of the factory stamp. Podolsk produced SVT-40s only 1940-1941 as the factory was evaquated to Izhevsk October 1941. So the number of produced rifles by plant #460 is rather low.

Thank you for the info. Now I need a SVT38!

Very nice SVT! Now how does it shoot?

Accuracy is acceptable, but recoils more than I expected for some reason. Disassembly is not a breeze, but is worth the fun of shooting it.

Too Slow

Too Slow wrote:Accuracy is acceptable, but recoils more than I expected for some reason. Disassembly is not a breeze, but is worth the fun of shooting it.

Too Slow

I think that the greater than expected perceived recoil is from the almost straight-line relationship of the barrel to the stock. The muzzle brake may also have something to do with it. The brake seemed to me to be more for eliminating muzzle rise than with limiting recoil to the rear.

I noticed that I did not have a problem with vertical stringing with my late SVT40 as I do with my M1.

And in spite of what anybody says, I claim that the SVT40 is a better weapon than the M1.

I agree about the break eliminating the rise. I have only fired it twice so I can't says it is better than a M1, but I will keep an open mind

Bugelson wrote:SVT-40s were made by Tula (from fall 1941 to 1944 plant operated in Mednogorsk) , Izhevsk and Podolsk (plant no.460 to be exact). Kovrov did produce machine guns, aircraft cannons etc. but no SVT-40s. Misconseption probably begun from the similarities of the factory stamp. Podolsk produced SVT-40s only 1940-1941 as the factory was evaquated to Izhevsk October 1941. So the number of produced rifles by plant #460 is rather low.

OP-This is the correct information.

CommoMan wrote:

Too Slow wrote:Accuracy is acceptable, but recoils more than I expected for some reason. Disassembly is not a breeze, but is worth the fun of shooting it.

Too Slow

"'I think that the greater than expected perceived recoil is from the almost straight-line relationship of the barrel to the stock. The muzzle brake may also have something to do with it. The brake seemed to me to be more for eliminating muzzle rise than with limiting recoil to the rear.

I noticed that I did not have a problem with vertical stringing with my late SVT40 as I do with my M1.

And in spite of what anybody says, I claim that the SVT40 is a better weapon than the M1"


Not even close, the SVT40 is an interesting historical curiosity, but it does not even come close to the M1 Garand.

Thanks to all for the information.

Too Slow

The SVT40 did have a leg up on the garand in the magazine department, sure they are fragile but back then they could replace em quick. The Magazine of the Garand is a silly and overly complicated design. I find it amazing that such a clever guy as John Garand couldn't figure out how to implement a simpler style of magazine into the rifle, it took him over 10 years to design the gun the idea must of crossed his mind at some point. When the Japanese copied it the first thing they did was put in a clip fed magazine like the Arisaka. That is really my only beef with the M1, it is a rifleman's rifle that's for damn sure.

Everyone is finding SVT40s lately... I feel like I need to jump on the bandwagon.