Why the ten-round mag?

Unironically, what was the Soviet rationale behind designing a sniper rifle that used ten-round magazines when it's Western counterparts (sniper versions of the M14 and FAL) already had 20 rounders and the AKM, which the SVD was intended to complement, used 30 rounders?

Why has there been no serious attempt to field a larger magazine in the Soviet Union, its successor states, or any of the other countries that use it?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    7.62x54mmR doesn't feed reliably when you stack more than 10 in a magazine

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is this still true even now? I could understand this 50-60 years ago when magazines were still delicate enough that deliberately underloading them was a common practice but surely you could design a more reliable magazine for 7.62x54mmR now.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        The rim really is just that bad.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        The magazines were new 50-60 years ago

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >surely you could design a more reliable magazine for 7.62x54mmR now

        It's not about the magazines, it's about the round, specifically about the rim.
        There STILL aren't many reliable high capacity magazines for .22 LR semi autos.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Barely feeds in 10-rounders

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This + mag height when prone, rimmed double stack 30 rounder would've been something

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >(sniper versions of the M14 and FAL) already had 20 rounders
      Yet for some reasons people came up with 10 round mags for M14
      Also,
      >already had 20 rounders
      XM21 came up in 1969, first conversions from National Match were there in 1968. SVD was adopted in 1963. Get your timeline together.

      How about AVS-36 mags? Those were 15-rounders.
      However yes, this is pretty much the main problem with SVD mag capacity- rimmed cartridge and feeding.

      theres nothing wrong with 10 round mags for DMRs it takes like 5 seconds to reload

      Not to mention that DMR doesn't need that much shots compared to battle rifle.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >XM21 came up in 1969

        Weren't there custom-built M14 sniper variants prior to the M21 though?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >it's Western counterparts
      The M1-D held 8 rounds
      >akm
      is an intermediate caliber service rifle

      The SVD was designed to replace the Mosin PU, and in that aspect, has DOUBLE the capacity. Maybe use your brain

      This + mag height when prone, rimmed double stack 30 rounder would've been something

      This

      >sniper
      It is a DMR. And yes 10 rounds is dumb.

      Its a sniper rifle. As per the russian definition. When it was introduced it was meant to replace the Mosin PU. It is not a DMR, at least not back then. It was deployed to the Platoon HQ level, not squad level.

      probably did not want to over heat the barrel

      This, after 10 rounds the groups open up because of the skinny barrel because the SVD had to have a certain barrel length + meet the weight requirements

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >M1D
        >western counterpart
        really? really?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The m1d wasnt widely issued, the SVD wasnt widely issued until the early 1970s, and by that point, the m21 and G3SG/1 showed up of which also werent widely issued.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            What's your point exactly? That its western contemporary wasn't the fricking M1D?

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              that the M1D was the closest thing to a western counterpart in 1963 and that neither things really matter because SVD didnt go into super mass production until the late 60s and early 70s, and that "sniper versions of the m14 and FAL" as stated by OP were not really a thing when the SVD was designed

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't design for what your opponent has at the time, you design for what the opponent will have. The M1D was horribly outdated by 1963, the thing was "designed" in fricking 1944 based on a rifle introduced in 1936. If you're designing for what your likely opponent had 19 fricking years prior then congrats, you're a fricking moron.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                And the soviet union was still issuing the mosin PU to snipers in the 50s and 60s. Neither the M1D, M14 nor the SVD had appreciable effects on either sides arms development. The russians were not looking at the M1D when they were developing the SVD, they were looking back at their mosin and SVT-40. The SVD was basically done being designed by 1959, they were just waiting for the PSO-1 to be developed, and even still took almost a decade to ramp up production. Just goes to show how little small arms really matter. The US didnt care about sniper shit because they were developing their air superiority doctrine.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know why you're getting so upset about this, nor how it relates to magazine capacity in DMRs, which have utterly plateaued at 20 rounds in all corners of the world in spite of half a century since then.

                I'm not the one who made this shit thread, I just think that calling the M1D the SVD's contemporary is fricktarded. OP may be a homosexual but comparing the SVD to M21, G3SG/1, and various scoped FAL variants (which were contemporary to the SVD, as an aside) is apt.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You upset that the soviets had an edge in one irrelevant field for less than 10 years against your powertripping isekai protagonist?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Quit projecting your powerlevel bullshit on me, I literally said the M1D was shit and should've been replaced wayyyy before, you're the one going
                >woah this rifle designed in the 1960s is way better than this one from 1944 based on a rifle designed in the 1930s
                and choosing to ignore the FAL, which was already around prior to the introduction of the SVD. The M21 was also introduced in 1968, so it was 5 years, not 10, if you want to nitpick.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I just think that calling the M1D the SVD's contemporary is fricktarded.
                It is its contemporary though. The SVD had ten round mags right from the start, and this hasn't changed at all in 61 years. Certainly through most of its lifespan its western counterpart has been scoped 20 round battle rifles, but at the time of its design its counterpart was the M1D, a mixture of scoped SMLEs (this was before the L42a1) and mausers, and some scope FALs; putting its 10 round capacity right within the norms of the time. The M21 and G3SG1 didn't come around for nearly a decade after the SVD.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You keep pointing to the SG/1 but the G3A3 with a ZF scope thrown on it was in service in the early 60s and had comparable accuracy to the SVD, the SG/1 was the proper marksman variant, sure, but an equivalent was already around. You're hyperfocusing on the M1D to justify your own powerlevel bullshit your buddy is trying to project on me, and you're trying to justify this by saying the other rifles weren't introduced yet when it was being designed, the exact issue of designing for what your opponent has rather than what they will have that I criticized. The US was the only one behind with the introduction of an improved semi-auto marksman rifle, aside from the frogs who barely had any small arms development to speak of.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                And also, the G3SG/1 did only come nearly a decade after the SVD but the M21 was accepted by 1968 and fielded by 1969, serial production of the SVD didn't happen until 1964, so that's a 5 year gap unless you're going from 1963 to 1969, which is still not nearly a decade. I don't know what you're trying to prove here by stating incorrect things that one can easily look up.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know why you're getting so upset about this, nor how it relates to magazine capacity in DMRs, which have utterly plateaued at 20 rounds in all corners of the world in spite of half a century since then.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The M1-D held 8 rounds

        It was also 20 years older than the SVD and had already been almost completely phased out of service in the United States Armed Forces by then.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    theres nothing wrong with 10 round mags for DMRs it takes like 5 seconds to reload

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >sniper
    It is a DMR. And yes 10 rounds is dumb.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    whatever you are shooting at is already gone 3 rounds in

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    probably did not want to over heat the barrel

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      yeah lol especially if its a PSL, worst purchase of my life.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The real question should be why they've kept a fricking rimmed cartridge around for so fricking long

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      the same reason russians do everything, they're on a constant
      >if it ain't broke
      trip because they don't want to bother going to the effort of actually replacing something

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        And yet they've gone and replaced 7.62x39 with 5.45, and their firearms have gone through multiple replacements. They could've swapped to a rimless cartridge and saved themselves a whole lot of trouble.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          As with nazis, who were about to get more cool stuff when the war was over, soviets ended up in with a similar trouble. They had certain positive ideas and research programs going on, like developing a 6x49 rimless round for rifles and machine guns, or experimenting with 9,3x64 Brenneke as a sniper round, but then everything started to fall apart, lots of research has been shut down or delayed.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      they made 20 and 30 rounders. they didn't like them.

      And yet they've gone and replaced 7.62x39 with 5.45, and their firearms have gone through multiple replacements. They could've swapped to a rimless cartridge and saved themselves a whole lot of trouble.

      >And yet they've gone and replaced 7.62x39 with 5.45, and their firearms have gone through multiple replacements
      I see there's nothing but geniuses in this thread. There's isn't any incentive to ditch 7.62r for them. It works in PKM, works in their marksman rifles.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I am so glad they didn't go with that stock design. Maybe it's just me but it really has that butt ugly "company that has only made plastic fantastic furniture attempts to make COOL WOOD furniture gives the project to the same designer of their other furniture and it looks exactly like some cheapo plastic stock but in wood" look. It's really that weird swept back bar that does it. Also that rod attached to the gas tube is a neat idea. Reminds me of several other rifles, not only the WA2000 but the accu-strut of the Mini 14. Not sure the looks or realistic functionality benefit from it but it is neat.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        where did you find that pic? I'm obsessed about svds and I'm trying to amass every pic and info on them.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Most countries did not design a new round for DMRs and GPMGs
        They just kept whatever the old battle rifle round was
        Most western militaries still issues 7.62x51; France even has some AA-52s in the old 7.5 cartridge

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Most countries
          to be fair, NO country ever invented and fielded a new round for a DMR

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This is the one reason to keep using rimmed.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        They could've made the switch when they were designing the PKs. There's nothing inherently superior about the 2-stage feeding mechanism on the PKs, hell there's 7.62x51 PKs. There is, however, a whole world of pain when it comes to fitting a rimmed cartridge into a box mag.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      sunk cost, and at this point I wouldn't necessarily call it a fallacy.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because .308 can't compete and the US knows it.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Wouldnt it be nice to find the general responsible for this disingenuous bullshit and take a golfclub to his kneecaps? This moronation is why were being stuck with a 6mm battle rifle. AKs in 7.62, issued by a conventional army in 2015? AKs without optics having the same effective range as an M4 with Acog? PKPs having dramatically greater range than an M240? FWIW, you actually might see a difference in maximum ballistic range with the SVD vs an M14, but its moot because no motherfricker is hitting anything at 1000 yards with a PSO chevron.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You forgot AKs that have been through the ringer and never maintained

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          In addition to claiming parity between ancient 7.62x39 AKs and M4s, and claiming that 7.62x54R somehow outperforms the ballistically identical 7.62x51 by hundreds of yards, it also claims parity between .50 BMG and 12.7x108, even though 12.7 is halfway between .50 BMG and .338 Lapua Magnum. The Russian weapons' capability is overstated on literally every single row.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >want more money
            >also in charge of determining if we need to purchase new weapons
            >overstate enemy capabilities
            >show how your funs are outmatched
            >receive money for developing new funs
            seems like a conflict of interest

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          he is dead

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >when it's Western counterparts (sniper versions of the M14 and FAL) already had 20 rounders
      the M14 and FAL aren't really counterparts of the SVD. The SVD was a very accurate rifle for the time it was made and is still very good for accurate fire for the DMR role it is used in. The acceptable spec for a FAL or M14 is like 5 moa or something. there is a reason of the big 3 battle rifles the FAL never really got converted to a DMR, the G3 is considered the best of the 3 for DMR and the M14 got replaced as a DMR despite how many we had and how much we tried to make them work.
      >Unironically, what was the Soviet rationale behind designing a sniper rifle that used ten-round magazines
      54r has a crazy rim and it was straight up an amazing engineering job to make the 10 round SVD mag in the first place. Its why the dp28 has that weird drum mag.

      >make a bunch of ammo during WWII
      >don't want to make new ammo because poor so just makes MGs in x54r
      >now have a frick ton of MGs in x54r and a ton of x54r
      >don't want to replace either due to cost
      plus if it is a belt fed anyway, I can't imagine the deficiencies of the x54r matter that much
      pretty sure the bongs and the bong colonies just kept using the vickers until they literally ran out of .303

      And yet they've gone and replaced 7.62x39 with 5.45, and their firearms have gone through multiple replacements. They could've swapped to a rimless cartridge and saved themselves a whole lot of trouble.

      because the rim on the x54r doesn't matter on belt fed machine guns which is where 99.99% of the rounds are going anyway.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >there is a reason of the big 3 battle rifles the FAL never really got converted to a DMR
        It did, by pretty much every commonwealth military and a bunch of others. If you mean why it wasn't modernized as a DMR and kept in use to this day, its because armies that used the FAL tended to be richer and able to jump on trains early, adopting 5.56 early, adopting new DMRs instead of converting old rifles, etc. Its notable that the two countries that did prominently use FAL DMRs, Brazil and Ireland, are some of the brokest b***hes around.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          FAL DMRs got dropped because the design of the FAL makes it inherently not mechanically accurate enough to be a good DMR. Slapping a scope on anything makes it better, but it doesn't make the FAL a good DMR. That is why only broke b***hes use it. Its totally fine as a standard combat rifle for conscripts, but not really good for trying to shoot accurately. the M14 isn't super great mechanically for accuracy either. That is why the US only used it as a stopgap DMR while developing AR based options

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The FAL is about as mechanically accurate as an SVD - not great but a DMR doesn't have to be sub-MOA and they historically weren't

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Not really, you'll be hard pressed to get 2 MOA out of a FAL, SVDs will hover between 1 and 2 MOA with appropriate ammo unless they're shot the frick out (they often are, conscripts treated them like shit and frickes up the barrel's crown more oftwn than not).

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Accurized FALs can be around 1.5 MOA which was more than adequate for a DMR before the current-era AR

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >muh mechanical accuracy
            The design isn't inherently inaccurate, it's more to do with the tolerances weren't very strict, much like the AK. I don't know what crack you're smoking to say the M14 isn't accurate.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >there is a reason of the big 3 battle rifles the FAL never really got converted to a DMR
        Even if you don't count the Brits and their SUIT, the Canadians had a scope mount developed for it, the Dutch developed a scope mount for it, Ireland I think fields one to this day, etc.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The SUIT was more of a combat optic to improve target ID and acquisition, it's a poorly designed system with a lot of play even if sexy

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >The real question should be why they've kept a fricking rimmed cartridge around for so fricking long
      Because it is cheaper to keep making rimmed cartridges with the existing equipment until the heat death of the universe, than replace whole production lines.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because unironically Americans didnt make replacements for their 7.62x51.
      Russians were sucker copy cats in small arms and couldn't make any decisions without moral aproval from teh West.
      Before WWII they adamant against SMGs, War happens, they meet Finish and German SMGs (though they overblew their numbers) - Russians spam PPsh
      Germans make STG44 - Russian copy it.
      Americans make AR-15 in SCHV, Russian copy it, while just 20 years ago Russian military high ups were screeching and kicking their feet when there were suggestions for 5.5mm caliber during AK-47 development (stop been smart! copy STG44!).
      NATO makes G11 - Russians copy it (AN-94).
      Oh wait were ejaculated prematurely with AN-94, cancel it, what is next? Put picatinny rail on AR-15? Russians make AK-12.

      Russian had bazillion small arms projects but only projects got approval from hiigh up that were Western FOMO, Russian top command are titled nobodies not able to make their own decisions and always seeking inspiration approval from the west.

      NATo didnt have replacement for 7.62x51, so what Russians were supposed to do? Replacing caliber just to get rid of the rim is not worth it and projects that improve ballistics were canned because NATO dint have projects to improve ballistics of rifle/MG cartridge.
      Wait and see Russians would copy 6.8x51 NGSW.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        There are few innovative Russian weapons
        > 9x39 round designed in the 80s before .300 BLK
        >RPD belt fed in intermediate cartridge; but turned out to be a dead end and they went back to a ''western'' style formula (GPMG wit big cartridge and infantry rifle with bipod)
        >Automatic and semiautomatic rifles issued in limited numbers between WW1 and WW2
        >First semiauto rifles issued with scopes

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >stop been smart! copy XYZ123!

        Apparently this happened numerous times with various things. What causes such moronation?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        they were copying an intermediate cartridge - 6x49 unified. similar to 6.5 mememoor or something similar i suppose.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          (addendum to my previous post)
          Russian 6x49mm Unified round - had a muzzle velocity of 3,700 ft/s, shot accurately to 1,500m, a supersonic range of 1,150m, and was 40% lighter than the 7.62x54R it was going to replace. Unfortunately the fall of the USSR halted all development on this round.

          https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/w1giw1/russian_6x49mm_unified_round_had_a_muzzle/

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          (addendum to my previous post)
          Russian 6x49mm Unified round - had a muzzle velocity of 3,700 ft/s, shot accurately to 1,500m, a supersonic range of 1,150m, and was 40% lighter than the 7.62x54R it was going to replace. Unfortunately the fall of the USSR halted all development on this round.

          https://www.reddit.com/r/ForgottenWeapons/comments/w1giw1/russian_6x49mm_unified_round_had_a_muzzle/

          That's not sneedmore speeds, that's like a 6mm-300 winmag or some shit. How the frick did they make it weigh less than 5.45x39?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            two piece case design

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How the frick did they make it weigh less than 5.45x39?
            They didn't. It weights 18 grams, 5.45 weights 10.5 grams

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              That's a different cartridge, it's 6x51 instead of 6x49 and doesn't have the weird groove.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          6x49mm is in now way "intermediate" cartridge. It's full power rifle cartridge but made in small caliber high velocity concept. It was canned, because NATO had no analogues.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    10 is easier to count to. You don't lose track of your round count like with larger cap mags.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    reduced visual signature and increased comfort when prone

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >mag
      >visual signature

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        i want you to use your brain and think about the bigger picture

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Is that a pun? It better not be.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    they made prototypes 20 rounders but 10 is already good enough, plus you'd might start to see issues since it's a rimmed cartdrige.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >20 round bakalite SVD mags
      I am going to BUST

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        tell me about it. I offered a sum I am ashamed to say to one who has one and got turned down.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Issues or not aside, the svd is one of the coolest rifle designs. The SVD and the m110 both.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I love how slim the SVD is. Feels like its a nice compact package for the firepower it brings.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's so sexy

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >no stock

        Doesn't it kick like a mule though?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I wouldn't worry about it

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    try shooting prone with a 30 rounder and you'll understand.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    How often do you actually need more than 10 rounds as a sniper?

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    well hello there

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Doesn't the m76 also have 10 rounds mags?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        oh yeah, my bad. still a sexy weapon, more than the above dragunov.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >more than the above dragunov
          Rude

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >beautiful original

            https://i.imgur.com/ljpBtW7.jpg

            well hello there

            troony cosplay

            I'm sorry I just had to make the joke.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah and they're dogshit because the LSBHO has a really fun trick where it catastrophically jams the gun instead of holding the bolt open.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Yeah and they're dogshit because the LSBHO has a really fun trick where it catastrophically jams the gun instead of holding the bolt open.
          like the PSL where the follower just jams up the bolt or worse?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Dunno about the PSL exactly but the front of the M76 follower can nosedive into the magazine body when the bolt hits the rear of it. The bolt wedges against it, jams up the whole thing rock solid, and is a b***h and a half to unstick when it happens. It happened to me first try when I tried to see if the rumors I heard about it were true
            >It surely can't be that bad
            >Turns out to be exactly that bad
            There's a way to fix them by spot welding a tab of metal on the back of the follower to keep it from getting tilted, but there's no excuse why they should have been made that shitty in the first place.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    SVD was to be fired prone without a bipod for lowest profile.
    M14 and FAL sniper variants used an existing 20rd standard rifle mag but there were prototype 10rd mags for the Strayan SLR 'sniper' variants to meet a similar requirement to get low in prone but they were never adopted.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    make it too long and it interferes with with prone with a bipod

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      They don't even use bipods on standard issue SVDs though

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Rarely issued, but they all have the cuts for it.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >sniper versions of FAL
    Was there ever such a thing? afaik the armies that had scoped FALs like the Dutch and British would just take a random rifle off the rack and put a Suit or KRR on them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not really. It's perfectly fine as a service rifle but it isn't really suited to having an accurised marksman variant the same way that say, the SMLE or M14 are. Just a lower ceiling to mechanical potential on that front. So like you said, most simply didn't bother trying.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I want to have sex and impregnate an SVD.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Do you know what year that PSO-1 optic is?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        1963 IIRC it was specifically designed for the SVD.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          yeah I know, it's just that usually that kind of black finish is more common on JJJ optics, but I think the russian ones were also black for a few years early on before switching to hammered gray so I wondered if knew the specific year of yours. Does your optic sn match the rifle? it would be nice to see such an older PSO still fielded with a relatively newer rifle (type 2 dust cover)
          other than early rus and jjj optics I think the only other ones were the east german ones

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Oh I thought you meant that in general.
            Black ones are usually Belarussian POSPs from Zenit BelOMO or Chink clones on NDM86 which I think might be the case here.
            My 1974 SVD's PSO was hammer gray, I can't really recall any Russian NPZ PSO or PO I've seen being black.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >My 1974 SVD's PSO was hammer gray
              same with my 1987.
              >I can't really recall any Russian NPZ PSO or PO I've seen being black.
              There were some pictures on dragunov . net before it went dark. One of these days I'll make PDF of all the available info there was on that site with the wayback machine.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                All the boomer sites about old guns dying is a tragedy of internet rot that very few people know or care about.
                7.62x54r.net was a gold mine for ammo and rifle markings ID and now it's gone forever.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >7.62x54r.net is gone
                frick

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nothing is ever truly gone.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nothing is ever truly gone.
                Yeah sure now try to find the porn video I fapped to when I was 12. Fricking gone

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        sweeeeet. Izzy or Tula?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Izzy, Tula never made any SVD afaik.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I recognize that show, you devildog

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    1.) A mag taller than the pistol grip interferes with prone shooting.
    2.) 7.62x54r in large box mags feeds kinda meh.
    3.) It's a DMR, you're not supposed to blast away like a moron, you don't have the ammo for that to begin with (it comes with 4 mags standard and you'll get twice as much at best) and the SVD accuracy will go to crap if you magdump two mags in a row.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    rimmed cartridges suck in magazines, that's why the Desert Eagle sucks.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What benefits do 20 round magazines offer when used in a sniper rifle that outweigh the drawbacks like increased weight or worse ergonomics when prone?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Slightly higher chances of survival if you're in a situation that requires precision fire, but also dropping a lot of targets really quickly.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >make the gun a lot less comfortable to shoot and carry in all scenarios for the slight chance you might drop a Black person more before being shot anyway in case your chopper gets downed.
        Yeah no. there's a reason almost all DMR and sniper rifles use small 10 round mags

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >almost all DMR and sniper rifles use small 10 round mags

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Learn to read ESL

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            RAMIREZ!

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Help me understand, how many true dragunov clones exist? Only 1 from the chinese right? The others are all either lookalike or rifles made to fullfill the same purpuse but with different mechanical parts.
    Can you swap parts from chinese svds and russian ones?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah China was the only country with the small arms industrial capacity to actually shit out copies.
      All other 'variants' are either built from rifles made in Russia or are just glorified AKs.
      >parts swapping
      I really, really wouldn't.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Besides other issues listed with feed and rifle height when prone, a ten round or even five round mag makes the rifle significantly easier to maneuver, drag around and aim.
    >t. hunt with my AR-10

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Long magazines make it harder to aim prone

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    shorter mags on your side hide you better

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *