Why did communists produce the best weapons?

>>32999274
Yes. It is a utilitarian culture that emphasises the bare minimum.

File: Каменные_джунгли.jpg (513KB, 1920x1369px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 1920x1369px

>>32999274
They weren't having to spend money on ((((marketing)))) and lobbying the government. And they weren't paying the manufacturers enough for the employees to all own houses, cars, and weekly movie tickets.

>>32999274
When you don't give a single fuck about other humans, you can get shit done

>>32999274
Making relatively small improvements on existing designs is something commies have perfected, first with the Soviets and now with the Chinese

>>32999436
But anon, how is allowing business owners to use slave labor communist?

>>32999374
What's with communism and making everything depressing

>>32999458
See>>32999299

File: costanza sks.jpg (62KB, 960x940px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 960x940px

>>32999458
>efficient = depressing

>>32999374
>he feels entitled to houses, cars, and weekly movie tickets
get a load of this decadent little bastard over here

>>32999743
It's ironic. Capitalistic decadence has mostly lead to the degeneracy as described by /pol/.

>>32999274
no, it's a function of the era of the design. An M1 garand or FAL or M-16 or whatever rifle you want to talk about from the cold war is ALSO a complete system. You have the rifle, the supplies to clean it, ammo and feeding or loading devices depending on whether you're using something fed by an internal magazine not meant to be changed every reload, or something fed by a detachable magazine. Back in the day, before about the 1980's, the gun was a SIMPLE design relative to today, and most pistols retain this attitude of design. The gun comes set up to be shot. It has sights, it just needs bullets mags and lube. Fighting at night? Well, learn light discipline and figure out how to make do with your irons at night. Back then, customization of ANY gun ANYWHERE in the world meant MAYBE giving it paint, as was famously done on Rhodesian FAL rifles. Back then you didn't make THE BEST weapon for military issue. You made the weapon that would do, for the Russians, that was the AK-47 until 1959 when they replaced it with the AKM. For america, the M-14 when they realized that enbloc clips were hindrances to volume of fire in situations that required liberal application of bullets. For a rifle to have optics, optional attachments even simple ones like vertical foregrips, electronics etc was rare and almost unheard of until the 1980's as far as an infantry rifle went. Then in the 90's you started seeing optical sights/electro-optical sights and systems on infantry weapons. The Russians DO keep up with this, in case you are unaware. They nowadays run rails, IR lasers, and electro optical sights on AK's that have been adapted to the purpose since not having these things puts you almost to a disadvantage in the day, and at a pretty bad disadvantage at night. The AK was by all means the rifle for its time, and can continue into the future, but that does not mean it won't need to be adapted to better suit tasks and stay as useful as possible at all hours of the day.

>>32999274
Capitalist, communist, imperialist, fascist, anarchist, whatever.
So long as I can shoot unrestricted and without killing myself, I don't care

File: 1425274892074.png (10KB, 404x511px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 404x511px

>>32999274

>guy builds really good gun

SEE THIS IS WHY COMMUNISM WORKS
YOU FUCKINNIG SHITYLORRDDSS1!!!!~

thats what you sound like and this is what you look like

>government funded weapons developers focused on doing their goddamn jobs instead of trying to chase trends and do jewish bullshit
>everything that gets adopted for any serious role is very stringently tested, gov't does back out of deals last minute (like the ACR, AICW, LSAT, etc)

>>32999957
*doesn't

File: slavs.jpg (409KB, 709x995px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 709x995px

>>32999916
>thats what you sound like and this is what you look like
Good, I'm looking forward to raping some Aryan qt's.

>>33000003
You tried for it, didn't you?

File: slavs.jpg (31KB, 324x196px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 324x196px

>>33000031
Of course tovarisch!

>>32999274
>Both AK's and SKS's are complete systems.
What did he mean by this?

>>32999274
The Soviet Union never was able to match the economic or military power of the US. The AK and SKS are well made because they didn't have the money to repair and construct complex weapons.

>>33000075
>complex.
Really means:
>over engineered and wasteful.

>>32999274
Best is also subjective. most of the AK's acclaim actually comes from it's contrast to the early days of the M-16. While the kinks of the M-16 were quickly worked out, they did leave a persisting legacy of the early days of the vietnam war in which AK's worked in mud, where as M-16's that weren't being cleaned or maintained with powder specs changed causing overgassing and case head separations, didn't.
And so, pop culture would go on to forever associate the popularity of the AK rifle with it's apparent reliability in the jungles of vietnam, making it a more reliable rifle, even though it jams if it gets obnoxiously caked in shitloads of mud as any other gun will, and it's popularity truly stemmed from soviet influence programs arming subversives all over the world in vast quantities.

>>32999274
I'd like to know how the Eastern Bloc was able to churn out a lot of good firearms and equipment too.

Just...how? You would think they'd churn out poorly made junk since they're barely getting paid (if at all) to even make this stuff.

Where in the West, high quality stuff is expensive due to various people needing to get paid.

>>33000127
>high quality
The eastern bloc absorbed a lot of german manufacturing techniques from the end of WWII, complex stampings, etc. It's not that they were cheap, it's that NOT churning them out was something that could see you in the back of a gas van.

>>32999274
Uh, no. 1911>Tokarev, M9>Makarov, Garand>Mosin/svt40/Sks, 1903>mosin. It's arguable which is better between the ar and ak. But as I see it, the score is American small arms tend to be superior.

>>33000127
The heavy industries were subsidized by the Soviet government over it's lifetime, due to some commie ideas about the importance of them versus other sectors.
They had a huge army to arm, and kept making guns after to arm the unending waves of conscripts when the inevitable WWIII against the capitalists came. Near the end the military-industrial complex had swallowed massive parts of the economy and government, ensuring production continued, need or no.

>>33000150
Have fun with your plastic toy rifles.
>early hand-guards made by mattel
It's practically airshit!

>>32999458
>not appreciating the slavic brutalism that makes you want to squat

>>33000187
Idk m8 if I had an SVT-40 on the table and a M1 Garand I'd pick the Garand myself. Same with the M9 vs Makarov and 1911 vs Tokarev. I have all these firearms, and there's nothing wrong with the soviet weapons, it's just the American ones tend to have superior features. Can you really compare the mosin to the 1903? Or the fucking Makarov (Tho reliable and accurate) to an M9?

>>33000214
No, I wouldn't compare a mosin to a 1903. However, the mosin is a force multiplier. I can give one to my cousin, my brother, my neighbor, my friends, etc... etc... They may be expensive at this point but the fact is, just about every gun owner probably has at least one or more mosins. Same with SKS's. I highly doubt you're going to have a few Garand's laying around. You might have one for yourself and maybe an extra if you have a lot of money. Unlike Russian weaponry.

>>32999957

But anon. What about the shit-fest with AVS-36, SVT-38, SVT-40 and AVT-40? Does not exactly fit to your theory that their stringently testing resulted going through four rifle designs/versions all accepted to production is just couple of years and finally ending up scrapping or modifying all but SVT-40 - which got pushed into furthers darkest corners of storage never to be seen in Soviet military use.

>>33000247
While price is an important factor, if you have the means to mass produce, say I have way more money than you do, then it's negligible. The M1 Garand just has far more capabilities than the Mosin Nagant. It's price is really it's only positive over the Garand.

Lemme ask you this, if you had to go to war, would you choose a mosin or a garand if you had both? Additionally ,say it's a civil war in the US, would you really pick a 7.62x54r rifle over a .30-06 rifle in North America?

>>33000276
You're comparing the United States at one of it's heights in small arms technology to the USSR during a time when it was relatively mediocre in small arms. The fact is, the USSR was producing effective assault rifles by 1947. Meanwhile, the United States was producing heavy M14's that were shit in any kind of urban setting. As opposed to the light and state of the art AK-47.

>>33000360
Goal post moving won't help you, you can't just say "Oh man, ya the first half of the USSR was garbage but they got better at the beginning of the cold war than the US" Because As I recall, the Makarov and M9 were 70s-80s era anyways, and the M16 is full of myths, the AR platform is very reliable, in some tests you can find (Such as that mud test and sand tornados) the AR is more reliable.

I own ars and Aks, I have a built Colt ar and a molot vepr. (Yes converted) I've fired thousands out of both rifles, and I've had very similar reliability performances. That's why I said it's arguable on which one is superior, because I'd say it goes down to your preferences.

But you can't just select a short period of time in the 20th century (The entire existence of the USSR) and go "Durrr combloc guns better!!" when we have more inferior examples on the USSR side than we do the US side.

>>33000360
>he United States was producing heavy M14's that were shit in any kind of urban setting
that wasn't an issue in manufacturing technology, that was a doctrinal isssue.

>>33000360
NIgga, M-14's didn't even show up until the AK-47 was discontinued in production for the AKM in 1959.
>>33000399 is correct, Doctrine issue. Though the M-14 saw its own heard of challenges which ALSO led to the myth that the M-16 didn't work when tested side by side.
Pro Tip: It turns out that if you run an AR-15 and an M-14 side by side for checks on reliability, the one that will win is the one that is taken care of.

Nazi Germany made even better weapons at the time and the Russians just stole their designs. Same with the allies.

/k/, we leave you alone for a few seconds and you go all commie on us? tsk tsk tsk

>>33000580
/k/s always been more slavaboo than wehraboo m8

>>33000150
>1911>Tokarev, M9>Makarov, Garand>Mosin/svt40/Sks, 1903>mosin
Let me guess, you're a shart in mart.

>>32999274
>Build high quality rifles/assault rifles.

Did you forget about AK-47 Type 1s and 2s or? Cause let's be honest 1s and 2s were shit, 3s and 4s were ok, and it really couldn't be considered "good" until the AKM.

>>33000274
the SVT40 is a fine rifle that doesn't deserve to be shat on like it is

>>32999274
You sound like a nigger shill gtfo nigger shill/crew

>>33000214
The fact that you have such low praise for the SVT40 leads me to believe that you either do not respect it or fanboy over it like you do with your Garand, or that you do not properly treat your SVT40 (i.e. gas system care, feeding correct ammunition). I'm not saying that it is vastly superior to the Garand, but if you don't neglect the proper treatment of it, it will certainly hold its ground against a Garand.

t. proud user of both

File: m19431.jpg (27KB, 990x198px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 990x198px

>>33000580
>russians stealing german designs

haha ok

>>32999458
That's the most efficient solution. If you want to build 30 blocks that are 40 flats + each in one place then commieblocks are super-economical. They're not built in the west because on small scale they're not economical, and on large scale you'll earn less money by doing this since real estate development is the most profitable when you're exploiting housing bubble.

There's economic efficiency and there's technical efficiency, you see.

>>33000127
You see the problem is that many people assume that Eastern Bloc was primitive, like Africa or something

The economic system introduced artificial poverty but many things were either high-quality or worked-around in many ways. Good example being healthcare - commie bloc had decent quality but it wasn't something you could get in private clinic in the US. However since the way healthcare was financed was far more "liberal" than any other solutions in the world, it meant that with those mediocre means they've had, they could've had super-healthy population for one single reason - extensive, regular checkups. Preventive healthcare was always huge thing there, as opposed to the west where it was too expensive and it kind of restricted some freedom

Technical education was an example of high-quality field there, however the focus was completely different than in the west

SKS is weirdly enough a symbol of their technical thought. It weights as much as SVT-40(which is like the polar opposite of their technical thought) despite firing lighter cartridge but is super-reliable, maintenance light, easy to mass produce and takes extensive use very well. The reason is simple - in communism cost-related problems were by default thrown out of window. They've never experienced raw material scarcity so they didn't fucking care about materials either. The only economical issue they've had to deal with was ease of production - which was understood as compromise between speed and ability to produce the thing in primitive conditions rather than anything else. It has huge tolerances and its parts are excessively strong(increasing weigth) given that it doesn't fire full-sized rifle cartridge. This translates to everything, from electronics(most of which had tons of redundancies and were designed to survive conditions which they would never work in anyway) to cars(ugly as fuck and underperforming but with 2-3 wrenches you can replace every single part in your own garage).

The only good thing i could say : Considering the best representation of communism was the USSR and currently china lets take the USSR of example they had good economy and good hand about guns also considering the WW2 I have pretty good examples of amazing guns made by russians PPSH-41 and the DP-28 Both used in the WW2

>>33000913
Is your period key broken, anon?

>>33000580
Can't make a general statement like that. Yes most weapons USSR made were inferior in quality. I wouldn't say that holds with the western allies.

>>33000075
>The Soviet Union never was able to match the economic or military power of the US.
but that's wrong you dumb nigger, WARPAC was on par with/surpassed NATO in terms of military strength/capability until the Bloc's demise in the late 1980s.

>The AK and SKS are well made because they didn't have the money to repair and construct complex weapons.
how were the Soviets able to field advanced technology on a massive, standardized scale, yet not be prosperous enough to produce complex weapons? Surely there couldn't be a more likely reason, like doctrinal differences or some shit?

>>33000580
is everybody in this thread retarded? Holy fuck.

File: 1486579532677.png (428KB, 558x744px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 558x744px

>>32999483

Cause the soviet union was a white military state hiding behind a humanitarian facade.

Whereas the US is a gay black jewish communist state hiding behind a military tough guy facade.

Not exactly /k/ related, but look up the NK-33 for another example of Soviet engineering success.

File: vlcsnap-2519-04-12-03h42m00s588.png (635KB, 1280x692px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 1280x692px

https://youtu.be/9Dc-IWCxP2I

Good day, /K/itizens.

>>33000705
What's wrong with the svt?

It's a great battle, the reason it was abandoned is because it's a battle rifle. You don't see anyone carrying a battle rifle today. Soviets where one of the first to make small caliber high velocity rifle. I think it goes back to pre soviet Russia, when a person representing the tsar went to the US they necked a cartridge to find it was gr8.

But anyway, they realized before us that individual marksmanship was bs. So give em smaller rounds.

>>32999274
they didn't make high quality arms
they seized the means of production so nobody could design and make anything better and flooded the world with a bunch of surplus shitty lethal weapons instead of innovation and capitalism limiting what got produced and distributed instead of a bunch of shitty mass produced full auto weapons with no purpose but to kill other humans

>>32999800

Capitalist decadence and Progressivist memes: A powerful combination for ruining a society.

>Build high quality rifles/assault rifles.
Hahaha, no. Only the finns were autistic enough to produce match grade kalashnikovs.

>>33000705

And you failed grasping the whole thing. OP claimed that Soviets tested their rifles in strigent manner, but yet they:
1. Adopted AVS-36 without testing it properly, then noticed that it did not work properly.
2. Replaced AVS-36 in production with SVT-38 - only to find out that SVT-38 was in dire need of improvement as well.
3. Replace SVT-38 in production with improved SVT-40. But find out that they cannot really mass-produce it large numbers during the war and instead decide to re-introduce Mosin-Nagants back to production along new SMGs. Whole SVT-40 production is pushed into two manufacturers, one of which (likely due to having workers from previous manufacturer) succeeds in getting production up and running, while another (Zlatoust) fails miserably.
4. Decide that what they still have left from production capacity capable making SVT-40 should instead start making select-fire version AVT-40. But AVT-40 proves to be such a POS that all AVT-40 that are still in half-way decent shape in end of the war get used as parts for repairing SVT-40 rifles when they are refurbished in post-war era.

I actually own refurbed Podolsk 1941 SVT-40 and IMO it is a decent rifle considering it is an early semiautomatic rifle designed for military use. I have found the design somewhat finicky. It still makes failures to feed from all mags every now and then, even if I have adjusted the gas setting right for the particular ammo. Accuracy-wise it is pretty good as long as one remembers to tighten the cross-bolt every now and then (it seems to get loose after enough rounds have been fired).

>>32999901
are you on drugs
ritalin or what

>>32999374
>employees to all own houses, cars, and weekly movie tickets.

ever considered some of people here may lived in soviet union and your statement cant be further from truth

File: 1486340834252.jpg (58KB, 381x351px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 381x351px

>>32999274
AKs cost more to produce than a competing capitalist design, most likely.

lol socialist inefficiency so who cares. Just spend more on infantry rifles and get better product than soviet shit.

File: pepe fist.png (123KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 785x757px

>>32999800
What you think is capitalism is actually due to government interference.

>>32999274
For the same reason that your grandmother who lived through the Great Depression can make anything she puts on the stove or in the oven taste good, even if it's week-old leftovers. When you have jack shit, you learn to work with jack shit and do it well.

>>33000276
>Additionally ,say it's a civil war in the US, would you really pick a 7.62x54r rifle over a .30-06 rifle in North America?

Probably, assuming .30-06 would be harder to come by in such a situation.

>>32999274
it was an engineering centric society. But unlike Germoney it emphasizes simplicity

>>32999436
How is pure capitalism that makes you only care about yourself and or people you like communism?

>>33000150
The mak is superior to the M9 in both quality and design. Its safety is unobtrusive and stays where you want it

>>33000150
The SVT was damned good for what it is and the SKS is unbreakable

>>33000214
I would take a Stechkin to a M9 any day

>>32999274
no, communism is inefficient. The reason why you see so much working on the bare minimum is because assets are used elsewhere in a more wasteful manner

File: dcapsuleur1.jpg (37KB, 448x327px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 448x327px

>>33000214
I'd take a Makarov over an M9 desu senpai

File: 1469332883407.jpg (26KB, 500x378px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x378px

>>33000894
keke commie and healthcare in the same sentence

ROFLMFAO! I, I'm seriously starting to think that all the colleges are giving their students A's to shit post.

File: ss (2015-01-05 at 03.56.58).png (112KB, 781x1169px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 781x1169px

>>32999274
>Why did communists produce the best weapons?

>>33000913
The PPs-43 was just about the best SMG of WW2. Tied w the Owen

>>33002655
its moot anyway. Officers and pogs got Maks. Stechkins were in the hands of frontline troops. They were widely issued in Afghanistan

>>33002659
I bet you're the type that throws tantrums when people point out how high the USSR's literacy rate was, or how much high quality medical research it produced

>>33002655
9mm Makarow has literally half the joules of 9mm Parabellum.

>>33001220
I wouldn't call 7.62x39 small caliber or high velocity
it's the same caliber as their old battle rifles and 2300 fps is not high velocity
but the soviets were one of the first to do intermediate
/nitpick

>>32999274
This is a bad bait as the "nazi invented everything modern" bait.

Fucking stop.

>>32999274
Anybody else notice that Russians look vaguely Asian? Do they have a history of importing Chinese whores or something?

>>33005084
Russia comprises both Asia and Europe depending on what part of Russia you're in.
>Western Russia
>Descendants of Aryan vikings.
>Eastern Russia
>Descendants of mongols.

>>33004742
and 9x19 is terrible compared to an actual rifle caliber. A pistol is always garbage as a weapon, so why not make it nice and light?