"Soviet Reliability."

>>33683807

It has to be simple to operate (and by that definiton, rugged) because the average Russian is beyond stupid.

>>33683807
If I remember correctly the Soviets knew that their supply lines were shoddy at best and designed equipment to last as long as possible fresh parts. That said there's very little you can do to repair electronic equipment without resupply so chances are good the more advanced it is the more likely it is to break. Don't take my word for it of course, I don't have professional background.

File: 1488905440276.jpg (138KB, 1024x791px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x791px

>>33683807
Probably the ak has to be the wurst and most annoyingly shilled of all time. Rolled steel and Riveted EVERYTHING is a good runner up.

T. Mud test inrange for WASR

As of current the only claim to fame the AK has now is that it can last longer than an AR due to "muh chrome lining". Just because it had chromed parts doesn't mean it was supposed to last long. Chrome lining upped the service life of an Ak since no soldier would care to maintain their gun against the elements or the shit ammo the shat through it.

>B- but Ak is still just as ACCURATE

At normal engagement ranges yeah but Jesus Christ, A reciprocating piece of steel inline with the barrel is going to impart deflections at the point of firing to when the round exits the barrel.

I wanted to get a Zastava M76 because I have a ton of cases for 8mm and needed an actual sniper rifle not a DMR. Changed my mind on that piston though.

Off topic I wish savage still made the M99 or Winchester still made the M95.
>Spitzer
>trench gunk myth a shit
>only have to move the charging hand in two directions so faster
>chamber bolt heads just as strong

Europoors are just jelly

>>33683860
>Forget to mention the fact that the AR bolt camming behind like an internal piston makes it a target gun well beyond 600 yards easy

Don't care if you wanted a comparison, you got it buddy

AKs/Maks/Mosins are super reliable and I think people project that reliability to everything else they do

I'm not trying to be a contrarian. I promise. The SVT was famously unreliable as it is complex and from everything I've heard is a bastard and a half to clean.

Pre-AKM AK-47s were originally stamped steel then they had to go back to milled receivers because they couldn't make a decent stamped receiver. Russians, the kings of stamped metal guns in modern times didn't get it right the first time. If at first you don't succeed you need to try again because you might accidentally make the world's most popular rifle.

A lot of their shit is last-gen and thus they can just work out the kinks and make a proven and old design better.

But I do think it is largely "Russian is reliable!" is a better slogan than "They get it right most of the time but everyone makes mistakes!"

>>33683876

Many things about the SVT are mostly, well, memes.

It isn't unreliable. The only problem is if you use bad magazines, feeding can be problematic if you aren't careful. Literally the only problem I had with mine.

About disassembling and cleaning, it's "complex" is you compare it to other Soviet guns like the Mosin. As one of the leading gun authors in my country wrote back in the 60ies, the SVT is a "charmingly simple gun". And desu, he's not even that wrong. It's not overly complex or badly designed.

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

112KB, 781x1169px

>>33683807
>Which weapons systems did the soviets built did suck dick in terms of reliability?
Early T-64, Su-7 - it was incredibly fucked up. VM-A reactor. A lot of submarines sunk because of it.

Point is - Soviets didn't have fancy computers to calculate material stresses and deterioration. That's why they put enormous margin of safety in every detail. That margin of safety leads to "reliability".

>>33683860
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VRrc2n0NXg

We should also remember that the AKM is a older design than most ARs and has been redesigned, but ARs have constantly been redesigned as well.

AKs are greater for going through concrete, but the AR is better for shooting more more accurately.

>>33683807
The AK requires less preventive maintenance because peasant fighters cannot into gun care, but has huge open holes in the body and so is more susceptible to shit getting in it and fucking it up.
In contrast, the AR requires more preventive maintenance due to tighter tolerances and a dirtier operating mechanism, but is a much more airtight design that won't spread for shit like a Catholic schoolgirl five minutes before confession.

>clean AK once in 1976, have to go to autistic lengths to keep from dropping it anywhere other than a clean concrete floor
>clean AR once every 3 days of use, can submerge it in a Florida swamp and get a round downrange on every trigger pull

File: 1487259190733.png (237KB, 382x597px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 382x597px

>>33683980
That's so fucking old

The show implies 5.56 is the only round an AR can fire or the cinder block take into account bullet cannelures which allow M193 5.56 nato to dump ALL its energy into the target rather than a ball 7.62x39

Are you also referring to 7n6s supposed ability to some how yaw better than M193 and still go straight through concrete before hand?
Because an round with a long body and a heavy rear can yaw.

Gotta love Gunny though

>>33683980
Any modern AKM like AK103 or RK62
can beat the crap out of AR in terms of accuracy

>>33683980
Soviet AKs weren't actually chambered in 7.62 for all that long. Most of its life in Russian service was as a 5.45, which does just about the same as the 5.56 vs concrete.
>>33684034
Trust me, it's not as bad as you think when it comes to keeping shit out the action. Still not great but you really don't have to put in an effort, autistic or otherwise.

>>33683807
Soviets literally called a unanimous vote to approve manufacture. If there was a no, then there was no way.

>>33684065
>inb4 inrange mud test
Trust me that's not 'dropping your rifle' that's 'sergeant I was roleplaying passchendaele and my rifle got dirty, would you please euthanize me for being so fucking useless' levels of mud.

File: 2012-08-23-40.jpg (122KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x683px

>>33683807
Their equipment is not more reliable as in it will run forever but it is very maintainable.
All those T-55s, BMPs, BRDMs etc. in the mid-east and Africa? They are not running since the 60s because they never break down but because even Hadji can maintain them.

>>33684105
This .
You simply can't get an ak that muddy unless youre brain dead or role playing like ss undercut karl likes to do.
>messaged Ian on fb and he replied the next day and was civil.
>messaged Karl saying hi nice work with the channel and no response. This was when I first found inrange and was not aware of how much a larp fag karl is.
Ian just comes off as understanding and not autistic, karl is like that guy in middle school who screamed at kids for making fun of his new vidya in 2006

>>33683832
Simple to operate can (and does in the case of various things like Russian jet engines) mean easier to replace or repair than more durable.

>>33684162
Karl probably isn't a needy bitch like you anon. Why the fuck would you message random men to pat them on the back like some homo?

>>33683860
>falling for the mud test memery
into the trash with you

File: 1486665428573.jpg (28KB, 466x404px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 466x404px

>>33684065
>>33684105
>>33684162
>>33686072


Oh fuck its the entirety of the Kalashnikov defense force.

>Implying flying mud from as little as a 155mm HESH can't find its way into actions
>Implying Iraqi moon dust doesn't find its way into AK actions in heaps
>implying typhoons aren't a thing
>Implying you can ignore a firebase call for 'charlies in the wire' where literally its fucking goop

Please ignore the last 70 years. Just because illiterate farmers illiterated themselves through 70+ different wars with their AKs doesn't mean they didn't fail or dirt and debris is a reality

>>33683807
hey fgt, i served in soviet army from 1985 to 1987

i am going for cigarette now and if you are interested i can tell everything about reliability of soviet stuff

File: image.jpg (79KB, 576x675px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 576x675px

>>33687412
>Sand
>fucking up a kalashnikov
It doesn't stick into the action like mud does. Literally remove the dust cover and shake the bitch out. Have a (you) for low quality bait.
>Forgetting the reason why field strip operations are taught in the first place
>Implying you'll be without a squad

File: 1489036026733.jpg (22KB, 363x364px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 363x364px

>>33687629
>regular sandstorms
>literally fight anyone with large bore artillery/ tanks for massive amounts of sand/mud
>inrange goop is literally sand and water
>all in open action
>conscripts/regulars care for cadre

What even is your last one.

>>33683968
>>Which weapons systems did the soviets built did suck dick in terms of reliability?Early T-64, Su-7 - it was incredibly fucked up. VM-A reactor. A lot of submarines sunk because of it.Point is - Soviets didn't have fancy computers to calculate material stresses and deterioration. That's why they put enormous margin of safety in every detail. That margin of safety leads to "reliability".


T-80s Most of their planes since the 80s their submarine fleet, their aircraft carrier, fuck it their whole navy, their air defence, their gps, their drones their conscripts, their radios anything made by lada

Its all shit

All of it.

The nagant was invented under the tsar for fuck sake.

>>33687767
If you're getting sand flying into your action from tank or artillery shells I doubt it will matter because you're going to be dead soon anyway.

>>33684045
Fucking idiot, you just outed yourself as completely nogunz

>>33683807

Very, very reliable. Our army has "upgraded" to G36 and various variants of it, but that weapon is a piece of shit thats not even good enough for shooting range in sterile environment. Before we had used AKMs and even after many years of service they were working pretty damn well. Although, desu, I like american M14 too

>>33683807
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EwSJiAwoMpY

And I personally have beaten shit into shape on my AK, dremeled mags to be skeletonized, mistreated it and rarely cleaned it.

I also have a makarov I specifically attempt to abuse just to see how far it'll go.

I've lost round count but I've cleaned them both probably twice in the past two years I've been doing this, each with several range trips in between and by "clean" I mean "douse in oil and let it go"

I also have an old Russian watch.
The leather is shit but the mechanism works and works and works (though it's always a few minutes off)
In my experience soviet shit is just fine for about anything you'll ever need.

>>33693329
What country are you from? Somewhere in the Baltics?

>>33688183

I find it interesting that the Nagant while considered quintessentially Russian is actually Belgian in origin, at least the design is anyways.

File: IMG_20151205_225813.jpg (12KB, 290x174px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 290x174px

My uncle owns a factory in Izmir. The turks, they import any old heavy machinery they can get, from all over the world. Bridgeport mills from America, German machines, old Soviet with all the labeling in cyrillic, Japanese stuff, whatever they can get. Any machine shop there is an engineers' museum wet dream. The old tradesman master there ("usta") told it to me best:
>We like the German machines the most, because they are simple to use and reliable. The Soviet ones? They are also very reliable, but when the German machine weights one ton, the Soviet one will weigh two, you understand?

File: 1491515137225.webm (2MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x360px

>>33683860
>>33687412
>AR15 defense force shilling for their $1500+ Barbie dolls.
Listen the AR15 is a SHIT rifle. Full stop. Numerous tests have been done, over and over and the AR15 failed. The ONLY test is some autist crawling through "mud" about as thick as concrete. And guess what? The AR, being sealed keeps that shit out, but drop it in a mud puddle, like you would find IN REAL LIFE and your gun will either kaboom, or go click. The mountains of evidence, from Veitnam to Afghanistan, has proven the AR is garbage. That's why everyone with a brain is going piston.

File: welcome to Russia, I will be your guide.jpg (151KB, 640x428px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 640x428px

>>33683807
Russia and the USSR really only got into modern industrial age in the mid 1930's and by the 40's was still dragging arse, then it managed to drag itself along in some kind of bedraggled way for the next 60 years and just did shit the way it did due to comparative isolation.
That said, their rockets, jet engines, machinists, mathematicians and some of their engineers are actually quite brilliant.
Actual production... fucking terrible, soviet era shit is churned out in vast numbers, by people who essentially don't give a fuck as long as they produce enough to stop being bothered by the state. So that means lots of shit welds, rubbish tolerances, wiring birds nests and fucking god damn awful quality control- does that mean its all complete shit? No, it just means by sheer volume you'll get some gems in all the bullshit that actually work really well, its wasteful of both time and materials, but kind of works in its own arse backwards kind of way- but that's just commies for you.

Thing with being 'easy to fix' is kind of a half truth, most of it means you end up fixing it all the fucking damn time and the other half is that they have to fix it because there's nothing else available, so it has to work one way or another.

File: different.tools.for.different.tasks.jpg (459KB, 1600x956px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 1600x956px

The Soviets shared more borders than any other country besides China. They could have a conflict at any of those borders, and their equipment reflected that.

For them, a war meant operating not far from their own country, and close to rail transport. Thats why their naval surface fleet contained bits and pieces of ships for simple domination in different small theaters, like the Caspian, Black Sea, Baltics, they only needed submarines for long distance operations. They didn't have a lot of cruisers, or high endurance ships, while the U.S. needed a very robust navy with tons of carriers to project the same level of force, far from home.

So, their investments in material reflect that. Look at the equipment they have in reserve, and its tons of tanks, artillery, and missiles. Not a lot of bombers, not a lot of naval.

>>33683936

I've had good reliability with my SVT. As for the design, I will admit that it's more fragile than most soviet firearms, but the craftsmanship is still wonderful. It's biggest flaw is the design of the recoil spring. If disassembled or reassembled poorly, you can bend the spring so that the whole gun becomes inoperable. Mine has a 30 degree bend from when I was just learning. The upper handguard is also thin and the gas system is comically long and exposed, but they aren't detrimental to the gun.

>>33694780
Think of the glory that could have been the 20th century if all those geniuses that died in trenches and gulags had stayed alive.

>>33695389
WW1 and 2 where catastrophes on a scale that decimated so many young men its actually quite profound. Even if we take out those 1 in 100,000 people who where legit apex's of intelligence and capability, there where 10's of 1000's of highly skilled artists, craftsmen, machine operators, medical professionals, farmers and tradesmen that just absolutely gutted some countries for decades. When you literally can't find people who can't bang two planks together, know how to work metal, its a real backwards slide for some time to replace them and in some of the older professions (blacksmithing and metalworking in particular) that knowledge mostly died with them.

Eventually things bounce back, but it can take a very long time. Used to hear comments all the time when we where in Afghanistan about how fucking medieval it is and damn, it really is in some areas where if you where there 5-600 years ago it'd still be much the same- that's because anyone with a brain or any kind of useful skills just buggered off years ago to somewhere else that wasn't a war torn shit hole. Former USSR countries are much the same, they had a huge brain drain that just upped and left because it was so rotten.

>>33694738
Guess what, you hydraulic lock any gas-fed weapon, its going to be unhappy.
I've carried an M4 through tropical jungles and rain in Timor and northern Australia, through moon dust and mud in Afghanistan and the damn dusty sand pit of Iraq.
I had no malfunctions