7.62 x 54r Rifles

[tobnpr]

The thing that's always hung me up on the Vepr imports is the plastic mags.
Eventually, the rifle will no longer be manufactured- and I've always been leery about the longevity of the plastic mags. I suppose one could stock up on them, but they're not cheap.

The Izhevsk arsenal also made/makes? the Tigr- which is a commercial knock-off of the Dragunov- but I haven't seen new ones for sale commercially. I suspect subject to the import ban?

I'm of the opinion that the 54R ammo isn't going away anytime soon.
We saw the prices up 50% and more during the last "scare"- and guess what- they came back down to under $100 per tin.

It's not a chambering like other milsurps that have gone by the wayside. It's still manufactured by Novosibirsk, and still VERY much in use in around the world by about a dozen countries in MG's like the PKM and it's variants. It is NOT obsolete...

[Mobuck]

For the difference in price to find and buy one of the oddball, imported freaks, you can buy a modern 30/06 and more ammo than the average person will shoot in several years.

[skizzums]

The difference between the vepr and the svd os a stronger, beefier bolt type, and Molot is known to make fine quality barrels. If you poke around the forums, you'll see folks with stock Molot VEPR's pulling 1.5-2moa, but, it is the internet, but I don't see why not. Ad for stamped or milled, not sure, looks stamped.

If your a collector and want something that's going to a very desired piece one day in your lifetime, find a druganov. But for a shooter, I can only imagaine that a company with a good rep for accurate quality barrels will be a better choice for the range, at about half the price. If only an svd shot as good as they do on call of duty.....

Never thought about the plastic mags, something to think about though. I would probably buy a couple that never got opened, but still as you said, they prob wouldn't be worth a dang a hundred years from now. But I suspect if you really really needed a mag 20 years from now,youll likely be able to quickly scan an original and print one out....unless they ban those evil printers.

[Erno86]

The main difference between the VEPR and the Dragunov...is that the VEPR has a long piston like the Romanian PSL, and the Dragunov has a shorter piston; that is supposed to contribute too better accuracy for the SVD.

I own a PSL...and it is a beast at the range, but always stick with the light ball 147 grain bullets, which puts less strain on the receiver; and keep that thin barrel from getting to hot or your groups will spread out.

You might be better off buying a Hungarian AES-10 A or B sniper rifle in 7.62x39, because it is less recoiling, and you can get a better cheek weld with the offset Russian rangefinder scope; compared to the wider receiver PSL. I was lucky enough to buy the Iraqi TABUK version before the AK rifle ban came here in Maryland.

The supplied Russian rangefinder scope has no focus adjustment, but I have perfect focus and cheek weld shooting the PSL right handed while aiming with my left eye thru the scope; but I use my right eye while shooting with the irons.
With my AES-10...I shoot right handed and aim with my right eye thru the offset scope, including the irons; while still getting a good cheek weld.

[BoogieMan]

ou might be better off buying a Hungarian AES-10 A or B sniper rifle in 7.62x39, because it is less recoiling, and you can get a better cheek weld with the offset Russian rangefinder scope; compared to the wider receiver PSL. I was lucky enough to buy the Iraqi TABUK version before the AK rifle ban came here in Maryland.

Not exactly what I was looking for. But, I am trying to gather a healthy collection of Hungarian (My family is from Hungary) made guns. I have never heard of the AES-10 until now. I looked on Gunbroker and found a Romanian. If you know of any please post link or PM link. As I mentioned I have a soft spot for all guns made in Hungary.

[Erno86]

Our range has a Hungarian diplomat that shoots black powder rifles & pistols. I believe he is a member of the Hungarian black powder team. He is an excellent offhand/standing shooter.

I bought my PSL new for $1,000 --- that came supplied with the standard 4x Russian rangefinder scope and 4 PSL mags. Once you sight-in the irons --- it will be a field check for the zero of the scope --- in case the turret adjustment knobs are accidently moved or the turret screws come loose.

[Erno86]

I'm sorry, my bad...but it is a Romanian AES-10 A, RPK, not of Hungarian make.

I bought it used for $1,300. You'll find that the MAS 49/56 recoil pad fits perfectly on the RPK's clubfoot stock.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

One of these days I'll get the Winchester 1894 and the Marlin 1895 straight in my mind...

[SIGSHR]

I have read that the 7.62x54R round was a little much for the Winchester M1895, led to action stretching and headspace problems.

[Mike Weber]

One of these days I'll get the Winchester 1894 and the Marlin 1895 straight in my mind...

Actually it was the Winchester 1895 which features a box magazine we were discussing in this thread. The Winchester 1894 utilizes a tubular magazine under the barrel.

[44 AMP]

I have read that the 7.62x54R round was a little much for the Winchester M1895, led to action stretching and headspace problems.

The Win 95 was also chambered for the .30-06, .405 Win, .30-40Krag, and I think .30-03.

Never heard about any issues, other than expensive, fragile (too much for a military arm), and complex, but then, I'm no expert on the 95.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Originally Posted by Mike Weber

Actually it was the Winchester 1895 which features a box magazine we were discussing in this thread. The Winchester 1894 utilizes a tubular magazine under the barrel.

I know, but they got mixed up in my addled brain. After 10pm and before 8am brain not work so good.

[Mike Irwin]

The 30-40 and .405 work at significantly less pressure than the Russian.

The 30-06 has a slightly higher chamber pressure
.

[44 AMP]

I paid $125 for this, but it was a LONG time ago...

[Gunplummer]

Nice rifle, but from my experience they had too many feeding problems. You have to remember, a dollar went a long way years ago. $125 dollars was a weeks pay for a lot of guys. I bought my first deer rifle (Hex receiver M/N) through the mail for about $15 dollars with shipping. Then as others pointed out, the only ammunition available cost as much or more a box than the gun did. I don't know. what did a new Winchester model 70 go for in the mid-60s?

[Art Eatman]

Model 70, mid 1960s? Under $200. In 1971 I bought an L-579 Sako Forester carbine for about $220, and a Weatherby Mark V for $315. NIB. Prices were up by then from LBJ's guns'n'butter monetary policy.

A guy bought a Model 70 in .458, shot it a very few times, and traded it back to McBride's in Austin. Jack put it in the rack at $150; "like NIB". 1968 or 1969, thereabouts.

In 1966 I gave $65 for a NIB convertible Blackhawk and $60 for a four-digit 1911.

[Gunplummer]

If you look at inflation, are most surplus guns unreasonably priced? You can still easily pick up a Mauser for under $300 to rebarrel or modify into something to hunt with. I kind of think it is the ammo that took the big jump in price.

[robinsroost]

Isn't the Ruger mini 30 chambered for the 7.62 x 39? Robin

[bamaranger]

Not to get too sidetracked, but in addition to the difference in the operating systems (long AK type op rod v. short piston), the trigger systems are different as well, the Drag supposedly having one much better. Magazines will not interchange either. They shoot the same cartridge, use similar optics, and have a similar cosmetic appearance. But it stops there.

The PSL/Romak is literally nothing much more than a stretched AK, from a design standpoint. The Drag was designed new from the ground up. Read somewhere the magazine alone took years to refine.

[Model12Win]

It begs the question WHY did the RUSSIANS USE the 7.62x54mm for so LONG?

Seems that if they just adopted a modern rimless design, it would have eliminated having to design all these different guns around the goofy x54 chamber dims.

[Mike Weber]

It begs the question WHY did the RUSSIANS USE the 7.62x54mm for so LONG?

Seems that if they just adopted a modern rimless design, it would have eliminated having to design all these different guns around the goofy x54 chamber dims.

You could ask the same question in regards to the .303 British cartridge and rifles chambered in that cartridge have been popular in both military and sporting configuration throughout the former British Empire.

[Model12Win]

Yes, but the x54r is STILL used as the primary sniper/dmr/LMG/MMG/GPMG cartridge in Russian and all over the middle east.

[Mosin-Marauder]

I don't really see any drawbacks using it. Just as effective (more so) than the 7.62 NATO, only difference is the Rim. Just as reliable. Not wonky at all.

[skizzums]

I am not sure why, but my 54r brass almost doesn't stretch at all. I would think the opposite since where it headspaces and the generous chambers of milsurps. But 4 realods and still no trim, any ideas why?

[44 AMP]

It begs the question WHY did the RUSSIANS USE the 7.62x54mm for so LONG?

The Russians used the 7.62x54R from its introduction (1891) until 1917.
The SOVIETS used the 7.62x54R from then until the fall of the Soviet Union.
The Russians use the 7.62x54R today.

Think of it as institutional inertia. OR just think of it as being cheap.

The cost of replacing the 54R round simply wasn't worth it. It IS cheaper to design new guns to use the old round than replace the old round, and everything that goes with the old round.

Also the Soviet system strongly discouraged any criticism, even when warranted. Wanting to replace the approved standard (for any reason) would have been seen as a criticism, and not just of the old round, but of the Soviet system in general. They were kind of ...funny that way.

(they went to the 7.62x39 NOT as a replacement for the 54R, but an addition to it.).

A SLIGHTLY similar situation (economy) was why we got the M1 Garand in .30-06 instead of the .276 round it was designed for. Depression era economy, we were able to afford (in small numbers, at first) a new rifle, but with literally billions of 06 rounds (and our standard MGs using them as well) it was economic sense to adapt the new rifle to the old round, rather than replace the old round, despite the apparent advantages the new round offered.

Bottom line is, it worked, and the benefit of changing to something else did not outweigh the expense of conversion.