The Russian Mosin Nagant Forum

Which would you choose and why?

I would take the SVT because I am a lefty and can get a decent cheek weld on the non skeletonized of the SVT stock.

I would choose the SVT. It has some history in it. Mine runs like a sewing machine when the gas valve is on the correct setting.

SVT-40, no question about it. It has the looks. And PSL won't even outshoot a good SVT-40.

Having both, I couldn't decide between the two. Both have their good and bad.

The PSL, it's modern, mine is an actual Romanian, not a U.S. built one. The one big plus of it is, if you can clean an AK, a PSL is a cakewalk. And being an AK variant, it's proven and it works. At the range, I've had no issues with distances out to 600yrds. Barrel heating from rapid fire causes stringing of shots, but just slow your rate of fire. Aftermarket quality scopes and mounts are readily available, as are better trigger assemblies and other parts. Magazines can be pricey. Stocks and overall finish can vary, and the buttstock can have a rather short length of pull if you have long arms. The biggest thing with a PSL, is no heavy ball ammo, it can beat the rear trunion to pieces.

The SVT, to me the biggest thing is, it's history , it's a true weapon of war used during WW2. And the sniper version, that is the holygrail. They can be a finicky weapon if the gas system is rough, pitted and leaks, but replacement parts are available. Cleaning is not a joy, lots of small parts. Fully understanding the operation and adjustment of the gas system is a must for weapon longevity, and also if you reload, if misadjusted it will beat brass to death. At the range, mine shoots slightly better than a typical Mosin at given ranges, it's by no means a precision weapon. Magazines can be an issue, they aren't really designed to be swapped like an Ak, thats why magazines were numbered, they were fitted to the particular rifle. Also replacement originals are very expensive and may require fitting. And the final thing, an SVT just looks fricken awesome

Pricewise, they are from what I've seen, roughly in the same price range now, so price I left out of the equation.

Just my on owning both

Well, I have a SVT-40 and I like it but what a PIA to clean. I have fired a buddy's PSL and I agree with Greasemonkey's comment on length of pull. As to cleaning, he had a good bit of it done while we still at the range and it was obvious to me that it was easier to do. As a collector, the SVT wins hands down. as a shooter, I'd lean towards the PSL.

I finally held an SVT this past weekend. Didn't get a chance to shoot it but it was enough to make me want one. So that would be my vote, but I am a sucker for firearms with historical value.

Plastic rifles are a dime a dozen. Tacticool is fine. However, a workman knows his tools, and fits the tool to the task. I'm in it for the history, partly, and for the feel of the weapon. I'm an old infantryman, and I appreciate the weight and feel of weapons I grew into the calling with.

Plastic? Last time I checked both the PSL and SVT are all iron and wood.

jones0430 wrote:Plastic rifles are a dime a dozen. Tacticool is fine. However, a workman knows his tools, and fits the tool to the task. I'm in it for the history, partly, and for the feel of the weapon. I'm an old infantryman, and I appreciate the weight and feel of weapons I grew into the calling with.

Not much Tacticool about the PSL-54c, and also, there is no plastic, it was designed and built at the RATMIL Cugir arsenal for the Romanian military.They were first deployed in Romania around 1974, while more modern than the SVT, they are no means "modern" by todays standards. It's deemed as a designated marksman rifle, more so than an actual sniper weapon, but it has been used in such roles. Externally it's almost a copy of the Soviet SVD, while internally it's a heavy built Ak, like the RPK light machine gun. They have seen use in conflicts and such, photos have been seen with Afghan forces and other forces using them, so technically they do have some field history, just not as noteworthy. Yes, you can go Tacticool on them, but one could do that on an M1 Garand a well. Just my

PSL. Although I like the SVT, having shot both, I'd choose the practicality of the PSL. (Accuracy, better scope, easier to maintain.)

I bought the SVT, milsurp triumphs over commercial sporter.

All in all, I'd still rather have the battle rifle. My prejudices win out in this.

I've owned several SVT-40's over the years, sold them all off as they are a pain to clean and accuracy was nothing special that my 91/30's couldn't achieve. I've owned one PSL and still have it. Built like a T34 tank and torso accurate to 600m or so. Super fun to shoot, not so much fun to be beside the shooter though with the brake.

are adj stocks for an AK able to fit the PSL style weapons? im leaning toward one to fill
the semi auto role of that caliber in my home. and im TALL and got monkey arms.

PSL, easier to clean and operate, parts are more readly available and cheaper.

Now that said if I had my choice I would hold out and save up for an SVD Tiger.

I like both the PSL and SVT however I chose to buy a Molot-Ruzhie VEPR in 7.62X54R with a 20"bbl when CenterFire Systems had them on sale in 2012 for $699.99. I also bought one in 7.62X39 W/ a 20" bbl for $499.99. I thought the $200.00 discount with free shipping was a good deal. They both are excellent rifles with only one drawback and that being the cost of extra mags. A 20 Rd. 7.62X54R was $49.00 and a 10 rd. $44.00. The 20 Rd. 7.62X54R mag. makes the rifle a little too heavy . The 30 rd 7.62 X39 is about the same in weight as a regular AK but costs $39.99. Since I'm a real Russian gun nut I would like to have both a PSL and a SVT40. Maybe someday if I find the right deal. Probably the SVT40 first.JGC

Svt because history

SVT-38 and 40, because a PSL -type rifle could be made easily from an RPK receiver, obviously after strengthening it and rechambering it to 7.62x54R.

Can't/Won't do that for an SVT.

Heresy? Or is it heresey?

Vepr