SG-43 Semi-Automatic Goryunov 7.62×54R for sale
AimSurplus are selling a semi-automatic version of the belt-fed SG43 Goryunov machine gun. Their guns are build from original polish kits on new semi-auto US made receivers.
This gun is perfect for those of you who do not think the AR-15 offers enough protection from incoming fire. A shield comes standard and while it may not be tacticool, there is nothing cool about being hit!
The Goryunov was developed by the Russians during WWII and later copied by the Chinese. It served until the 1960’s.
Super Neat Semi-Automatic version of the Soviet Guryunov SG43 Belt Fed 7.62×54R Machine Gun. Built from original kits out of Poland on new US receivers. The original Goryunov was develpoed in WWII as a replacement for the Maxim, and saw service throughout the Communist world. Comes as shown with ammo can, 250 links, and carriage. Barrel 28.3″, overall 44.1″ total weight 96lbs. Packed in a wood crate, Rifle, carriage with spoked wheels and a 250rd belt and can.
They are selling for $4,399.95.
I find the armor design strange. It is inclined on a negative angle, deflecting incoming rounds down, instead of up and away from the shooter like tank armor. Anyone want to shed some light on the design decision?
Hat Tip: Ammoland
As far as the armor design goes, I think that the angle of the picture is odd. To me the shield appears to be vertical. The gun itself appears to pivot up and down independently while the angle of the shield stays constant relative to the carrage.
It does however, seem odd that it would be vertical since that means it would require a thicker piece of steel to defeat the same types of ammunition that a thinner, angled piece would have no trouble with.
If I am wrong and it is angled down, then perhaps deflecting incoming rounds down into the ground is better than deflecting them up into the air.
Crabula, I thought it may be the picture, but other photos of the real deal, including the Chinese version, look the same:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SG-43
well, to be honest, im only 17, and far from being a firearms expert. just enjoy the blog;). but, i believe the shield may be angled downward, because the rounds hitting the ground would be better than raining chunks of bullet on your own men, which a otherwise upward angle might do. no proof, just an opinion.
That would be effective and have sens in the terrain, earth, sand or whatever. But if you deploy it on hard surface like a road, that shield would be pretty dangerous from my point of view (the angle is not very steep thought).
It’s important to remember that this was built in Russia during the last half of the war. It means it would have been designed when they were getting their asses handed to them.
Like a lot of things done during the war, it was better to have something than have it be perfect. Given a choice between one that may not have the best coverage or may bounce bullets around and not having one, I’d take the shield.
There are other clues that this is just how it came together. For example the cutout on the shield for the handle. It’d be a safe wager to bet that some engineer or factory supervisor had a test mount, noted that the handle was in the way, and ordered that taller slot to be cut rather than moving the gun around or removing the handle.
I love Russian guns. They’re not pretty, they’re not masterpieces of engineering, but damn it they go bang and don’t cost a lot.
Commie engineering (in this case) = fail
I have never fired a belt feed weapon before so I am wonder can you use the ammo links more then once? Also where would you buy more ammo links for the gun?
Id bet that they just didn’t think about it. These were the guys that were issuing Nagants with 5rds of ammo, and shooting there own guys if they retreated. I see a trend in Soviet design were they don’t care about operator comfort (or safety) as long as the weapon continues to work. If you look at the shield from a profile id bet almost any rifle cartridge would penetrate it. I know that 8mm and 30-06 will both go though 1/4inch steel like it was butter at 100 yards, and it cant be more than a 1/4inch thick (judging by the picture and the fact that its only 96lbs).
The reason for the downward angle is simple: Your incoming round, or, since it’s military, shrapnel, is most likely coming from a distance, and as such coming at a downward trajectory. So you have to do less deflection if you enforce the downward angle than if you try to send it flying upwards. The one thing you’re trying to avoid is the incoming bullet hitting at 90 degrees, least amount of armor, highest chance of penetration.
The reason tanks have upward angled armor is that the most dangerous shots are high speed rounds on a very flat trajectory, so the difference in angle isn’t great, and the Mark I type design leaves you with a huge top area that’s usually poorly armored.
Mu, good point!
The shield is angled downward for a fact, I own one and MU is correct on his info, as for the links question yes they are reuseable along with the ammo cans, now for most of the ammo out there most of it is berdin primed and not reuseable, but everything else is
Ray, thanks for your comment.