SG-43 Semi-Automatic Goryunov 7.62x54R 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 7.62x54R 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

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Crabula

    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.

  • Tim

    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.

    • PackinMak

      I disagree. One of the issues on early American Humvees was that rounds could be fired at the ground underneath and richochet inside, and bounce around, which led to more and more IED’s to penetrate poorly armored underbellies. Like Nooky said, but that on a Road, and the rounds will deflect down and possibly richochet under and hit feet.

  • Nooky

    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).

  • Freiheit

    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. 😀

  • redmanlaw

    Commie engineering (in this case) = fail

  • Zach

    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?

  • dg

    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).

  • Mu

    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.

  • Ray

    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.

  • torc

    i beleive the downward angled armour may perhaps be angled such as the round hitting it would have been coming down, after travelling in an arc, and that is to deflect it forward

  • joe man

    I have one with a mark in it from a bullet strike….

  • Glen the Rotorhead

    The shield is angled forward because this mount was also used as an anti-aircraft mount, standing on the wheels and shield. If if was angled to the rear like usual, it would fall over. I was hit by one of these while flying reconnaissance in Vietnam. It had just shot down another helicopter, killing its crew.

  • tom

    is this some kind of super secret offering from aimsurplus? i’m asking cause they don’t seem to know anything about it.

  • Zach


    AIMSurplus only sold the SG-43 for a limited time. I don’t think there are many of these available within the US.

  • Glen the Rotorhead

    The armor is angled the way it is because it served as a baseplate when the mount was configured for anti-aircraft use. I got hit by one of these in 1970 right after it brought down one of our OH-6s. We wound up with the gun but it cost us a crew and helicopter.

  • dylan

    A gun made from good strong soviet steel!!

  • Aaron

    This particular weapon appears that its armor is downsloped because the claw at the back of the carriage isn’t fully embedded…once you embed that claw into the ground to keep the carriage from rolling back, the armor would slope up, albeit at a very slight angle

  • These guns are available from They are built on your kit and good barrel. There is usually a 6 to 9 month wait due to backlog.

  • Erik

    Does anyone know what happened to “P.M. Goryunov?” I can’t find any reference on any site relating to the inventor, except for this gun here. No family, date of death, no history at all.