Kalashnikov Concern Introduces New 7.62×51 NATO SK-16 Precision Rifle

2031645_original

The venerable SVD “Dragunov” (after its designer, Yevgeny Dragunov) was one of the first successful squad designated marksman’s rifles ever developed, and it spawned numerous copycats and competitors. In the more than half-century after it was developed, however, virtually no successors to the design have been developed in Russia itself – until now. The Russian 164th edition of Popular Mechanics carries the story on a new precision carbine.

DPUdm

Source: popmech.ru

 

From Kalashnikov Concern designers Demyan Belyakov and Evgeniy Erofeev comes the SK-16, a very modern-looking rifle that – notably – chambers the American .308 Winchester/7.62x51mm NATO round, not the venerable 7.62x54mmR round in Russian service since 1891.

0ZtRj

Source: popmech.ru

 

The impetus for designing the new rifle came from the SVD’s age and lack of modern features. Modern optics that mount to Picatinny-type rails are incompatible with the SVD’s WWII-era siderail design, and the SVD cannot mount modern muzzle devices or suppressors. Further, the SVD is a long weapon, with a 24.4″ (620mm) long thin profile barrel. The SK-16 is a much shorter weapon, although barrel and overall lengths have not as of yet been released.

o2vH9

A photo of the earlier developmental mode of the SK-16. Image source: retiv

 

Mechanically, the SK-16 reportedly works in the same manner as the SVD, with one very notable difference: Instead of the ubiquitous gas port design used by virtually all modern gas operate rifles, the SK-16 uses a gas trap design that taps gas after it leaves the muzzle of the barrel, similar to the very first production M1 Garand rifles. The gas trap mechanism was selected to improved the accuracy characteristics of the rifle.

WxqHS

Source: popmech.ru

The SK-16 continues the trend of development of new carbines designed for longer-ranged engagements. The Russians and Chinese both have responded to Western developments in this area, and American planners are even considering standardizing on an ultra-long-range carbine.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • Giolli Joker

    From the moment that Americans could no longer put their hands on Russian guns, Russia started releasing a ton of cool stuff.
    Passive revenge.

    • Chris22lr

      Nah, it’s them still making one-shot prototypes that would be shelved and forgotten. Since 2012, and first photos of real-deal AK-12, we’ve seen Izhmash releasing photos of bullpup SVD, several Ratnik related SVD prototypes, AK-107 reimagined, even more modernised AK-107 for civilian market, several prototypes of Ratnik modernised AK-74M and AK-105. And lot’s of stuff from other Russia’s armament makers – prime example being ZiD’s A-545, evolution of AEK-971 and AK-12 competitor.

      However, apart from AK-74M and AK-105 modernisations, nothing have come out from all these plans. VS-121 (the new bullpup SVD) is not even listed on Kalashnikov Concern webpage. But it should be not a surprise – Russian model of reasearch and development is quite different then “western” one.

      Let’s take a look at history of Russian (or Soviet to be more precise) firearm development. For every weapon adopted (AK(M), AK-74, RPK, SVD, PK(M) and PKP) you could find several competetive designs which were forgotten after the end of contest. So we had all these early assault rifles that lost to AK (including Sudayev’s blowback operated monstrosity), futuristic bullpups competing against AK-74, various GPMGs developed in 60s and 90s (AEK-999 which lost to PKP). These prototypes represented various design philosophies and focused on different aspects of firearm technology. With centrally-planned economy, Soviet Union could research virtually any firearm design that human mind can come up with. And then throw them away with no hesitation.

      In western societies, there’s always that economical boundary that makes us think about financial loses and save all the usable scraps to later sell them. This can be traced back to Johnson M1941 rifle which was sold even after it lost with Garand. After Project SALVO, every major US firearm program which failed was somehow “monetized”. ACR failed, but US adopted some of it’s elements like lightweight optical sights (both ACOG and Elcan were parts of ACR). OICW is officially dead, but XM25 is still being pushed (despite conflicting reports about it’s effectiveness and safety). Heck, even FN SCAR was designed for a competition which was nothing more than “we’ve got this XM8 left from OICW, so now we need to compare it with some other design to prove that OICW fiasco was not so big”.

      • Tritro29

        Errrm, actually that’s a mixed bag. Russia has a largely state driven design world inherited from the USSR. So basically the pool to choose from is restricted and has to get with the technical capacity of late.

        This basically means that while seemingly a lot goes to waste, the losses are actually rather small, because the “inventor” will not go around chasing sales, like for some designs in the West which have resulted in flamboyant

        The know-how is preserved, and while basically being dead-weight, if the need arises the projects can be restarted. The academic side of this is actually far less expensive.

        Secondly most of what you’ve seen lately is R&D. There’s no one exactly thinking of producing half of those outside the KC portfoglio. Ironically the losses from the recurring programs in the West are real as much as Izhmash. Let’s recall Colt’s woes.

        You like to underscore monetization…I like to explain that the problem is not monetization but the actual recurring cost for various programs intiated by the US. On that level, we’re nowhere near the waste level. Positively supported by the fact we don’t have the same means or the same hubris.

        If you’re going to piss on Izhmash flakes because they try and upgrade their portfoglio, then you should basically port that to every business (let alone the firearm trade that in Russia is not exactly normal) and understand that R&D in the new circumstances (Market Economy) is normal although wasteful if it doesn’t work.

        • MPWS

          One thing to mention and you may know this, is the fact that Russians and before them Soviets had always several competing designs from which they chose one – all state sponsored. So at the end loss was close to none. This applied for any and all sort of conventional armaments.
          In countries such as US the effort is split between state (typically US Army) and private companies trying to serve the demand. Result is often extraordinarily costly and non-recoverable. Items in use are 50 plus years old with no clear prospect of update.
          So here you have it – central planning is more effective, at least in this field.

          • Jay

            And there’s another advantage to the Russian/USSR system. If they find something useful in a design that lost the competition, they can incorporate it into the final product, because the government owns the rights to most competing designs.

          • El Duderino

            Except for the pesky facts that there’s never enough money to fully modernize to the better design(s) and the end user is still a poorly paid conscript, it’s a great system.

            What I see from afar is a fairly simple, low-tech weapon system can be easily mandated and put into action with central planning. It’s the more complex systems that just never match up to those produced in a more decentralized profit-driven economy. The copious notes/research after the fall of the Iron Curtain and analysis of East Germany specifically seem to back this up. E.g. the rifles were fine, the MiGs were terrible and 10+ years behind technologically.

          • Tritro29

            Eastern German Mig’s like what?

            You understand that NVA’s MiG 29 were 29A?

  • Martin Grønsdal

    This looks so… developed… I know the visuals don’t shoot bullets, but this gives a different impression than your average AK

  • Ceiling Cat

    Lol.Even slavs abandon slavshits to go with superior western cartridges.

    • micmac80

      Note the long magwell , its for longer cartridge 7.62×54 and i wouldnt be suprised at even larger calibers ,SVD variants in 300WM and larger are made for civilian market. Civilian market is the only reason for .308

      • Major Tom

        7.62x54R is available to civilians, yeah 7N1 precision ammo is hard to find but it’s legal. I’d venture the focus on .308 is promotional rather than designing itself solely for that.

        • forrest1985

          My guess would be to make it available in 7.62×51 for export and 7.62×54 for service use. I doubt russia has stockpiles of x51 but given Kalashnikov’s financial struggles it makes sense to offer this in various calibers for export.

          • MPWS

            Export plan is probably the reason for this capability; they are not going to rearm to .308Win. Look at piece market has been lost by Russian industry and filled by Romanian, Bulgarian and Serb makers. And on top of it, the new design(s) are lighter and stiffer (pressure cast aluminum receivers). AK era must end one day.

          • randomswede

            The AEK series is the only possible “end” to the AK era I can see, not that I’m all seeing.

          • Tritro29

            AK is too simple to end…It’s something that jams it for other designs. It’s just a freaking piece of beautiful simplicity.

          • Chatterbot

            Russia is a major producer of .308. If they wanted to, they certainly could fill the military demand internally.

    • Major Tom

      The same “superior western cartridges” that brought us the fail and crap that was 5.56x45mm M855 ball? M193 came before and was a hell of a lot more lethal. The newer M855A1 EPR had to fix everything that was wrong with M855.

      Meanwhile in “slavshit” ammo, 7N6 ball ammo for 5.45 beat the hell out of M855 and 7N10 is comparable to the EPR minus the eco-friendly features.

      • …Where are you getting the idea that 7N10 is comparable to M855A1? You know what 7N10 is, right?

        • Major Tom

          Yes, 7N10 is improved 5.45mm ammunition developed in response to the proliferation of body armor and from lessons learned in Afghanistan and Chechnya. It features significantly improved penetration and wounding ballistics relative to 7N6. Just as M855A1 EPR’s have improved penetration and wounding ballistics relative to M855 ball.

          The differences between M855A1 and 7N10 aren’t very large.

          • ostiariusalpha

            M855A1 can create two divergent wound channels when its penetrator and core separate, 7N10 cannot.

          • You don’t seem to really know what you’re talking about. 7N10 is basically 7N6 with the airspace deleted and a longer core with a smaller diameter tip, which unlike 7N6 has been heat treated. It has better armor piercing capabilities at the expense of wounding potential.

            7N6 was one of the rounds trialed by the Army when it was exploring the fleet yaw phenomenon, too. Guess what? It suffers from the same inconsistency that other rounds do, to the extent that the Army determined that kind of bullet could not give a yaw-independent solution. Given the construction of 7N10, we can assume that at best it offers no improvement over 7N6.

            As for the differences between M855A1 and 7N10, they’re about as different as two bullets can be. M855A1 uses a steel “arrowhead” penetrator backed by a copper slug and wrapped in a base-drawn gilding metal jacket, while 7N10 uses a full-length steel core wrapped in a lead sleeve and clad in a point-drawn steel jacket.

            Completely different bullets, in other words.

    • wysoft

      Not sure this means they are abandoning 54r, but civilian and export sales are important. Which is why just about every Russian firearm design in production from K group has a NATO chamber in available.

      • toms

        It was a HK417, they issue those for sure.

    • randomswede

      The 7.62x54R is “inferior” to 7.62×51 mainly in that rimmed cartridges and magazines aren’t the best of friends.

  • Spudmonkey

    If the Russians are wearing multicam, what happens on an actual battlefield between Russia and the US?

    • Friend of Tibet

      Don’t you know the Multicam is the Earth Federation Force’s official camo, Even Iran, South Korea, China, England, I mean basically everyone is using Multicam.

      • Avery

        At least, Zeon is still using feldgrau, with the exception of that one guy in salmon pink.

    • micmac80

      Russian top SOF teams have been using multicam or multicam lookalike for a while now

    • Robert Blake

      Russia’s MOD doesn’t use multicam, just the various “spetsnaz” teams, photo-op friendly FSB (Federal Security Service) teams like Alfa, and occasionally MVD/Interior Forces troops.

    • Avery

      It’s not just the Multicam. His entire outfit looks like it’s supplied from Crye Precision. Or maybe it’s airsoft gear that’s been bootlegged, like the Flyte plate carrier.

    • Evan

      Send in the Marines. We’ve got our own schemes, we’re way too cool for multicam.

  • Tritro29

    The fact the weapon is on Popular Mechanics and in the Wrong calibre, tells you what you need to know about this rifle.

  • Friend of Tibet

    Looks like a nerf gun….

  • MPWS

    If this is the confirmation of trend (and this does not seem to be a dedicated DMR), it suggests that all Russian rifles will look like this; just a matter of time. Fancy terminal ballistics of small caliber rounds go away; reach is the preferred feature. Again, Russian practical approach at its best. Bye-bye AK…. well not yet.

    • MPWS

      When I say “does not seem to be a dedicated DMR” I refer to overall layout and detail features. Optics shown are of long range type, but standard may have just more conventional red dot – good enough.

    • What on Earth makes you think that? The Russians have just commissioned a program for a 5.45mm support weapon, for example.

      This is clearly a Dragunov replacement. The trend has been for shorter, handier SVD variants, including ones with folding stocks. There’s no reason to believe this is being designed as a standard issue infantry rifle.

  • kregano

    Super surprised they’re going with a gas trap system. Don’t those have major fouling problems that you wouldn’t want in a front line weapon?

    • micmac80

      That might be error in translation as there is no gas trap to be seen on actual rifle more like SVD short stroke piston

  • micmac80

    Note the long magwell , that hints it can possibly grow in calibers, Civilian SVD clones like Tigr take calibers well past .300WM

    • Raven

      I think the Russians even make a heavy SVD variant called the SVDK firing 9.3×64 Brenneke.

  • Riot

    A gas Trap? Someone get Ian on this.
    It will be very interesting.

    • micmac80

      Translation error? as there is nothing resembling gas trap to be seen

      • Major Tom

        Indeed. The only actual photo of the thing shows a more traditional piston tube. All the other images suggest a blowback operation or otherwise.

        And if they were doing gas trap….why? Gas trap weapons were found notoriously unreliable and needlessly complicated in the Second World War. Lessons learned from the G43.

        • Tritro29

          It looks like a gas piston indeed. I’ll go and check Popular Mechanics for the exact term, although, I doubt Retiv would have translated it erroneously.

          • Tritro29

            Also the receiver looks somewhat like the Dragunov carbine.

          • randomswede

            Is there any chance that they have a new “spin” on the gas trap concept or that it’s a gas system that just isn’t a traditional gas piston?

            The black rifle must have a piston very similar to an SVD that the tan rifles don’t appear to have.

          • Tritro29

            My “fear” is that the first image (black rifle) is a rather conventional short stroke piston based on the older Dragunov MA concept.

            The second one (the AR looking one) clearly makes me uneasy. It looks strangely like a direct impingement gun from the CGI…I’m not home yet, so it’s going to be difficult to check. But I’ll ask people to check for me.

          • micmac80

            You are leaping here where do you get DI from

          • Tritro29

            The AR-looking CG they’ve shown doesn’t have a gas port (look at the 3rd image) so either it’s thinner like the AR or some kind of “no analogue in the world” wizardry. Gas trap.

          • I specifically asked him about it, and he insisted it says “gas trap”. He’s familiar with that concept, too, so I trust him. The earlier prototypes indeed have a traditional gas port.

            The later ones, however, have a muzzle device that could be an annular duct for a gas trap, although that raises the question of how they’re then tapping gas to the operating group.

            Keep in mind, we’ve got Kalashnikov Concern going through Russian Popular Mechanics and then going through Retiv to me, so there is a lot of potential for error. Even so, a modern gas trap weapon would be very exciting.

          • Tritro29

            That’s what I said basically. I doubt Retiv would translate it erroneously.

            But I’m really having a fixation with the Dragunov Carbine and this SK 16. That charging handle position and the hinged reciever of the black prototype are too juicy to ignore;

          • randomswede

            So here’s a not entirely sane thought: The barrel is sleeved and the sleeve is the actuation “rod”.

          • Tritro29

            Sounds Russian enough…Are you 100% sure you are Swedish?

          • randomswede

            I was just working with what we have so far:
            > I don’t know of any gas traps that aren’t at the muzzle.
            > The force has to travel from the muzzle to the breach.
            > There’s no traditional piston or gas tube visible.

            Supposedly I’m 1/16 Finnish and 1/32 German the rest of me got here before they made records and the “Swedish” vikings did trade and labor down what’s russia now…

          • noob

            is a gas trap design incompatible with using a suppressor?

          • Can’t think of any reason why not.

          • Джон Доу

            I have read that article in Russian. It states new SK-16:
            … will have receiver like Dragunov’s MA short assault rifle, i.e. top optics mounting rail acts as an upper receiver and bolt carrier guide;
            … will have gas system like TKB-0145 sniper rifle, i.e. using gases trapped at the muzzle (I checked TKB-0145 pics and there is no visible gas trap or long op rod too)
            … will have reciprocating firing assembly like AN-94 Nikonov assault rifle and hydraulic buffer to soften the recoil.

            Keeping in mind last two statements I suggest there could be something like gas assisted short recoil operation.

          • Thank you, I appreciate it.

            It’s interesting that the other prototypes do not seem to have a gas trap, but the SK-16 almost seems to. Maybe that it just the muzzle device.

            It’s not clear what they mean by “gases trapped at the muzzle” if not a gas trap.

    • John

      Listen, gas traps have been in use for centuries…where I come from…they’re called underwear.

  • Avery

    The Magpul-copied handguard looks so WEIRD mated to the Dragunov receiver. Like I could see it with the prototype handguard and gas system, but now it looks like there’s rifle missing whenever you get to the barrel area.

    • randomswede

      M-Lok is a free license so in theory they could have gotten a license. But you could see why they may not want to slab an M-Lok logo on there and still want the functionality. I just hope they haven’t made “M-Lokski” that’s similar but dimensionally different.

  • Petto

    Looks very interesting , it’s like Russian take on Rem RSASS but of course with Dragunov receiver

    • forrest1985

      My first thoughts were RSASS too!

  • Evan

    That receiver looks like it’s about half again as long as it needs to be.

    • iksnilol

      Probably gonna make it in larger calibers.

      I’ve seen SVDs in 30-06.

  • LazyReader

    *Drools* Want.

  • Audie Bakerson

    R.I.P.
    7.62x54R
    1891-2017

    • Audie Bakerson

      Alternatively: 7.62 is dead. All hail 7.62.

    • randomswede

      I think we’ll see it belted for quite some time still.
      I’m not sure if the rim is a benefit in belt feeding but it’s doesn’t appear to be a big problem.

      • David Harmon

        Not until the rounds start hanging up on each other when you try to fold them into a nutsack so you can move and shoot it. Rimmed cartridges are so horribly outdated and obsolete.

        • randomswede

          Designing a reliable self loading weapon that uses rimmed cartridges is on the list of torture methods seen as inhumane, I’m sure.

          • David Harmon

            There should be some sort of ban against it as torture by the Geneva convention.

  • LazyReader

    It’s what Springfield should do to the M1A, Modernize it.

    • Zachary marrs

      god no

    • Marc Seltzer

      They already tried that with the socom. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.

      Truth is that the design was already updated in 1964 when it was decommissioned and replaced with a modern rifle.

  • goodtime

    By the caliber of this rifle I can tell its a export and LE only option since Russians are not leaving 7.62x54R any time soon since current PKP and SV-98 weapons Soviet calibers. Looks like Russian arms makers are pushing back into the international market again.

    • LazyReader

      Yes, selling to the international market that uses NATO ammunition. That’s why Kord machine guns are offered in 12.7×99 NATO

  • Marc Seltzer

    What does this do that existing, ubiquitous designs don’t already do? A 308 AR is pretty hard to beat.

    • Exactly how many .308 ARs would you guess are in service with the Russian Army?

      • Zachary marrs

        they’ve been seen with 417’s…

        • I wote that article; those were 417s made in Germany, not Russia.

          • Zachary marrs

            “Exactly how many .308 ARs would you guess are in service with the Russian Army?”

            You didn’t say “how many russian made .308 ARs would you guess are in service with the Russian army?”

            Don’t blame people for missing a point you never made in the first place

          • Tritro29

            Actually Nath’s only mistake is to know his point better than you and think every one knows the same thing. Implicitly AR308’s in the Army (key word Army) are unicorns…
            Most of the AR-variants have been seen with the Ministry of Interior/FSB Spn. It’s like a whole different world.
            The article that dates from June 2015 depicts MVD (Interior Ministry) Spn.

          • Zachary marrs

            Nathaniel is arguing about Ministry of interior vs army, he is arguing about domestic production.

            If you read his first comment i replied to, he never said anything about domestic production untill people brought up the video of Russians using the 417

          • Tritro29

            That’s because he expressed an something implicit. At least to me. The very finest example of AR-pornography within Russian Interior Units, the Alfa Calendar has enough FSB tags all over the pages. But basically this is a moot point. Let’s all be friends. At the end, the fact is that as Nath said, if the rifles are going to be acquired for large introduction, it is basically impossible now ANYWAY (2014 sanctions) so it has to be a domestic production.

          • No, listen, they only have a handful of imported .308 ARs in use with special units. If they are going to procure more for standard issue, they are going to buy domestic; that’s how these things work. And there is no domestic production!

          • Zachary marrs

            You never specified domestic production in your original comment. Do you understand?

          • The two points are deeply interrelated. Just like how SOCOM may buy HK416s that are made in Germany, but when the Marine Corps places an order for M27s, production has to be set up stateside.

            I didn’t point this relation out; you’re right. However, if I ask “how many .308 ARs are in service with the Russian Army?” and the answer is “zero, or close to it”, that implies little or no domestic production of .308 ARs. Does that make sense.

      • Marc Seltzer

        How many sk-16’s are in use with the russian army?

        • You miss the point. There are no .308 ARs made by Russian firms; to get a rifle like that, they would have to buy outside the country. For an Army issue rifle that is unacceptable.

          So while you’re dumbly scratching your head wondering what this rifle offers you in an American market filled with DPMS Gen 2s and DD5V1s, Kalashnikov is wisely targeting a market where they have no competition.

      • JSmath

        Though there are distinctly more 556/AR-15 derived weapons in the Russian Army than most people would typically guess.

        • Tritro29

          Oh please tell me how many? Especially in the “Army”…take your time, because you’re on for a rough ride.

        • Stan Darsh

          Russian SOF units do seem to get a kick out of using the captured Zbroyar Z-15 and the domestic produced Molot HPE-140.

          • Tritro29

            All AR-15 variants (especially those purchased from FSB Spn) are of three origins. US (DD’s have been seen), German (HK416’s) and in at least two cases (Belgian made M4’s have been seen, although it’s possible those could have been “gifts” exchanged among “quiet professionals”). There’s also one case of Chechen FSB guys using borrowed m4’s from Jordanian SOF during International competition. And then there’s the Chechen “SOBR” black hole who has been seen using LMT carbines. No other non-sense about “captured” weapons or Molot AR’s. There are personal purchases, although surely not Army Spn. There’s at least one guy I know personally that has bought an Oberland Long gun on his own money.

          • guest

            Firstly, “domestically produced” the Molot weapons are not, since they are made in Belarus. Secondly, I have been following the conflict in Ukraine closely, and so far the only trophies were western made ARs and even those are very few and far apart, as the Zbroyar is nowehere to be seen (including ukraine’s own market).

            And lastly, specops get to chose. Army does not. And what the specops chose also depends on ammo availability, hence they have no reason to even field any weapon in 5.56 or 7,62 NATO.

        • guest

          In the ARMY???? Oh please, do tell more!

    • Tritro29

      It’s a Russian design and industrial capability…and it can be sold abroad. It’s a halo weapon for Izhmash. One of those things that might sell IF the sanctions die out. Jesus you guys are a real let down.

  • toms

    Its DI they just don’t want to admit that they are copying the west again.

  • c4v3man

    That seems amazing that they would design this to be altered for left hand users… I would think they would just design it for right hand use and tell lefties to get over it.

  • cloudhidden

    Misspelled “Kalashnikov” in the post title.

  • Thamuze Ulfrsson

    All this dickering in the comments about bullets, yet nobody seems to understand how hilarious it is that the Russkies are using a gas trap system? It’s like time travel powered by vodka that somehow went stale.

  • akim h lettner

    Thay coud have it 7.62x54r

  • ryanwazhere

    Still would love to see an AK12 DMR

  • Tritro29

    Nope I don’t know what you meant. Because I suspect Nathaniel had a modicum of knowledge. Especially since TFB has had posts about Karden, in which he clearly explains (Karden) he’s MVD. However, because you seem to be an unrepentant ignoramus, I’m going to explain you in US terms what you said. You said that the Equivalent of the FBI is the Army. Yeah, that’s what you meant. Also AR-15 in the Invasion of Ukraine? Oh please tell me more. Just for the fun of seeing you talking crap and me retorting back with first hand evidence. Please go on about “plenty evidence”.

  • joedeats

    Oh for F sake…….We want an SVD, just build SVD’s and sell them here and you will have a cash cow. Build them here in America if you need to but Americans love the SVD, we want the SVD, don’t reinvent the wheel. We have lots of choices for accurate rifles that look like AR’s but the pent up demand for SVD’s that aren’t being sold for 5000 dollars is HUGE….why no one listens is beyond me.

  • RickOAA .

    That thing looks like it fell off the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down.

  • Core

    I’m guessing that the gas trap routes the gas back up a port in or around the barrel, making it gas impingement. The receiver looks machined out of aluminum or polymer, but the prototype looks milled. They must make the gas trap /muzzle device removable to clean the gas port. Or they might have engineered the port to outlast the barrels rifling?

  • John

    If this is true and they have developed a reliable, highly accurate, .308 in semi-auto I have three (3) demands….

    1) I would like one

    2) I would like it to cost under $1500

    3) If item number two (2) is satisfied, I would like another

    Thank you

  • Cottersay

    “It is better to look good than to feel good”, so I think I’ll take the beautiful SVD Dragunov any day over the hideous looking SK-16.

  • guest

    not to worry little americunt, every rifle Russia ever accepted into service was pretty much bar-none, or close to it, so I get the feeling they’ll figure it out.

  • Bonzaipilot

    This looks suspiciously like a CGI I was looking at not all that long ago.
    when you can’t look to the future for inspiration look to the past and reengineer. I wonder how they will get past the reliability issues inherent in the gas trap design. A short throw long oprod?