“On 26th April 1944, during a battle for Hill 172.4 (in Moldavia), the enemy counter-attacked 12 times in an attempt to cut our units off from the sides. Comrade Zhezherya, in spite of hostile fire of the enemy, moved ahead and repulsed all counter-attacks with his machinegun. By the evening, however, the handful of brave (Soviet) soldiers was surrounded, even though their courage remained undiminished. In the ensuing battle Zhezherya alone killed 70 Germans with machinegun fire…the encirclement was broken and his gun-crew rejoined the regiment.”

The above was taken from the award given to Guards Sergeant Aleksandr Efimovich Zhezherya. In a two month span in 1944 he was wounded three times, yet never left the field. He was credited with killing 343 German soldiers and repulsing 22 enemy counter-attacks. His weapon, a M1910 Maxim 7.62 watercooled machinegun.

The Russian Model 1910 Maxim machinegun served with distinction through the First World War, the Revolution, numerous small border conflicts, the Second World War, and then with the Red Chinese in Korea. A dependable and reliable weapon, it utilized Hiram Maxim’s basic recoil toggle system. Born in Sangerville, Maine in 1840 Hiram Maxim was originally apprenticed to a coach builder. He was gifted with a wide-ranging inventive faculty which embraced such things as electric lights, gas generating plants, steam and vacuum pumps, and engine governors. After setting up shop in Hatton Garden, one of the more exclusive market areas in London, he spent from 1882 through 1885 patenting every possible way of using a weapon’s own energy to operate itself. At this time all repeating guns were manually operated. Weapons like the Gatling, Nordenfelt, and Hotchkiss gun were all dependent on the muscle power of their operator. Hiram however was able to harness the weapon’s own energy to operate it using what became known as the recoil principle. Using a toggle lock it operated very much like your knee joint. With your knee locked, upward pressure against the sole of your foot is easily checked. However, a sharp rap to the back of the knee while there is pressure on the sole of the foot will unlock the joint allowing the leg to fold. While seemingly simple, it was revolutionary at the time.

Hiram demonstrated his new invention in front of the Czar in St. Petersburg in 1887. The Russians had been using the Gatling gun since 1865 but had no concept of what true automatic fire was. Looking at Hiram’s invention Russian officers ridiculed it until he sat down and fired 333 rounds in exactly half a minute, shooting the center out of the target. After seeing this Hiram said, “they became enthusiastic”. He promptly received an order for 12 guns in caliber 10.75x58R Russian Berdan for testing and evaluation purposes. Between when Hiram first demonstrated his machinegun in front of the Czar and when their initial order was delivered the Maxim saw its first use in combat. The British where the first to draw blood with it. On 21st November 1888 General Sir Francis de Winton led a command to the newly formed colony of Gambia. Arriving at the fortified village of Robari it is said that the General himself set up the Maxim and opened fire. His dispatch read as follows, “the bullets rained in through the portholes and between the planks killing numbers of the enemy. The breastwork and other towers were treated in the same manner, and in a few minutes it was seen that the garrison were issuing from the fort and flying for their lives.” The abilities of the Maxim were now proven in combat, a small prelude of what was to come.

After Maxim’s M1887 successfully completed trials the Russian Artillery Committee issued a very favorable report. They stated that the automatic machinegun had advantages over all of the mechanical types. Revolving the firing handle of a mechanical gun had required considerable physical strength and quickly tired the gunner so that crews had to be constantly changed. The Maxim eliminated this. The single barrel of the Maxim also brought a substantial weight reduction compared to the multi barrel weapons. Plus a hang fire in a multi-barrel mechanical gun could damage the weapon and injure the crew. An additional advantage was that the cloth belts used by the Maxim were much more convenient than the magazine and cartridge assemblies then in use.

The Imperial Russian Army took delivery of its first automatic machineguns in 1899. Interestingly enough these guns were purchased from DWM in Berlin and were their 1894 Ludwig Loewe commercial model. This was an exact copy of the British 1889 Smokeless Powder Model with heavy brass jacket, early crank handle, 1889 style lock, and was chambered for the “Three-Line” 7.62x54R cartridge. Mounted on large wheeled carriage mounts with gun shields they were issued to the artillery in batteries of eight. Tactical thinking of the time was to deploy them to repulse mass attacks on fortifications and fixed positions. The Russians didn’t have long to wait before they had a chance to use them in combat. Their first use of the Maxim came in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05. One such deployment of the Maxim came at the Yalu River where eight Russian Maxim guns stood their ground and beat off several Japanese assaults. The highly motivated Japanese infantry who were accustomed to attacking en-masse were decimated, the Maxim guns stacking their lifeless bodies up like cordwood. They were an immediate success in combat wherever they saw action. The Russians did find out as the war progressed however that the heavy cumbersome artillery style gun carriages did not allow sufficient maneuverability posing the possibility of being outflanked and overrun. Necessity being the mother of invention, the Russian gunners took it upon themselves to improvise expedient mounts out of materials on hand to increase their weapons maneuverability and effectiveness. Later, during World War I the Germans would also make expedient trench mounts for their MG 08’s in an attempt to increase their portability.

While the war ended in defeat for Imperial Russia it was of no fault of their Maxim guns. Over half of the Japanese casualties were officially credited to Maxim gun fire. Satisfied that it was superior to the Hotchkiss machineguns fielded by the Japanese the Russians decided to begin manufacturing it in quantity to equip their forces with. The first Russian manufactured Maxim was called the M1905. While closely resembling the 1894 Ludwig Loewe Model (Bolotin refers to this gun as the Russian M1895, this may be when the Russians officially adopted it, Goldsmith refers to it as the M1899 as this was the year the Russians actually received them) the Russians incorporated 2 major improvements. These were a new easily field stripped lock (as introduced on the 1901 “New Pattern” commercial Vickers-Maxim), and an “S” shaped crank handle. The M1905 was in turn modernized and replaced by the M1910. This new improved model was basically a fluted jacket copy of Vickers, Sons & Maxim’s “new light” Model of 1906. The heavy brass parts of the earlier guns having been replaced by steel, the M1910 weighed 10-12 pounds less than the previous models. It was mounted on a sturdy wheeled mount that had been designed by Aleksandr Alexeevich Sokolov. The Sokolov mount was an extremely stable firing platform, and could be towed by the gun crew via a rope while traveling on a road. During the winter the wheels could be removed and replaced with ski’s. The Sokolov mount shows a striking similarity to the Vickers commercial combination tripod/wheelmount. While a stable firing platform, the Sokolov mount did have one serious drawback, its weight. The early mounts which incorporated a set of folding legs to allow firing over parapets tipped the scales at a whopping 110 pounds! Later simplified mounts that did away with the extra legs still weighed in at a hefty 80 pounds. A simpler and lighter mount designed by Ivan Kolesnikov was adopted in 1915. However it did not replace the Sokolov mount but merely served alongside it in smaller quantities.

The M1910 Maxim proved to be a tough, sturdy weapon with excellent reliability, even in the muddy conditions of trench warfare during World War I. Yet even the firepower of the Maxim could not make up for the inept senior officers of the Imperial Russian Military. Common German propaganda photos taken during the war show Russian prisoners towing their M1910’s into captivity. During the war the Sokolov mount was simplified by doing away with two extra legs that could be used to raise the gun for firing over a parapet. The excessive weight of the weapon system was also noticed. The guns and early mounts tipped the scales at a none to amusing 155 pounds, while the later mounts lightened the combination up to 125 pounds. To the gun crew desperately trying to wrestle their weapon forward over mud clogged terrain to support their comrades in attack the gun’s weight was a serious drawback. It’s no simple feat to scramble forward with your Mosin-Nagant under interlocking MG 08 fire with 77 cm shells bursting around you. To do it with a 45 pound (not including water) M1910 on your shoulder with its jacket full of boiling water, a steam plume belching out to mark your position, knowing you have to keep up with the attack to provide suppressive fire must have been something else all together.

The M1910 fought on both sides during the Revolution and was adopted by the Red Army afterwards. An interesting note is that it was even successfully used by mounted troops during the Revolution. Mounted on a special cart it gave the cavalrymen increased firepower and flexibility. During the 1920’s an attempt was made to lighten the M1910 so as to produce a light machinegun version. Ivan Kolesnikov and Fedor Tokarev both produced lightened air-cooled versions of the basic Maxim. Equipped with a bi-pod and shoulder stock they remind one of the Browning 1919A6. While Tokarev’s design was adopted, it was only produced in small quantities and, due to inherent problems, was subsequently withdrawn from service.

To increase the long-range and indirect fire capabilities of the weapon a new 7.62x54R load was introduced into service. The M1930 Heavy Bullet Type D load consisted of a 182 grain boattailed projectile whereas the normal M1908 load utilized a 148 grain projectile. The new bullet was designed by Dobrzansky and Smirnsky and was intended to increase the effective range out to 4500-5000 meters. It can be identified by a yellow tip (Light Ball was identified by a silver tip). This load was along the lines of the British .303 Mk 8Z ball round designed for long range use with the Vickers MK I. While the 7.62x54R cartridge continues to give excellent service with the Russian Army today, both the M1908 and the M1930 Heavy Bullet loads are officially obsolete. Although officially replaced in Russian service by more modern steel core loads large stocks still exist and may be encountered in odd places around the world.

With war looming on the horizon the Soviets were eager to replace the M1910 with a lighter, more modern weapon. While the development of a new HMG had been desired since 1925, such was not to be. As the Wehrmacht blitzkrieged into the Soviet Union Ivan Lubenets and Yury Karazin developed a simplified version of the M1910. Using accumulated combat experience, including lessons learned during the 1939-40 Winter War with Finland, they improved and simplified the Maxim to increase production and eliminate any superfluous features. A new simplified rear sight was installed which lacked the lateral adjustment scale and range graduations for the M1908 Light Ball load. The new rear sight was graduated for the Heavy Bullet load in 100 meter increments out to 2700 meters. It was recognized that the Maxim was normally used to engage targets at ranges up to 800-1000 meters, at these distances the difference in trajectory between the two loads was not great. The original small diameter barrel jacket filler cap was replaced with an enormous one. This allowed the coolant to be refilled much more rapidly. But more importantly it allowed snow and ice to be poured into the jacket. This was useful in the long, bitterly cold Russian winters and was a trick learned the hard way from the Finns who had incorporated this feature on some of their Model 09/32 Maxim guns. Weapons intended for Army service had the optical sight bracket removed. Plus a high pressure aluminum alloy casting replaced the machined steel feed block.

Yet even with constant improvements and good combat characteristics some of the Maxim’s fundamental drawbacks were impossible to eliminate through modernization. The speed of war had changed dramatically since Hiram had originally designed it. Its excessive weight was a significant drawback. The gun and mount were 20-25 kg heavier than its foreign rivals. The water-cooling was a hindrance to combat readiness, especially in temperatures below freezing. Also the barrel jacket was vulnerable to damage from small arms fire and shell fragments. A puncture in the water jacket would severely curtail the sustained fire ability of the weapon.

The Ukrainian Front issued a report on Soviet Artillery Equipment that had this to say, “Maxim 7.62 machinegun is quite satisfactory in regard to its reliability and stability; it is durable and can deliver powerful fire. It is trusted by the soldiers. However, its weight (70 kg) renders the system totally ineffectual; it reduces maneuverability, forcing the crews to lag behind their units in offensive battles and sometimes leaves the attack without fire support. Experience with the combat application of heavy machineguns during the Patriotic War shows that all machineguns weighing more than 40 kg(88 pounds) are a burden in an offensive and thus do not meet combat-maneuver requirements.” And so the venerable Maxim Model 1910 machinegun was replaced in Soviet service after 1945. Many wound up in China and saw action in Korea, and I’m sure some made their way to Vietnam. Then the old war horse faded into the history books, the days of watercooled machineguns being past.

At the 1999 Hiram Maxim Machinegun Shoot in Dover Foxcroft, Maine I had a chance to meet Robert E. Naess and his 1943 vintage M1910 Maxim. Manufactured at Tula Arsenal his M1910 is an excellent example of a wartime production Russian Maxim. Exhibiting a rough finish with unground rivet heads it was not the prettiest thing you ever saw. However there’s just something about holding onto a set of spade grips attached to a watercooled machinegun. It kind of reminded me of a 1968 Plymouth Hemi Roadrunner. With dog dish hubcaps and a spartan taxi cab interior it wasn’t much to look at, but it wasn’t made for looking at, it was made for driving and driving hard. Simply flooring the gas and opening those two enormous 4-barrel carburetors would instantly bring a smile to ones face (and a look of terror to your passengers). So it was with the rough wartime finish M1910. With a belt hanging out of the weapons right side I snapped the crank handle forward twice and with my elbows resting on the inside of my knees I gripped the spade handles. Pushing the safety out of the way with one thumb I pushed the trigger forward with the other. Immediately the old Maxim roared to life spitting 7.62 rounds down range. The crank handle slapped back and forth as the belt danced, indexing through the weapon. A steady flow of empty 7.62x54R cases spilled from the ejection port as 148 grain Light Ball rounds pounded a car down range. At the 100 yards we were shooting at, a 148-grain 7.62x54R projectile is still traveling at 2477 fps for 1919 ft-lbs of energy. It was obvious an automobile was poor protection against a belt fed watercooled machinegun!

Accuracy was surprising. Robert said that with a Finnish made barrel in the weapon it would group into 1 1/2 feet at 450 yards. He feels the Finnish barrels are of superb quality while the Russian barrels tend to be much poorer. While fabric belts were originally used with the Maxim we had no problems using metal non-disintegrating link belts for the Finnish Maxim or metal Goryunov belts. We discussed the subject of fabric belts and how they could affect the weapon’s reliability due to shrinkage from becoming wet. As the belts shrink the pockets grip the cartridges much tighter than normal which can lead to malfunctions. It was his opinion that the 7.62x54R cartridge has a different recoil impulse than the 7.92×57 round. He feels this difference makes the 7.62 guns slightly more reliable when feeding cloth belts.

I was very impressed with the Maxim M1910. My time behind it came to an end much to soon. The weapon exhibited excellent firing characteristics and the Sokolov mount was a very stable firing platform. It was easy to see why the weapon inspired confidence. But of course I didn’t have to pack it about on my back either! For someone interested in owning a Maxim M1910 Robert Naess is currently building them from original Russian parts and registered MG 08 sideplates. For more information and current prices give him a call. For the Imperial Russian/Soviet collector, or the person who just has always wanted a belt fed watercooled machinegun, this might be just what you’ve been looking for.

Postscript: Aleksandr Efimovich Zhezherya was killed in action in one of the last battles of the Great Patriotic War. He was awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union and included in perpetuity in the roll of honor of the 1st Company of his Motorized Guards Infantry Regiment. His Maxim M1910 machinegun is now preserved in the Central Museum of the Armed Forces of the USSR.

Acknowledgments: Thanks to Robert E. Naess for his help, knowledge, patience, and time spent behind his 1943 M1910 Maxim.

Scope mounts. No matter how accurate your rifle or how precise your optics, if your scope is not mounted rock solid all is for naught. Ever since soldiers started mounting optical sights onto their rifles to successfully engage further than was possible with iron sights, the fly in the ointment has been how to properly mount them. And once mounted, how to keep them properly mounted. In his book ‘A RIFLEMAN WENT TO WAR’ H.W. McBride wrote about how he anchored a Warner & Swasey telescope onto his Ross sniping rifle, “I had to tinker up the mounting a bit to keep it from jarring loose; on my particular rifle I rusted all the screws in and spiked them with a center punch, then by ramming a thin wedge or “shim” (made from a safety razor blade) in between the sight base and its holding lug, I finally got it on so tightly I could not get it off. This “anchored” it properly and the sight thereafter worked all right.” I’m sure his method not only worked but made him right popular with his armourer.

Rifles and scopes have changed a lot from McBride’s .303 Ross straightpull with an offset mounted Warner & Swasey, but some problems remain timeless. The only country that apparently took the sniping lessons of World War I to heart was the Soviet Union. Dominated by German Scharfschutzen’s (sharpshooters) the Russians suffered dreadfully, but learned their lesson well. From 1932 to 1938 54,160 Model 91/30 Mosin-Nagant sniper rifles were manufactured. From the outset of the Great Patriotic War the Germans suffered alarming losses to Soviet snipers. In 1942 alone the Soviets produced 53,195 scope sighted sniping rifles of which the Germans reissued all they could capture. After the war the Soviets went on to produce the worlds first rifle designed from the ground up for sniping, and sniping only. Named after it’s designer, Evgeniy F. Dragunov (1920-1991), the SVD Dragunov entered Soviet service on July 3rd, 1963. With the SVD a rail mounted scope, the PSO-1, was adopted for service.

Since variants of Kalashnikov’s rifle, hereafter simply referred to as AK’s, became available in the U.S. people have searched for a way to mount optics on them. And since SVD’s in different forms (TIGR’s, Chinese, .308) came into the country, and with Romanian FPK/PSL’s available, shooters have wanted to upgrade their optics. It is now possible to do both, and with excellent results. Originally the only mounts generally available for AK’s were “trash” from China. Topcover mounts that adjusted your zero for you between shots, and clunky receiver mounts that were a take off from the 91/30 Mosin-Nagant mount. Some American companies quickly caught a whiff of money to be made and turned out some horrible trash, good only for separating you from your hard earned cash. While this garbage is still out there I am very happy to say that there are also some excellent options now available for the individual desiring to put optics on their AK, or upgrade the optics on their SVD or FPK.

The Holy Grail required for properly mounting optics on a Kalashnikov is the military rail mount that attaches to the left side of the weapons receiver. SVD’s and FPK’s of course have this rail already mounted, as do many of the semi-auto AK’s now being imported. However, if your favorite shooting iron lacks this important piece don’t despair as they are cheap, readily available, and easy to mount. Both Kalashnikov USA and K-VAR carry this important piece, so properly mounting optics onto your weapon can now be a reality. The rail comes with all needed hardware and a mounting template so that anyone who is not a hazard with power tools should be able to accomplish the task.

Why bother, you might ask? Why would someone want to go through the trouble of mounting optics on an AK? Well there are several good reasons. One is that not all AK’s shoot like a bucket. The AK-74 used for testing in this article hovers around 1.5 MOA for instance. The second is that you may wish to have the option to use optics or not to at your discretion as the situation calls. The third is that you may wish to install not a scope per say but a red dot sight for quick target acquisition. And the fourth may be that while your AK shoots like a bucket you just feel like doing it. All good reasons.

To show you what is available I contacted three companies and tested what they have to offer. Product from Kalashnikov USA, K-VAR, and I.O.R. Valdada were all put through their paces. For testing purposes a Russian SVD TIGR 7.62x54R and a Romanian 5.45×39 AK-74 from Tennessee Guns were used. The AK-74 was outfitted with a stock from Ace Tech to increase the length of pull. It is without a doubt the finest stock available for an AK. Patterned after an FN-FAL sidefolder they are available in both fixed and folding versions for legality. Testing was done at 100, 300 and for the SVD, 600 yards. Ammunition for testing purposes was Wolf Performance Ammunition from Tula Arsenal and supplied by Sporting Supplies Int. Inc.

Kalashnikov USA has an extensive line available at reasonable prices. A joint partnership with Izhmash Joint Stock Company of Izhevsk, Russia they import products of Russian design and manufacture. Founded in 1807, Izhmash JSC is where Mikhail Kalashnikov and Evgeniy Dragunov’s weapons were originally manufactured so they have plenty of experience with both AK’s and SVD’s. I tested three scopes, one red dot sight, and two mounts from Kalashnikov USA.

Kalashnikov USA carries a PSO-1 variant. Adopted in 1963 with the SVD the PSO-1 is still the standard issue sniping scope in the Russian Army. With a built in mount, the whole assembly simply slides onto the weapons side rail and locks with a throw lever. A fixed 4x with a 24 mm objective, BDC (Bullet Drop Compensator), battery operated illuminated reticle, sunshade, and finger adjustable target turrets. It comes with a post reticle, as the original military reticle is not allowed to be imported. With coated lenses and an exit pupil of 6mm it does a surprisingly good job of transmitting light. The optics are very clear, and the illuminated reticle is an excellent feature that once you get used to you’ll wonder how you ever did without it. While I at first did not expect that it would actually hold a zero, I can honestly say that my PSO-1 returned to zero flawlessly no matter how many times I dismounted it. The standard scope for an SVD, it makes a nice addition to an AK, but you will want to increase your length of pull.

Of interest to SVD and FPK owners is a 6x version of the PSO-1. At the extreme ranges encountered during the fighting in Afghanistan the Soviets found the PSO-1’s 4x lacking. This scope not only has increased magnification, but also a larger objective lens. Advertised as a 6x36mm the objective lens actually measures a full 40 mm and appears to be the largest lens they could utilize without a major redesign. In all other respects this scope is identical to the PSO-1. It does however have a different reticle. It uses an inverted chevron aiming point and a Zeiss style rangefinder. Optics are coated, surprisingly good, and very clear, better than my Leupolds. The BDC proved very accurate and with a 100 yard zero simply dialing the knob to “6” put me on a military silhouette at 600 yards. For me, 6x seems to be the perfect balance of magnification in a fixed power scope, even at 600 yards (at this range 4x was lacking however). For someone wanting to upgrade their SVD/FPK to more magnification and a larger objective lens without sacrificing ruggedness, durability, the illuminated reticle or BDC, this is the way to go.

Red dot sights have become very popular lately, and for good reason. Lightning fast and allowing accurate fire to be placed at reasonable ranges they work well for their intended purpose. Kalashnikov USA’s entry in this field is called the Cobra. A collimator sight, instead of having a tube it projects the aiming point onto a single lens. It has a built in mount that allows the whole unit to quickly and easily be attached or removed from the weapon. Powered by two 3-volt lithium batteries it has some outstanding features. Instead of just simply having a dot for an aiming point, the user has the option from choosing a dot, a post with horizontal stadia, or a combination of the two. Changes in reticle are accomplished simply with the push of a button. Brightness settings are changed easily and the unit has a memory feature so that when you turn it on it will automatically give you the same settings as when turned off.

Also offered by Kalashnikov USA is the PSO-2. A conventional looking 7×29 scope with a 1-inch tube, it comes with a mount. What is interesting about this scope is the reticle. Consisting of a vertical row of inverted chevron aiming points, each marked with the corresponding range. This allows the shooter to zero his weapon at 100 meters and then use his reticle hold over marks at all further ranges. Hold-over marks are given all the way out to 1100 meters.

For those of you who wish to mount their own choice of 1-inch scope they offer the MTK-75. This mount has integral rings and is angled forward to allow proper eye relief with most scopes. Sitting directly over the bore it seems to be the perfect height, not to tall so that your cheek weld goes out the window, but high enough that you can mount a scope with a 40-42mm objective bell on an AK, 56mm on an SVD. Like all the other mounts it attaches and detaches easily with the throw of a lever.

Another company that offers a mount is K-VAR. They have a wide selection of AK parts and accessories, Krinkov conversion kits, Romanian FPK magazines and mag pouches, to just scratch the surface. One of the neatest machineguns I have ever shot was an AKS-74U built on a K-VAR kit. Of interest here is their scope mount for AK’s. Extremely rugged and blocky, your receiver will flex before K-VAR’s mount does. It sports a standard Weaver rail so that you can use whatever rings you wish. Plus it’s high enough that any size scope bell, including 56mm, will fit without a problem. Mounting simply consists of sliding it onto the rail and locking it in place via a lever. Like the Soviet military mount, it is adjustable for a perfect fit to each individual weapons rail quickly and easily.

The last mount tested is from I.O.R. (Industry Optic Romania) Valdada. Almost unknown in the U.S., I.O.R. has been manufacturing precision optics since 1936. A supplier of optics to elite Warsaw Pact units, I.O.R.’s product line of state of the art military and hunting scopes and binoculars is now available through Valdada in the United States. Utilizing glass for their lenses manufactured in Germany these precision optics compare with anything Schmidt undt Bender, Zeiss, or Leica manufacture. In a phone conversation with Valdada’s president Valentine Leatu, he mentioned that although they don’t advertise it they also carry mounts for SVD’s, AK’s, and FPK’s. Like everything else they make I quickly noticed that their mount is very well thought out, well made, and rugged. Slightly offset to the left, this mount is very low to the bore, just barely high enough to allow the weapons top cover to be removed for maintenance. It features a rail that accepts both Weaver or Stanag rings for your convenience. No cheap junk here, this mount is definitely mil spec. Either mounted on the AK-74 or my SVD this mount proved to be an awesome performer.

I also tested three scopes from Valdada that will be of particular interest to AK/SVD owners. They offer two fixed 4x scopes with straight 30 mm tubes, BDC’s, Tritium illuminated military reticle with range finder, and matte finish. One is calibrated for the 7.62x54R/7.62 Nato and the other is calibrated for the 5.56/5.45’s trajectory. They both feature the Soviet military SVD reticle and the rangefinder is calibrated for a standing person out to 1000 meters. Of extremely high quality I tested one on my AK-74 out to 300 yards with excellent results. Also of interest to someone looking for a true Tactical scope for their SVD/FPK is Valdada’s 2.5x10x42. With optics that put my Leupold on the trailer, handsome good looks, and flawless performance at 600 yards this is simply an incredible scope. The clarity is good enough to allow you to easily spot .30 caliber holes at 300 yards. A modified mil reticle is utilized allowing ranging of a 6 foot figure past 1000 yards. The mil marks can be used for hold over points out to 1000 yards. Adjustment repeatability is flawless. I could go on and on, suffice to say you will be hearing a lot about Valdada and I.O.R.’s scopes in the future.

Throughout testing I was extremely impressed with the quality of the Wolf Performance Ammunition and I recommend it highly, it is definitely a cut above. Both their FMJ and HP 5.45×39 loads shot extremely well. High quality 7.62x54R ammunition is extremely hard to come by and I was incredulous when their soft point hunting ammunition shot into 3/4 of an inch at 100 yards. For someone looking for reloadable 7.62x54R I highly recommend Sellier & Bellot’s 180 grain FMJ. Inexpensive and reloadable it shot sub-MOA at 600 yards. I have had very poor results from their soft point load however. I also cannot say enough about Ace Technology’s AK stock, it simply must be experienced to be appreciated.

If you intend on putting optics on your AK do it the right way, the way the Soviet military did. There is no excuse for using cheap junk that uses the pistol grip or top cover to hold your scope onto the weapon. If the military rail will securely hold a huge Night Vision Device it will hold your scope. I have found all of these companies to be excellent to deal with from a customer’s point of view. Decide what your needs are and give them a call.

Acknowledgments:

Thanks to R&D Outfitters of Warren, Maine for allowing us the use of their 600 yard range during renovations, it was greatly appreciated. Also thanks to Gabe Sende of THE RUSSIAN STORE for providing the uniforms and field gear used in the photo’s and Paul J. Martin (The Red Rifle Man) for allowing us to pick his brain and Jim Mcloud for letting us shoot his Krinkov and RPD.

References:

A RIFLEMAN WENT TO WAR
by H.W. McBride,
Lancer Militaria, Mt. Ida,
Arkansas 1987.

THE GERMAN SNIPER
1914-1945
by Peter R. Senich,
Paladin Press,
Boulder, Colorado 1982.

SOURCES

KALASHNIKOV-USA-LTD
1-561-337-3398
(Scopes, Mounts, Rifles, Shotguns, Target Rifles, Parts, More!)

I.O.R. VALDADA
1-970-879-2983
(Scope Mounts, Tactical Scopes, Hunting Scopes, Binoculars, Rings)

K-VAR
1-702-364-8880
(Scope Mounts, Parts, Accessories, Krinkov kits)

SPORTING SUPPLIES INT. INC.
1-714-635-4246
(Wolf High Performance Ammunition)

WESTERN INTERNATIONAL
1-503-887-6921
(Sellier&Bellot Ammunition)

INTERNATIONAL MILITARY PUBLICATIONS
1-703-221-4339
(English Translation of Soviet SVD and other Russian Weapon Manuals)

TENNESSEE GUNS
1-423-577-1939
(Pre-Ban style AK-74’s, Guns, Ammo, More)

ACE LTD
1-530-346-2492
(U.S. made Pre and Post Ban AK Stock Conversions)

THE RUSSIAN STORE
1-818-999-1257
(Soviet Uniforms, Gear, Medals, More)

In the darkness of 23 August 1916 a battalion of British infantry worked feverishly bringing cases of ammunition and water forward. They were tasked with bringing up enough supplies to keep 100 Coy, Machine Gun Corps well supplied. It was no light work as the ten guns in question were Vickers .303 medium machine guns. When the signal to fire was given on 24 August the ten Vickers fired for 12 hours non- stop. The only pause was to change ammunition belts and barrels. Between ten guns they fired just shy of 1 million rounds. One gun actually averaged 10,000 rounds an hour for 12 hours. They used 100 barrels and an untold amount of water was turned to steam in the process. In the end their assigned task was accomplished. They had been charged with denying the “Hun” movement over a far distant hill. For 12 hours they had made the hill impassable. No reinforcements got through, no ammunition, food or water was brought forward, communication was effectively cut. In both World Wars and afterwards the Vickers Mk I machine gun proved eminently capable of providing long range indirect fire. It was used to such an extent in this manner that a special load was developed for use solely with the Vickers, the .303 Mk 8Z.

Unlike its contemporaries the .303 British was originally a blackpowder cartridge when it was first adopted on 2 February 1889. The .303 Mk I Ball load consisted of a 215 grain round nose bullet on top of 75.5 grains of blackpowder. It was soon changed to cordite and remained basically the same up through the Mk VI ball loading. This drove a 215 grain round nose at 2060 fps. The charge was 30-32.5 grains of cordite.

The big change came with the adoption of the famous Mk VII ball round. This load consisted of a 174 grain flat based spitzer on top of 37 grains of modified cordite. Velocity was 2440 fps. This load was in service at the outbreak of World War I and continues to give outstanding service in various places around the world today. For extreme long range use of the Mk VII ball did have two drawbacks. One was the velocity, the other was the flat base projectile design. Both were easily remedied.

Before delving deeper it is first important to understand British thinking as far as projectile design was concerned. They did not deny the long range superiority of the boattail (they referred to it as streamlined) projectile over the flat base. They readily admitted a boattail projectile has a greater capacity for overcoming air resistance, flatter trajectory, higher striking power at longer ranges, and greatly increased ranging power. However they also felt that it was far easier to manufacture a square (or flat) base projectile and therefore it was easier to maintain the standards of manufacture. This in turn would produce a more consistent and accurate projectile. Poorly manufactured projectiles may give rise to oscillation (wobble) in flight producing dismal accuracy at anything but short range. They felt that since mass production is at its peak during wartime that it was likely that boattailed bullets manufactured under such conditions might lack the careful finish needed to guarantee accuracy. The Germans however embraced boattail projectiles and it is interesting to note that in his book ‘With British Snipers To the Reich” Captain Shore mentions coming across specimens of German projectiles whose tapered bases were definitely lacking symmetry.

If you scratch your head at their (British military) thinking, just remember that when British tankers complained that the hammer spur on their revolvers were catching on this or that as they clambered in and out of their vehicles they came up with a surefire fix. Instead of simply issuing flap holsters they removed the hammer spurs and made all their service revolvers double action only.

Flat base or not the Mk VII ball round proved to be an excellent rifle cartridge. To make it more efficient for long range indirect fire they upped the velocity from 2440 fps to 2550 fps. Then they added a 174 grain projectile with a long boattail. This was loaded atop a charge of 37 grains of nitro-cellulose propellant as opposed to the normal cordite loading. So the Mk 8Z ball, for machine guns only, was born. This load gave the Vickers machine gun a maximum range of 4500 yards (4.1 km)! This is in comparison to the Mk VII’s maximum range of 3700 yards (3.38 km). Terminal velocity of a dropping .303 Mk VII at this range is only 315 fps which equates to about 40 foot-pounds of energy.

You can easily tell Mk VII ball from Mk 8Z ball by simply looking at the head stamp. The British military headstamp gives the manufacturer’s name abbreviated to one or two letters. “RG” for example indicates the round was manufactured by the Royal Ordnance Factory, Radway Green in Cheshire, ‘K’ indicates manufacture by Kynoch and so forth. The year of assembly is given, and the cartridge type. Up until the end of 1944 Roman numerals were used to indicate the mark type of the cartridges. VII or 7 would indicate the standard Mk VII cordite loaded ball. A suffix of ‘Z’, such as ‘7Z’ would indicate nitro-cellulose propellant instead of cordite. So a round with a head stamp of K63 8Z would be a Mk 8Z ball round loaded with nitro-cellulose by Kynoch in 1963.

A letter prefix on the mark designation before 1957 identified projectile type. No prefix indicated ball. The codes are listed below:

B-Incendiary
O-Observing
D-Drill
P-Practice
E-Smoke Bomb Projector
Q-Proof
F-Semi-Armour Piercing
R-Explosive
G-Tracer
U-Dummy
H-Grenade Discharger
W-Armour-piecing
L-Blank

Where a cartridge performed two functions the prefix could use 2 letters, such as ‘PG’ for Practice Tracer. So a designation of G8Z would indicate Mark 8 Tracer, loaded with Nitro-cellulose. Until the adoption of the NATO color code in 1957 the British used a color code as follows:

Of special note is British wartime experience with the barrel erosion characteristics of Mk VII ball (cordite) and Mk 7Z and 8Z (Nitro-cellulose). They found that barrels should be used with either cordite ammunition (Mk VII) or Nitro-cellulose ammunition (Mk 7Z and 8Z) but not with both. This was due to the different wear patterns of the two different propellants. They stated this was especially important for overhead fire. I’d hate to know who found that out!

I took examples of different types of .303 ball cartridges, pulled the projectiles and weighed the components. For Mk VII ball, I had examples from 1949 vintage Radway Green and 1948 vintage Greenwood and Batley. For Mk 8Z I had examples made by Kynoch in 1963. And to make things interesting I used some Greek ball manufactured by Greek Powder and Cartridge Co., in Athens and Sellier and Bellot in Vlasim, Czechoslovakia (I have been extremely impressed with Sellier and Bellot .303 Ball, it’s really good stuff). Data is contained in the chart. I then trundled all my gear out to my car and drove to The Outdoor Sportsman in Northport, Maine. The range is class 3 friendly and the owner Carl Kosomo helped with the testing. To check for accuracy I used a custom No. 4 Enfield Tactical rifle with 26” heavy fluted Douglas match barrel, synthetic stock, and 3X9 Leupold.

I was pleased as the Mk 8Z shot into an inch at 100 yards. Not bad for machine gun ammunition. Average velocity was 2559 fps and recoil seemed no different from Mk VII ball, fairly mild. Point of impact was 1.5 inches higher than for MkVII ball. Bolt opening was normal and cases extracted easily. Primers were normal with no signs of higher than ordinary pressure.

While I did not have the opportunity to perform any long range tests, it has been my experience that the .303 Mk VII gives easy hits out to 850 yards or so (with a good rifle). Somewhere around 950 to 1000 yards though, for direct rifle fire the old girl runs a little short on steam. It would be interesting to see how much of an improvement the Mk 8Z offered. It doesn’t seem to be very different from some of the new 175 grain 7.62 NATO match loads that are now coming into vogue. In all truthfulness, the Mk 8Z probably doesn’t offer much of an improvement over the Mk VII for rifle use at typical infantry engagement ranges. For it’s intended purpose though I’m sure it was extremely effective. There is no doubt that a number of Vickers firing Mk 8Z ball could wreak havoc at incredible distances. One does not normally worry about rifle caliber machine gun fire at a distance of 4 kilometers. In this case it would be a mistake you wouldn’t make twice.

The Vickers Mk I machine gun passed into oblivion in 1968, and with it the Mk 8Z ball round. Their indirect fire role having been usurped by the 81 mm mortar. With its passing a chapter in machine gun history closed. It has been said that once one has tap traversed on the Vickers the fascination of the weapon remains for all time. The Vickers gun will stand for all time as a truly great machine gun. So the .303 British will stand as a truly great military cartridge.