Error creating thumbnail: File missingAirsoft Tokyo Marui AK-47 tuned with the "Dragunov Conversion Kit" to look like an SVD rifle. This conversion is popular among certain airsoft players, as it is cheaper by about 70% of what a genuine SVD rifle would cost, plus the gun is still capable of fully automatic fire.Error creating thumbnail: File missingCYMA SVD with silencer.
The Killer
Can anyone say for sure that the gun Chow Yun-Fat uses in The Killer is a Dragunov SVD? It looks to me more like a Romanian Romak-3 or similar. The stock doesn't look like a Dragunov SVD stock. Is anyone else 100% sure it's a Dragunov? Brandtbl 05:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I wrote about this on IMFDB's The Killer page. It's not an SVD at all; it's a Norinco Type 56 (AKM) assault rifle visually modified to look like an SVD. One of the armorers who worked on the movie has testified to this on a web site I used to visit; he said that they had to use a Norinco AK because they couldn't import a real SVD into Hong Kong in time to film the scene.
ATM Machine Syndrome
This article should be renamed either to "SVD" or "Dragunov sniper rifle". SVD is an acronym which, translated, means "Dragunov sniper rifle". Therefore, to say SVD Dragunov is analogous to saying "Dragunov sniper rifle Dragunov", it's redundant. --MattyDienhoff 04:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
That's what a generation of GIs/firearms authors called it (1960s-1990s). Besides SVD is "Sniper Rifle Dragunov" in Russian, so you can see the Dragunov as an addendum to the SVD name. MoviePropMaster2008 05:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
lol. Not "СнаЫперская" (it sounds very funny in Russian... like red-neck slang), but "СнаЙперская".
Old discussion, but shouldn't the proper designation be SVD-63? I don't understand the constant use of "popular" names half the time, but then insisting on not using them the other half. Shouldn't we be always using what's correct and educating people so things like "Dragunov sniper rifle" become less common? The MAC M-10 is another example that comes to mind. Alex T Snow (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2016 (EDT)
It was never called SVD-63, just SVD. I have a Soviet Army manual for SVD, it is called "7,62-мм снайперская винтовка Драгунова (СВД)" - "7.62mm Dragunov sniper rifle (SVD)". The year generally weren't used in names of Soviet post-war guns (AK-74 is a rare exception). Greg-Z (talk) 02:36, 29 July 2016 (EDT)
My mistake on that part then, thanks for the correction, but the rest is still relevant. Alex T Snow (talk) 01:31, 31 July 2016 (EDT)
Dragunov
The designer of SVU isn't Dragunov, it's Bondarev[1]. Thus the page will have Dragunov SVD and Bondarev SVU, unless there is a reasonable reason against. --Masterius 09:07, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Nobody has ever heard of Bondarev and all he did was re-work an existing design. Evil Tim 09:10, 9 November 2011 (CST)
What's next, put Stoner in front of every AR-15 variant? Dragunov wasn't the exact designer of SVU, thus shouldn't be put in the name. --Masterius 09:22, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Well, it's commonly still known as the Dragunov and I don't think it's ever been called the "Bondarev SVU" (except perhaps by Bondarev himself). Googling I get 36,400 results for "Dragunov SVU" and none for "Bondarev SVU." And I had to check world.guns.ru for this (which uses neither), so it's your fault if my computer catches the clap. Evil Tim 09:30, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Googled "Dragunov SVU" and the results are wikis, Facebook and Flickr (which borrow material from wikis). None serious source calls the weapon "Dragunov SVU". It is true that designers of TsNIITochMash and TsKIB SOO aren't much known to the Western world, in comparison to the designers of IzhMash (Dragunov, Kalashnikov) and IzhMekh (Makarov, Yarygin). Does that mean they should be ignored? NO! They are still known in Russian sources. --Masterius 09:48, 9 November 2011 (CST)
But equally no serious source calls it the Bondarev SVU. It's called the Dragunov SVU because it's the SVU version of the Dragunov rifle. Evil Tim 09:56, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Okay, a deal. Just omit the Dragunov part from the name. --Masterius 10:01, 9 November 2011 (CST)
So, um, we'd just be calling it "short sniper rifle?" Evil Tim 10:04, 9 November 2011 (CST)
It's called SVU, not SVDU. This isn't like AKS-74U. --Masterius 10:06, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Yeah, but it's the SVU (short sniper rifle) version of the SVD (Dragunov sniper rifle). I wouldn't say "Dragunov SVU" is an incorrect way to render what it actually is in English; Dragunov isn't being used as the name of the designer in this context, but as the name of the rifle. Evil Tim 10:19, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Sure, SVD is called Dragunov, but not SVU. It's a different weapon, a bullpup conversion of SVD. --Masterius 10:25, 9 November 2011 (CST)
Work done. --Masterius 08:13, 10 November 2011 (CST)
And undone. I said not to do that. Evil Tim 08:20, 10 November 2011 (CST)
And why? You haven't provided the counterargument, thus I assumed you didn't disagree. BTW, looking at the page's history it appears to have been easier to just put Dragunov back into titles, than make a revert and then go on a edit spree. --Masterius 08:36, 10 November 2011 (CST)
What I'm saying is it makes grammatical sense in English to call it Dragunov SVU. Also, my second edit was basically reverting the first, if you noticed. The one thing I keep forgetting is that clicking rollback doesn't give you an edit screen. Evil Tim 08:39, 10 November 2011 (CST)
If it made sense, you would have seen it being confirmed by sources. And it is not. The current calling of SVU as 'Dragunov SVU' is parroting the Wikipedia's SVU page title. Even if you read the sources there, you would see no mention of 'Dragunov SVU'. Because it is incorrect. Also, the SVD variants elaborated descriptions are returned to the previous randomized state, which says otherwise. --Masterius 08:56, 10 November 2011 (CST)
SVU just means short sniper rifle. SVU Dragunov says which short sniper rifle it is (a short Dragunov sniper rifle). This makes sense. Evil Tim 08:58, 10 November 2011 (CST)
As I've already said: should we put Stoner in front of every AR-15 variant, and Kalashnikov in front every AK-47 variant? SVU isn't simply short SVD (as AKS-74U to AK-74, like I've already said), it is a bullpup conversion (again, said). We might as well say NDM-86 Dragunov, because that's what it is. --Masterius 09:10, 10 November 2011 (CST)
The rifle is called the Dragunov in English. The SVU is a short Dragunov sniper rifle. If the generic for the Ar-15 was "Stoner" rather than "AR-15" then you might concievably add it in that fashion, but it isn't so you don't. Evil Tim 09:45, 10 November 2011 (CST)
It is called Dragunov (Драгунов) in Russian as well. Only SVD is called Dragunov. SVU isn't short Dragunov sniper rifle, it is bullpup conversion of Dragunov, made by different manufacturers. Otherwise we should call the NDM-86 'NDM-86 Dragunov' and any other Dragunov clone should get Dragunov in its title by such logic. --Masterius 10:17, 10 November 2011 (CST)
A bullpup conversion of the Dragunov rifle is a short version of the Dragunov rifle. Evil Tim 11:36, 10 November 2011 (CST)
But it is not Dragunov, it is a derivative of it. In fact, the manufacturing designation for SVU is OTs-03 (with the variants being called OTs-03A and OTs-03AS. SVU is military designation, and Dragunov part is nowhere to be found. And IMFDB is about the proper names for weapons, not what someone decided randomly calling the weapon because its design is related to the other weapon. Its presense on the SVD page is enough, no need to put 'Dragunov' to it, just like there is no 'Dragunov' attached to the name of any other Dragunov clone. --Masterius 12:50, 10 November 2011 (CST)
Actually, it's the most common Western name that's used. Hence using NATO names for Russian MANPADS and such. Also, please don't link to world.guns.ru, that site is full of malware. Evil Tim 02:15, 11 November 2011 (CST)
'Dragunov SVU' - the most common Western name that's used? Please provide a link. --Masterius 03:06, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Um, 36,400 google results is common. Evil Tim 03:35, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Please, be more specific. You can type everything you want in the Google, including complete nonsense, and there will be results for it. --Masterius 06:47, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Look, just give it a rest. I'm not convinced this is a change there is any particular need to make. Evil Tim 06:52, 11 November 2011 (CST)
I fail to see why you so defensive about the Dragunov part. It's like you are Dragunov's relative and want it to remain there for everyone to see and take for granted (even though you won't see such bias from non-wiki sources (to which IMFDB kind of related, because of 'first one to come, gets the cookie, and won't share it with anyone' nature (and that's not limited to SVU page). --Masterius 07:00, 11 November 2011 (CST)
I don't see why you're so adamant it needs to be removed. See how this goes in circles endlessly? Like I said, just stop. Evil Tim 07:06, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Actually, my point was that IMFDB should use the names that are backed up by respectable sources. Or am I wrong and IMFDB has it in the rules that the made up names can be used? So? --Masterius 07:13, 11 November 2011 (CST)
What part of "stop" is giving you trouble here? Discussion is over. Move along. Evil Tim 07:16, 11 November 2011 (CST)
In that case, I'm calling even more admins. --Masterius 07:18, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Also, you want a respectable source? Jane's. There you are. Evil Tim 07:24, 11 November 2011 (CST)
"The OTs-03AS Dragunov 7.62 mm sniper rifle, or SVU". Not that that would be enough to persuade you, so... --Masterius 07:31, 11 November 2011 (CST)
So you read the heading ("OTs-03AS Dragunov SVU"), read that they call it the Dragunov (which you insisted nobody does), and then concluded that you're still right? Get out. Evil Tim 07:33, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Yeah, put any related term into the title and that's how it is. Ironically, this particular Jane’s article doesn't know about the actual differences between OTs-03 / SVU variants, thus raising the question why shouldn't the info be taken with scepticism. --Masterius 07:44, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Look, enough. Knock this off until and unless another admin posts here or I'll ban you for three days. Evil Tim 07:46, 11 November 2011 (CST)
Masterius, where you took info about Bondarev? Any Russian source doesn't mention it. Only Dragunov. May be Borat Sogdiev has written a new fundamental source about weapon? :)) Flexo 13:46, 30 December 2011 (CST)
Holy shit was that a pointless waste of time. I feel sorry for Evil Tim. StanTheMan (talk) 18:17, 19 August 2013 (EDT)
Sorry for the necro, but I still don't see what's wrong with just calling it an SVU. Sure it just means "short sniper rifle", but it's still its true name, and I don't see any other rifle one could possibly mix this up with. As long as it's on this page, I don't foresee anyone thinking its original design was Dragunov. Hell, even the variants are captioned simply as "SVU-A" and "SVU-AS" without the "Dragunov" suffix.
In the first place, is there really a need to call this page "SVD Dragunov"? Isn't that kinda redundant and wrong? What makes it any different from calling a Type 1 AK an "AK Kalashnnikov", or calling a BAR a "Browning BAR"? Sure Masterius was pretty needlessly aggressive but I do see some reason behind this. He did also cite sources to back his point that "SVU" is as proper a designation as "OTs-03". --OngYingGao (talk) 12:16, 7 February 2019 (EST)
'Dragunov' is the common English/Western name for the rifle as has been pointed out, so its used for reference. I agree it's a tad redundant but I also don't see the harm - I'm pretty sure you can use just 'SVD' or 'SVU' in a media page and it will redirect here just fine. For the record, Masterius' incessant crap was about calling the SVU "Bondarev" which is absurd for reasons previously stated. StanTheMan (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2019 (EST)
SVU looking good with that paint job!
Does anyone else think the picture we currently have of the non SVU-A or SVU-AS version of the rifle looks really good with that paint job? Jeddostotle7 22:55, 28 July 2012 (CDT)
Personally, I think it looks kind of mall ninja-ish. Maybe if it were green or tan and brown, but black and red? Where's the user going to be hiding, in the midst of a forest fire? Spartan198 (talk) 03:26, 3 February 2014 (EST)
SVU-AS
I'm getting a headache from trying to find a good image of an actual SVU-AS that also shows the fire-selector. Mr. Wolf (talk) 03:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)
I only can see one detent for semi, a detent for full-auto would be in the middle above semi. Mr. Wolf (talk) 03:39, 1 December 2015 (EST)
Is it possible they just don't have the detent and you're supposed to just find the middle position by feeling the mechanism engage rather than the selector click into it? Maybe they had the middle position on the A but then decided they didn't need it or something? Evil Tim (talk) 03:45, 1 December 2015 (EST)
You can easily see it on this This is a SVU-A, an SVU-AS has a bipod. Mr. Wolf (talk) 03:47, 1 December 2015 (EST)
Yeah, but what if the AS just uses the fullauto innards with the standard SVU receiver? If you can't find one with the AS bipod and the A detent, that would be the most logical conclusion, I'd think? Evil Tim (talk) 03:51, 1 December 2015 (EST)
AFAIK, AS only differs from A by adding a bipod, all other features are the same. Greg-Z (talk) 03:56, 1 December 2015 (EST)
It's that I don't know what I'm looking for, I've searched for hours and I can't find a image I can put on this site. Mr. Wolf (talk) 04:15, 1 December 2015 (EST)
Oh, sorry about the blops 2 thing Tim, I didn't know it was called an AS in-game. Mr. Wolf (talk) 04:21, 1 December 2015 (EST)
The only ones I found are airsoft ones... Mr. Wolf (talk) 05:19, 1 December 2015 (EST)
I worked hard fixing up this pic, if you look closely you can make out the middle detent for full-auto. If anyone can find a better image by all means override this one. Error creating thumbnail: File missingSVU-AS Dragunov with its bipod - 7.62x54mm R. Note 3-position fire-selector.Mr. Wolf (talk) 06:38, 1 December 2015 (EST)
On a semi-related note, is that a suppressor on the end, or just a massive flash hider? Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 18:09, 27 March 2017 (EDT)
I think it's a rather small suppressor, with a muzzle break peeking out on the end.--AgentGumby (talk) 23:49, 27 March 2017 (EDT)
SVD-M
The so-called SVD-M, which apparently refers to Russian military SVDs with synthetic furniture (like the Tiger Carbine reference image on the main page), appears to be a fabricated term. These "Russian military SVDs with synthetic furniture" are apparently just normal SVDs in Russian sources. An actual weapon designated SVDM entered service in 2018, and it's quite different from just being "Russian military SVDs with synthetic furniture", featuring the SVDS folding stock and Picatinny rails. For this reason, I think we should stop referring to the "Russian military SVDs with synthetic furniture" as SVD-Ms.
Seems to me we just need to be more careful differentiating SVD-M (old variant with synthetic furnishings) and SVDM (new Russian version). Since the term SVD-M was added to this page in 2010 (it appears to have originated from Jane's Infantry Weapons) while the Russian SVDM has only existed for about six months, it's obviously not the same thing, and given the synthetic furnished one is indeed "modernized" (or was back when it first came out), it's not like it's an inaccurate designation, and it's useful for distinguishing a specific model even if the manufacturer doesn't bother to distinguish it themselves.
Also, with regards to the edit you made on Watch_Dogs 2, please don't send people off to look at a description on a different page, we're fine duplicating a description so people can stay on the page they're actually reading. Evil Tim (talk) 14:08, 5 January 2019 (EST)
Right OK. --Wuzh (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2019 (EST)
I don't know if Jane's Infantry Weapons truly refers to as such (to me it seems weird to use this term if even the manufacturer doesn't use it), but one sure thing is that the info on the page needs some bit of rewording about where the designation came from and the like; currently it kinda reads like exclusively this wiki decided to use this term. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:34, 6 January 2019 (EST)
I feel that if the manufacturer doesn't distingush between the two, we shouldn't either, at least not with something as official-sounding as "SVD-M". What's so bad about "SVD with synthetic furniture" that we need a new designation for it, especially one that can be confused with an actual variant of the SVD? --Tamarin88 (talk) 08:12, 7 January 2019 (EST)
I don't see a problem with us using it internally within this wiki to distinguish it from the older models, similarly how we use the 'R' on newer SIG-Sauer pistols to distinguish them from the older ones even though SIG itself doesn't do it that way. We should note of course this is not any official designation and merely a matter of an internal identifier, but again I don't see the big deal with doing it that way especially since there is precedent for it on the site. StanTheMan (talk) 12:21, 7 January 2019 (EST)
This is different from the R designation, in that SVD-M and SVDM are too similar names and designate completely different things, which can become confusing. The use of the P226R name on IMFDB is used to reduce confusion ambiguities, but the SVD-M situation only increases confusion. It's like if we called improved P226s SIG-Sauer P227s. --Wuzh (talk) 12:55, 7 January 2019 (EST)
We don't really need to give a new name for something that doesn't even have one. It's exactly as Wuzh says, we're making 2 things share the same name. Personally I just refer to it as "polymer SVD" or "post-90s variant of the SVD", it's just a little longer. I mean, if a Galil ARM with polymer handguards is still a Galil ARM, why must we rename an SVD with polymer furniture? --OngYingGao (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2019 (EST)
We do need a name for it if we're going to talk about it, and as noted, this name might not have been used internally by Russian sources, but was used by Western sources. It's not a new name, it's quite an old name. Same as "AK-47" was never used in Russia outside of referring to the original prototypes, but it's such a common name in the West it's regarded as hair-splitting to say it shouldn't be used. Evil Tim (talk) 03:31, 8 February 2019 (EST)
I'm not sure how many sources out there use "SVD-M" to refer to the modernized Russian military SVD. Wikipedia doesn't use it. Are we sure it's that common outside of IMFDB? --Wuzh (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2019 (EDT)
After some in-depth discussions with AugFC of the Gun Wiki, I have come to the conclusion that most Western sources did not call the post-1990s military synthetic furniture SVDs as the "SVD-M" (the previous discussions have also not provided any concrete evidence supporting this claim; AugFC's copy of Jane's also made no mention of the "SVD-M"); therefore, the use of this name on IMFDB is both needlessly confusing and unreflective of reality. Therefore, I plan to replace all mentions of "SVD-M" on IMFDB with less confusing and more accurate-to-reality names, such as "SVD with synthetic furniture" or "post-1990s SVD". I will be making a direct request to site admin Funkychinaman for final approval on the plan. --Wuzh (talk) 07:23, 8 November 2020 (EST)
I agree, I think it's really easier --Pustelga7 (talk) 8 November 2020
Sounds like a solid plan. I mean, the Russians did do the same thing with the AK-74, and those don't have a separate designation either - replacing wood with polymer was just a thing the Russians did around this time period. Hell, it was a thing a whole bunch of countries did at various points - the only difference is that some got a whole new gun with no wood, and others just replaced the wood. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2020 (EST)
PSO-1 reticle pic?
The RPG-7 page has a picture of the reticle for its optic for comparison to video game appearances. As the PSO-1 is also very common, I think it could have a picture added to this page if someone has a picture/suitable free image. (The ACOG is the only other post WW2 optic that immediately comes to mind as common enough to justify including, but I'm sure there's others.) --VladVladson (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2021 (EDT)
