Am I making a mistake or the Tokarew rifle that ERkila uses sometimes in the movie is a semi-automatic rifle? So why does he reload after every shot?
is that bolt action model such mosin nagan (Martt's rifle) or what?
Thanks in advance
Leonardo Martino
Finns used mosin nagant in wars so I guess that you have made a mistake.
Tokarev was taken to use in 1942 or something like that and Winter war was in 39-40.
I absolutely did no mistake at all. If look carefully after bus lift Erkkila is equiped with a Tokarev rifle. Moreover during the russian assault in which Somppi dies you can see a Pentti standing by Martti's side using a tokarev...
I checked these pages (http://world.guns.ru/rifle/rfl06-e.htm and ) and it states that tokarev rifle was semiautomatic but Erkkila and Pentti reload after every shot. I think this a mistake: Tokarev rifles (even the older 1936 simonov which resembles them) had a fire rate of at least 15 shots for minute without reloading. In fact finnish troops (and later german troops) were happy to grab them from the enemy becaus of their fire rate so I guess that's a movie mistake. I'm waiting for confirms!!
Leonardo Martino
I checked it out too. Erkkilä has tokarev when he is standing near the bus, but when Somppi is killed Erkkilä isin't using tokarev, but just a normal bolt action rifle. Near the end when Pentti shoot russians he is clearly using tokarev and reloading the gun after he shots and you can even see a shell coming out of the gun. I don't know can tokarev work like that, but maybe the movie producers had problems with semiautomatic rifles and they modificated tokarev so it can be reloaded like bolt action rifle. That could be movie mistake, it ruins the whole movie and the points must be dropped from 7.8 to 4.6!
shareNope : I checked out either but as soon as Somppi get killed and Martti gets close to him there's a close-up of Erkkila aiming at the enemy with a tokarev.
By the way I think this movies deserve much better than 7.8 score... I just wanted to point out this tokarev-matter becaus I use to play Medal of Honor Spearhead: in this videogames russian forces got as sniper rifle the tokarev SVT 40 and its a semi-automatic rifle.
Beside this movie is much better than Saving Private Ryan which has a better score and it aint deserve it!
The reason Pentti has to reload the Tokarev after every shot is this; blank ammuntion will not cycle properly in a semi-automatic firearm unless the firearm has a muzzle adapter to re-direct some of the gases, caused by burning powder, back down the barrel to operate the mechanism. Without a projectile in the barrel for the gases to build behind, the pressure using while using blanks simply isn't at a high enough level to operate the rifle properly. Also, the Tokarev SVT 40 had a predecessor called the SVT 38. It was almost identical to the SVT 40, the shortcomings and flaws of the SVT 38 were made clear during the Winter War. Which led to the SVT 38 being redesigned and modified into the SVT 40. These modifications, while fixing some of the weapon's problems, didn't fix them all. Consequently, production of the SVT 40 ceased in 1943.
shareJackass231, finns DIDN'T use mosin nagants in the war. They used m/27 rifles, see here http://www.tosimiehet.org/m27.html. The page is in finnish, but that's the rifle we used
shareSo you didn't think that finns may have taken some mosin nagants to use from a dead russian. Even Pentti says that "I must take a new gun from russian". I don't know if that is mosin what he uses after his own gun breaks but anyway.
Että niin saatana.
Prior the 1917 Finland was part of the Russian Empire and therefore some Finnish Mosin-Nagants were at one point original M1891s. Many rifles were aquired from foreign sources during the 1920s and captured during the Winter War and Continuation War.
I think that M 27 was just finnish version of Mosin Nagant which featured the same caliber and so many other details in commons that I think we could approximately say that they were actually Mosin Nagants!!!
Nightswimming22
Well most of the bolt-action rifles were caliber 7.62. And like Somppi said: "Take the locks from neighbourgs rifles they got smaller locks, sand won't be harm."
shareWhich was a complete bullsh!t statement on his part. The Finnish Mosin-Nagant conversions used almost exclusively Russian-made bolts and receivers, even my rifle from 1942 has almost exlusively Russian parts. Only the barrel including sights are Finnish. Of course, you could always attribute his comment to "soldier's superstition".
----
*beep* piss, *beep* *beep* *beep* *beep* tits. - George Carlin
Not quite. Your rifle from 1942 is probably an M-39, never used during the Winter War. The Finnish M-27's bolt featured little "wings" along the back which fit into slots cut into the receiver. Those receiver slots are one of the best ways to tell if you're looking at an M-27. The rifle will function better in field conditions if the bolt head is removed and popped onto a standard Russian bolt body, with no wings. This is what the solider is referring to. The M-27 was the standard issue SA rifle of the Winter War, with M-91's and captured pieces filling in the gaps.
The Civil Guard's M-28 and M-28/30 did not have this adaptaion, an it was never adopted in the M-39's design.
Check out more details here:
"One minor modification to the m/91 bolt was also undertaken. The connecting bar for the bolt head and body was replaced by a Finnish version with two small "wings" on the rear of the bolt. These "wings" or guides fit into corresponding slots cut into the rear of the receiver where the bolt was inserted. This addition was supposed to stabilize the bolt and improve the loading of cartridges by keeping the bolt in a more stabilized parallel position. This was a fine thought in theory but under field conditions it later proved to be an unforeseen problem. If the slot guides got dirt in them the bolt would not seat fully forward. Also this meant the bolt of a m/27 could only be used in a m/27 with the guide slots milled into the rear of the receiver. This presented the possible problem in field replacements of say a m/27 bolt into a non-modified receiver. It would not fit."
http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/The-Finnish-M27.asp
Ignoring the discussion of whether the Finns used the Mosin or their own weapons, has anyone checked whether the SVT-40 might have been an AVS-36? As far as I know, they are similar cosmetically, and there's always a remote possibility that an AVS-36 was issued to some RKKA soldiers by 1939.
Anyone with the least amount of gun-knowledge care to speculate?
If u are refering to the rifle shown in the movie.... no itsnt... avs was made of 2 pieces and there are no visible joint... its definetely an SVT :D
shareThere was a lack of everything in the Finnish army in 1939, and soldiers had not enough uniforms, weapons and ammunition. Some has helmets and Ushankas, but most weared the so called "Cajander" (?) hats.
So, he might have taken a Mosin-Nagant rifle. At one point a Finnish soldier is seen with a DP light machinegun, same reason. And, the m/27 was based on the Mosin.
A 'Cajander' hat is simply the one you've brought from home! Cajander was the serving Prime Minister of Finland at the time, and with typical Finnish gallows humour, the reservists who turned up at their depots to find no adequate uniforms but a belt and a cockade (as in the film) claimed they were wearing the new 'Cajander' pattern uniform, i.e. their outdoor clothes from home.
This is not to libel the those reservists, who fought magnificently against overwhelming odds, like the rest of the Finnish Army.
Actually, Finns did receive semi-autos from dead Russian. So did happen with Mosins. But Finns didn't know that the semi-autos were semi-autos, so Finns used them like normal bolt-actions.
shareSorry to say it but if its true then Finns were not much intelligent! If they did take tokarevs from dead russian soldiers then they must have seen during battle at least one russian soldier firing with those rifles without reloading everytime :S
shareThe semi autos and full auto rifles won't always cycle with blanks, so you can see a number of films where unmodified rifles need to be cycled like a straight pull by the actors. "City of God" is another example, where the actor has to cycle the FN-49 by hand. The Finns knew how to use semi autos!
shareI noticed some confusion here. The SA and Civil Guard both used Mosin-Nagant rifles almost exclusively as their primary shoulder weapons. The M-27's, M-28-30's, M-91's and M-91/30's of the Finnish military were ALL MOSIN-NAGANT RIFLES. The Finns utilized old Mosin receivers and simply improved upon the existing pattern. I'm not sure where the devil anyone got the idea that Finnish Mosins weren't Mosins. I've owned dozens of them, and I can assure you they are Mosin-Nagants. The Soviet versions tend to me somewhat less refined and less accurate, but they shoot the same basic cartridge and any Finn with a "D" stamp can fire heavy Russian ammo.
There were other rifles too. 2nd line and artillery troops were equipped with Italian 7.35mm Terni Carbines and Navy and Coastal units used Swedish 6.5mm Mauser rifles. Anyway Finns never called the rifles "Mosin-Nagants", they were "Pystykorva's". Tho word Mosin however appears as a nickname for an infantryman: "mosuri".
But the best weapon was the Suomi-SMG of which Russkies' Ppsh-41 was a copy.
The Apple Scruffs Corps, 05
Treat Me Like You Did the Night Before
It took some time for the Finns to learn to adjust the gas-regulator for Finnish ammunition (different powder and different load from Russian), and until then Tokarevs really refused to act semi-auto. So, while it may be due to blanks used in film-making, it's quite realistic, too.
shareIt appears to be a convenient coincidence. :P
sharethis is one of my favorite war movies. But please enlighten me HOW exactly its better then saving private ryan?
"Wait!" "Worry" "Who Cares?"
www.alienexperience.com
tiwwa.info/
Bit of a long-delayed echo here, but I would put forward the following ideas:
* The premise of Talvisota isn't stupid (To save one man for no rational, war-winning reason, you put seven valuable combat specialists into danger, losing most of them). Instead, Talvisota closely follows the real life incidents described in the book that inspired it.
* There's a lot less sentimentality. The Finns know what they fought their war for, they would find the sight of an old man sobbing at a graveside in front of his family frankly embarassing. So would he. Finns are a lot more emotionally continent.
* The cinematography is better. Spielberg's seems very derivative to me. However, that's an opinion (as are the two above).
* Talvisota has enough respect for its audience that it soft-pedals the schmaltz and lets the audience take their own experiences from the film.
WHAT I AM NOT SAYING:
American soldiers were not as brave as Finnish ones.
Only Finland had a just war.
Americans are idiots.
These are just observations on why I think Talvisota is a better film. If you want to disagree with me, or agree for that matter, for the FSM's sake keep it civil.