It does get a little better with some practice. I did so poorly on video that after filming I did it a few more times and it was better… but that makes the point. I *know* how an SVT40 disassembles, but it’s still obnoxious. None of this was rehearsed, you just see me disassembling rifles that I haven’t disassembled recently but definitely know how it is done. The M1 and K43 were pretty much no problem at all. Just take them apart. The SVT40 just doesn’t flow. Everything is under tension always, and nothing makes sense. (The rifle mimics the Soviet Union.) There is a stereotype of Russian/Soviet weapons being simple and robust. This is definitely a higher level of training beyond the other belligerents. It is not simple.
I was previously unaware of the bullet trick. I looked it up and while it does seem helpful, my main struggle is with the bolt and not the action cover.
I own all 3, and I disagree with most of your points. If you want to "wipe down" the M1, you do not have to disassemble the magazine bits to get the op rod and bolt out. If you have a G43, it is 100 times more of a pain to reassemble than the other 2...plus you have MUCH smaller parts to lose. The fact that you have a very late war example of a K43 is not a fair comparison since the vast majority had the bolt button. As for the SVT, I think it's the simplest of the bunch. Very simple bolt mechanism with virtually no small pieces.The spring is a bit of a pain, but you are exaggerating the difficulty level way beyond proportion. Also, you need to consider how much access you have to the internals of the gun after the field strip is complete. As much as I love my G43, the mechanicals are a work of pure madness - hence the reason the mechanism went absolutely nowhere after the war.
I wouldn’t say it went nowhere. Flapper locked essentially became roller locked (not sure why they used flappers on the K43, since roller locking predates it, but I’m sure there was some logic in the decision) which eventually became roller delayed blowback. The concept of two locking devices being pushed out the sides of the bolt by a central wedge survived on. The disassembly mechanism of the final evolution of the K43 is alive and well in the Kalashnikov. I don’t know where else that concept would have likely come from, but I could certainly be missing something. The SVT I just find annoying. It isn’t intuitive, it’s under tension during the disassembly process. The gas system is certainly a great idea and was copied for a reason, but beyond that it isn’t particularly inspiring. The tilting bolt concept had its last hurrah in the FAL, which is definitely notable, but never went anywhere after that. It’s more or less a design dead end. I can definitely appreciate your perspective on it, though. It’s largely a matter of personal taste and experience since all three are obsolete by modern standards. Take the rotating bolt of the M1, the gas system of the SVT, and the disassembly concept of the K43… and you basically would end up with something similar to a Dragunov SVD. All three had worthwhile design features, just in primitive form.
