Russian PKM GPMG vs FN 240/ MAG GPMG

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Russian PKM GPMG vs FN 240/ MAG GPMG
Rasputin 9/29/2006 5:23:17 AM

Could experienced users of both weapons rate the reliability, effectiveness(penetration) and accuracy of both 7.62mm weapons? I have always felt that both these weapons are very similar even in looks, reliability, and are suitable for vehicle mounts. Obvious differences are that the PKM seems to be lighter by a kg or 2, and that FN MAG uses center fire ammo, while the PKM soldiers on with a 100 yr plus rimmed cartridge. (that does not seem to affect reliability) PKM also has a slightly longer barrel despite lighter weight. The views that I observed were that US troops rated the FN240 as their top favourite MG, but that the PKM issued to Iraqi soldiers are also pretty good. I hope u guys could give me a more informative reply.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

flamingknives 9/29/2006 1:26:03 PM

The Russian 7.62x54R cartridge is rimmed, not rim-fire.

From a technical point of view, this is a disadvantage because the round must be extracted backwards from the belt before being chambered. The 7.62X51, being semi-rimless (the rim is no larger than the case, and used only for extraction) can be chambered directly, allowing fewer motions for a given rate of fire.

Quote Reply

Yimmy 9/29/2006 8:12:36 PM

7.62mm NATO is rimless, not semi-rimmed.

Quote Reply

Rasputin 9/29/2006 11:18:43 PM

The Russian 7.62x54R cartridge is rimmed, not rim-fire.

Yes flamingknifes, I see what you mean about the larger rim (from closer exaimination of a photo), but does this disadvantage affect the reliability of the weapon? The rimmed round does not seem to affect the receiver length of the PKM, as overall the dimensions of the PKM are still shorter than the FN 240. Any difference in the way you handle or load the ammo? I thought I noticed that the belts of ammo for the PKM are actually fabric? Another difference as compared to the disintergrating metal links used by the FN MAG.

Here are the specs of both guns from worldguns.ru for all to compare. Seems there is also a weight difference despite the
disadvantage of rimmed ammo. Rate of fire is also similar, although it is adjustable for the FN 240. I know that there is also a new tripod for the FN 240, but really someone really needs to invent better tripods for both weapons that don't weigh more than 4 kg.

I was very impressed with the performance of the gun when I saw an African govt soldier, protecting some TV news crew against rebels/gunmen in a town, the soldier looked nervous breathing heavily but really gave good suppresion fire, in bursts and was very steady using only bipod. He did so to allow the crew to back out to safety behind him, after it was over the nervous soldier stood up and gave a grin. Needless to say, I was also impressed by the soldier's performance, he did all things very professionally inlcuding quick barrel change and safety contrary to popular pre conceptions of African soldiers. Maybe this chap is an exception, but he was in full camo kit and had a beret. Can't recall from which country, but I think he is most likely Nigerian.

PKM
Caliber 7,62x54R
Weight 8,99kg on bipod (PK), 16,48kg on tripod (PKS)
Length 1173 mm
Length of barrel 658 mm
Feeding belt 100, 200 or 250 rounds
Rate of fire 650 rpm

FN 240 / MAG GPMG
Caliber: 7,62x51mm NATO
Weight: 11 - 13 kg on bipod (depending on version), ~21 kg on tripod
Length: 1260 mm
Barrel length: 545 mm
Feed: belt
Rate of fire: selectable, 650-750 and 950-1000 rounds per minute

Quote Reply

flamingknives 9/30/2006 4:41:11 AM

Oops, rimless it is. My bad. The rest stands though.

The PKM, as noted, has a non-disintegrating belt, so you get the spent belt dangling out the side of the weapon, which may get in the way.

There was a bit of news on the front page about a lighter tripod a while back.

The PKM is lighter, but I suspect that it cannot attain the higher rate of fire without placing undue stresses on the gun, due to the more complicated cycle.

Quote Reply

dobrodan 10/1/2006 6:52:03 AM

I have a lot of experience with the MG-3, and the fact that it also uses a non-disintegrating belt has never really bothered me... What bothers me with the MG-3 though, is the fact that it is fed from the left side, and not from the right as the PKM. Feeding from the right side seems more optimum than from the left, as the co-gunner will have better workingspace, and not obstruct the gunners view in the process...

After getting some hands-on experience with the PKM, I would actually prefer it to the MG-3, at least in the infantry-role, as it is substantially lighter, and has a better center of gravity (further back), so that it alomst feels like a heavy assalt rifle. Another point is that its ammo-boxes is mounted on the underside, thereby simplifying carrying.

Unfortunately, I have no experience with the M240

Quote Reply

Rasputin RE: Dobordan 10/1/2006 9:33:47 PM

Thats alright Dobordan, MG3 experience is good. I was afraid to ask about the MG3 because I thought there were not as many users of that MG.

Firing rate is 1000-1200 rds per minute? That would be twice the PKM. Can you tell me how long will you hold a burst on the MG3? 3 or 12 rds?

Is it more difficult to fire the MG3 using a bipod due to its higer rate of fire?

Yeah, I am supprised that the PKM can be so much lighter compared to other GPMGs out there.

Quote Reply

dobrodan 10/3/2006 4:05:24 PM

From a bipod, against point-targets, I normally cut the bursts at 2-4 rounds. Against massed targets, I fire very rapid 2-4rd bursts. Against area targets, I fire maybe 6-12 rds per burst. I dont really follow any doctrine, except trying to use as little ammunition as possible, while still delivering good effect in the target.

Firing the MG-3 is a very intense feeling, because it beats the shit out of you. After 6-700 rds you are actually feeling fatigued. The reason for this is that the bolt of the MG-3 strikes the recoilbuffer at high velocity, thereby delivering a very strong recoilimpulse to your shoulder.

The bolt of a PKM does not strike the recoilbuffer at high speed, thereby not delivering as strong a recoilimpulse as the MG3.

In other words, the PKM gives your shoulder a more firm push, while the MG-3 acts like a pneumatic drillhammer with your shoulder in the receiving end.

Quote Reply

Rasputin 10/4/2006 11:07:34 AM

Well Dobordon, you must be a tough man to lug the MG3 around, and now I know u must also be one willing to shoulder the recoil when firing the MG3

Quote Reply

mad monk PKM & 240 12/2/2009 3:20:14 PM

Rasputin,

The MAG 240 is an excellent MG. Very high quality. Bullet penetration is a function of design, range and target material.

The rounds are about the same and yes that Russian rimmed is an antique, but it works just fine. There were two bullet weights light (150 grain, silver tip code) and heavy (180 grain, yellow tip code).

I ran belts thru PKMs in which the steel cased ammo had rusted to the belts and they zipped right on thru. The belt is not polarized and I had one that had a starter tab on both ends. Belt is same for Maxim 1910, RP 46 and the SGM/Goryunov and they were 250, 200,100 and 50 round lengths.

The PKM is every bit as good as the MAG 58 (240) and in many ways better. They cycle at about the same rate. PKM is a better carry piece. Have shot both and tried to abuse PKMs in theater. More reliable than the 240 because the cartridge extraction occurs during the power stroke phase since the round is rimmed and is pulled from the belt. I really liked the PKM belt loader machine. Compact and efficient. Belts are recovered and reused over and over.
I can now see why the Serbs dropped their old MG 42 clones (M53 SARAC) and went with the PKM. The PKM ejects to the left and won't toss hot brass down your shirt. The 42 fired too fast and went thru barrels quickly.
The PKM doesn't beat you up either....it is a joy to shoot.
All the SAWs are wonderful shooters as well, but are not in the same class as PKM/240, being .22s.
The Czech Vz 59 is an excellent MG too. High quality with a milled receiver and curiously it uses a push-thru belt...which is a neat trick with the rimmed cartridge!
If you ever get the chance to rattle a PKM, you will appreciate it as much as I do....for a modern, current use weapon. Best gun those commies ever devised.

Quote Reply