Archagnel Mosin stock

man, I am starting to get sick of this stock.

in all fairness I guess this discussion hasn't been around the block here on the firing line all that much but on the SKS boards in the C&R section it's been a nonstop discussion ever since shot show.

this is just my personal take on the matter so please don't take this too close to heart.

the mosin nagant is one of the crudest designs in history. the tool marks are ugly, the bolts are stiff, the handles are too short to offer any real leverage and the leaf sights are horrible. add to that, the fact that the soldiers that used them were uneducated, untrained conscripts, trying to 'wing it' when it came to maintenance so bores were carved into ovals by steel cleaning rods. add shot out oval bores, crude designs and then the fact that most ammo you can get is either inaccurate and corrosive surplus or just plain inaccurate wolf/tula and it's THEN you want to put a tacticool sniper stock on it?

the only real thing that it has going for it is a 10 round box mag which actually sounds pretty appealing but the overall concept is just flawed. if they would have tried to go with a standard sporter style stock and kept the 10 round mag then it would have a little more practical application as far as I'm concerned but as is, it's a pretty poor idea.

but that's just me
 
I guess that if I had an MN with a really boogered up stock and had nothing better to do with it, I'd give it a try. It's just hard for me to get into the plastic stock because they've got no character to me. But I also know that there are plenty of folks out there who really like it, so there you go.
 
It isn't like an MN has ever won an Olympic event or anything...

YOu could build a nice rifle off the action, or spend time accurizing what is there, and this stock would be a great part of such a plan.
Most peopke will probably throw an off the shelf cosmoline stuffed firing pin gun in them and it will be a a waste of money.
 
Yeah we've heard about em. I'm not interested in one of them though. I leave my old crude war horse mosins as they are. Except for a few accuracy enhancing modifications. I LIKE WOOD AND STEEL. I did the whole plastic stock thing to my first enfield, which was a beautiful rifle to start with ( which I think that today, but didn't when I was 14).
 
I'm not against it, I have my share of plastic furniture on some of my guns. But I don't see where it improves anything. Get good with stripper clips and the original mag is fine. It's a bolt action and not the smoothest one at that. I just don't see where a ten round mag is necessary. The rest of the stock doesn't do anything at all for me.

He should have made this stock for something easier to scope IMO.
 
I did the whole plastic stock thing to my first enfield, which was a beautiful rifle to start with ( which I think that today, but didn't when I was 14).
Click to expand...
not to sidetrack the conversation but my younger brother has a ramline plastic stock on his longbrach no4. he assembled the entire gun from a huge tack of parts and couldn't find a wood stock that fit properly so he went with the synth. it's not the prettiest gun around but it'll keep up with my savage no4 all day long. his is lighter and more practical for hunting with and he uses it for that quite often...
 
Trying to walk a fine line here because I make stocks for the Mosin...and don't want to be seen as critical...

Without getting into the aesthetics, or ergonomics of the stock itself, I just think they've eliminated a large potential market by designing a stock that can't utilize a bent bolt for a "modern" low profile scope mount like the ATI, Rock Solid, or JMeck. This stock is meant to keep the rifle with it's iron sights.

The stock cannot be inletted for a bent bolt because of the hardware for the DBM.

They apparently felt a DBM was a bigger deal than being able to mount a scope.

For me, no optic means it's a non-starter. And no offense to the guys that like pistol scopes on rifles, it's not for me...

I just don't get the big deal with the DBM, but then I never have even with our long-range precision rifles. I'm more about practical, than "tacticool".

And while the Mosin is certainly not a precision rifle, one with a tight action and good barrel CAN shoot minute of angle with handloads (esp. when sporterized)- I'm not the only guy that has one that does...
And a "good one" can make a fun project. Don't underestimate them- the Russians won the Olympic Biathlon with one in '76...and the Finns still use a modern version of it as a sniper rifle- the TKIV 85.
 
Last edited:
I personally hate the ATI bent bolt that requires inletting but the ones available through Ebay that follow pu profiles shouldn't require inletting unless the stock is too bulky even for that...

unless I'm mistaken... the rear sight LER scope mounts would still work but this type of stock and that heavy of a finished rifle would be horrible as a scout rifle...
 
I prefer to leave mine looking like this.

012-1_zpse6027bae.jpg



Mine must be defective from the way people say how crappy they shoot.

mosinnagantgroups009_zps071e8d3d.jpg


3 shots at 50 yards with iron sights in heavy wind that was moving the target. Shot in a semi seated position using my knee to rest my elbow on. It could do better with someone that has better eye sight, and is steadier than I am.
 
Mine must be defective from the way people say how crappy they shoot.



3 shots at 50 yards with iron sights in heavy wind that was moving the target. Shot in a semi seated position using my knee to rest my elbow on. It could do better with someone that has better eye sight, and is steadier than I am.
Click to expand...

is that supposed to be comical?
you are shooting from a non stable platform, with heavy outside influences further increasing instability and shooting at a moving target and then you think that because your shots randomly landed near eachother at 50 yards that it is accurate? 100 yards is the standard, non moving targets, stable shooting surfaces, and little outside interferance is how you calculate accuracy. you pretty much voided your entire argument.

even if that group was done in the specified conditions, that 1 1/4 inch group at 100 yards equates to 2 1/2 MOA, not exactly a tack driver.
 
Last edited:
is that supposed to be comical?
Click to expand...

Well, sarcastic, at least. I think he was stating that he was getting good accuracy (actually, a firearm is consistent, a shooter is accurate) in less then ideal circumstances from a rifle that 'people say how crappy [it] shoots'
 
you are shooting from a non stable platform, with heavy outside influences further increasing instability and shooting at a moving target and then you think that because your shots randomly landed near eachother at 50 yards that it is accurate?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

You negated your entire argument all by your self. With those conditions that is excellent accuracy from a surplus military rifle!
 
If that's only three bullets he clearly is keyholing - at 50 yards. Talking of accuracy either way if you can't make round holes is meaningless, at 100 yards those wouldn't be on paper.
 
I'm leaning toward that is more than 3 bullets. More like a few dang near in the same hole. Won't know till he chimes in. But I say that is excellent for an old warhorse. Some of you guys LOVE to pounce all over someone for being proud of how well their Mosin shoots. Just suck it up buttercup, and ADMIT you love em just as much as the rest of us!!! :D
 
That was not key holeing at all. Two shots were touching. The target board, and paper target got wet the night before I went to the range. It was rainy and crappy for three days.

With the iron sights shooting for the smallest groups I limit to 50 yards. At 100 yards I would most likely get 3 to 4 MOA out of a match rifle with my eye sight. At 100 yards I hit minute of torso most times.

This was 8 shots with my hand loads on a calm day at 50 yards from a sand bag front rest with the stock on my shoulder.

009_zpsa2fc604a.jpg
 
i think i would pick one up just for a fun little project....that is if they figure out how to get a bent bolt and a scope on the bugger. they are taking pre-orders this friday....think ill wait on the 200$ stock until they have all the t's crossed. my project was going to be "the poor mans sniper rifle" then i started thinking about the cost. $100 for a mosin (but ill find one with a nasty stock and try to get a bargain), ill bend the bolt myself, 200$ for the stock, 25$ for a 10 round mag, 90$ for a Timney trigger, found a cool no drill no tap mount for 75$ that is on its way already, and ill put a 200$ 4X12 Nikon Prostaf on it probably. coming to a grand total of: $690.....so much for the "poor man sniper rifle" but what the heck! ill have the ugliest Mosin ever!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top