Nagant revolvers
- Thread starter BoogieMan
- Start date
Mosin revolvers
Nagant revolvers used to be a $99 revolver... which is about how much mine was from J&G right after that Newtown shooting. Ammo isn't that common, being the bullet seated below the edge of the brass.
They took a jump in price because they all were sold out quickly. Kind of like other military surplus weapons when the supplies run out.
Unique design... and a revolver that can be suppressed somewhat easily. But as a shooter, probably makes a Hi Point look like a tuned pistol. Heavy trigger pull in either DA or SA. Not that accurate, and is an anemic round (even the military loads... commercial ones are even weaker).
Nagant revolvers used to be a $99 revolver... which is about how much mine was from J&G right after that Newtown shooting. Ammo isn't that common, being the bullet seated below the edge of the brass.
They took a jump in price because they all were sold out quickly. Kind of like other military surplus weapons when the supplies run out.
Unique design... and a revolver that can be suppressed somewhat easily. But as a shooter, probably makes a Hi Point look like a tuned pistol. Heavy trigger pull in either DA or SA. Not that accurate, and is an anemic round (even the military loads... commercial ones are even weaker).
It requires quite a bit of additional energy to move the cylinder to the front, and to compress the return spring, so DA pull is pretty heavy and long. SA, which the revolver was originally designed for, is not too bad.
Loaded cartridges are not cheap, so I handload. Mine is actually quite accurate.
-TL
Loaded cartridges are not cheap, so I handload. Mine is actually quite accurate.
-TL
Model12Win
Moderator
The military loading were not "anemic".
They were easily as powerful as a .38 special and nobody calls that "anemic". It's the heavily watered down commercial loads that are anemic. Nagant revolver were effective enough for the job. I am currently reading a book about a Soviet penal battalion officer who used his Nagant revolver to kill a German soldier at a claimed 100 meters away, probably firing single action would be my guess. He described his Nagant revolver as "trusty" and apparently thought it was effective. But what would he know? He only fought through a world war.
They were easily as powerful as a .38 special and nobody calls that "anemic". It's the heavily watered down commercial loads that are anemic. Nagant revolver were effective enough for the job. I am currently reading a book about a Soviet penal battalion officer who used his Nagant revolver to kill a German soldier at a claimed 100 meters away, probably firing single action would be my guess. He described his Nagant revolver as "trusty" and apparently thought it was effective. But what would he know? He only fought through a world war.
I read SA were issued to NCOs and soldiers. Only officers were given DA. But most of them fired SA anyway.
BTW, I handload with 30 carbine bullets. I tried both with and without gas seal. The difference in speed and accuracy was significant. Experts who claimed the uselessness of such feature most certainly just copy each other.
-TL
BTW, I handload with 30 carbine bullets. I tried both with and without gas seal. The difference in speed and accuracy was significant. Experts who claimed the uselessness of such feature most certainly just copy each other.
-TL
There was a Tales of the Gun episode that talked about the gas seal system... and it was mentioned that it only increased it like 40-60 feet per second. I'm not sure what the number was... but it definitely was under 100 feet per second. Think it was about pistols or revolver technology.
If it was such a good system that increased speed/energy like that... why wasn't it further developed by any nation? There were also Nagants (not Russian) that were not gas sealing. It is one of those dead-end ideas.
Model12Win
Moderator
If it really increased velocities and energies that much, you'd see weapon like the .357 magnum Desert Eagle producing 20% more velocities over a revolver firing the same load, would we not?
We don't. And the Nagant didn't increase velocities by much either.
We don't. And the Nagant didn't increase velocities by much either.
Velocity loss at the barrel/cylinder gap in most revolvers is on the order of 25-50 fps. Velocity difference between two rounds in the same box of normal ammo can often be more than that. In other words, the complexity of the mechanism needed to "correct" the problem costs more than the "fix" is worth.
Even so, the Nagant is not that complex and they can produce good shooting if one is used to the gun.
In general, Russian arms research and development in that era was not well advanced; they bought whatever arms met their needs from the gun makers of other European nations. But Russia was not behind the curve completely; one problem (which they shared with Britain) was that once they adopted a weapons design, the amount of money required to re-arm their vast military establishment was so great that they could never "keep up with the Joneses (or the Germans)" and they were stuck for years with designs they knew only too well were outdated.
Jim
Even so, the Nagant is not that complex and they can produce good shooting if one is used to the gun.
In general, Russian arms research and development in that era was not well advanced; they bought whatever arms met their needs from the gun makers of other European nations. But Russia was not behind the curve completely; one problem (which they shared with Britain) was that once they adopted a weapons design, the amount of money required to re-arm their vast military establishment was so great that they could never "keep up with the Joneses (or the Germans)" and they were stuck for years with designs they knew only too well were outdated.
Jim
kilimanjaro
New member
The Nagant revolver was in service for a five million man standing army and two wars requiring twenty million more servicemen for over 50 years. It's not weak, not inaccurate, and not difficult to shoot. It will shoot minute-of-German or Running Dog Capitalist all day.
Reloading it takes time, but that's what your rifle and the machine gun section was intended to put the firepower out.
Reloading it takes time, but that's what your rifle and the machine gun section was intended to put the firepower out.
Onward Allusion
New member
The action is cool. The DA trigger is insanely heavy. Used to be available for $100. These days they are pushing $400.
Shoot 32 S&W Longs out of it. Yeah, split cases but it's not like you're gonna shoot hundreds thru it.
Shoot 32 S&W Longs out of it. Yeah, split cases but it's not like you're gonna shoot hundreds thru it.
Jim in San Antonio
Inactive
At the time the Nagant was developed, its designers figured that sealing the gap would increase velocity, as others have stated. But as firearms designers soon figured out, very little gas and little velocity is actually lost at the gap, so the Nagant system was quickly dropped.
For the casual shooter, such as yours truly
, it's a fun gun to shoot, fun to take apart, and easy to clean, because the cylinder doesn't get dirty. The double action pull is atrocious, and the single action pull isn't anything to write home about either. It's just a fun, and novel, seven-shooter.
For the casual shooter, such as yours truly
, it's a fun gun to shoot, fun to take apart, and easy to clean, because the cylinder doesn't get dirty. The double action pull is atrocious, and the single action pull isn't anything to write home about either. It's just a fun, and novel, seven-shooter.It is out of my own record. 110gr 30 carbine bullets. Powder was trailboss. Gas seal 813fps. No gas seal 676fps. 20% difference.
I am not talking about other revolvers or calibers. Just Nagant compared to itself. Same components, powder charge, and brass volume. One had longer brass over the bullet to form gas seal. The other didn't.
-TL
I had one. The DA trigger was the worst I ever felt on any firearm. I was not fond of the feature in which the cylinder spun freely whenever it wasn't cocked. I had to eject the rounds one at a time with an ejector rod. The sights were small.
To fill a gap in a collection, why not? But as a shooter it was not very good and I didn't miss it at all when I traded it in towards something else - ironically, I believe it was a Tokarev.
To fill a gap in a collection, why not? But as a shooter it was not very good and I didn't miss it at all when I traded it in towards something else - ironically, I believe it was a Tokarev.