Why don't I want a Mosin Nagant?

Who cares? I have owned all kinds of military surplus guns over the years, and if you leave them in factory condition, there is not a lot of difference. The main driving force in owning them seems to be price. I have owned .303's that shot well, some did not. I had one I used to hunt with and it was very accurate, but the safety sucked. Most of the surplus bolt actions have lousey safeties for hunting. They all weigh a ton because they were designed to be clubs also, but I used them to hunt when younger because they were CHEAP. The 30-40 Krag is like dragging a '57 Pontiac axle around, the ones I had were accurate. That old bull about the smoothest action around is true, if it actually picks a round up. I have never owned or worked on an '03 and never will. I have owned and converted several Russians. Not worth the effort to convert to hunting rifles, but OK as range guns to shoot targets with. If you take them as they are and leave the converting for hunters alone, surplus guns are pretty much the same.
 
Canada is getting spam cans of Non Corrosive New Production 7.62x54R from Norinco). I dont see 7.62x54R drying up anytime soon.
Click to expand...
key word in that phrase is NORINCO. bill clinton banned the importation of any weapons and ammo from China. all of the Chinese mosin nagants and SKS slip through under a loophole that they can be imported as C&Rs but the ammo will never be allowed in the US even if you were to try to leap frog it from canada, it would be stopped at customs and not allowed into the US. it is a huge pain because Chinese ammo is WAY cheaper than russian. a few months ago I was looking at a canadian ammo website and they had norinco 223 ammo for $200 per thousand rounds... we haven't seen that price in the states since about 2010.
 
The Mosin Nagant is a BATTLE RIFLE. Yes, some where used for sniping but for the average soldier shooting mass-produced wartime ammo, if he was getting 3-5 MOA well guess what? That is perfectly acceptable to hit a man-sized target at 300-400 meters all day,
Click to expand...
unless you are using your mosin nagant to kill other human beings then minute of man accuracy is irrelevant. you don't hunt with minute of man accuracy. you hunt with rifles that give you the best chance of hitting the kill zone of an animal and 5 MOA is definitely not well suited to that task. same for target shooting. original intended purpose is nothing to the people the have their own intentions when owning these rifles.
I don't think Tahuana has ever even fired a Mosin Nagant.
Click to expand...
not to see who can whet the side of the outhouse higher up but one must wonder your experience level? I have fired several mosin nagants, handled dozens more and owned 2 personally(the 3rd that mosin marauder speaks of was never technically mine). I've kept one original and I tried a number of sporterization methods on the other before trading it off for an enfield. I have personal experience with nearly every design out there from between 1900 and 1945.

that quote is the second time in the last week that I have seen you insult other members of this forum by calling them ignorant, fools, or liars. I highly suggest that if you would like to continue to post on this board that you take a look back and think long and hard before you click the submit button from here on out. that's not a threat, that's a warning. the admins here do not tolerate that kind of behavior.
 
Last edited:
5 MOA is definitely not well suited to that task.
Click to expand...
I agree. But then again, there are Mosins out there that can shoot 1.5-2'' groups consistently, with decent ammo, which would be adequate for hunting. Depends on the gun and the bore. Some Mosins can't shoot better than 6MOA, some can shoot significantly better than that. Some MN's have .311 bores, some have .318
A good example should be able to shoot tighter than 5MOA with wolf factory ammo.
 
I agree completely but the majority of MNs just are not sub MOA or even 2 MOA rifles with good ammo. I'm not saying that there was never a single one ever that could shoot a decent group, I'm just saying that they are few and far between that can.
 
Thing is, we're talking about military rifles that used corrosive ammunition and whose barrels are 75-100 years old.

Take a 1903, subject it to the same over time, I doubt you'd see much difference.

Now, take an M28, or the more common M39 Finn.

Barrels are of much higher quality. These will commonly shoot minute of angle, or better.

Like any off-the-shelf rifle today, some are going to be more accurate than others. Though modern machining tolerances make them far more consistent than they used to be. The Russians used a screening process to determine which rifles were to be used as snipers- marked them as such (and I have one that I'm about to accurize).

I've said it here before many times- it should be lost on no one that the most confirmed kills EVER by a sniper, 505 in 100 days (that's five per day, gents) with iron sights- was by a Mosin.

If only accurate rifles are interesting, no one can dispute that Simo's Mosin-Nagant, was that...
 
Take the type-99 Arisaka from the earlier war years, they had chrome plated bores. Cheap ammo had no effect on them. All the military guns had drawbacks, but some had more than others. And Tobnor, if these sniper rifles were so special, why must it be accurized? I would think just loading for it would be plenty of accurizing. It is the shooter, not the rifle.
 
Last edited:
I've been tempted several times to buy a MN but a couple things hold me back.
One I have a Garand, a 03A4 and a P17 and I reload so I can shoot better more refined rifles and more accurate ammo just as cheap.
Two I know myself a MN would be the gateway to other foreign mil surp I'd have to have a SMLE and a Mauser as well and this would probably lead to others as well.
There is no way a MN wouldn't get expensive for me.
 
Thing is, we're talking about military rifles that used corrosive ammunition and whose barrels are 75-100 years old.

Take a 1903, subject it to the same over time, I doubt you'd see much difference.

Now, take an M28, or the more common M39 Finn.

Barrels are of much higher quality. These will commonly shoot minute of angle, or better.

Like any off-the-shelf rifle today, some are going to be more accurate than others. Though modern machining tolerances make them far more consistent than they used to be. The Russians used a screening process to determine which rifles were to be used as snipers- marked them as such (and I have one that I'm about to accurize).

I've said it here before many times- it should be lost on no one that the most confirmed kills EVER by a sniper, 505 in 100 days (that's five per day, gents) with iron sights- was by a Mosin.

If only accurate rifles are interesting, no one can dispute that Simo's Mosin-Nagant, was that...
Click to expand...
I will not contest any of that, you do draw a very good point with Finnish rifles being of much higher quality and accuracy standard than russian but the Russian MNs are the ones being largely argued over. as much as I've put the mosin nagant down in this thread, I would not hesitate to add a decent finn to my collection however nobody is picking up an M39 for the $150 that you could get a Russian 91/30 for. it is also worth noting that simo hayha was using what was essentially an M28, a 91/30 that was captured and reworked by the Finns for accuracy. it is also worth noting that not all of his kills were with the same rifle, or even with a rifle at all, he is reputed to have made several kills with handguns as well.
 
Some shooters are happy to hit a paper plate at 100 yards with a milsurp rifle. Others aren't happy unless they can cover a group with a beer can lid.
Truthfully, with an open sighted, military rifle I couldn't do better than a paper plate no matter how much precision accuracy the gun is capable of. So the claim of accuracy or inaccuracy for my Mosen-Nagants, Enfields, various Mausers, MAS 36, and 49/56, SteyrM95, K31, or various SKS rifles is a pointless argument.
I enjoy shooting them, and accuracy is judged by what the best I can do with any particular rifle.
As far as hunting with a milsurp, I use the same parameters as various other methods. Scoped, finely tuned long range rifles for areas that might present longer range opportunities. Usually open field shots from 100 to 300 yards. Open sighted "classics" like my Winchester 94 30-30, milsurps, and muzzle loaders, woods shots at 100 yards or less. That range is also my limit for deer with my scoped 35 Remington Super 14 T//C Contender.
 
I generally follow the same guidelines with my hunting rifles as well, I used to hunt solely with scoped rifles but after getting used to Irons I started to favor them for anything within 150 yards because of rapid target acquisition. however each rifle needs to be played to it's strengths. my Arisaka 44 can keep everything in a paper plate at 400 yards if I have sandbags but the 6.5 cartridge just doesn't have enough oomph from a 20 inch barrel at that point to be of much use for anything larger than deer and I don't normally pack a shooting bench and sandbags when I'm hunting so I would likely not hunt with it if I expected having to make a shot at that range.

similarly my mosin nagant could keep everything inside a paper plate at 200 yards with the best ammo I can load, but again, I'm not going to have that stability so I would likely not hunt with my mosin nagant at that range.

back when I still owned my 1903A4 sniper I could keep everything in a 10 inch steel plate at 500 meters and 30-06 is still able to kill just about anything in north america with the right bullet even at those ranges but that rifle got dang heavy after packing for a while, especially in elk country around here where those kind of shots are not out of the question, so I would likely not take that rifle hunting at those ranges... and again... I don't have sand bags when hunting.

hunting with milsurps takes a certain degree of strategy, know how, and caution that most people don't have to deal with when they only hunt with scoped featherweight rifles.
 
Lt. Skrumpledonk --- Does the Mosin spring look like it has been filed or grinded down to shiny metal? If it has...buy another spring from Numrich Gun Parts.

My M91-30 sniper rifle shoots a 3 shot, 1 3/4" m.o.a. at 100 yards, using Russian N-1 sniper ammo. It's important to not let the barrel and the receiver get too hot, while group sizing the Mosin rifle.

I believe the correct pronunciation for the Mosin Nagant is: Moseen Nagon
 
Last edited:
Cheapshooter- Some shooters are happy to hit a paper plate at 100 yards with a milsurp rifle....

Isn't the size of a man's chest about the size of a large-sized paper plate?
Seems good enough for me!
 
Cheapshooter- Some shooters are happy to hit a paper plate at 100 yards with a milsurp rifle....

Isn't the size of a man's chest about the size of a large-sized paper plate?
Seems good enough for me!
Click to expand...
LOL
Heck, I'm happy if it goes bang, and something comes out of the barrel!:D
Delighted if it actually hits what I am aiming at.:D:D
 
rifle interest

If anyone here finds your choices odd what will they think about me? I don't have an interest in either an AK or an AR.I do have an M44 and I take it along to CMP matches just stir the pot sometimes.I can think of no better truck gun or something to carry on the tractor that can take care of almost anything you will run up against.If you drop it ding it run over it so what its built tuff and you aren't out much if you destroy it.Ammo is cheap and plentiful but most of it is military stuff and not target grade.Your choice is not wrong but for around $100 bucks its hard to say no to.I would say you should try one if you know anybody who has one and see if you like it.Who knows you maybe finding yourself giving a new home to a poor orphan rifle needing a new gun cabinet to call home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top