In Defense Of The Mosin Nagant: The Nerd’s Milsurp

IMG_5905

A week ago, Alex C. and Miles Vining pitted the Russian Mosin-Nagant against the German Mauser Gewehr 98 in a battle royale shootout to see which was the best rifle. Unsurprising to some, and outrageous to others, Paul Mauser’s masterpiece took home the gold and handily beat the Three Line Rifle, scoring more hits more quickly in all the shooting sessions.

Now, it may seem strange that an avowed Lee-Enfield fan such as myself would take to the keyboard to defend the Mosin-Nagant, especially after such a poor showing in the head-to-head challenge, but I think there are more reasons to take the Russian rifle seriously than just its design and performance. It may be enough for me to say “but the 1891/30 is cheap!” and leave it at that; for some, low-cost is its own reward, and the Mosin-Nagant, though uninspiring as a rifle, is a sound weapon that is unlikely to break or otherwise disappoint, if its known flaws are already accepted by the buyer.

Instead of focusing on its low cost, I’d like to discuss a somewhat roundabout virtue of the Mosin-Nagant that I’ve seen time and time again. The title of this article is a bit odd, but it is a succinct expression of the article’s thesis. I have seen many times academics, geeks, Ph.Ds, doctors, scientists, program managers, software developers, and other intellectual types choose the Mosin-Nagant as their first rifle, and for all its faults, I think this is actually the perfect fit. Why?

The first reason is that Mosins have a lot of history. They are one of the longest-serving bolt-action rifles, and they really light the fire under a creative person’s mind, having served in a long list of wars that well and truly qualifies for “countless”. Setting aside the great battles and wars the Mosin is best known for, A Russian infantryman fighting the Japanese in the 1945 campaign was as likely to have a Mosin as a Vietnamese soldier in Indochina in the late 1950s. Its ubiquity and presence worldwide are what really captures the imaginations of many – I say this having asked several of them – and its crudity is hardly a hindrance in this. Indeed, it may only fuel the fire, as there’s a visceral feeling, almost a connection, holding a meter-long rifle designed in the 19th Century, that has a sticky bolt and a foot and a half long bayonet. The Mosin-Nagant is a rifle that feels like we civilians (perhaps inaccurately) imagine a soldier’s lot to be. Dirty, ugly, uncomfortable, rude, and long. This is surely an over-romanticization, but I’ve seen it at work over and over again. The Mosin-Nagant’s history feels so strongly expressed through its form, design, quirks, and flaws that it has developed a sort of brand loyalty all its own. Mosin-Nagant owners (of which, it should be noted, I am not currently one) are quick to express their allegiance to the rifle, despite the inelegance and ungainliness of the most common variants.

IMG_5903

The Three-Line Rifle and its nemesis, the Gewehr 98. Thanks to Alex C. for the photo.

 

For the cubiclite, though, the rifle offers something else, too. A sort of rude awakening for fingers that put pad to key in endless sequence day after day, lighting off – with a creepy and long trigger pull that builds anticipation and challenges the shooter’s steadiness – a round of 7.62x54R that jars and blasts the air around you and sends the often sharp and rude buttplace hard against the clavicle is enjoyable in its stark contrast. Unlike an M1903, which is, if anything, even more uncomfortable to shoot, the Mosin is honest about itself; its guise is as brutal and uncultivated as the experience of shooting one. It’s not a svelte, restrained gun, but a noisy, uncomfortable weapon of utilitarian and often indifferent war, and it shoots like one. Is it any wonder that Mosin owners often take their rifles hunting, or try to shoot the tightest possible groups with rifles that cost $99.95 plus tax? I think, it is perhaps not about how good the Mosin-Nagant as a rifle is or isn’t, but about the connection between the rifle and the shooter, and about doing your best with modest equipment. True, this may be indulgent in its own way, but I’ve seen it bring shooters back to the shooting bench and the deer blind with their Mosin-Nagants time and time again.

Finally, the Mosin’s experience is fleeting, and I think this is a key ingredient to its popularity among the white collar world. Mosin-Nagants are not a lifestyle; today, and except in the hands of Pashtuns, they are something taken out of the safe and shot from time to time. Their inexpense is a large component of this; for an almost trivial price, a piece of history and a unique (if unsophisticated) shooting experience is within reach. More than one Mosin owner has bought and subsequently forgotten their rifle, the demands of day-to-day life seeming to always get in the way of that range trip they’ve been meaning to take. For many of those, though, the Three-Line rifle was a doorway to the shooting world at large, and I think for that the rifle should always have a place of respect in the shooting community. One Ph.D I know went from shooting his 91/30 at trees in New Hampshire to milling his own 80% AR-15 receivers on his CNC machine, and for others in my personal circle alone, the Mosin-Nagant was the first of numerous milsurp and new firearms that feed their vital shooting habit.

It’s true that the Mosin-Nagant is not the best bolt action rifle in the world. It may be, in a technical sense, one of the worst. Maybe that is its greatest strength for today’s gun buyer, though. While Mausers have all soared in price – despite being made in comparable numbers – the Mosin-Nagant has stayed inexpensive, keeping it within reach of even the most frugal gun buyers. Shooting it is an experience that not only connects the milsurp buyer with the rifle’s history, but Mosin-Nagant owners to each other was well. It is undeniably thrilling to shoot an M44 rifle, bayonet extended, as fast as one can karate chop the bolt handle open, while a friend stands behind and screams to you about impending fascists!

Maybe instead, we should call it the best worst gun ever made.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • TVOrZ6dw

    I love my Mosin. I also own and love a Turkish Mauser and a Lee-Enfield MkIII.
    My personal preference all being equal is the Lee-Enfield. But, things are not all equal. I have to buy expensive factory ammo for the Enfield or hand load, no more cheap surplus ammo. Same for the Mauser- the 8mm surplus ammo is harder to find. I can always find cheap ammo for the Mosin, so I end up shooting it more. And the Mosin just works. I have no doubt it will continue to work, no matter how much I shoot it, for the rest of my life.

  • “It’s true that the Mosin-Nagant is not the best bolt action rifle in the world. It may be, in a technical sense, one of the worst.”
    Brace yourself Nathaniel.

    • Bronezhilet

      The Mosin is a bit like the AK-74 and AR-15 (and their variants). Good when they were designed, garbage right now.

      … I’ll brace myself as well.

      • Bear The Grizzly

        I wanted to reply, but my head exploded.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Dat troll tho’! But seriously, the AK & AR designs are still outperforming newer rifles even today, the Mosin was the top bolt action for all of seven years.

          • Not really. The 1889/1891 Mausers are still better guns, and the Swedish 94 and 96 rifles are even better.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Well, all the pre-98 Mausers lacked the third locking lug and, same as the Mosin, none of them have gas relief holes. Like iksi pointed out, this makes the Mosin the more rugged action. But I’d take the stripper clip, controlled feeding, and rimless cartridges of the Mausers any day.

          • Kivaari

            The 91 Argentine rifles are very nice. Too bad they are so scarce today.

          • Pete

            A friend has a 91 carbine. Handsome, but can’t hold paper at 50 feet with FACTORY loads, and what bullets do hit are sideways. Handloaded with a bullet .001 larger, 5 shots cloverleaf at 100 yards! Over tighten the muzzle cap screw and the groups open back up to 6 inches. Cool rifle though.

          • Kivaari

            The muzzle cap is the key. Many military Mauser rifles/carbines with tensioned caps just will not hold a group. It is the case with the Argentine M1935 carbines as well. Zero it with the cap off, so the front sight can be moved side to side. The groups are fine, but put the cap back on and it just wont shoot well. Removing enough metal so it doesn’t impinge on the muzzle and it will shoot.
            The Russian M91-30 are designed to be zeroed with the bayonet attached. Almost none of the rifles currently being sold, don’t come with the original blade. Since pretty much no one wants to use the bayonet, the long stock warps. Finns lessened that issue by using a jointed fore end. Several Combloc nations used 91 type sniper rifles with the wood cut back so no wood or barrel band hits the tube. Those guns can be quite accurate. There are a few 91s or Finn variants that have been re-chambered to 300 Win Mag. The bolt face is already large enough and the shells fit in my magazines. I would not recommend it without good testing of the locking lugs.

          • Dave C

            î This!

          • The Brigadier

            I have to agree. Paul Mauser’s bolt action design and Winchester’s are the two best in the world. I’ve shot the 96, but never the 94 and it too is very smooth and tight. Most modern bolt actions are based on the Mauser or Winchester and just about everybody’s is smooth and tight today.

            By the way Alex, there was a show with a bald-headed Seal as the host called ‘Future Warrior’ six or seven years ago and they did a show about a company in Arizona who made a .480 (or .481?) that shot accurately out to 2 miles. Are they still in business and if not what happened to the rights for the rifle? Might there be a article for this?

          • Secundius

            @ The Brigadier.

            Neither. It was a .375 CheyTac. And there seems to be some confusion about the shot. One person Target was made of Steel, while another said Wood.

            Until resolved the 2.47-kilometer shot with a Accuracy International L115A3 .338 (8.58×69.2) Lapua Magnum, shot stands…

          • The Brigadier

            It wasn’t a .375. The show specifically said a .481.

          • Bronezhilet

            I am actually serious, but apparently saying that the AK and AR are bad isn’t allowed on TFB. My messages are in a moderation cue and/or disappear without a trace.

            Sooo…

            The AK and AR are great guns guys, they really are!

            Edit: And this sarcastic message got through… I have no idea what’s going on.

          • Bear The Grizzly

            Ok, so what platform currently renders the AK and AR obsolete?

          • ostiariusalpha

            We’re getting more than a bit off topic here, but who cares if it’s just a Mosin discussion? Anyways, the AK-12 seems pretty friggin’ sweet (admittedly I have no firsthand knowledge with it), though that doesn’t necessarily make the AK-74M obsolete. I’m sure as soon as someone figures out how to combine the best aspects of the ACR, SCAR, ARX, and LR-300 (or a lightweight LSAT assault rifle suddenly appears) then the AR-15 will be relegated to the out-of-fashion, budget segment of the rifle market. I won’t be holding my breath for that to happen anytime soon.

          • Bronezhilet

            No currently existing gun actually. I said in my disappeared post that in my opinion all current guns are bad. We (the firearms inventors/designers) can do so, so much better than what we have right now, but nobody cares to actually do so.
            It’s like sticking to the Thompson while you can make an M16, but don’t.

          • See that’s a much more interesting thesis, though I would argue it doesn’t make them “bad”, just un-ambitious, perhaps? If you accept the idea that you can do better. 🙂

          • Bronezhilet

            I’m absolutely certain I can do better, and I will. Too bad I live in a country with horrible firearms laws and with an MoD that doesn’t in-house firearms development. I need a manufacturer in another country to make my stuf, without stealing it because I can’t afford patents (yet). Welp.

          • Rick5555

            You can have a company sign a disclosure statement/document. Which shields and protects you. If a company stole your idea, after you present it to them. You would have legal recourse. Since you’re most likely in Europe. Perhaps, have FN look at your design(s). To have a disclosure document created, wouldn’t cost much from an attorney. If a manufacture liked your ideas and designs. You could sell them an inclusive licensing agreement. I’m in the US. And I invented some new surgical tools. And went the aforementioned route while waiting for my patents. In the interim, I signed with Rom-Hill a licensing agreement. We still share this agreement a decade later. They pay me X amount to make my product. As well as, I get a percentage of the sales…not profit. Always get a percentage off the item being sold. In return, I get a hefty amount, yearly. I could easily retire at 52 years of age. However, I still love what I do…which is perform surgery and help people who need my skill set. If you would like to discuss this matter further. Let me know, and I would be happy to provide my email address. As well as, I would like to see new and possibly better designs. The design of pistols and rifles hasn’t really change much. Sure newer technology in how the product is made. And advances in materials used. So give it a try. And do not trust ANYONE. Unless they sign a document, that’s dated, witnessed and certified via a notary public. Goo Luck with your future endeavors.

          • Bronezhilet

            Hmmm, very interesting. Thanks for the info, I’ll check it out!

          • Kivaari

            It seems that if it were possible someone would have come up with it. Except who pays for the research? Since entire countries have been testing such ideas, they have not overcome the problems. Germany is quite wealthy and were well advanced 30 years ago. No one has improved on that.

          • Grindstone50k

            Oh, oh, I know! G36, right?

            … right?

          • iksnilol

            G11? Sure, it got canned because of the Cold War ending but it might have been a contender.

          • ostiariusalpha

            The G11 was the most awesome mechanical calculator that had been converted to fire ammunition ever made. The caseless ammo, the triple hyper-burst, the tilting chamber, and the floating action; it was amazing. I feel that whatever rifle could’ve succeeded it would have replaced the M16/M4 entirely.

          • iksnilol

            Don’t forget that the ammo was super lightweight, as in half the weight of 5.56.

          • Caseless is the sticking point. That is a concept that goes against modern materials science itself.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Pfft! Don’t you know that Bronezhilet came up with a solution last week? More seriously, it is indeed devilishly hard to fabricate a material with abrasion & moisture resistance that will combust with minimal residue. But the idea is sooo sci fi, it’s like the siren’s song of ammunition development.

          • Secundius

            @ Nathaniel F., TFB Moderator.

            Actually, the bullet was a Nitrocellulose based Cartridge. The problem was “Cook-Off’s”, the nitrocellulose cartridge was temperature sensitive to 320(deg)F. And when the Barrel Temperature exceeded 500(deg)F, you had a “Cascading Cook-Off” not only in the Rifle Barrel. But the Magazine as well, considering the Magazine was Situated on top of the Barrel. Not a good thing if your the Shooter in the Heat of Battle…

          • Uniform223

            The G11 was/is very futuristic but I can’t just get over it’s magazine and how you have to load it…

          • ostiariusalpha

            Hyperburst is far more accurate at landing multiple hits on targets at short range than traditional burst fire and increases the hit percentage at medium range. At extremely close range, it can defeat the best Soviet body armor more easily also. The problem with fletchet projectiles is that they are extremely vulnerable to deflection by intervening material like glass or brush. At the velocities necessary to overcome this defect you end up with pathetic wound profiles on your target; tiny in-and-out injuries that aren’t even particularly life threatening, much less incapacitating.

          • Rock or Something

            “You don’t understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I
            coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let’s face
            it.”

            -G11

          • Kivaari

            The G11 ammo could not pass one of the major tests done by NATO. One test is to fire a 20mm cannon into a pallet load and see what happens. Reports are the whole pallet load goes high order detonation. A pallet load of conventional ammo won’t do that. That is a tough test. I don’t know of any caseless ammo that could pass. If you look at how the various rounds were put together, it is easy to see how setting off a couple of cans in a pallet load can create a condition where it all goes. The G11 had a tiny high explosive compound in the core that was supposed to fracture the “powder” so it would burn like an IMR powder. Since it was reported that the ammo went high order, I wouldn’t want to be driving a truck load of it in a combat zone. A Russian 23mm is a pretty heavy duty round. They are in common use by ISIS.

          • Both your messages got through, and you’re still wrong on both counts.

          • Bronezhilet

            I’m not seeing one of them. In that post I actually offered to do a write-up on why I think the AK and AR are bad/obsolete.
            Dunno if you guys accept guest articles like that though. But hey, I could at least email you.

          • Hmm, I dunno why. Our comment approval is really strange and I don’t understand it.

            Tell you what, you can email me at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com with your outline, and we can discuss it. If you still want to do a guest post at that point, you can either go through me or Steve and we’ll post it. I’ve posted guest posts for people before, so it shouldn’t be a problem. Since it’s a rather extreme topic/perspective, I think it would be worth your while to discuss it first, but you have my assurances that I won’t bury it just because I disagree with it (though it has to meet a certain standard for me to post it; if I don’t, you can still run it by Steve).

            Does that work?

          • Bronezhilet

            It might have been binned because I said ‘sh*te’.

            That would work, email should be on it’s way soon.

          • Yes that would do it.

          • Bronezhilet

            Just as a confirmation, you should have an email by now.

          • Brian M

            Bronezhilet, I’d like to see your writeup. If you can’t get it made into an article, feel free to reply with your writeup here.

          • Dave C

            There is more to the proliferation of firearms, much, much more actually, than the simplistic consumerist notion that the market simply “invisible hand” regulates what is available.

            C.J. Chivers’s, _The Gun_ pretty much sums up the Kalashnikov. There have been places in remotest sub-saharan Africa where a Kalashnikov is cheaper than a bicycle. After the Rome accords between FRELIMO and RENAMO in Mozambique, cab drivers in S. Africa could buy a Kalashnikov (with just the one magazine, mind you) for about 17 dollars.

            “More commonly known as the AK-47, or
            Kalashnikov. It’s the world’s most popular assault rifle. A weapon all fighters
            love. An elegantly simple, 9-pound amalgamation of forged steel and plywood. It
            doesn’t break, jam, or overheat. It’ll shoot whether it’s covered in mud or
            filled with sand. It’s so easy, even a child can use it; and they do. The
            Soviets put the gun on a coin. Mozambique put it on their flag. …”

            Kid tested, mother approved… “Ay Kay Forty-seven: When you absolutely, positively gotta kill every MF in the room. Accept no substitute. yo.”

          • Secundius

            @ Dave C.

            A Piece of SH^T! 100% accurate at 100-meters, 4% accurate at 250-meters, and beyond 300-meters, Totally Worthless. I’ll take the Sturmgewehr StG.44 before taking the the AK-47/Type 56 Assault Rifle…

          • Dave C

            Ah, Secundius, I see you are an adherent of the “cult of accuracy.” Whelp, the faith in firepower school just wants to fill the air with lethal missiles… And like the inaccurate muzzle-loading muskets of old, the child soldier of today simply “presents” his Kalashnikov and squeezes the trigger with his nimble, youthful finger…

            The DDR NVA initially had the StG.44 while the Soviets had SKS carbines and ol’ Mikhail’s design team were working out the bugs.

          • Secundius

            @ ostiariusalpha.

            On the Military Channel a couple of years ago. A show called “Triggers”, has a Competition between the M1 Garand and a Ak-47. In Ten Different Categories, the M1 Garand Beat Out the AK-47 in 9 of 10 of those Categories. The only Category in which the AK-47 won, was Ammunition Capacity. Don’t Sell Out the Legacy Rifles Short…

          • ostiariusalpha

            Hahahahaha! Ah, padawan, your credulity is indeed charming! Triggers is infamous as one of the most factually challenged TV shows about firearms ever produced. Their “experts” routinely stated things about the weapons they were supposedly so knowledgeable about that were completely incorrect. As to the Garand comparison, iirc it is actually an M14 they contrast the AK with (which is even more hilarious if you’ve ever seen how the M14 chokes when the Forgotten Weapons guys put it through an torture test). Most of the trials were a joke; such as having a SOCOM with a scope vs an iron sighted AK (as if you can’t attach a scope to it). They also conveniently left out little things like weight, compactness, cost to manufacture, and controllability in full auto as categories. The truth is AK-47>M14 any day, and AK>>M1 Garand just that much more.

          • The Brigadier

            Except with a rack grade scoped M14 I can kill you with it at 800 yards. Try that with your AK . Even with iron sights I can kill you at 500 yards, and that’s 100 yards farther than you can remotely hit me with your medium range round. The M14 is a battle rifle and the AK-47 is an assault rifle. Both do what they were designed to do very well and this chest thumping is getting very old.

          • jcitizen

            Depends – if it were a Valmet with a scope, I might be able to get pretty close to M14 performance. I used to kill wild dogs at 600 meters with iron sights with mine. Valmet M62, if I remember the model number correctly. Of course I had uphill advantage as well.

          • Kivaari

            The RK62 is in 7.62x39mm.
            If I remember right the 7.62mm NATO Valmet in semi-auto is the Malli 78 (factory model number 255 480 as a LMG).
            IMI also produced Galils in the 7.62mm NATO.

          • jcitizen

            What ever the result, they were my best wild dog killer at long range. Dogs are not stupid like coyotes, they run as far away as they can, very fast – you can’t even climb on a motor cycle fast enough to intercept them – my Valmet did the job just fine! I wish it had been a .308!

          • Kivaari

            The M14 was replaced due to so many accuracy issues with wood or plastic stocks. The makers could not deliver reliably consistent rifles. There was a great deal of problems with the M14. I recommend reading Ezell’s “The Great Rifle Controversy”. Sorry to the M14 fan club, but there were serious deficiencies.

          • The Brigadier

            Did you just read the article about the M14 in one of the last couple of TFBs editions? The M14 and the civilian version the M1A have been quoted as being the best battle rifle ever made. I don’t know where you get your information from. With the exception of the full automatic feature on the M14, it was the M1 perfected. Its has also been dubbed the Deathstick by our military. You make up some claim about the walnut stock. I do get tired of your constant contrarian statements about everything. If your that bored, find something else to do.

          • Kivaari

            Did you notice I suggested those interested read Ezell’s book, “The Great Rifle Controversy”. So, I suggest you blame the deceased Smithsonian military curator C. Edward Ezell, since he was the authority on the subject. It is not my opinion that mattered. If you know anything, you know the BS that permeates the gun world. Blame Former Secretary of Defense in the Kennedy administration, Robert S. McNamara. It was he that, after warning the makers, Winchester, H&R, and TRW, that if they could not remedy the problems he was going to cancel the M14 rifle production. It is why the M14 was one of the shortest used rifle, in the army. He did in fact order the ending of production. It is a major reason why the army adopted the M16 rifle. An Air Force contract for rifles to replace the M2 carbines, turned into a wholesale replacement.
            I suspect that YOU never understood why the M14 was replaced.
            Once again, the expensive rebuilding of the M14 using new stock materials including new polymer and aluminum machined stocks, have turned a failed rifle into a specialized rifle in limited use by our forces. If the M14 was so damn good, why didn’t they just issue M21s in the DMR role. OH, that’s right they couldn’t make them shoot accurately or reliably. Those damn walnut stocks that warped so bad in Vietnam that the guns were sometimes-semi-auto rifles. Those troops issued a “key” so it could fire full-auto instantly found out it was uncontrollable. Hence the M14E2 with a pistol grip and folding fore grip were added so it would fill the role of the BAR. Given a choice I believe the BAR has a better reputation.
            So get pissed off that I happen to have more information based in reality and you believe Chuck Taylor’s BS.
            Now we know it cost a bundle to make the M14 into a new rifle for issue in the now and short future. The SR25-type rifles have had serious issues with reliability, so I guess I’ll get bad-mouthed for repeating the words of contemporary military users. Damn, I just need to stop reading real reports.

          • Kivaari

            Actually, I never read the recent articles about the 14s on TFB. Ignoring real history dilutes the effect. I wont bow and scrape in front of the M14 alter.

          • Sorry, bro, the M14 isn’t as good as the M1. 🙁

          • The Brigadier

            The M14 was the M1 perfected. Talk to your seniors about the M1 systemic flaws. The M14 was designed to fix those problems and it did. I refuse to argue you about this. You are an AR maniac and know very little about the M14/M1A. Get yourself educated and better yet, find a well cared for “Deathstick” and shoot it. Even better, scope it and see how accurate it is at 1000 yards. Until then play with your mouse rifle until you get better educated.

          • Kivaari

            A Vietnam era M14, still has a history of failure to deliver. A tuned M14 was rarely issued as they were expensive to build, and when put into a jungle environment wood stocks swelled enough to ruin accuracy and created malfunctions. Take a close look at REAL M14s from the era. If you notice many show a great deal of light between the rear of the receiver and the stock. That is an issue. The M14 was obsolete when it was adopted. The Army claimed it was designed to replace not only the M1 rifle, but the M1/2carbine, M1911A1 pistol, M3A1 SMG and fill the role formerly occupied by the M1918 BAR. In the end it failed when used in wet theaters of operation – Vietnam. Now having a nice dry M14 that never gets out in the field they can be made to hit. AHHH, that just isn’t good enough. Hence (I like that word, as I rarely get a chance to use it) we have rifles and carbines all built around the M16. For over 50 years. Wasn’t the M14 dropped from frontline service in under 8 years? Todays M14 is no longer an M14 as it took huge expenditures to reconfigure it work better. Well, now that I dumped some truth on you, I will continue on my way. I will call bullshit when it is bullshit. Many bloggers need to stop listening to bar room chatter and do some research.

          • Kivaari

            There are many mistakes on that show. It’s painful to see so many editing errors.

          • Kivaari

            They should have done head to head comparisons of the M16A1/M4 against the AKM and/or AK74. The M16-types are easier to use and HIT at 300m. Up close I’d still take the M4. As much as I liked the AK variants (I owned ~25) and fired tens of thousands of 7.62mm rounds, I have to say the 5.56mm in the AR pattern is a great combination. I should have kept the Finn and Israeli rifles, as they are the finest AKs that were in circulation.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Absolutely, I have an AKM variant also, but my go to rifle is a Recon-style AR. They just work.

          • Boogur T. Wang

            Frankly, it’s really all about the shooter.
            Both are good weapons. It’s the operator that really makes the difference.

          • Kivaari

            Put a modern AK like the Valmet RK62 or a Galil and those rifles will perform much better. Valmets and Galils have aperture sights allowing much better accuracy. I found I needed to open the diameter of the apertures to get enough light through them. In thick dark forests it makes a difference. Standard AKs can print a good group hen used by younger eyes. Sights remain a big defect in the AKM.

          • Secundius

            @ Kivaari.

            The AK-47/Type-56 is a Controllable Fire, “Fire Hose”. Essentially a PPSh-41 with a Selector Switch…

          • Kivaari

            The PPSh41 in 7.62x25mm is much more controllable than the AKM. An AK74 with its small bore and effective muzzle brake are more controllable. The 74 according to Soviet claims (it was still the CCCP) improved the soldiers ability to hit by 2.5 times that of the AKM. The PaPaShaw was heavy for its caliber and was easy to control.

          • Secundius

            @ The PPsh-41 if I recall has a 71-round magazine, which explains the weight. And a Cyclic Rate of Fire of ~900rpm and NO Single Shot Option. At that Rate of Fire, it was Virtually Impossible NOT to hit anything…

          • Kivaari

            Skilled shooters could get one or two shots off without wasting ammo.

      • Kivaari

        Uhgg!

    • StoictheVast

      The French called. They’re offended that it beat out the Lebel for that title.

      • The original draft of this article had an addendum that clarified that I felt the Lebel was the worst modern smallbore magazine-fed bolt action design, but I left it out because I thought it was superfluous.

        • As a Lebel owner I agree, however you have to respect it as a technological leap of course.

          • A silly one that was obsolete in two years; actually a lot less than that if you’re counting intro dates.

          • Indeed. The Lebel is an oddity because it is a weird fusion of both old and modern (at the time) thinking. I will be the first to admit that it is crumby, but it brought something so important to the table that it just kind of gets a pass and a hat tip.
            Because of this, I almost feel guilty saying simply “yeah, the Lebel was crap”, because of the revolution it brought to the world of small arms.

          • StoictheVast

            The biggest problem with the Lebel was that that the French dithered in making the next step up after the Mauser showed the way. The French drug out development cycles and couldn’t field an effective replacement in time for the kickoff of WWI. The Lebel was a great weapon in 1886.

            Why didn’t the French recognize in the 1890s that the Lebel was a dead end? For all of the US Army’s small arms procurement issues, it recognized that the Krag was a dead end after the Spanish-American War and replaced it with the M1903 and M1917 by the time that the US entered WWI.

          • I would characterize it more as the French focused too much on trying to replace the Lebel with a selfloading rifle, and leapfrogging everyone else. The irony is that they did actually accomplish this, just a little too late to be ready for WWI.

          • StoictheVast

            In others words, they made the perfect the enemy of the good.

          • ….Eeeeeyup.

          • ostiariusalpha

            The Swiss in contrast saw that the Vetterli rifle (a bolt action with a tube magazine very much like the Lebel) was a dead end and developed the radical & successful Schmidt-Rubin straight pull design.

    • Dave C

      “The best worst gun ever made.” I totally am stealing this!

      Of course, I’m a Ph.D. history knurd… My first “mil-surp” was a heavily and shoddily “sporterized” Swiss Schmidt Rubin. Then came a “project” of building a T38 carbine, while I accumulated Type 56 SKS rifles and ammo, and so on. Then, one very fine day in 1987, I bought a Tikka Finn M91 for $72. I still have it. I took a long hiatus from collecting, and when I got back into it, the Mosin-Nagant rifle was the “gateway drug.”

      Now I’m shooting black powder, planning a .22 single-shot build, etc. So Nathaniel’s points are pretty much on the mark in my own case. Good article!

      the best worst gun ever made
      the best worst gun ever made

  • nougabol

    Who stated that Mosin-Nagant’s need to be defended… 🙂 The rifle’s history speaks for itself I think.

    • mosinman

      not to mention it’s combat record

      • It’s 1:1 in World Wars… The Lebel has a better record. 😉

        • McThag

          Only 1:1 against Germany in World Wars.

          It’s like 4:4 in Finland.

        • mosinman

          was WW1 really a technical loss for Russia? they were on the winning side after all.

          • ostiariusalpha

            They didn’t get a seat at the winner’s table, so yeah, they lost.

          • Kivaari

            When the commies and republicans pulled out in 1917, it wasn’t a Russian loss. They just took their ball and went home. Then they entered into a bloody civil war, where quite a few reds and whites killed each other. Even US Army forces fought in Russia during the civil war. We were on the side of the whites. Brits were in Crimea, in my memory.

          • mosinman

            yeah i recall that.

          • Dave C

            Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Big-time defeat to the Central Powers. “Republicans” wanted to continue disastrously lost war. Bolsheviki did not. “took their ball and went home” and Germany and AH took over Ukraine, Belarus, lost Baltic States, etc. Only Germany’s defeat later in 11 Nov 1918 and the Bolsheviks winning the Civil War followed by mass famine “ameliorated” the scale of WWI defeat for Russia.

          • Kivaari

            The Reds and Whites fought for many years following the “end” of WW1. Now tell me why in todays America the Republicans are call the Reds and the socialist democrats the Blues, while the socialists are green. The Russians had a real chance for a sane republican nation, except the Reds had so much hate for loyal Russians that they just kept up the killing.

          • The Brigadier

            Because socialists were called pinks and hardcore communists were called reds. Both of these groups disliked the nicknames even though the commies proudly adopted a red flag. And groups like the Khmer Rouge included the word “red” in their name. The leftists in the media here started showing their red states as blue when Clinton first started running and Fox didn’t bother to counter them. This always rankled me. If you are going to proudly embrace something as insane and evil as socialism and communism then don’t run from it. What a bunch of cowardly rosies they are.

          • Secundius

            @ Kivaari.

            Before Color Television came alone, the were ONLY THREE Networks. ABC, CBS and NBC. The Network that Covered the Elections, was NBC. They USED Crayon’s to Color Shade States as the Elections came in. With the Vagrancies of Black and White Television, the Only Two Colors that showed a “Shade Difference” were Blue and Red. It was just Happenstance that the Democrats were Colored Blue and the Republicans were Colored Red. When Color TV came on Line, in 1954. But most Networks were still Broadcasting B&W until 1965. At the time, the Color Scheme Held Little Importance. So they left as it Was, Blue for Democrats and Red for Republicans…

          • It sure wasn’t a win for Russia.

          • John Shore

            Ultimately, it was a bad technical and strategic loss; Russia, already losing badly after major defeats in East Prussia, and in the throes of the Bolshevik-inspired October Revolution, agreed to a cease-fire in December 1917, made a separate peace with the Germans in March 1918 (via the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk) in spite of offers of support from the Allies, and let the Germans keep huge swathes of former Russian territory–pretty much everything from the border with Finland well past the borders of Estonia and the like. Russia had lost 1.7 million dead and more wounded, industries and agriculture had failed, and the Bolsheviks were busily taking over what was left of government after the Czar had abdicated, so things were a general mess. Just after Russia withdrew and made its separate peace, the Allies invaded part of eastern Siberia and held chunks of it up until 1922.
            Yeah, they blew it.

          • Kivaari

            One needs to keep on mind that the royal cousins went to war. WW1 was totally unneeded. The King of England. Czar of Russian and cousins in Germany were really stupid, to go to war over an assassination of a nobody in a Baltic-not-much-of-a-nation. Since the assassins were captured it should have been handled in a civilian court.

        • mosinman

          and the Mauser is 0:2 😉

          • Depends on whether or not you want to count the Mauser derivatives that won (Springfield, P14, M1917, etc.).

          • mosinman

            We’re talking about the OG of Mausers

          • The 1871?

          • Secundius

            @ Alex C.

            Nice Rifle! Any specific caliber?

          • Kivaari

            The M71 and M71/84 fired an 11mm black powder cartridge. The 71/84 was a beautiful repeating rifle. The workmanship was spectacular.

        • Brian M

          Actually, the Mosin won in both WW’s. The Russians won when the allies tried to mess with their revolution in 1917, and both sides of that used Mosins. The only other rifle to have won both World Wars was the SMLE. Hey, the G98 managed to lose BOTH of them.

  • Major Tom

    “Maybe instead, we should call it the best worst gun ever made.”

    Nyet, rifle is fine. There are many things worse and not a lot better. At least in bolt actions.

    Now if we modernized the competition, put a Russian AK-74M vs a German G-36….well.

    • ostiariusalpha

      нет к вашему нет, Фанаты. There are just as many bolt actions, both military and civilian, that are superior to the Mosin-Nagant as there are in the inferior category. The Mosin is a determinedly mediocre rifle, and it likes it that way.

      • iksnilol

        Well, it has a really strong action, stronger than the Mauser. So if high pressure and wildcattery is your thing, it might have an advantage.

        • ostiariusalpha

          If you want to mess with high pressure wildcats, than you’d be better off with a MAS Mle 36. It has an even stronger action & includes gas relief features that the Mosin lacks.

        • In what way does the Mosin have a stronger action than a Mauser?

          • We call that “talking out of your ass” here in Texas.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Hmm, I thought he was referring to the pre-98 Mausers, they don’t have the third lug that the Gew 98 has. The Mosin uses the base of the bolt handle as the third lug, so it is indeed a stronger action than the pre-98s. Or he could’ve just been talking out of his ass.

          • Zugunder

            talking out of your ass huh? As “mosin is the worst rifle evah!!111” kind of talking?

          • iksnilol

            I dunno, I am not an engineer. I shoot stuff, and do minor repairs on simple guns like Mausers and AKs if needed. Heard a gunsmith or two say Mosins were stronger. Saw a vid or two where somebody tried blowing it up by using way too stout ammo, it only resulted in the bolt sticking. So I am kinda on the fence. Though isn’t the Arisaka the strongest? IIRC P.O. Ackley tried blowing one up and failed.

            Not that I really care though. I am perfectly happy with the Sauer I use. Short bolt throw, accurate and flexible. Only thing that sucks is the 5 round mag but I can live with that. Maybe it would be possible to convert it to use G3 mags or something? The action has plenty of steel.

            Though I’ll admit, one of my dream blasters is a Mauser in 9.3x62mm. Though I am unsure of barrel length, it should work with a 20 inch barrel + suppressor. Should look classy done right.

          • Secundius

            @ iksnilol.

            You can probably still get the 9.3x62mm/Mauser, from either Egypt, Indonesia, or Pakistan. Mauser’s were Very Popular in Those Countries…

          • iksnilol

            It ain’t a problem getting it, it’s just stress. Like, why bother with 9.3 if 308 does all I need while being cheaper/more available. I don’t handload yet, but even if I did I would still buy factory ammo for plinking and practice.

            Maybe I could build a switch barrel Mauser? Entire point of the 9.3×62 is that it can fit in the standard mags and receivers. I can get a regular Mauser for pretty cheap, and I get one that’s been sporterized I can modify it with a clear conscience.

          • Secundius

            @ Iksnilol.

            Try the 8x60S Mauser. An can still be fired from the 98k (M48)…

          • iksnilol

            I think 9.3×62 is easier to get, considering I actually see it in stores.

          • Secundius

            @ Nathaniel F.

            The test was conducted in 1946. The Rifles Extractors were Shredded at 70,000psi, the Locking Lugs Blew a 90,000psi, and the tests we STOPPED at 120,000psi. The Barrel Never Blew. Some Speculate that steel used is called “Vickers Steel”, the same Steel used in building the Super-Battleships Yamato & Musashi. And possible the Aircraft Carrier Shinano, which was to be the Third Supper-Battleship…

    • Lance

      With what the German press and tacti coolers say the AK-74 would win.

  • I’ve found that mosins have nearly doubled in price since 2012. Having a hard time finding one for less than $200 lately.

    • Geoffry K

      True. I bought mine in January 2014 and it was $135 from a private seller. $190 each from Classic Firearms or $180 each if you buy 3 crates (18 rifles). Aim Surplus is out of stock. Mausers are running $250 (poor) to $400 (VG, rebuilt) depending on condition.

    • Barney Samson

      Sure ain’t none worth having for the stated “$99.95 plus tax”, that’s for sure.

  • SP mclaughlin

    Bulgaria’s 101st Mountain infantry still field nuggets.

    • iksnilol

      Always nugget when innawoods.

    • Paul White

      I hope and pray you’re wrong

  • Darkpr0

    Just for giggles, I’ll add in that it may be in your interest to have a go on a real Mosin PU sniper rifle. The fit and finish them is a step above the rack-grade Mosins at everyone’s favourite gun stores. The bolt and trigger tend to be way smoother. For sure they are special Mosins, but they are very good indications as to what the guns are capable of when made well. It really does start to hold a candle to the 1903 and Mauser variants, even with the scope removed. I have a 1942 PU and it just blows the garden variety Mosin out of the water, although it’s still pretty ugly. If you have trouble finding one, come up to Canada and I’m sure we can find you one B)

    • Beatcha, only Mosin I’ve ever owned was a Finn 91.

  • iksnilol

    I think the sticky bolt isn’t really a part of the design, it’s more a consequence of their storage and whatnot. Shouldn’t be hard to fix.

    • BrandonAKsALot

      It can also be caused by headspace beginning to hit the excessive size.

      • Kivaari

        Headspace corrections can be done in a couple minutes on the M91s. I used to keep extra locking lugs heads. I only found a few that were excessive, one on a yellow painted bayonet practice rifle from Finland. I encountered some with too tight of a chamber. The arsenal folks did not check the rifle after the rebuild. Most recent imports were rehabbed then put away for “Just in case”.

        • BrandonAKsALot

          Thus my using the qualifier “can”. Not saying most Mosin’s are, but excessive headspace can cause sticky bolts too on any bolt action.

    • mosinman

      it really isn’t

  • schizuki

    Don’t think of it as a crude rifle. Stick that bayonet on the end and you’ve got the most sophisticated musket ever made.

    • Most muskets I’ve seen are much more elegant than a WWII 91/30.

      • ostiariusalpha

        Some of those old Brown Bess’ though, stylish they ain’t.

  • BrandonAKsALot

    I’ll agree the cheapness and historical aspect is nice. I have one and mostly spend my time looking at it in contempt. This is coming from an admitted Ruskiephile too. The terrible feeling action, weak ejection, and paper thin barrel were tolerable for a bit, but then the magazine started popping open spontaneously and the the frequent misfeeds really started to annoy me. I may not be the best precision rifle shooter, but I can generally keep my bolt-actions on target at 50 yards. Mosin, however, says nyet.

    Sometimes I want to sporterize is out of spite and I’m an admitted purist. Although, an actual M1891 is way nicer. They were machined with a lot more care.

    • John Doe

      It’s the ammo/bore size. Russian/Bulgarian/NATO/Blahblahblah surplus projectiles are complete garbage if you are a discerning shooter. Pull the sorry excuse for a projectile, ladder a load using Sierra .312’s. Mexican Match ’em. It’ll shoot much better. I have some Russian ’73 spam can pulled powder that is remarkably consistent. Using .312’s you’ll even get perfect neck tension reseating what was a .310 or .311

    • Secundius

      @ BrandonAKsALot.

      Try Mitchell’s Mausers @ (www. mauser. org) they may have some Argentine M1891 Mauser’s in stock…

  • mosinman

    that TFB-TV video was biased and that’w why it appeared so lopsided

    • Alex and I have had our differences before, but I’m positive he gave the Mosin a fair shake, though I think both he and I would agree the tests were imperfect.

      • mosinman

        he makes good videos, but it really looks like Miles wasn’t too familiar with the rifle. furthermore i think it would be better if they did some bench testing and shot some paper targets just to see how well both guns shot from the bench and offhand. just my 2 cents

        • mosinman

          Also, i’m not trying to say the Mosin was the best bolt gun ever because it isn’t, but i just think it wasn’t given a fair shake

        • IIRC, either he owns one, or that Mosin was his rifle.

          • mosinman

            not surprising, many people own them. still didn’t look too practiced with it

      • Herr Trollzorz

        Wasn’t that the time you got pimp slapped for constantly fanboying the AR last Spring and getting into epic flamewars with people who knew better than you? Ahhh, so lulzy.

  • Southpaw89

    A Mosin Nagant is like cheap vodka, its rough, unrefined, and one too many shots will leave your head spinning, but it gets the job done without breaking the bank.

    • Les Legato

      AMEN!

    • Mark

      Whatever happened to, “Only accurate rifles are interesting”?

      • Vitsaus

        That sentiment vanished when people discovered that accurate rifles are rarely cheap.

        • Mark

          Truly so!

        • CavScout

          And then those people because loyal Mosin fans, because it’s such a ‘great’ gun…

      • SirOliverHumperdink

        I’ve always disagreed with that. Most heavy, single shot bench guns are uninteresting.

      • Cymond

        That’s just a shooter’s perspective. There are many more facets to the firearm community.

        Personally, I’m far more interested in a firearm’s history or how it works than the size of its groupings.

  • Lance

    Alex C rigged the tape last week the M-91/30 didn’t get a fire side by side shoot out with the G-98. Having shot M-91/30 its has a few things better then a K-98/G-98. It has a much smother action. Very simple to disassemble for field cleaning. Its 7.62x54R round is more accurate than a 8mm round in my opinion at long ranges.

    Don’t forget the biggest fact Germany lost the war and the USSR won it. So while on paper Alex may trash the M-91/30 but in combat the Mauser lost….. BIG Time.

    Next thing Alex may do is compare a T-34 to a Panther tank and say the panther thank and say the Panther was better………… That didn’t help the Nazis.

    • Almost everything you said is wrong, as usual. And we were doing a WWI theme, where Germany beat the Russians and knocked them out of the war.

      • Lance

        Don’t get soar Alex. And the fact 7.62x54R is still in use and 8×57 is not used by any standard army anymore as well I’d would challenge you to see how a none mid war Mosin action is very smooth. You used a 1943 M-91/30 mid war Mosin finish and polish sucked. Id ask to try a prewar Mosin vs a prewar Mauser. Its not a true WW1 match. A M-91/30 is not a WW1 Mosin a true 1891 Mosin Nagant would be a WW1 Mosin. M-91/30 where a 1930s Soviet upgrade to the WW1 Mosin and the fact it ditched Arshans for Meters was a real improvement.

        PS both are good guns but saying Mosin sucks is a false statement. No personal attack I like you videos just the Mosin Nagant is not a piece of crap.

        • Lance, you accused me of rigging a test (which I would never do). We had an infantry marine and weapons instructor (who owns a Mosin) against myself, a simple enthusiast. So yes, it was rigged in the Mosins favor. Also, I did make notes of the anachronisms of the test.
          If you think any Mosin has a “smoother action” than a Mauser though, you are the only man on earth with this opinion.

        • pbla4024

          7.92×57 is in fact still used by standard armies (in Zastava M76 rifle 🙂

          • Secundius

            @ pbia4024.

            Agreed, and you have the added BONUS, of being able the Chamber the Russian/Soviet 7.62x54mmR in the 98k Rifle/Carbine. Try to do the Opposite in the M91/30 Rifle’s…

        • iksnilol

          8mm Mauser is still used in Ex-Yugoslavia.

          We’re a logistics nightmare.

        • Brian M

          I have a 1942 Izhevsk Mosin. The action was never bad. After applying some transmission fluid and cycling it several dozen times, I can’t believe how slick it is.

    • DW

      yeah totally, Mosin best smooth action bolt gun, comrade! Comrade lance never wrong! mad minute was invented in Soviet Russia, rifle was discredited by westeren imperialist pigs who dared to use fascist Mauser / imperialist SMLE or whiteflag MAS actions! Cycles sooo fast SKS wasn’t even an upgrade! Rifle and T-34 totally won the war, not the numbers of man, the IS tanks or the General that was later sent to gulag! And if yuo of disagree go to gulag!

      Don’t be beech, be Comrade!

      *above is 95% sarcasm, rest is vodka*

      • He’s at least right about the T-34 bit.

        • Secundius

          @ Nathaniel F.

          Read: Chris – Intel – Corner. blogspot. com/…/ ww2 Myths – T-34 Best Tank of the War – Christos Military…

    • Secundius

      @ Lance.

      The T-34 had a 0.2 Kill Ratio Compared to the Panthers 5 to 1 Kill Ratio, Plus the added fact that the T-34 had to get within 500-meters of a Panther to make a Kill Shoot at 2,000-meters…

    • Secundius

      @ Lance.

      The ONLY reason the T-34 beat the Panther, is because the Soviet’s had 90,000 T-34’s, to Nazi-Germany’s 1,000 Panthers…

    • n0truscotsman

      Technically, the Mauser AND the M/91 both ‘lost’, alongside every bolt action rifle, when the assault rifle was invented.
      But both designs ‘won’ in their own ways
      1.) Mausers are still one of the most popular actions on the planet
      2.) Mosins are still one of the most popular mil-surplus rifles on the planet

      Both spawned excellent families of rifles of countless manufacturers from differing national origins.

      • Secundius

        @ nutruscotsman.

        There’s no such thing as an OBSOLETE Weapon, ARCHAIC Maybe. But not Obsolete. An 18th Century Flintlock, will KILL you just as DEAD, as a 21st Century M4 Carbine…

        • n0truscotsman

          Thats very true! Ill concede to that! 🙂

    • Secundius

      @ Lance.

      One BIG Difference though! You can Chamber a 7.62x54mmR in a 98k’s, you CAN’T Chamber the 7.92×57 in the M91/30’s…

  • William_C1

    What’s with the hate the M1903 keeps getting?

    • Don Ward

      It’s gun hipsterism.

      *Laughs maniacally*

      • DaveP.

        “I shoot a P-14. You’ve probably never heard of it.”

    • Ever shot one?

    • iksnilol

      It’s an American Mauser ripoff. With nice sights, but still, a ripoff.

      That and 30-06 + steel buttplates doesn’t win you any love.

      • Secundius

        @ iksniol.

        When your a Company like Mauser, and are Supplying most of the World with Variations of the Mauser Rifle Design and Ammunition Manufacturing Process. And Know eventually you going to be going to War with one or more of those Countries. And Have a Rifle that not only Fire’s German Ammunition, but their’s too. It’s time to be Creative, the USA produced the .30-06 (7.62×63.3mm) and Sweden produced the 9.3x62mm, neither of which can be Chambered in the Model 1898 Mauser Rifle. Your Relatively SAFE…

        • iksnilol

          Sweden didn’t use 9.3x62mm. The whole point of that cartridge is that it was non-millitary, which meant that German settlers could use it and not breach the post WW1 treaty. Sweden used 6.5×55.

          I didn’t mean to imply that the ’03 Springfield is unsafe.

          • Secundius

            @ iksnilol.

            Swedish Sniper Rifles, the 9.3×62 was a great Long-Range Hunting Round. Someone in the Swedish Army saw the Potential in the Round. And Adopted it in Limited Quantities as a Long-Range Sniper Round. I should have Specified, My Bad…

  • Edward Franklin

    I always think something that gets overlooked is the Mosin Nagant was developed in a period of exceedingly rapid innovation. When the basic idea of the M91 was formulated the Lebel was still shiny and new and Germany was just issuing the 1888 Commission Rifle. Compared to its counterparts of the 1886-1890 era the Mosin is a fully satisfactory design, in fact it’s ruggedness and simple design is impressive honestly. Move forward not even ten years and technology has moved onward and the M91 has soldiered on long after all its counterparts have entered the dustbin of history. Compare an 1888 Commission Rifle or an 1891 Mauser to an M91 and suddenly the lowly old Mosin doesn’t seem that bad.

  • Don Ward

    Again. Put the contestants in minus 40 degree temperatures with General Winter screaming down their backs and then test to see which of the guns is better.

    • Based on my experience in negative temps in New Mexico, probably still the Mauser.

      • Don Ward

        I know that New Mexico will get more nipply than my hood (Seattle) but that is hardly a comparison. Time to ship the TFB team up to Fairbanks to do some proper testing. Alaska Airlines even has some discount fares!

        Alex might want to trade upgrade his sandals though…

        • Havent worn sandals on 10 years I bet. Even went to Hawaii for a week and a half in July and only took one pair of shoes: my boots.

          • iksnilol

            I thought a well off guy like you would be classier than boots?

            But yeah, sandals are just the worst.

          • Iksnilol, you’re not from Texas and you probably haven’t spent any time in Texas, so I’ll give it to you this one time. In Texas, boots are the height of class.

            https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/99/84/41/998441c5cffd656dcf699a9b8fa4e846.jpg

          • iksnilol

            Eh, at least they’re not brogues. “Oxfords, not brogues”, words to live by.

            But seriously, you wear big cowboy boots wherever you go? I kinda want to book a flight over the pond just to see that. Do you intend to open carry a Colt Walker? Maybe start wearing a Stetson? Cause I think that might help characterize TFB somewhat xD

          • Many Texans do all of the above. I do not, since I am not a Texan.

          • iksnilol

            That’s good, or you would be getting all the Tumblr outrage for stealing Texan culture.

          • Zebra Dun

            “Brilla Cuando La Luna Vaquero!”

            Now that’s what I call a pair of boots.

        • Secundius

          @ Don Ward.

          Better Yet? Join the “300 Club” at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. Take a Hot Sauna @ +150F, streak 402-meters in your “Birthday-Suit”. Then Jump into a Pool of Freezing Water, and Streak back to the Station. Outside Temperature -150F (the “300 Club”). One draw back though, Once you’re there. You’re there for a Whole Year, time intervals between Transfer Flights…

      • Kivaari

        One thing Finn warrior found is it was common practice to use “rifle grease” in the bolt cylinder. It was known to Russians/Soviets that a diluted mix of grease thinned with gasoline left enough anti-rust protection, but not enough to freeze. It was surprising, to me, that the Finnish Civil Defense forces had lost that technique from the times when they were part of Russia and the Winter War of ’39. Finns created very nice upgrades to the Russian rifles, with the Mali 39.

  • You’re talking to the guy who wrote the Infamous St. Patrick’s Day Article, only spoken about in hushed whispers and whenever a commenter wants to give me crap. 😉

    • Cal S.

      Hey, I still say that article should have stayed up. The truth is just hard for some people to accept.

    • iksnilol

      What was the St. Patrick’s Day Article? I’m sure I’ve read it but I can’t recall what it was about. Wasn’t that the “hit piece” on the 6.8 SPC?

      • ostiariusalpha

        I believe it was about the IRA & their use of the AR-18.

        • iksnilol

          Oh that one, I remember now. So much outrage. Good times. Is it down?

          • ostiariusalpha

            It’s brilliance is lost to this mortal world. Unless Nathaniel has secreted away a draft of it. A little money under the table and you might score a hit from him.

          • iksnilol

            If only we knew what was to happen. We could have screenshotted it or something.

          • Sadly, it is gone.

            Not my finest hour, to be sure.

          • Yeah, they took it down.

          • Secundius

            @ Nathaniel F. & iksnilol.

            What happen is that they rewrote the Lyrics of the Song, to: “Come Out Ye’ Black and Tans”. Some people found it Racially Offensive, though it has Absolutely Nothing to Do with Race’s or Ethnicity. Song can be heard on YouTube…

    • Paul White

      I think I need a linik

      • Doesn’t exist anymore cuz it rustled the jimmies right off a bunch of people.

        • Let me guess? Hypersensitive P.C cops?

  • Grindstone50k

    So much ado over such a cheap and fun rifle.

    • iksnilol

      Well, I am cheating by being in Norway. But it is milsurp, costs about 170 USD and is chambered in 308 (or 30-06).

      Though, in Norway the Mosins are hens teeth. So it might be skewed.

      • Grindstone50k

        I picked mine up last year for $125 from Armslist. Mosins are plentiful here, it’s just people are gouging due to Obama fears.

        • iksnilol

          Not in Norway. Besides, I don’t want to depend on reloading ammo. Most registries in Norway don’t even have 7.62x54mmR in their registries. I saw a Tigr in 7.62×54 for sale, it was registered in 308 because that was the closest thing the office had in their registry.

          • Grindstone50k

            Everything you just said sounds awful.

          • iksnilol

            In Norway you register guns? Not that bad. Though I’ll admit it sucks because you can’t really have multiple guns for the same purpose.

            Not having Mosins? Eh, the NATO Mausers take their place as decent milsurps for a cheap price.

            Not having 7.62x54mmR? Yeah, that’s a bit sucky, but we have 6.5×55 in liberal amounts.

          • Secundius

            @ iksnilol.

            Sounds a “little” odd considering, that the 7.62x54mmR is actually a (7.92×53.72mmR) Cartridge…

          • iksnilol

            What do you mean it’s odd? Don’t want to be rude but it is bureocracy + guns, of course things are a bit messed up. And by a bit I mean very.

          • Secundius

            @ iksnilol.

            Odd in the sense, that they DIDN’T classify it a “sub” Mauser cartridge or something like a 8-mil Mauser/Russian. A “.308” is a Stretch. That’s like saying “Camel”, 4-legged & Runs Fast. Ahhh, “HORSE”…

          • iksnilol

            Well, the registry there had a list of cartridges, 7.62×54 wasn’t one of those. In regards to size and ballistics 308 is closer than 30-06 or 8mm Mauser.

        • Secundius

          @ Grinstone50k.

          It’s not that bad. I live just 5-miles of Washington, DC. I own two Garand’s, two M48’s (98k) and a Steyr Scout in .308Win. And Nobody, either for the Local or Federal Government have taken them. And I have No problems getting Ammunition for Any of THEM in a Tri-State Area…

        • Secundius

          @ Grindstone50k.

          Just exactly, What Branch of the US Government MAKE’S Law’s. I KNOW it’s not the White House, and it’s NOT the US. Supreme Court. That LEAVES, the US. Congress. It must be that Private School YOU went too…

          • Grindstone50k

            Dude, put down the meds and re-read my post.

          • Secundius

            @ Grinstone50k.

            I DID read your post, Sir. Congress can Override the President’s Presidential Memorandum or Executive Order. With a SIMPLE 2/3’s House Vote, there in the NRA’s Pocket. Why DIDN’T THEY…

          • Grindstone50k

            If you did actually read (and comprehend) my comment, then you’d realize you’re basically ranting to yourself like a loon.

          • Secundius

            @ Grinstone50k.

            LOON, Maybe. STUPID, NO…

  • Douglas Chandler

    One of the biggest problems with the Mosin-Nagant is its the ejector, interrupter, and other bolt and trigger essentials can bugger up operations and it becomes necessary to take the take down tool you should have with your cleaning kit and take everything down and thoroughly clean the crud (the Russian vs. of cosmoline, gun shot residue, and my God what is that) off down to bare metal. lightly oil them, and put everything back together and 90 percent of your bolt jamming, failure to feed, failure to extract, etc, will go away. The remaining 10 percent can be fixed by adjusting the tension on the spring steel parts or better yet, just ordering replacement parts from Numrich. There are a number of YouTube videos on this.

  • tazman66gt

    Is it just me, or have the moderators gotten rather chippy ever since they opened up the “members only” part of TFB and was met with resounding criticism? Now it seems every time you say something against their writing or comments it is met with vehement and vile snippyness.

    • It’s just you; I’ve always been like this. 🙂

      Also, as of yet I have basically nothing to do with Team TFB, so I can’t see how that would effect my commenting.

    • ostiariusalpha

      I’ve always enjoyed Nate’s testiness. So many buttons to push! ?

  • True

    Yes because the G36 and SA80 were much much better……

    • Kivaari

      It is somewhat funny. Germany had the M98k which for a bolt action was pretty good. Then the adopt the G1 (FNFAL) and liked it. Belgium did not want to issue a license for W. Germany to make the G1 – recent memories from the not to distant past was a stumbling block. Then the G3 came along. Some were very accurate (none of my 3 would do better than 3.5″-100yds). Then the new G36, the melting inaccurate rifle is a poor rifle, if we can believe TFB, and I do is being replaced with yet unknown rifle. I suspect they will adopt a serious proven rifle, along the lines of the M16/M4 type. The M4, Mk12, Mk18 and others using that basic M16 action will be chosen. Why waste money looking for something that will have a hard time competing with existing rifles. Germany already uses M16-family guns on a limited basis. Just like SOF groups around the world, they pick M4-like carbines – instead of AUGs, SA80, G36 etc.

  • Kivaari

    That is odd considering how wide spread both systems are used. M4 carbines are pretty good rifles. Valmet and Galil rifles are not too bad.

  • Cal S.

    To me, the Mosin lost 100% of its appeal the day its price went over $100. Especially when, in order for it to fill any sort of modern role, that price rose high enough to make a Ruger American or Mossberg ATR look really good in comparison (with the disappointing exception of not being able to mount a bayonet). I hold that view of most antique firearms, by way of full disclosure.

    Unless it’s an SKS. For some reason, that gun has held lasting appeal to me. I really regret selling the only one I owned, though not enough to pay 2015 prices for one. I tend to want my fun guns to stay under $200. Silly me, I know.

  • Cal S.

    Then why not design your own? If you find all options today unacceptable, that is the next logical step. And why not? We’re in need of innovation these days.

    Just so long as you’re able to convince consumers of good, modern guns that have worked for decades why your “Wunderwaffe” is so much better that it’s a steal at twice the price.

    • Bronezhilet

      I am designing my own. But I live in one of the most gun-hating countries of the EU. Getting a license to manufacture costs buckets of money and if a police officer thinks “I dont like the way his glasses look”, I can kiss any chance at manufacturing goodbye.

      • Cal S.

        Oh, gotcha. Yeah, it’s a good $3,000 over here in the US. However, we have the advantage of being able to manufacture however many thousands of guns we want to without a license so long as we don’t transfer them.

      • The Brigadier

        There are a lot folks working on personal rail guns right now and soon enough someone is going to design one the world will want right away. Then all the arguments about ARs, AKs and M1, M1C and M14s can finally die a quiet death. I can’t wait.

      • The Brigadier

        Is there no other country in the EU you can relocate to?

  • Darren Hruska

    The Mosin-Nagant. It feels/handles like a club first, a spear second, and gun third. But hey, it is inexpensive to buy, inexpensive to feed, and can probably survive a nuclear holocaust!

    • Trevoriche

      I’d argue the handling is actually not too bad. It’s not too heavy in a world where people don’t have an issue with Garands and M14’s. The Mosin has most of its weight located around where your forward hand goes, giving it pretty nice balance.

  • Mc Cain

    What’s not to love about the Mosin? Cheap rifle. Cheap ammo (relatively speaking), plus if you get an M44, you have a flamethrower as well! FTW!

    • DW

      Best use of M44: cooking bacon/ kebabs.
      Ingredients: Bacon/kebabs, M44, Crisco, surplus 7.62X54R ammo
      instructions:
      1. Extend the M44 bayonet
      2. Apply crisco to bayonet and action
      3. Put meat on bayonet
      4. Load rifle and fire
      5. Check 100yd group,
      6. Bacon/ kebab is ready

      • ASterisk

        If you clean the gun with FireClean, you don’t have to use Crisco

  • Geoffry K

    For those of us with a bum shoulder or want to shoot more than 20 rounds with the Mosin without going to the ER, get a Medium size LimbSaver, it makes a snug fit over the steel butt plate and is WAAAYYYY more comfortable to shoot.

  • Bal256

    Tags: the lebel is worse

    heh.

  • Edeco

    The Mosin has added to my enjoyment as a shooter by allowing a broader spectrum of other shooters to make sounds that I can feel in my lungs at the indoor shooting range. I’m like Cooter in the Demolition Ranch videos; I want to feel the vibrations.

  • Alex Nicolin

    The sticky bolt problem is solvable trough proper maintenance. Some of the guns sold as surplus spent decades in storage, soaked in a hard lube called cosmoline. When they were taken out to be sold, some were improperly cleaned. The bore cleans itself, when shots are fired, because any remaining lube is scraped and burned away. But the bolt and chamber can remained impregnated.

    One easy solution is to take the bolt out and apart, and soak all the components for a few hours in gasoline or hard alcohol – methanol and isopropylic work best at dissolving hardened lube. Put a cork in the bottom of the chamber and pour the same substance down the bore so it fills the chamber. 10 ml should be more than enough. After soaking rinse all the components with the same solvent until no dirt comes out, then leave them to dry for a few hours. After they are dry gently polish the bolt face, lugs and the chambers with a very fine and soft metal brush. Polishing the chamber is easy as you can attach the brush to the end of drilling machine, and run it for a couple of minutes. Remove the metal dust with a clean dry cloth, then clean with a cloth soaked and solvent. Leave to dry, oil each part of the bolt and assemble it, then mount it.

    After that, periodic cleaning is necessary to prevent further sticking because almost all 7.62×54 mm R ammo is corrosive and the case is made of steel. Steel does not expand and contract to the same extent as brass, so a larger portion of the gasses tends to escape further down the walls of the chamber, where it builds carbon deposits. In an improperly cleaned gun, it also bakes the remaining cosmoline which is carbonized to a hard tar like substance. Also steel case are lacquered. and the lacquer may melt, contributing to the problem.

  • Nimrod

    The Mosin didn’t win anything, it was simply a tool for the masses i.e, peasants. I have 4 of them because the are iconic historical rifles but more because they were $40-60 a piece when I bought mine and the ammo was cheap as well.

  • Trey

    Lest we forget that the m-1891 was also used by the USA in WWI as well!

    The mosin / mauser comparison of course has some issues as well.

    Most people that shoot bolt guns are far more used to the feel of the Mauser system, the bolt manipulation of a straight bolt is different than bent, had it been a Gew 98 it would have been maybe a little more equal.

    The use of lacquered Steel cases agaist brass was also a disadvantage in the mosin v mauser. Not only do lacquered steel extract less well they are not as good in a stripper clip.

    I am not saying that the mosin is as good a system as the mauser 98 but the test was weighted in the 98’s favor due to factors that could be controlled (a little)

  • Zebra Dun

    I am not an expert yet my impression of the worst bolt action rifle in the world is the Carcano specifically the 7.35 x 51 mm Model 1938 with the folding bayonet that aimed down while fixed below the barrel line and flopped after every shot or would hang down and impale the hand after being stowed.
    I say a test between the two, Mosin and Carcano is called for.

    The Mosin is what it is, an efficient military infantry rifle.
    The Carcano is a bad Italian joke.

    • Booko Ninjiin

      Worked fine for Lee Harvey Oswald, didn’t it?

      • Zebra Dun

        The Carcano Rifle that was used to shoot Kennedy was not the Model 1938 in 7.35 x 51 carbine of which I speak.
        The 7.35 x 51 mm rifle came with fixed sights, shot a round bullet and the performance of this round and rifle left much to be desired about as powerful as a 30/30 win with the same trajectory and it was dropped from Italian Army use though used by other nations during and after the war for lack of any other weapons. The Finns got them and promptly dropped them in the snow after killing a Soviet and taking his Mosin.
        The rifle used in the assassination was the M1991/38 in 6.5 x 52 mm the range at which the POTUS was engaged was less than 100 yards.
        The 6.5 x 52 mm is a known flat shooting cartridge of adequate power.
        The Carcano used was operated by an EX-Marine who qualified as a Sharpshooter in the Marine Corps, midway between Marksman and Rifle Expert.
        The one My brother owned was a piece of junk used to simply shoot as a fun gun and was unable to consistently hit a paint bucket size target at 50 yards. My brother is a good shot too!
        Oswald could have done his evil ended with any rifle that had the capability to hit the target he aimed at that he picked the Carcano is probably due to cost and ease of purchase..

        • Booko Ninjiin

          I remember seeing adds for buying them mail order in Mechanics Illustrated, I believe.

          • Zebra Dun

            The ads were every where! Sears, Ace hardware and in the backs of many magazines.

    • Secundius

      @ Zebra Dun.

      Worst Gun in the World, would have to be the .45ACP Liberator. You actually had to make Physical Contact with the Victim too make a Kill Shot…

      • Zebra Dun

        I agree, it did how ever work and at that range was accurate as hell ;^D

      • Cymond

        I gotta nominate the Remington derringer in 41 rimfire (or anything in that cartridge, really). Apparently, it threw a 130 grain bullet at about 400 fps. The 22lr is a killer magnum compared to that.

  • Anthony Smallwood

    To me the greatest thing about shooting a Mosin is picking up a Garand and shooting them at the same time. Then you can ponder how the Russians managed to fight the Japanese and Germans and why they lost so many more lives than the USA. The USA had the best battle rifle for WWII by a large margin.

    • Brian M

      I’d place the SVT-40 above the Garand for a few reasons.

      1. SVT-40 had 10 rounds vs 8 rounds.
      2. SVT-40 had detachable magazines.
      3. SVT-40 was easy to top off and could be reloaded by magazines, clips, or loose rounds.
      4. The Garand is difficult to reload in any away apart from 8 rounds via clip at once.
      5. The SVT-40 has an adjustable gas system.
      6. The SVT-40 was designed to higher reliability standards.
      7. The SVT-40 was easier to control.
      8. The Garand has an open action.
      9. The SVT-40 was more economical for equipping armies, especially at large scales.

      • Anthony Smallwood

        Sure Brian, but clearly the SVT40 wasn’t in use by all Soviet soldiers and many or most of them relied on the Nagant. The Garand was in widespread use by US troops. I’d rather have a Garand than a Nagant or empty hands waiting for my SVT40.

      • Secundius

        @ Brian M.

        Early Models of the Italian BM-59’s made in 1953. Were in .30-06 (7.62×63.3mm) and used a BAR Magazine in 20, 30 and 40-round magazines…

      • Secundius

        @ Brian M.

        Only ~1.4-million SVT-40 were produced in WW2 and ~29.5-million Soviet Army Strong from 1941 to 1945. Which is 1 SVT-40 Rifle of every ~21.07 Soviet Soldier, Hardly a War Winner…

  • MrKen

    Whatever your preference would you please take or buy one and use it to go forth and do battle with ISIS. Let us know how it worked or didn’t, for you, if you could..

  • CavScout

    The reason the Mosin Nagant is so popular here. It’s cheap. Perfect for the uncommitted gun buyer. That’s it. It’s a high value buy; the ammo is dirt cheap (albeit corrosive), it’s as reliable as an old mil bolt gun can be, durable, and the 54R’s ballistics are extremely comparable to .308win. All great things, but it’s so popular because it’s cheap, requiring very little commitment to buy and keep. After that, people just become loyal to cheap things they buy, and SEEK justification the purchase and ownership. They put their pride in it. Sure, that’s everyone with most things, cheap or not; but I think it’s the basis for the attention to the Mosin in this country.

  • The Brigadier

    A lot of people don’t know that the U.S. Army carried the Mosin-Nagant for almost ten years. It happened that Teddy Roosevelt and Czar Nicholas became great friends and Teddy invited Nicholas on a cross country shooting trip. The trip involved a series of trains across the plains and through the woods from coast to coast. Teddy gave Nicholas a fancy engraved Springfield and Nicholas liked the gun so much he ordered 50,000 of the 1903. Teddy said he couldn’t send that many, but he wanted a treaty with Russia and Nicholas worked out a deal for 50,000 Springfield’s in exchange for 30,000 (I am not sure if this number is accurate) Mosin-Nagants and a lot of cash. Both leaders took their trophies home along with the inked treaty and our army carried the Mosin-Nagant. Springfield eventually overcame the scandal of their overcooked 1903 steel (fortunately the Czar didn’t get any of that series) and our guys learned to respect the Mosin-Nagant. This was a story in the American Rifleman about ten years ago.

    • Brian M

      Thanks for posting this. I have a little more info about the Mosin in American service.
      The Mosin was used as a training rifle by the United States Army and was also issued to US troops in rear areas. The Mosin was also issued to numerous National Guard groups as the Army was not in the mood to let them have its 1903’s. Because of Mosins went to the Alaska National Guard, there is the possibility that they saw WW2 service against the Japanese.

  • OhNoes

    Remind me again who won WW2 and what rifle they were using? I forget.. Hopefully the author of this can tell me.

  • Lai

    To be fair, you have to consider that the M91/30 was based on the original dragoon version of the rifle. The original full size rifle, which is the one that should be compared to a full size G98, was a great deal longer even. That also explains the antiquated pike bayonet: it was originally a genuine pike! We just tend to remember the dragoon sized M91/30 as the full length rifle because it is compared to the carbine version, to other rifles of its era, and because it was the one fielded as a ‘standard’ infantry rifle during WWII (with reason). Length wise: Mosin carbine = G98K, Mosin dragoon/’M91/30′ = G98, Mosin full size/M91 = Braveheart cavalry stopper.

  • jcitizen

    I remember reading in the American Rifleman that certain makes and model of Mosin Nagant rifles dominated world wide shooting competitions for decades starting in the late 1800s. One of the WW2 Russian snipers supposedly has the world record for over 500 kills – I have no reason to dispute this. I like the Mauser 8mm design of the ammunition better, but as far as rifles go, I will want a Mosin before a Kar 98 in my collection. But then who doesn’t like the price of the ammo?

    • iksnilol

      Guy from Finland with a Finnish Mosin did the 500 kills thingy. Simo Hayha.

      • jcitizen

        Ah yes, that’s the one!

        • Secundius

          @ jcitizen.

          The original Unabridged Book was better. “War of the Rat’s”…

          • jcitizen

            HA!

    • Secundius

      @ jcitizen.

      It wasn’t Major Ivan Mikailovich Siderenko, of the Soviet Army with 500 kills. It was Simo Haya of Finland with 542 confirmed Kills and a Possible 705 Unconfirmed Kills from 1939 to 1940…

      • jcitizen

        Thanks for that correction!

  • Ok guys lets play nice—-

  • The T-34 was crude in most respects. It did get the job done. That and the massive numbers made are a plus in itself.

    • Secundius

      @ Phil W.

      When you have 90,000 T-34’s against 1,000 Panther’s, sure. “Quantity Has A Quality of It’s Own”…

  • Kivaari

    You are correct.

  • Secundius

    @ The Brigadier.

    Colt also manufactured a BAR Variant called “The Monitor” which weighed only 16lbs.3oz. and had a cyclic rate of fire of ~500rpm. There was also The M1918A2 Paratrooper BAR @ 19lbs with a cyclic rate of fire of ~600rpm. Both were available with 20, 30 and 40-round magazines…

  • Kivaari

    So I am correct. The Air Force wanted a replacement for the little M1/2Carbines. There was NO rifle in inventory that they wanted, considering the M1 was out for front line unit. The M14 was the new gun, but the Air Force did not want the M14. Especially so after the M1 performed so poorly. I was there when the Army made the claim that the M14 was going to replace all the non-belt fed guns from handguns to BAR. The doctrine was intended to simplify weapons. Adopt the M60 to replace the M1919 and the M14 for everything else.
    Well anyone that paid attention in class, knows the M14 and M60 were plagued with troubles. Like the M16 we are nearly 60 years later and all the weapons have undergone improvements. Todays M14 is not 1957s M14. Neither are todays M16 and M60 the same guns they were over 50 years ago. So everyone were subject to PIPs that took quite awhile to de-bug the guns. How many M14s are still working in the tropics? In a country that cares about performance? Well, almost none. Is the US Army issuing M14s as originally built? NO! We no longer issue original M16s or M1911s or M60s as originally issued.
    Gun writers telling us all the M14 (or fill in the blank) is the top performer today, they sure are not talking about those old rifles, in conditions like Vietnam.
    Air Force Generals wanted to replace the M1 carbine, and since Armalite was part of Fairchild Aircraft, he was pitched the new gun. So the AF staff was ahead of the Army once more. We are using mostly M16s in mass quantities, and new variants of the M14 in tiny numbers. Special troops get special guns. Those rifles get special care. Today’s M14 is a very expensive rifle, very much better than in 1957.
    Circa 1980 the AF wanted a new pistol, and did a study, where the Beretta 92 was picked as the winner. The army wasn’t happy and did their own testing. Well, the Army test showed the baseline test gun the M1911 was a very poor performer. That really makes 1911 lovers mad, but the test showed the M92 (soon to be M9) outperformed all but the SIG P226. OK, which to adopt? Well the spare parts for the P226 were costlier and we ended up with the Beretta. A great loss to a better pistol. The Navy said we don’t care, and bought P226 and P228 and Glock 17s.
    So some nostalgic M14 users and modern M1A users claim the M1A/14 is the best battle rifle of all time. Well, I say NO, I’d rather have an M4. Just because some old vets love ’em doesn’t make them the best.

  • lamarlamar

    Wish a good one was still $99! Love to shoot them with my son. It is a hoot to shoot .22’s but, nothing like the raw blast and blowback of the Mosin! Something about the big BOOM!!!

  • Kivaari

    AND, the RPD filled the role for a long time. As you say the PKM outranges both. The RPD is a great weapon, with only having a fixed barrel limits it. Valkerie Arms had/has a quick change barrel prototype for the RPD. That would make a huge improvement. We supply quite a few PKMs to allies, as they cost less than our M240s. In nations like Iraq and Afghanistan it was easy to keep existing stocks going. AND they work.

  • Jackson Andrew Lewis

    this seems to be of the idea that simplicity is bad……

    no its good….. less to break….. easier to build….. easier to train…….maintain etc……

    mosins are plenty accurate if you take the time to sight it in…….. mine will shoot moa at 100 meters…… and easily on a pie plate at 300

    history- excellent, combat record excellent…..

    the dud is that this article came from, thaqt video where the mosin only lost due to shooter technique….. granted the mauser is more accurate but the gap is not that wide……