M1895 Nagant Revolver: Yes, You Can Suppress Them

The M1895 “Nagant” revolver appears pretty standard at a quick glance, but upon closer inspection you can see how unique this little handgun really is. A number of odd features make it somewhat of a curiosity, but it served Imperial Russia and the USSR well until it was gradually phased out of military service by semi-automatic pistols. In this episode of TFBTV, we take a look at the Nagant revolver to see what it can do!

Firearm featured:
M1895 Nagant Revolver

Thanks to our sponsorsĀ Grizzly Targets andĀ Ventura Munitions.



Alex C.

Alex is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and Director of TFBTV.


Advertisement

  • Nick Grahm

    Is there a video here?

  • David W.

    Why is it not suppressed?!

    • Flounder

      10 internets to you sir.

  • gunsandrockets

    Don’t hold back, tell us what you really feel!

  • Bronezhilet

    … did you know you could suppress that?

  • iksnilol

    Well, the Nagants won gold before (or more correctly, guns based on them). So they’re accurate. You only need to fix up the trigger and sights. There’s a guy on Youtube that has the tutorials, the guy is an American Nagant expert.

    • BrandonAKsALot

      Basically, fix everything terrible with them and they are great guns. I’d love to have one for a historical piece, but I couldn’t even pay the $100 they cost several years ago for one. I couldn’t justify it. It’s an interesting curio and I love Russian stampings etc., but I just can’t. I’d probably throw $50 at one, but that’s a maybe still.

      • iksnilol

        Not really, that’s how you build a precision piece. It’s got a good action which is kinda the most important part.

        To get that sucker competitive the only thing I would bother with is changing the mainspring and polishing up the trigger and doing the bullet mod. The sights are good for precise shooting, not the best for quick shooting though.

        • BrandonAKsALot

          It was mostly a jest. There are many firearms with viable guts or designs that just need attention to areas they lack. It’s like someone in Russia got really drunk when this and the AN-94 were being designed and that they should go against typical soviet design and be as complex as possible.

          But Ivan, we always design weapon so simple. Why not try and make design have great complexity? My brother Dmitri is pulley man, why not put in gun?

          • iksnilol

            I dunno, the Nagant is pretty simple. The AN-94 is just a trainwreck for the layman. Could see it being used by a “professional” character in a film or book, though.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            I don’t really know if I’d say any revolver is simple necessarily. Its like saying a pocket watch is simple. The design itself is inherently more complex to produce due to the necessary tight tolerances on indexing. The AN-94 is just an entirely new level of Russian madness.

          • Kivaari

            Look at Colt M1851s or SAAs, they are so simple they were made a long time ago. When they broke, even the town blacksmith could make them work over a glass of whiskey.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            Well if we’re adding whiskey to the equation, I can make anything “work” too. The definition of work may change drastically after the whiskey, but it’s all semantics.

  • Vitsaus

    Every time I think I want one, I see one in action, and realize they aren’t worth the $200 I would have to pay for it.

    • PK

      I stopped buying them when the price went over $100 each. I’m glad I bought as many as I wanted back when they were all over the place.

  • SP mclaughlin

    NYET REVOLVER IS FINE FOR SHOOTING CAPITALIST COWARD DESERTERS

    • nova3930

      Da hiding is for cowards

    • BRAMIT device was developed in USSR, you know.

      • Daniel

        That was just a joke, you know.

  • Riot

    I do have a soft spot for these, being more efficient by eliminating cylinder gap is an admirable goal. The round was wasting the potential however.

    • Edeco

      I hear ya. A more efficient 150 ft/lbs is interesting to me, whereas raw output, efficiency-be-damned, like 357 in a J-frame, not so much*.

      The added complexity is a minus, I mean, I’m no more for extra complexity than I am for extra propellant. But it’s a mixed bag because having added engagement between cylinder and barrel, at least as a concept**,sounds good.

      *I speak as an enthusiast, not a self defense user
      **in practice I don’t know how tight/stable they are

  • Darren Hruska

    Technically, you CAN suppress most revolvers. It’s just that it’s not overly practical for most of them due to the cylinder gap. I mean, gases will still be vented through the barrel (and thus the suppressor) even with a cylinder gap. If that weren’t the case, having a barrel would just slow down the bullet in such a firearm. Anyways, what I’m more interested in is the 1910 Nagant with its swingout cylinder, which seems to have very little publications out there.

    • Holden McGroyne

      I agree. It would be nice to have a 1910 but they are rare.

    • AD

      Is that… is that cylinder swinging out on the RIGHT side of the revolver? Good grief, that must be a fantastic gun for lefties! Well, assuming decent trigger, accuracy etc.

  • james

    very funny boys hahaha

  • Holden McGroyne

    I love mine. One of my favorite suppressed weapons

  • Don Ward

    The Mosin revolver gives you a nice dual threat; suppression and repression!

    • Kivaari

      Nagant revolver. Mosin – Nagant rifles. It shows that the revolver had moved from a weapon (.44 Russian) to rank badge (7.62x38mm). When it is a badge of rank, it can be a little .32 so popular in German ranks.

      • Don Ward

        Why yes, I meant Nagant…

        *Smoke bomb*

        Creeps away stealthily.

  • Flounder

    You guys looked like you were being interrogated by the CIA the whole time. Kinda funny but at the same time your shooting! HAVE FUN!

    • iksnilol

      Not CIA, comrade, KGB.

  • Holden McGroyne

    Finally watched the video. Pretty amateurish attitude towards the gun the whole time. Also, I highly suspect that the gun used has issues. I have many rounds of new production and surplus through mine with zero failures. It seemed at times in the video that the shooters did not know how to handle a revolver of any type. The only complaint I have with them is the heavy double action pull. Single action is pretty decent even for modern standards and is quite predictable. They are quite accurate if you can shoot. A video where the shooters don’t take the gun or the shooting seriously should also not be taken seriously.

    • BrandonAKsALot

      “A video where the shooters don’t take the gun or the shooting seriously should also not be taken seriously.”

      So, what you’re saying is the video was supposed to be fun, light-hearted, and only half serious? Glad you pointed this out, because I wouldn’t have known ever.

      • But they just thrown all their intelligence and wisdom out the window and just riffed on the revolver. Meanwhile, in all the other videos, they are extremely humble and try to impart the most knowledge they can, even to the detriment of the clear summary of the video. This one was just a slapstick routine with Nagant as a stooge, that ended with a freaking USSR anthem. It’s not even an insult to Russians or Tsarist Russians – it’s just a very not good video compared to other TFBTV’s.

        • Holden McGroyne

          Precisely.

        • BrandonAKsALot

          Holy crap we get that you guys love the Nagant. Not to rip on TFB, but there isn’t exactly a lot of journalistic integrity here anymore. I still enjoy this site, but much of the posts are content from other sites, heresay, speculation, product announcements, and sometimes just incorrect. The revolver was basically obsolete at it’s design and has always been a punchline in Soviet small arms design. It’s a novel idea, but that’s about it. Not everything has to be so serious. Plus, they do these videos and articles because it gets a crazy amount of attention from pissed off fanboys every time. Look at the Mosin Nagant vs K98 video.

          • Holden McGroyne

            We get that you love TFB. If you can’t see the difference in the two videos referenced, I don’t think you will ever get it. The mosin got beat by a better rifle. Pretty cut and dry. You just said that TFB has been lacking in journalistic integrity but are continuing to argue the fact that someome pointed it out because you don’t like the gun. The irony is thick in this comment section.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            My comparison to the other video was not based on pure content, but the fact that these sorts of things draw lots of hits due to many people coming to defend specific firearms that they love. I get that you guys want them to sit and break down the pros and cons by bullet points and would like the video to be a logical and reasonable study into the revolver. I have never spent a lot of time concerning myself with this specific firearm. It is factual that the gun was essentially obsolete shortly after development.

            Agree to disagree again. I don’t mind a pointless video goofing on a firearm sometimes and I see that you expect a different approach and probably that you feel it could sway people into thinking that it’s a humongous pile of garbage even though that’s not necessarily true. I love Carnikon’s youtube channel and it’s some of the only content I’ve ever bothered watching on there, but it’s much of the same although way more over the top. It’s whatever man and good game. High five and I shall move along so we don’t continue to beat this deceased mule.

      • Holden McGroyne

        No. I am saying that the text of the article in no way matched the video. If you take the video as half hearted when all they did was go out of their way to disparage the gun, ending with it is the second worst gun ever, I would hate to see a whole hearted attempt. I think you may have been fooled into thinking that they were attempting to be clever. Missing the entire point of my reply and using the last sentence to elude that I missed the point is pretty ironic. Thanks though.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Nobody missed your point, it’s just that Brandon didn’t miss the fact that you’re a butthurt fanboy either.

          • Holden McGroyne

            Ahhh. Internet toughguy sticking up for his boyfriend. Cute.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            We’ve only been on a few dates. I’m not sure that I’m ready to commit to the bf title.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Says the man who can’t let anyone insult his Nagant waifu. LOL! I’d take you more seriously if you didn’t obviously have it stuck so far up your pooper.
            …And don’t post pics of yourself here. No one cares how you dress yourself.

          • Holden McGroyne

            Apparently you have trouble reading. I have no problem if you don’t like the gun. It would be nice if there was an honest, realistic breakdown of the problem. Just blind irrational hate does appeal to the masses. It’s funny, you are attacking me for having an opinion of an opinion. Oh, and it would be wevolvuh not waifu. Thanks though for putting me in my place.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Your welcome kid. By the way, I happen to like the Nagant pistol, I just took the video for what it actually was: the TFB Boyz riffing on a particularly frustrating example of revolver that is not entirely user-friendly in general. But I’m sure you can find a quote somewhere that I let everyone know how much I hate it; because you’re such a good reader.

          • Holden McGroyne

            Ahh. Name calling in every post but I am the kid. Get real buddy. They very plainly had a bad time with the REVOLVER and plainly don’t like it. I completely understand where they are coming from based on the performance of that gun but the “clever” format didn’t hide the things they completely missed on that could be easily noticed by people with actual experience with the gun. See other comments for examples since mine don’t count. I honestly could care less if you or anyone likes the gun but I will share my opinion if I think they missed the mark. Apparently that is frowned upon around here. God forbid anyone have a dissenting opinion from the great TFB.

          • ostiariusalpha

            There’s no problem with you’re having a contrary opinion. It’s your defensiveness that marks you (quite properly) as a butthurt owner that took TFB’s jesting as a personal attack on your investment. Don’t worry though, I’ll keep playing that violin for ya’.

          • Nope most any honest opinion is welcome. I don’t know where you get the idea that a dissenting opinion is unwelcome.
            We don’t like direct personal insults that’s very true but reasonable discussion is always welcome.

          • Geez the 1970’s run for your life!

        • BrandonAKsALot

          Not a problem friend! I enjoyed the video and it’s humorous content and noted from the beginning, even the title was supposed to be tongue in cheek. Sometimes I get upset when I see the millions of comments and videos calling the AK’s junk, inaccurate etc, but then I realize that I just don’t care. I do understand that no one is allowed to have fun on the internet or disagree with an opinion though. I’ll make sure to report these guys to the cyber police.

          • Holden McGroyne

            I am totally OK with them not liking the gun. I get it thst not every guy is going to like what I do. I just don’t think it was tongue in cheek. Agree to disagree I guess. You do realize though that my post was an opinion that you seem to be taking exception to. I’m not the only one in internet land that felt the video came off that way. I would be happy to let Alex C. or anyone else try another working unit of they were ever in my neck of the woods. Take care.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            Well, I used to lurk on the same nefarious image board that Alex did way back, so I can see that perspective can differ. Humor is subjective. I don’t mind your opinion at all. I just don’t see the point in getting that upset over the interwebz. I think Alex and Patrick seem to enjoy stirring the pot on this stuff too. Just how they are too good to ever include the AK-74m in anything EVER!

            We all know Alex will never accept our invites to go shooting or to have a candle-lit dinner because he’s too busy nuzzling his machine guns on his bed made of other machine guns.

  • Mike L

    Not for nothing, but did you guys ever hear of a hang fire? And what’s with shooting with your glasses on top of your cap?

    • iksnilol

      Some of us do it to see more clearly. Especially with hard to see sights or dirty glasses.

  • Southpaw89

    I have one of these revolvers and honestly I love the little thing, if only because it is so unique. I will say that I just treat it like a single action as the trigger pull in double is horrendous, and does result in a jam on one cartridge, likely the same every time. Mine has also proven to be one of my more accurate handguns, the sights just line up well I guess, I may have gotten lucky with that although they are useless in low light. The trick is you have to take it for what it is, it is a crudely made revolver designed over a hundred years ago to solve a problem that didn’t really exist, (talking about the gas seal, not Russia’s desire for a locally produced side arm). The one myth about it that I have seen floating around the internet is that you need to keep a pencil handy to eject the casings, when in reality there is an ejector rod hidden in the pivot pin. All in all I rank it similarly to my Single Six as far as usefulness goes, its just another fun gun to shoot without a lot of utility value aside from pest control, ammo is more expensive but not ridiculously so, and you get a little more power, along with the fact that it will be available in the stores that carry it even in the darkest days of a banic.

    • Holden McGroyne

      Exactly. Perspective is everything. I thought when I got mine that it would be tough to unload but I have never even used the ejector rod. About 50% fall out by themselves. 40% need a nudge from the front of the cylinder. 10% need the same nudge and then hook the rim with a fingernail to yank it out. Everbody I let shoot it smiles and they all also agree that the double action pull is hard. I may have a good one but I think while the double action is not smooth due to the double operation of the cylinder and heavy, I think it is blown way out of proportion.

      • Kivaari

        I found that if the cases don’t fall out, I can tap the little exposed case mouth and out they come. The cleanest revolver I ever fired.

  • JS

    Thanks… Jackass.

  • 5flytyr .

    All of those I’ve ever seen back east were made into LAMPS! Lotsa Ivans ate 9mm para. from using them I’m sure….

  • Steve Truffer

    Looks like a bad spring. The Nagant’s leaf spring is very easy to damage, especially by Bubba or bored Ivan running a file or something crosswise from the length of the spring. This can cause double action to misfire, catch the abutment plate, and make the trigger pull inconsistent. Pretty much everything you guys ran into. This was the problem with mine, but when a helpful smith pointed that out, and replaced it with another, its been heavy, but consistent, and reliable.

  • nova3930

    At one point this was the best darn $95 revolver you could buy. Not sure what they go for now

    • Nicole Woodruff

      Twice as much and you can’t find them :/
      I wanted to buy one when I turned 21 but they were already gone

  • What’s with the bashing? You have Ian McCollum regularly on your TFBTV and Nathaniel F. on staff (both are wizards at dispelling myths), and you just created your own little strange myth? No one on YouTube, and no one in real life (according to documents and firsthand knowledge… even in starter-pistol or a rubber-bullet conversion variants!) have complained that Nagant 1895 is unreliable. Not ideal. Clunky. Unwieldy. Obsolete. But NEVER unreliable (except for extreme old quartermaster specials). Moreover, the (sport-tuned) Nagant was used as a target pistol for decades. This runs entirely contrary to the vibe in the video.

    The only complaints about Nagant were when it was cared for very badly, improperly modified or broken. So you just go out and have these issues and not even question them or at least mention that you would like to get to the bottom of the issue? It’s very unlike you,TFB. Or any of your respectable partners,

    • Iggy

      Everything I’ve read about it states that troops loved it’s reliability (if maybe none of it’s other features), and the specific quote was ‘It doesn’t break, and if it does you can fix it with a hammer’ so they probably got a dud.
      Ian doesn’t like it either btw, but his complaint was trigger pull and reloading.

    • Watch Ian’s 2-Gun match with it. A black powder revolver beat it if I recall.
      In the end they throw it on the ground out of dissatisfaction.

      • mosinman

        i think that had more to do with skill than the gun… just saying

      • You’re right. This is a stupendously bad revolver by modern standards, comically so. But what’s bizzare is that reliability was never among its
        downsides. On the contrary, it’s stupidly reliable without
        anything else to say for itself. So jokes about it being unreliable are strange. That’s what alarmed me. Thanks for your work!

    • Kivaari

      I had several and none were unreliable. I sold my best examples to friends. I’ve always felt my friends have the best gun collection I ever owned.

  • Jeff

    The benefit of fitting a suppressor to it would be the club would have a longer handle. That’s always good when the ‘club’ will not shoot.

  • robocop33

    I normally agree with these guys but I have to take exception to their comments on this firearm. I happen to own one that was built in 1917, that’s 98 years ago folks. This firearm has yet to misfire or the cylinder jam. tHE ACCURACY IS NOT GOING TO WIN ME ANY TROPHIES BUT YOU CAN STILL HIT A MAN-SIZED TARGET WITH IT. THE PROBLEMS WITH THIS FIREARM ARE MANY SUCH AS THE TRIGGER PULL IS HORRIBLE AND NOT SMOOTH AT ALL, I WOULD ALWAYS FIRE IT SINGLE Action. The firing pin on he hammer is just plain strange and while I have not broken it myself, it does seem fragile. The ammo itself is vastly under-powered. Still, the engineering on this firearm is quite unique and impressive and for a design that is 120 year old, that is impressive!
    (Sorry about the Caps)

    • iksnilol

      I probably said it already but try polishing the trigger and putting a bullet under the mainspring. Should make the trigger pull good/decent. There’s youtube videos showing how to do it.

  • john4637

    Wow! Glad I did not carry that on the street! Here to swear by the S&W mod.19 that saved my butt more than once!

  • Sulaco

    To para phrase: Seven warning shots and one aimed throw.

  • smartacus

    What do you call that facial expression when your mouth is grinning,
    but your eyes are all wincing like you’re tasting vinegar?

  • BrandonAKsALot

    Now there’s a video for TFBTV. Machine gun snuggles!

  • Kivaari

    . At one time I had gone on a Russian gun buying and collecting spree. Those little revolvers are quite fun to shoot. The Fiocchi ammo was very mild, and would leave more than a little copper and lead smear on a steel culvert. The Nagant was the cleanest revolver I had ever shot. Fire a few cylinder loads and the clean up was quick, since the gas seal feature held the crud at bay. I have contended that the Russians adopted the gun thinking if would help keep it cleaner if they had to fall back onto black powder. Since smokeless was a new item, I think they used it as a fall back option. Had it been needed, that little M1895 would have really simplified clean up.

    • iksnilol

      A modernized Nagant revolver could be a good blackpowder option in other words? I wonder if you could use .357 Maximum as a base? As in take the case and seat the bullet far back so that it doesn’t extend past the case mouth. Then of course put that in an upsized Nagant revolver. Could get you regular .357 performance I believe.

      • Kivaari

        I doubt the cylinder advancing mechanism would hold up to pressures in the 35,000 CUP range. It would be interesting if the pressures could be managed. I rather like the idea. Eliminating the flash at the gap would be a good thing. The gain in FPS/MPS would be nominal, at least in terms of what the Nagant offered in increases in the 1895 era. That probably wasn’t much then, but they worked with cartridges having under 12,000 CUP. It wasn’t until the .357 appeared that handguns were able to handle three times what was previously available. I guess a Thompson Center single shot pistol could give us an idea of what NO-GAP would deliver. If the increase is substantial it would make sense. Otherwise, why bother.

        • iksnilol

          I don’t doubt it, sure, rechambering a Nagant to 357 would be bad. But sizing up the same mechanism should work just fine. Just like those guys who sized up the DP28 mechanism and made a .338 Lapua autoloader.

          IMO it would have multiple advantages. Better precision, be cleaner and of course it could be suppressed. I don’t really care for the extra velocity but that’s a bonus.

          • Kivaari

            I did not suggest re-chambering the Nagant. It could be done with modern metals, but would it be worth it?

          • iksnilol

            Sure it would, besides, it is easier/cheaper to find .357 bullets and .357 maxi brass than it is to find Nagant brass or loaded ammo.

            Cleaner operation, higher accuracy, suppressor use and a slight velocity boost should be worth it. As long as the price is reasonable of course. You could also make it fire from the bottom chamber to make it even more worthwhile/unique.

          • Kivaari

            I guess you have stores that sell .357 MAXIMUM brass. I don’t see it on shelves even in the big outlets. I can find it on-line, but so is the Nagant ammo. A modern gas-seal revolver would be “interesting”. I doubt the gain is worthwhile.

          • iksnilol

            I would like it just for the suppressor use and precision.

          • Kivaari

            Buy a SIG P220 in .45. It is quiet with ball ammo. A .357 would have a sonic crack. I recently shot a suppressed P220 inside of a building without hearing protection. It was amazing, having less blast than a .22 pistol.

          • iksnilol

            Where’s the fun in that? I can just use any 9mm pistol with heavy ammo as well.

            Though I see your point.

  • Devil_Doc

    Oooohhh… They’re not THAT bad.

  • Lance

    Its 7.62x38R not 30R. the tried and true TT-33 never phased the Nagant out. Both where phased out by the Makarov PM in the 1960s

    PS is shoot them at closer ranges and accuracy is average. Id challenge Alex C to a Nagant shoot.

    • Kivaari

      PM entered service in the early 50s. But those TT33s are still seen today in backwater places. They are pretty good designs, It is too bad the US government wont allow originals to be imported, without adding those horrible safeties.

  • Jeff Heeszel

    Would it hurt if someone threw it at you?

    • Kivaari

      If it hit you, maybe.