Why I Like Old Guns…

Too often I am confronted with the question “why do you have so many old guns?”. Well, the answer is pretty simple, and I lay it out quickly in a three minute video. Modern firearms have their place, but shooting antiques is definitely more my style.

Please remember to subscribe to our channel.

Please subscribe!!!

Please subscribe!!!

Thanks to our sponsors Grizzly Targets and Ventura Munitions.

Want 20% off a Grizzly Target? Use the discount code TFB20.

Transcription …:

I get asked all the time why I prefer old guns to new when someone steps into my gun room, and I have had to explain myself an unusual amount of times.

I have discovered that most modern shooters prefer the latest and greatest to the time-tested. The polymer wonders to forged steel. Videogame cameos to actual battlefield appearances. Marketing campaigns brilliantly are able to sell the public on mediocre products, and the sad part is that people don’t often realize they have been duped until they are either confronted by an honest review or have handed in their hard earned dollars for a gun like the disaster that was the Remington R51.

When you buy an old gun, you have the most thorough reviews and experiences available: decades of soldiers using them, the accounts of ordnance departments, the development history, and even contemporary tests performed by enthusiasts like you. I would highly recommend trusting the experiences of a million men who soldiered long and hard in battle to a small smattering of print or video reviewers, however qualified they may be.

The Enfield that soldiered on at El Alamein, the Mauser from Tannenburg, the Nagant from Stalingrad, the Lebel from Verdun, and the Garand from Iwo Jima all come with a narrative that modern whizbangs just cannot match. As a history enthusiast with a degree in the subject, this appeals to me greatly, and firearms are one of the few tangible objects that come with intrinsic value AND a narrative that helped shape the world.

These old workhorses were made with pride. They were symbols of their nation’s might, and often bore an imperial seal or crest to add to their importance. But, of course some are outdated designs. These guns came from an era when firearms were acquired to win fights, and the way of the gun was law. They came from an era when a man was expected to get everything possible out of the firearm he was carrying, making use of every last bit of its capabilities. Old guns came from a time when fighting men were issued the best tools available, with the research and testing to back up the decisions, and often high costs came second to effectiveness (something that doesn’t seem to happen anymore).

The best part is that you can own these old retired military surplus firearms for a fraction of what they cost to make, and many shoot as well as the day they rolled off the factory floor at Mauser Oberndorf, Birmingham Small Arms, or Waffenfabrik Bern. You can buy a rifle shrouded in wood and forged from iron that is also wrapped in an important historical narrative for much less than a new rifle of questionable quality with obvious cost-cutting measures in place.

I will never turn down a day at the range, but a day at the range with an SMLE dated 1917 that has seen better days, is ridden with arsenal repairs and splits, and an action that has been broken in the hard way makes me happier than getting behind a gun that looks like it was lifted from science fiction.

History, craftsmanship, effectiveness, and affordability all come at a fair price, and that’s why I like old guns.

This is Alex C. with TFBTV, thank you very much for watching.



Alex C.

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


Advertisement

  • cs

    If I had a pick of any of those guns to take to war, it would have to be the M1 Garand

    • Joshua

      Ross M.10, or a SMLE Mk III*
      I have the Lee, still working on the Ross. I’ve never had a Garand in my hands, but I would love to have one, and maybe if I did I’d agree, but from my experience, I have never carried a smoother, faster gun then a good SMLE.

      • Darkpr0

        I have two Rosses. You do not want to take it to war. You want to take it to a target shooting competition and outshoot some K31s. But if you get a raunchy shell stuck in that Ross it is going to result in Fun. When it runs, though, a Ross will stomp over anything not semi-automatic or Swiss. Gloriously slick gun marred with some minor stupidities.

        • Joshua

          that’s really what I’m looking for, they don’t seem to show up very often around me

          • Darkpr0

            I recommend hunting Gunbroker. They show up not infrequently there if you don’t mind the bureaucracy of getting guns from out of state.

          • Joshua

            out of state, or out of “The States”? I’m pretty sure Gunbroker is an American site, which means exporting the rifle from the USA, to Canada, which despite that being the origins of the guns, I doubt my government would like me to just, do…

          • Darkpr0

            If you’re Canadian you can use services from IRunGuns or Prophet River to buy stuff off of Gunbroker for reasonable prices. You can also google Ross Rifle Forum and it will take you to a place where there are people who can put you on the right road to finding whatever Ross suits your fancy in Canada.

          • Joshua

            I have looked at IRunGuns before, and always sat there and thought, “that sounds really easy, what’s the catch?”
            if I can’t find one in Canada before I have the money together again, I may do some research on them.

          • Darkpr0

            The catch is that you have to fill out some (easy) import paperwork and get the seller to stick it on the box. You may also have to do some convincing for the buyers who only accept USPS money orders. But the actual process is ridiculously simple. I moved an 11 gun collection of mixed Non-Restricted and Restricted with no difficulty at all two weeks ago. Both Prophet River and IRG do good jobs.

          • The_Champ

            Fellow Canuck here, if you don’t want to get into cross boarder complications, maybe keep an eye on “Collector’s Source” here in Canada. Yes they are generally over priced, but how much do you want that rifle?
            I got my M1 Carbine from them, only place I could find that has them here in Canada on a regular basis. I do believe they have a few Ross rifles listed at this moment.

        • CS

          K31 or a Mauser might be my 2nd pick.

          • Darkpr0

            K31s are oustanding, especially if you reload. Mausers are great as well, but many of the nice ones have become collector’s items. I bought a (very nice) 1944 Kar98k and it cost me as much as a brand spanking new M1903A3. All great guns though, with a ton of history.

          • K31s are great for the price, but overrated in absolute terms.

          • Secundius

            @ CS.

            If you’re referring to the 98k Mauser, it will also chamber the 7.5×55 Swiss of the k31…

  • Heretical Politik

    Agreed. I like my AR just fine, but I LOVE my milsurps.

  • wildman0708

    Well done! You summed it up the way I never could. Now when people ask me the same question, I’ll just give them the link to your video.

  • Lance

    I 10000000000000000000000% agree Alex older weapons have durability, usually have good accuracy. they have the history when you hold a Enfeild your favorite rifle Alex I bet sometime you think of the British Infantry charging the Germans at El Alaliman in WW2. Or a M-1 at Normandy or a Mosin M-91/30 at Stalingrad. Or heck even a Hawkins rifle you think of the Mountain men in the Rockies in the 1830s. Or a Colt 1851 navy at Gettysburg. You hold a plastic Tavor you never get the history so I agree with you on older weapons.

    • Anonymoose

      Zastava AKs have some good history attached to them.

      • anon

        tupac alive in serbia making new record.

      • LOL!

      • iksnilol

        I see what you did there.

        I’ll just be in my bunk sharpening bayonets *crazy glare* Only good history Zastava AKs have are when they were used to kill their creators :3

  • Darkpr0

    I love old guns. It’s fascinating to think that you can hold something in your hands that is identical to what someone would have had decades or centuries ago, fire just like they did, and enjoy it. it’s also personally fascinating to me the sheer ingenuity that was displayed while we were still figuring out new stuff… The entry into bolt-actions before WW1, the WW2 forays into semi-automatics and the evolution into smaller, lighter, and faster that came afterward. One problem, an infinite amount of solutions. Some solutions were great. Some solutions were not so great. Some solutions could allegedly be suppressed, but I’ve forgotten which ones.

    Also the price is killer. I bought my stupid Ross Mk 3 for 280 dollars. You couldn’t even buy the bolt of that gun for 280 if you had to get a guy to make it today. The prices are ludicrously good compared to the time and craftsmanship that went into them. You even get real wood for your money. Nah, it’s not as functional as polymer, but sometimes it’s nice to dress up.

    Post-edit: It’s also fascinating that we made so many of these things that you can pick one up out of a crate, brand spanking new like the day it was made…. 70 years ago. I have guns from around the world that were literally picked out of a crate, and the last person who handled them was the guy (or gal) who packed them in while the bombs fell. That’s pretty cool.

  • Couldn’t have said it better myself.

  • anon

    Why not both?

    Good video though. I feel like a lot of the mall ninjas who have only ever shot and will only ever shoot a block 19 and an AR15 will send you some hate mail though.

  • Andy B

    Wait a second, is that an M249 in your profile pic…….

    • Yep.
      If you can’t appreciate a belt-fed machinegun regardless of vintage, thou hath no soul.

      • Andy B

        Absolutely agree. Just giving you a hard time buddy. I love me some SAW too to go along with all my old battle rifles.

  • hikerguy

    Gotta love those classic designs. Well done, sir, well done.

  • Green Hell

    You made some very good points i agree with, but not necessarily they only apply to old weapons, more like the whole philosophy and design of military weapons. For instance, if would NEVER buy something like Kel-Tec’s, which were disigned to fight for consumer markets, rather than to fight the war.

  • ostiariusalpha

    I like new whiz-bang guns better than fine, cutting edge stuff is awesome and tacticool stuff you can pretend to be awesome. But owning a legacy firearm is for certain more than just an investment in an affordable bullet tube with a militarily outdated action and potentially questionable metallurgy (that kind of outlook is what creates rechambered Bubba rifles), it is instead the acquisition of an anchor of history. Not just any anchor either, more than any number of knick-knacks and gizmos from the past, these machines were on the edge of Fate’s sword when the destinies of Empires and the lives of men were decided. The taming and subjugation of frontiers was begun from the end of their muzzles, and Oppression & Freedom had their Ultima Ratio voiced through the bark of these guns’ fire time and again. To pull the trigger & send the bullet is to be initiated into that weapon’s fellowship, creating a link for yourself in a chain of possession that roots itself into the time & place of it’s original construction. From the designers & workers that fretted & sweated over it, through to every soldier, adventurer, hunter, and enthusiast that held it before you. The lineage is very strong with each of my old guns since they’re all family heirlooms that have been passed down & entrusted to me, and I feel the weight of that chain whenever I heft one of them in my hands to work the action. It’s just not something you can get from a new rifle or pistol no matter how well made or cool it is.

  • Tassiebush

    It’s hard to see many new guns turning into loved heirlooms

    • ostiariusalpha

      I don’t know about that, lots of people treasure old Artillerie Inrichtingen AR-10 rifles and attempt to recreate old M16s, or look at how many obsess over Bakelite furniture & mags for AKs. Take any owner of a classic AR-18, G3, MP5, Bren 10, Mk 23, P90, etc. and they’ll display it with every bit the pride as a wood stocked milsurp. It’s not just because they’re expensive NFA guns either, a well made gun with a history is to be admired no matter what era it comes from.

      • Tassiebush

        I was thinking sporting arms but I must admit those examples are pretty good. I really like the original M16

        • Make a pilgrimage to Texas and you are welcome to shoot until your trigger finger is sufficiently cramped!

          • Tassiebush

            I’ll need to book a physiotherapist for when I get back just to get it moving again 🙂

    • Dan

      If they do you can bet it us going to be expensive and very custom

  • Steve Martinovich

    My thoughts exactly Alex. Well said.

  • Oh I agree without reservation. Sometimes, though, holding an old gun makes me want to do nothing more than to buy a brand new gun from a quality manufacturer, and add some of my own history to it. 🙂

    • carlcasino

      The way the Nation is headed you may well get a chance to season your weapon.
      Remember to Practice the way we vote, Frequently.

  • Biglou13

    I only have one criticism. While I agree in many cases that they can be had for less then it took to make them, some are really expensive. I’m an old school guy myself and have yet to shoot my AR-15 that’s almost 3 years old. I always gravitate to the older designs, even if they’re recently made. Still looking for my 1903, Krag and Trapdoor.

  • The_Champ

    Spot on Alex! Couldn’t agree more. Hope to see more oldies covered on TFB, and also tickled to see that you and I own many of the same old rifles.

  • M T

    This falls outside the spirit of the Second Amendment and borders on historical studies and antique collection as a hobby. Nothing wrong with having a hobby or appreciating history as a rightful pursuit of happiness. But for Second Amendment purposes, with “well regulated” meaning well equipped and capable, functional superiority within one’s budget should be the goal. Sometimes that entails polymer over steel, red dots over just iron sights, pistol grip over straight stock. If modernizing an AK makes improves its effectiveness, then so be it.

    • I assure you that those three safes have plenty of modernity inside 😉

    • “I like old guns.”

      “HE’S AN ENEMY OF THE REPUBLIC, GET HIM!”

      Maybe calm down a bit?

      • M T

        Apologies if it came off like that. I realize old and modern don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

  • Geoffry K

    You would be surprised at what early 20th Century firearms can do (and late 19th Century).
    I have a 1942 Mosin Nagant and I wouldn’t trade it for any modern bolt action rifle.
    Which isn’t to say I don’t have any, but there is just something special about those early firearms.

    • Dan

      Those early firearms seem to be more than just wood and steel. They have a soul, they have history. And like classic and antique cars they tell a story. Someones life may have been saved by that firearm and possibly many lives taken by it. I find myself looking at them trying to imagine the life it has had. And how some scared recruit treated it like his best friend. You will never get that kind of “value” of any new production firearm.

  • Joshua

    a tool suited to it’s task, for the most part I have a modern bolt action rifle in 6mm, match grade bull barrel and all, that does most of my work, but when I have to go into the field after something unknown, where distances are close, and no time to set up a bi-pod, I will take an SMLE No1 Mk III* for a very simple reason; it’s lighter, shorter, faster, more reliable, and more dependable than the 6mm, and it would be one third the price of something that would compete with it.

    I love old guns because in my case, it does the job I ask of it, it is as well suited to it as I could ask of it, and most importantly, I’m good with it.

    really that last one is as important as anything else, the rifle best suited to the task is useless, if your not good with it. The old guns I grew up with? That my Grandfathers brought home? I’m good with, and they perform when called upon, the same as a new gun I wouldn’t be familiar with. There is a certain pride there, some connection to fore-fathers, some piece of spirit in a rifle that has saved lives, and taken lives, and now stands to do it over, if I ask.

  • Nashvone

    I just got my M-91/30 and Saturday was my first trip to the range with it. I left all the polymers at home and only took a 1911 along with it. It was an awesome day of shooting that found me more focused on my form and technique since I wasn’t comforted by having tons more ammo in the magazines.

  • Kriegs Bemarlon

    “Old guns came from a time when fighting men were issued the best tools available, with the research and testing to back up the decisions, and often high costs came second to effectiveness (something that doesn’t seem to happen anymore).”

    That is simply not true, but the rest of the article I agree with very much.

    • ostiariusalpha

      Springfield Model 1873, for instance? Mle 1886 M93? Krag-Jørgensen rifles vs Spanish Mausers? Though to be fair, they were at least well crafted rifles, but point taken.

      • DetroitMan

        Two other points. One, the US did not have a first rate army at the time of the Springfield 1873. We were still an isolationist nation with a shoestring budget for all things military. The 1873 was adopted because it was the cheapest solution. Two, the Krag-Jorgensen was a good rifle design that gave good service in other nations. The main thing that let the US down was the .30 Army (.30-40 Krag) cartridge. The Norwegians chambered their Krags in 6.5×55 and it was a very effective rifle.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Not so shoe-string a budget that they didn’t send at least a couple expensive Gatling guns along on the expedition. The use of the Springfield rifles was less about expense or ammunition conservation and more a product of Army doctrine concerned with range & stopping power that they felt the Henry & Spencer lever actions lacked.

          • I thought you were referring to the Rolling Block being better than the 1873, but cheaper conversions led to the Trapdoor.

          • ostiariusalpha

            The Remingtons had certain better qualities than the Allin design, but the earlier Navy models had left a sour taste in the Army’s mouth with manufacturing & reliability problems. They were both pretty conservative in comparison with what the lever actions could do, and were not really adequate for the needs of mounted cavalry.

          • DetroitMan

            Custer left his Gatling guns at home, along with his artillery. Every army at that time was trying out the Gatling, regardless of their budget. The US was no different. The procurement of a few expensive weapons doesn’t mean the military had a large budget. The fact remains that we severely cut back both the army and navy after the Civil War. We didn’t begin seriously rebuilding until the turn of the 20th Century. It is true that the Army’s insistence on the .45-70 was largely responsible for the selection of the Trapdoor. However, we essentially ignored the development of better rifle technologies until the 1890’s when we adopted the Krag. Cost was a factor in the army sticking with the rifle it had.

      • It is easy to criticize the Lebel now, but the fact is that it was the greatest rifle the world had ever seen at the time, and set off an arms race that reverberated throughout the world. The Krag ironically was selected in part because of its loading gate and its ability to be topped off at will.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Right, the 1886 Lebel was Jules Verne sci fi when it first came out, but 30 years later? There should never have been an M93, the French could have dumped the rimmed cartridge & tube magazine tout de suite and developed a respectably contemporary standard issue rifle. I understand they were chasing after an autoloading dream gun, but they should have been able to walk & chew gum at the same time with their small arms development.

    • DetroitMan

      Sadly it is true in too many cases. The M16 was a disaster when it was first fielded. So was the SAR-80. The jury is still out on the G36. You didn’t see this level of failure in a general issue rifle before the end of WWII. Militaries of the world have changed their procurement policy for rifles from “best available at any cost” to “most cost effective and easiest to produce.” The M1 was far more expensive in 1930’s dollars than the M16 was in 1960’s dollars, and the trend has been repeated around the world since the end of WWII. If you really study the development of service rifles in the first half of the 20th Century and compare it to development processes after about 1960, Alex’s statement rings true. It used to be a point of pride for a nation to arm its soldiers with the absolute best rifle it could procure.

      • iksnilol

        I dunno, they went with 30-06 in the garands because it was cheaper. Originally they wanted a 6.5mm round but that wouldn’t be economical, especially with the approaching war.

        • DetroitMan

          An economic choice was made on the ammunition, but no compromise was made on the rifle itself. It still used the very best of manufacturing and materials technology for the late 30’s. The M1 had some early teething problems, but they were resolved before it was in general issue.

          The .30-06 did very little, if anything, to diminish the M1’s combat effectiveness. The .276 Pederson would have given it two extra rounds; nice to have, but not a make-or-break issue for the time.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Don’t forget the .276 Pedersen was less stout in recoil and faster to re-acquire the target. It may only have been 2 extra rounds per clip, but that’s still a 25% increase in overall ammo available for no additional weight. Which would have been a good deal.

  • Tom – UK

    I bought a VZ 58 in 2014, its a new production rifle with black synthetic furniture. Now a few thousand rounds later with scratches, worn off bluing, and a very happy owner I can say that it will become an heirloom. It will last, and one day it will be looked upon in the same manner as my Lee Enfields, Mosins, and Mausers.

    Just remember this:

    When Mosins, Mausers and Enfields were being produced wood stocks were as common as synthetic stocks are today. My VZ 58 has its nations crest marked upon it, and many other modern rifles have company logos written on them too.

    Spikes tactical and it’s logo which is on many AR lowers doesn’t seem antique or special today, but then neither was the Birmingham Small Arms logo at the time.

    All things mature with time, as does people’s perspective of them. Today’s modern space guns are tomorrows antiques.

    • Dan

      While I agree I also disagree. If you own a modern sporting rifle that has seen action besides range trips then i can see that. The guns Alex talks about conquered nations some literally. A Cadillac escalade will never hold the same classic status that the classics hold today because there is no story to them. There isn’t a muscle car war going on, the days of cruising with your best girl to the drive in are long gone. It has to tell a story. A Garand that sat on a rack in an armory is boring. But one that has a battered stock stained with sweat and dirt and god knows what else is history.
      It will be interesting to see what future gun owners will decide are their generations classics. It will also probably depend on society’s attitude towards firearms at that time.

  • Jeff

    BRAVO!

  • Dan

    Yes! Now that we have attained minority status, where are all of our special programs, and incentives. I want the right to marry my guns!

  • Vitor Roma

    I still want a video comparing two k98s, one in 7.92 and the other in 6.5×55. It will interesting to see how the difference in recoil affects performance.

    • 6.5x55Swedish

      Don’t forget that 6.5×55 is very easy to feed as well.

    • I don’t think they ever made 98 carbines in 6.5×55. You would have to make one which would be cost a lot of time and money.

      • Vitor Roma

        Ah, don’t nitpick, any mauser action in 6.5.

        • 96s are quite a bit different than 98s, to be fair.

    • Secundius

      @ Vitor Roma.

      Your probably thinking of either the m/1894 Carbine, or m/1896 Rifle, or the m/1938 Short Rifle. In any case the Standard 98k in 7.92×57, will also chamber the 6.5×55 Swiss Mauser…

  • Jerry Sussman

    Let me be a counterweight to the article: Baloney!

    Reminds me of those who champion the old supposed “classic” cars of the 1960s and earlier…many of which were no good even when new. You know, the ones that routinely experienced high speed blowouts of bias ply tires, the ones whose tailpipes belched soot, the ones that had no seat belts, the ones that leaked oil and radiator fluid, and if the owner was lucky enough to make it to 50,000 miles, the ones that were rusted inside and out.

    In their day, some–but not all–of the old guns had a lot going for them. But I would no more trust my life (or my eyes) to a 100 year old Springfield with a splitting stock, worn screws and stressed barrel than I would race across an interstate highway at 100 miles per hour in a 1956 Chevy. Time does not render junk valuable. And time does not enhance the performance of a product that was manufactured when the standards to which modern firearms are held did not even exist. The French Chauchat rifle of WWI was garbage one hundred years ago, and the passage of one hundred years has not miraculously transformed that firearm into anything remotely comparable to a modern rifle manufactured to serve in a comparable role.

    I too favor guns that are wood and steel rather than polymer and alloy. If you want that, there are plenty of newly manufactured firearms to fit the bill. But they are made with modern metallurgical processes, are more precisely fitted, and are likely to be far more durable than firearms manufactured one hundred years ago–even if some of the parts are “MIM” rather than cold hammered steel. And they all come with a warranty and legions of readily available options, accessories, replacement parts and ammunition.

    Nostalgia is fine. Collecting old firearms is a great hobby. But let’s not pretend that all of the progress made in the past one hundred years of firearms manufacturing has been of no avail. Given a choice between an average production run WWII rifle (even if a Japanese one adorned with a chrysanthemum) and a 21st Century rifle of comparable caliber and features, the advantage almost always will turn in favor of the newer weapon.

    • Fred

      I agree with some of the things you said. But! I am always amazed at the accuracy of my T 99 Arisaka. That rifle will put lead on a 8″ steel at 300 yds. with open sights and 63+ yr. old eyes. I haven’t been so lucky with some newer rifles.

  • Douglas Ervin

    VERY WELL SPOKEN. At age 73, I have two recently made and purchased firearms, but still love to shoot my Colt SA Army and my Garand.

  • WFDT

    I agree.

    My longarm collection includes: .54 Pennsylvania flintlock, age unknown; 1858 Harpers Ferry .58 rifled musket; 1873 Springfield Trapdoor; 1890 Winchester .22 Long pump-action; 1898 Krag; ’03 Springfield; M1 Garand; 1973 Colt AR15 SP1.

    My pistols are: 1890s Webley Green revolver in .455 Webley, Colt 1911 made in 1918; S&W M1917.

    My only recent firearms are a lever action .38/.357 Rossi 92 (the go-to firearm for our small farm) and an AMT 1911 frame with a Tactical Solutions .22 conversion kit and Sparrow suppressor (for shooting mice in the barn).

  • Stu Gotz

    Even though it’s a Commie gun, my favorite shooter is a Chinese SKS that eats anything and quite accurate with a cheap tactical scope. Load up 10 stripper clips (100 rounds) and you’re good to go. A head-turner at the range, my SKS is all stock, beautifully finished and NEVER malfunctions. A joy to shoot.

  • Oldtrader3

    I am not a collector of Militaria. Three years of Infantry duty filled that need. I have and still do have a few sporting rifles that are nearly as old as I am (72). Several of my firearms have been dispersed to family and grandchildren.

  • J S

    I can appreciate the military slant to this article, but I also enjoy other old shooters. One of my favorites is an Old Remington model 12C pump. great shooter with a history to it. I also inherited my WW2 vet friends personal firearms and think of him when I take out the old 20 gauge he kept around.

  • Raftjumper07

    Absolutely agree! My Springfield 1903A3, Kar98k, or SVT-40 have an intangible quality my LWRC does not- though I am satisfied with it. History is the story of people that formed the world we live in today. Military firearms are some of the tools they used.

  • dltaylor51

    Very well said,his guns are modern compared to the old Winchesters and Colts that i have a passion for but that’s the nice thing about the gun world,we can all pursue what ever type of guns we like and we all get something out of it but now the biggest hurdle we have is keeping the democrat party at bay because they would love nothing more than to ban all of this gun nuttiness because its part of a long term agenda that they signed on for and they are not giving up.

  • Bob

    This is an excellent video.

    I haven’t decided on my favorite pistol, but my favorite longarm is my No. 4 Mk 1 Lee-Enfield. I have an AK, I’ve handled an AR, Mosin, Arisaka, .22s of all flavors, Remington 870, but in the end, Enfield takes all. Outside of a couple of my .22s, my Enfield is simply the most accurate rifle I own, even with surplus Greek ammo. Sure, I can get rim lock, it runs from stripper clips, the sights only have two settings, 300 and 800 meters, but it is still a good rifle and if I were to take one of my longarms to war, it would be either my Enfield or my AK. The AK would be better for close up work, but the Enfield takes the cake for anything at range.

  • Archie Montgomery

    What he said.