Why Are Mosin Nagants So Great?

1) Yes

2) Multi-part answer:

a. It gives me hands on insight to the weapons technology of the Soviets in WWII.

b. Shooting one lets me have some of the experience of a Soviet soldier in WWII.

c. Shooting one makes me glad that we have modern hunting rifles when we actually want to seriously hunt or target shoot.

d. I own a weapon that was made in communist Russia.

e. It is a cheap way of having a gun "collection".There are so many variations, collecting them is like collecting beany babies with a 2000 meter lethal range.

f. I always get a chuckle out of the optimism of the Russian military with an iron sight graduated out to 2000 meters.

Mosins are very old rifles. Now don't get me wrong, you likely know I am a classic firearm guy. The Mosin Nagant lost it's integrity I believe by the mass production and the variations so many other countries made to it. Not like the 1903 Springfield of the same time. Springfield kept the integrity of their rifle. The Mosin, was handled much like they did also with first the SKS, and now the AK 47 rifles. There are good ones, but, there is also some real POS rifles out there that are dangerous even.

The recent popularity of the Mosin is now due largely to huge quantities of them being dump into the market. And those who care not for quality, buy them cause they are cheap. I have no problem with that, I hope everyone, can find a way to enjoy shooting.

In fact some of the quality Mosins served very adequately as sniper rifles. Where they were the unusual rifle, out Springfield rifles you could take just about any one of them and add parts, and presto you have a very good much better sniper rifle. I need not even speak of the M1 Garand.

It is the production quality of the run of the mill issued rifle ( since these were military battle rifles ) was disgraced, by the many countries that produced Mosin Nagant rifles later. Not to mention they are also VERY long to handle. It is a fairly recent development that Mosins are even available in this country. The real Russian version, in my opinion is the only one worth having.

Enjoy shooting everyone, that is the main thing.

Additional : I must add these WW1 -WW2 rifles were real rifle man's rifles. Marksmanship counted. I admire that.

Modern rifles have an expanded spectrum now. A one or two man operation with an AR can do it all, from throwing covering fire to surgical elimination of a single target, to close quarters clearing. The beauty of rate of fire.

Edit : Russ in Nova, I have Grandpa's Star Gauged 1903 Springfield rifle. Long range sight set at 1200 yards, and he did make shots that far. They brought two of these rifles to his outfit. This to silence the yelling and taunts from what was thought to be out of reach. It stopped in NO TIME. Most were head shot too. Grandpa always said he gave 'em a headache.

1) Yes and no.

2) Yes, because they're a good range toy that's inexpensive and can be used for hunting, provided the user has made sure that he knows the limits of his gun. No, because unless you're very lucky, most are barely capable of 2 MOA accuracy without extreme modification and repair.

Recoil on an unmodified Mosin-Nagant is pretty severe; a slip-on recoil pad can fix that for about $10-$20. The huge fireball and pressure wave that comes out the end when you pull the trigger can be disconcerting for any shooters at the range around you; just try not to shoot when others are nearby or ask permission first. The length of a 91/30 is so prodigious that it is unwieldy for anything in the field; either buy an M44 carbine or don't use the gun for hunting.

I'm not anti-Mosin-Nagant. I'm just opposed to doofuses who suggest them as first rifles to kids who want to hunt deer at 300 yards, despite the fact that many Mosin-Nagants couldn't print a 12" group at that range.

Mosin are Russian made rifles. Russians have been known to make somewhat superior mass produced items that survive very harsh conditions. And rightly so considering their long history of warfare composing of conscripted soldiers who are poorly trained and are stuck in extreme conditions ranging from sub zero snow to extremely muddy dirty conditions. Nearly every Russian made rifle survives this condition well and with limited maintenance where other weapons require strict discipline and maintenance to operate in the same conditions. One of the key thing about the Mosin is that during the war, soldiers were picking them off dead frozen soldiers and are able to kick the bolt open and still operate the gun. It's made purely to preserve a country no matter the cost.

So it's cheap, it's accurate, it's reliable, and to many that is something of a "legendary status" especially if you can't afford other rifles or aren't willing to pay the price and learning how to clean and use it.

Personally if I had to go with WW2 history, I'd go with a M1 Garand but then again those starts at 1000+ dollars and require somewhat more knowledge about cleaning and operation.

I like it. It's a $100 piece of military history. The ammo is cheap, and they are usually accurate enough to be better than the shooter, at least offhand. I have 4 of them in my collection. I have an early 91/30, a late war 91/30, an M38 in military trim, and one that someone turned into a passable deer rifle for short range or brush conditions. I probably have under $500 for all 4. In this case, you get way more than you pay for.

Not particularly no, why?

Because of the one I've worked on at my buddy's gun shop, because of the ones I've handled at various gun and pawn shops. They're a serviceable rifle but in all honesty I'll take a Type 38, type 44 or Type 99 Arisaka 10 out of 10 times if given a choice between a MN or an Arisaka.

I used to work at a gun shop in town here, I was the smith, All I did was fix hunter's remington's that they thought were indestructible, they are tough , but not that tough, In the years I worked there, I saw, 300 remingtons, 1 browning, and a few other brands, Now getting back to the mosin, piece of junk. I don't know what all the fuehrer is about those things, Everybody thinks they are great. My boss used to buy Ishapores, by the dozen, mausers, by the dozen, enfields, by the dozen, now you know not all of them worked, I did, I worked on every one, and for him to jack the price up, I refinished the stocks too. I must have done 250 rifles. Anyway, he buys a dozen HK91 clones, piece of junk, not one worked, L1A1, now these were good. then comes the mosin nangents, biggest piece of crap yet. The mausers were the best, the spanish mauser was the best. So, forget the mosin, find a mauser and go with it. My 2 cents.

Hello,

1. I like them.

2. They're tough. I mean, they are danged near unbreakable. As well, they can be very basic like the 91/30 or they can be made (or modified) to precision specs like the M27, M28, and M39 Finnish series. They can be lead slingers or precision weapons. They're wood and metal, like battle rifles should be, and depending on the model, handle and shoot well. I especially like the Finnish modifications of the trigger from instinctive to two-stage, and their ideas on sights. I should mention, though, that I find the front hood of the Russian model easy to acquire very quickly, as combat sights should be.

Regards,

Josh Smith

Smith-Sights LLC

Simply because you can chop down a tree with it then shoot someone at 100 yards after it has been buried under ground for 10 years.

Plus, 7.62x54 can deal some massive damage to a target.

No, They are cheap and the so is the ammo is why they are popular.

They are very uncomfortable to shoot. They fire 7.62 x 54r round which is a beast for that gun.