Mosin Nagant Defined

[Subdeacon Joe]

On another forum someone asked, "Is the Mosin Nagant garbage?"

 

Best answer that I read was:

"

I think Mosin Nagant can best be described as Russian. A rifle which will not shoot sub MOA at really any range, but will absolutely hit a deer sized target in a generally lethalish area at just about any range.

What is the expectation here? This is a rifle designed in 1891 to be effective in the hands of marginally trained Russian peasants with no real concept of proper maintenance or firearms handling. It's a very simple, very sturdy machine. Hand out a million of these to a million half drunk gopnik. Tell them to shoot in a direction. By sheer weight of numbers, something will be hit. In the hands of someone with some actual skill, it might even be intentional.

Edited October 10 by Subdeacon Joe

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

I've enjoyed the heck outta shooting mine (with careful selection of ammunition), as well as its lookalike cousin, a Polish Wz48 .22.  

[Rooster Ron Wayne]

Like any gun ever built .

The ammo determines how well the gun shoots .

With the junk military ammo most people try to shoot them with .

Is why the gun has a bad reputation. 

You build or buy some quality ammo you will shoot a quality gun! 

Its not no tack driver by anymeans .

But you would not want to be on the receiving end of one with quality ammo within 600 yards or less !

Its every bit of a round the 308 or 30/06 is .

So Saith The Rooster 

[Dapper Dave]

I've had a few. Late wartime production were, shall we say, "less accurate", but I had a hex receiver 1920 91/30, Tula, IIRC, that was a tack driver once I drilled out all the dadgum cosmoline. 

The M38, which I loved, was a THUMPER with Czech Light Ball silvertip ammo. Uncle Ivan was a tough old bird!

[Rye Miles #13621]

I had one for awhile, 7.62 x 54 a real powerhouse. I only shot it a few times sold it to a friend who can shoot it on his property. He loves it!

[Dawg Hair, SASS #29557]

Vasily Zaitzev racked up quite a high number of kills with a Mosin Nagant and so did several dozen female babushkas during WWII.  

It is just as ugly as a 1895 Nagant revolver but the danged thing does its job very well.

I've got a 1938 carbine and the only thing wrong with it is that it kicks like an enraged mule! 

[Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001]

the FInns did a fine job , of making it very accurate 

 

  even the M38 , I got to shoot some years back 

 

  CB 

[El Chapo]

120 years of shooting corrosive ammunition in them has probably had a influence on their subsequent reputation.  Color me skeptical that a bolt action rifle that needed a rimmed case to headspace was ever a decent design, though.  It's doubtful that outside of the early 1900s, when spitzer bullets and smokeless powder were relatively new to the world, that this ever was an effective weapon.  The Soviets were effectively unarmed against the Germans when all the basic soldier had was this piece of junk, and their casualty numbers show it.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

It has been said that in WWI, the Americans brought a target rifle, the Germans brought a hunting rifle, the British brought a battle rifle and the Russians brought a rifle.

All of that being said, a few years ago, I bought my nephews Mosin Nagants because they wanted one.  The have found them to be reliable and accurate rifles.   Since one of them took top marksman honors in Marine Corps boot camp, I'll take his word for it. 

[Texas Joker]

What other rifle can you pole vault with?

[Subdeacon Joe]

As the bit I quoted said, will hit a generally lethalish zone at almost any range 

 

Not a tack driver. But able to hit a man sized target at 300 yards. Maybe more.  For the way battles were fought in that era, it got the job done. 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

I had one for awhile, shot ammo from Poland (?) through it.  It wasn't a really bad gun but huge and awkward.  

 

I traded it for an unfinished reproduction stock set for a 1903 Springfield with all the metal parts.

[Stump Water]

Like the Ruger Mini-14/30, if you expect more out of it than what it was designed for you're going to be disappointed.  And trash-talk it every chance you get.

[Seldom Seen #16162]

The MN is designed to function in the extreme cold Russian winters. It worked while the German guns were unable to function due to being frozen.

 

Years ago there was one of those reality shows about several different families living in the remote areas of Alaska. One family was a white man married to a native lady and had two daughters. His wife was very knowledgeable and knew how to survive fishing and hunting. One episode she went hunting in the winter for a moose accompanied by her husband. She was small woman and used a military surplus  MN that was huge for her to handle. Shooting from standing position her first shot missed. Her second shot connected killing the moose. The show didn't give the distance but still is impressive.

 

The MN does have a serious problem. Due to it's long production the size of the bore varies creating problems with accuracy. The MN I have has.problems because of the bore being oversize but I have not slugged the barrel to determine the size of bullet to use. One of those projects to get too.

Edited October 11 by Seldom Seen #16162

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

I'll say the same thing I say anytime someone asks if a (any) firearm is accurate.

 

90% of all firearms are better than 90% of all shooters.

 

The weakest link in the firearm, ammunition, trigger puller equation is almost always the shooter.

 

If you think you're better than the gun - place the gun in an unhandled rest and shoot it.

Then shoot it off your shoulder.

 

Then compare targets and see which way it groups better.

 

I know where I place my money.

 

[DeaconKC]

I like the MN for several reasons:

1: Excellent sights. Only the rifles with peep sights were any better and the sights on the MN were far superior for combat use than the Mauser, 1903 and most other rifles of WW1 and WW2. 

2: Brutally tough and reliable, they were built with tolerances that allowed them to thrive in horrible conditions.

3: The interruptor in the magazine, this held the following round clear so the top round would feed no matter how the rims were aligned going into the mag well. Anyone who has ever loaded a SMLE knows how precisely those had to be inserted into the magazine or it would jam up. 

4: Most folks don't realize the rifles' sights were regulated for shooting with the bayonet attached or in the '44 with it extended. No bayonet and the rifles will shoot off of your sight picture. 

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

Thanks, I didn’t know that. I learn something new every day. 😊

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Here's the Polish Wz-48 and a standard Mosin.  Both fun to shoot!  

 

 

Aaand... a Mosin my son, Sassparilla Kid, sporterized.  Timney trigger, "Model 70" style bolt handle, cerakoted, drilled and tapped for a Weaver scope mount.

 

[Dapper Dave]

One other thing as lot of people don't catch with imported surplus Mosins is the counter bore.  A lot of Mosin rifles had damaged barrel crowns from steel cleaning rods, so when they were cosmolined for deep storage, many of them were counter bored, i.e., the bore drilled/widened down into the muzzle an inch or so to "restore" the muzzle crown INSIDE the muzzle. It worked, if done right. Some people freaked out looking at the barrel casually, wondering if they were smoothbores. My M38 was counterbored, and still shot just fine.

Another thing that really irked American shooters was how tight everything was, and how you would have to hammer on the bolt handled to get it to release when firing surplus ammo...except that wasn't true. The COSMOLINE in microscopic pits in the chamber would melt to the lacquer in the surplus steel ammo during firing, darn near welding it in place. Best way to eliminate the problem was to take a cordless drill to the range and chuck a 20 ga bore brush in it. Fire five rounds, dismount the bolt and drill out the chamber with some serious bore cleaner, then clean normally. Do that three or four cycles and the cosmo is gone. 

Edited October 11 by Dapper Dave

[Dapper Dave]

2 hours ago, DeaconKC said:

I like the MN for several reasons:

1: Excellent sights. Only the rifles with peep sights were any better and the sights on the MN were far superior for combat use than the Mauser, 1903 and most other rifles of WW1 and WW2. 

2: Brutally tough and reliable, they were built with tolerances that allowed them to thrive in horrible conditions.

3: The interruptor in the magazine, this held the following round clear so the top round would feed no matter how the rims were aligned going into the mag well. Anyone who has ever loaded a SMLE knows how precisely those had to be inserted into the magazine or it would jam up. 

4: Most folks don't realize the rifles' sights were regulated for shooting with the bayonet attached or in the '44 with it extended. No bayonet and the rifles will shoot off of your sight picture. 

Yes and no. My M-38 was regulated without the bayonet, but every 91/30 I had shot much better with the pigsticker attached. The other thing was that you could be on one side of the creek in a fox hole, and stab the German on the other side of the creek without ever leaving your foxhole!

There are days I miss those rifles. I actually reloaded for that round, too. 

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

32 minutes ago, Dapper Dave said:

One other thing as lot of people don't catch with imported surplus Mosins is the counter bore.  A lot of Mosin rifles had damaged barrel crowns from steel cleaning rods, so when they were cosmolined for deep storage, many of them were counter bored, i.e., the bore drilled/widened down into the muzzle an inch or so to "restore" the muzzle crown INSIDE the muzzle. It worked, if done right. Some people freaked out looking at the barrel casually, wondering if they were smoothbores. My M38 was counterbored, and still shot just fine.

Another thing that really irked American shooters was how tight everything was, and how you would have to hammer on the bolt handled to get it to release when firing surplus ammo...except that wasn't true. The COSMOLINE in microscopic pits in the chamber would melt to the lacquer in the surplus steel ammo during firing, darn near welding it in place. Best way to eliminate the problem was to take a cordless drill to the range and chuck a 20 ga bore brush in it. Fire five rounds, dismount the bolt and drill out the chamber with some serious bore cleaner, then clean normally. Do that three or four cycles and the cosmo is gone. 

 

The "Kid" has one of those.  Weird looking, but actually shoots surprisingly well.  The rifling in mine is crisp to the muzzle, as it is in the one he "sportered."

 

Those things used to be SO cheap!!  

[Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001]

It is my understanding the M38s did not have a bayonet , nor a means to attach one 

 

 CB 

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

12 hours ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

90% of all firearms are better than 90% of all shooters.

 

One oddly notable exception to that is the British Mark IV Enfield from WWII.  It had, not the best, accuracy.  The British, for a battle rifle, were happy with "general accuracy," not precision marksmanship.    But there was one exception to this; American made Enfields manufactured by Savage.   Part of the whole Lend Lease program, if you find a Savage Enfield, it'll be stamped United State Property, even though it was never issued to American troops.   Anyway, the story goes that Savage got the specs from Enfield, built a few rifles and found them to have, to their standards, terrible accuracy.  They did have a large stock of .303 British ammo, I don't know who made it, for testing, so, while leaving the mechanics of the gun alone to maintain parts interchangeablity, they modified the barrels they made.   I can't remember if they changed the rifling, bore diameter, or chamber size to match the ammo, or some combination of all three, but whatever they did, the rifles were now up to their standards for accuracy.   They were so much more accurate than British made rifles that the Brits actually noticed the improvement.

Interestingly, the WWI era Mark I Enfields have very good accuracy.  I guess in the first war, longer range accuracy was more appreciated due to the nature of trench warfare, where by WWII, the "closer" ranges of infantry combat made mass, almost volley fire, more acceptable.

[Tom Bullweed]

I bought a milsurp every other week in 1989-1994, when Roses sold these rifles for under a C-note.  I shot them in local DCM matches and in the field.  The best non-USA rifles were Swede Mausers that shot 2" groups at 100 yds.  The second best group were Mosin-Nagants, SMLEs, other Mausers and Smidt-Rubins that shot under 5" at 100.  The Arisakas, Carcanos and others...well they just shot.

[Utah Bob #35998]

$79 Nostrovya! ! 🤪

 

Edited October 12 by Utah Bob #35998

[Rooster Ron Wayne]

There is some really good ammo available to make your rifle shoot good  !

 

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1126535137

[Dapper Dave]

17 hours ago, Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 said:

It is my understanding the M38s did not have a bayonet , nor a means to attach one 

 

 CB 

No, the M38 I had didn't have a pigsticker - the M44 was the version of the same rifle with a permanently attached folding stabby stabby. I should have been clearer, my bad. 

[Chantry]

The Finn's made their own in addition to using and rebuilding the ones they captured from the Russians.   

 

Some of the sniper rifles used by the Finnish army were built off a Mosin-Nagant receiver made prior to 1898.  After the re-build and re-barreling they served in front line service until the 2020's:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_Tkiv_85

 

I have a Finnish M39, while you know you're firing a full power rifle round, I did not find the recoil really bad.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

Careful!   A non removable bayonet may make it an assault weapon!

[Dapper Dave]

9 hours ago, H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619 said:

Careful!   A non removable bayonet may make it an assault weapon!

No, my Mosin M44 identifies as a campfire hot dog holder...

[Sawhorse Kid]

On 10/10/2025 at 3:29 AM, Rye Miles #13621 said:

..................7.62 x 54 a real powerhouse. ...........

 

I have one ( stamped 1943 ), Nice weapon that will get the job done.

7.62x54 is equivalent to a .308

I believe the 7.62 has a slightly longer case and is a rimmed cartridge vs rimless .308

[Sawhorse Kid]

On 10/10/2025 at 10:12 PM, Dapper Dave said:

One other thing ..................... Mosin rifles ............................were cosmolined for deep storage, .................

 

May single handedly be the worst gun cleaning experience that I have ever had.

[Texas Joker]

5 hours ago, Sawhorse Kid said:

 

May single handedly be the worst gun cleaning experience that I have ever had.

Gutter section capped off and some gasoline. Unless you have a drum of CLP

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

3 hours ago, Texas Joker said:

Gutter section capped off and some gasoline. Unless you have a drum of CLP

Would carburetor or brake cleaner cut that stuff?

[Texas Joker]

Yep. It's a petroleum jelly designed to stop things from rusting.  Axle grease and additives.   

 

Carb and brake cleaner will work but are less cost effective than petrols.  Diesel, kerosene or gasoline all work as solvents