Mosin Nagant M38 vs M44?


PDA






pinetree64
May 16, 2003, 02:18 PM
What's the diffrence between these two? Is one prefered? How can I tell when looking at one which model it is (gun show venders are always accurate in their labeling).

Thanks,
tjg

If you enjoyed reading about "Mosin Nagant M38 vs M44?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
DMK
May 16, 2003, 02:31 PM
The M1944 had a hinged bayonette permanently mounted on the right side of the barrel. These are the most common of the Mosin carbines and the going prices reflect that. Some of these are in very nice shape having seen no action. Some are even unissued.

The M1938 has no bayo, but is pretty much identical. Most saw combat in WWII and are pretty worn out even after getting refurbed. Many have counterbored muzzles. Being less common and having war history, they can be more pricy than the M44s.

There is a third Mosin carbine, the 91/59. these are a bit less common and are 91/30 rifles cut down to carbines when they were re-arsenaled I'm assuming around 1959. Due to the fact that they are cut down rifles, they have a longer sight and a shorter top handguard. They are usually the nicest condition carbines since there were rebuilt then put away in cosmo to be used for an invasion that never came.

Here's some pics that compare the M38 and 91/59 side by side:

http://home.mchsi.com/~davidkoch/carbines/

MonkeyMan
May 16, 2003, 02:35 PM
Pretty much the only difference between the Russian M38 and the Russian M44 is the M44 has a side mounted, swing out bayonet with the stock cut out so it can lay flat. Sometimes you'll see an M38 in an M44 stock and it's perfectly OK. I prefer the M38 as the M44 will usually have a different point of impact vs point of aim depending on bayonet position. There's a few other differences but the bayo is the biggie.

Cosmoline
May 16, 2003, 11:41 PM
I like the M38 better. The ones that haven't been counter-bored are better shooters in my experience than the average M-44. The M-38 also seems to be better balanced, and weighs a good pound and a half less because of the M-44's big bayonet assembly.

Oddly, the M-38 seems to have less felt recoil, at least to me. Even though it's lighter.

DMK
May 17, 2003, 12:32 AM
Cosmoline, have you tried one of AIM's 91/59s? I think you'd really like one or two!

Bob
May 17, 2003, 03:25 AM
Only other difference I can think of that has not already be mentioned is the 44 has a chrome lined bore and all the 38's I've seen did not. That could be a consideration in since they fired corrosive ammo.
Bob

makdaddy03
May 17, 2003, 06:50 AM
If you like these two. Try the M39 way better gun IMHO.
I have the Finnish M39 and it can out shoot alot of modern hunting rifles. No kidding.... Best $150 t.hat I have ever put into a surplus rifle.:)

DMK
May 17, 2003, 10:26 AM
I'm with you makdaddy03. The M/39s are sweet! A lot easier on the shoulder too because they are heavier.

The little Mosin carbines are very handy and a joy to shoot if you keep the ROF to a sane level.

Cosmoline
May 17, 2003, 12:47 PM
Cosmoline, have you tried one of AIM's 91/59s? I think you'd really like one or two!"

I haven't seen any locally yet. As cut-down 91/30's I figured they'd be second-rate shooters. How do they perform in the field?

DMK
May 17, 2003, 11:18 PM
As cut-down 91/30's I figured they'd be second-rate shooters. How do they perform in the field? No they certainly are not second rate. Being post war rearsenalled, there is definately a lot more care put into these rebuilds. It looks like they replaced anything that was worn. The two I have are excellent shooters and look darn sharp.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mosin Nagant M38 vs M44?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!