mosin v. mauser


PDA






cwdotson
March 29, 2007, 01:35 PM
Yes, I know the two have been contrasted & compared in this forum ad infinitum, BUT I am throwing something out that , I beleve, is a little different. WHY is the Mosin considered, from what I have seen, to be the toughest or whatever of the two? I know about surviving Siberian winters, dealing with peasant conscripts, etc., but how about specifics?

1. Trigger group/mechanism: I have no ideas either way, but without these parts you have--a club!

2. Barrel: Any barrel blows up from enough internal stress, and I guess either make would slap someone in the head without bending--any thoughts?

3. Stock-whatever..both fairly tough wood?

4. The receiver: Ok, gets a little more interesting, I think. Those Mosin hex receivers look like you could cram them with C-4...realistically, we could blow those up from the inside with enough, I guess, but anybody debate that at least some of the Mosins are redundantly durable? Of course, that inquiry might get a little complicated a couple of items down...

5. Magazine assembly: Internal mags, need them to have a repeater versus a single-shot. I understand that some Mosins have an interruptor addressing the use of rimmed cartridges, so they don't improperly overlap each other--is this another piece that can go wrong?

6. The bolt assembly: The Mosins just don't look as tough to me, and understand extractors tend to break--don't recall exactly where I heard/read this, but I did. It would appear that, properly executed, the Mauser control feed extractor would never be stressed forcing over a casing. The bolts do have individual compnents, so who wins overall here?

7. The interaction between the bolt & receiver: This is where, to me, it gets fun. The 98 has a gas bleedoff system, the Mosin I don't think so AND the Mosin receiver may be practically impossible to blow, SO if something goes wrong, something gotta give, the bolt lets go? I know the 98 has the big 3 lugs, the Mosins I've looked at, two little wings? Point being, do we need to factor in what works best and most safely against what may have a tougher component or so? Would it matter to have the last standing barrel & receiver set in the field if the bolt gave up before the other, potentially less sturdy (in absolute terms) weapon?

I have little Mosin experience, some with a Mauser, and my ignorance may show and may even annoy. I have been intrigued by the Mosin and if I get one would spring for a Finn, and, practically speaking, which one becomes a hand grenade first might be moot, BUT we keep reading about how indestructable the Mosin is, I wanted to see some breakdown as to how we define this nigh indestructability. Hoep someone has a little fun with this.

If you enjoyed reading about "mosin v. mauser" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ball3006
March 29, 2007, 01:43 PM
is a third lug.....chris3

cwdotson
March 29, 2007, 01:58 PM
Thanks, already learned something! Is it as strong as the 98 third lug? I have know bolt handles on some makes to shear. Is the 98 bolt handle considered a lug?

Essex County
March 29, 2007, 02:08 PM
I have always considered the M-N a couple of steps above a sledge hammer. This is not a condemnation. It is simple and rugged. I bought My first one when I was fifteen ( 45 years ago ) and if I didn't admire then I wouldn't have a half dozen today. The Mauser is a more sophisticated weapon and has a number of refinements. I also own a number of them. As an Infantryman in WW 1 or 2 I wouldn't grumble about either. Essex

DMK
March 29, 2007, 02:16 PM
I've never had experience with it, but I've heard that the Mosin has poor gas checking. That a blown primer will blast right back into your face.

Anybody had experience with this?

Spiggy
March 29, 2007, 02:32 PM
I have; if that happens though, the bolt tends to lock itself

Much worse through an enfield when the striker ejects back, hits you in the thumb and resets itself :what:

Dr.Rob
March 29, 2007, 02:46 PM
As for facing cold weather.. the Soviets mixed gun oil with kerosene or deisel to make it less sticky in extreme temps. The Germans didn't learn this trick.

The rimmed cartridges of the 54R is a training thing... both can be loaded fast.

Anyone who claims a Mauser extractor is 'weak' has been using the bolt face to pull rusty nails out of a barn. :scrutiny: (this was suggested by the author who wrote War of The Rats when comparing the rifles)

As for the MN being 'crude.'I'd say there is definitle a 'simplicity of manufacture' that allows them to be made just about anywhere with less labor, but it's a big step above the stone axe.

Face to face I'd call the M44 Carbine and the K98k pretty equal. There were a lot more factors that won the war for the Eastern Front.

JesseL
March 29, 2007, 03:04 PM
The Mosin should have a little better case support (it has to, due to headspacing on the rim) than the original Mauser 98. Some later large ring Mausers had a fully enclosed case head thanks to some changes to the bolt face, internal ring, and an extra extractor cut in the barrel.

Cosmoline
March 29, 2007, 03:13 PM
--I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that the Mosin '91 is considered tougher than the Mauser '98. I would say they are on par with each other. Both have three lugs and both are overengineered with massive receivers and plenty of steel.

1. Trigger group/mechanism: I have no ideas either way, but without these parts you have--a club!

Actually, you'd have a spear. Either with a Mosin or Mauser.

3. Stock-whatever..both fairly tough wood?

Yes, though in both cases the wood quality dropped off as more and more of the great European hardwood forests fell. Eventually the Soviets went to laminated. The Finns used two piece stocks to utlize otherwise undersized bits of birch.

I understand that some Mosins have an interruptor addressing the use of rimmed cartridges, so they don't improperly overlap each other--is this another piece that can go wrong?

Rimlock is always a possibility, though with fairly new magazine springs and interruptor/ejector it doesn't crop up much. It happens more often with very worn parts and when rounds are loaded improperly. The Mausers don't have this problem (other than maybe the Siamese models), but they also don't have the advantage of rimmed rounds. Rimed rounds can tolerate out-of-spec headspace better than unrimed beause even if there is excess area for the rim, the shoulder acts as a backup and brass tears are very rare. I've had far more problems with headspacing in Mausers than Mosins.

Mosins in general have looser tolerances than Mausers. The bolts are looser, the headspace less exact, and the throats notoriously generous. This is one reason they've earned a reputation for doing well in rough, cold environments. But military Mausers aren't exactly poor performers, either. I wouldn't count them out at all. They've served well in all environments.

. The bolt assembly: The Mosins just don't look as tough to me, and understand extractors tend to break--don't recall exactly where I heard/read this, but I did.

You heard wrong. I've taken hammers to open up the bolt after shooting bad ammo and never busted an extractor. The rim will tear before that steel claw does.

The 98 has a gas bleedoff system, the Mosin I don't think so

It certaily does. There's a groove in the bolt opposite the extractor. When locked in battery any escaping gas is directed through here and into the magazine. If any gets inside the bolt, the three-part assembly guarantees it will be blown out the gaps before getting to the eyeball. I've busted a lot of primers with both Mosins and Mausers. The gas is more likely to coat your safety glasses with Mausers. The three part assembly, plus the enormous chunk of steel that acts as a third lug, would make it virtually impossible for the bolt to become an arrow to the head. I know of no incident where it took place, even with the batch of M-91's from WWI that had badly out-of-spec oval chambers.

Overall, I would (and have) put my face behind either a '98 or '91 Mosin, provided they were in generally good shape with good headspace. They are actually a lot stronger than most modern rifles.

I have know bolt handles on some makes to shear. Is the 98 bolt handle considered a lug?

Well if you can get a Mosin bolt handle to shear off, you're the man. The difference is the Mosin is a split bridge, so the bolt handle locks inside the receiver itself. THe Mauser is not a split bridge, and the handle sits behind the receiver. The Mauser's third lug is a raised bit of steel along the side of the bolt. It's just a safety feature to keep the bolt from going through the eyeball in the highly unlikely event both locking lugs shear off.

Hoppy590
March 29, 2007, 03:24 PM
damn cosmoline beat me to it!

nwilliams
March 29, 2007, 04:24 PM
Mauser for me!

I'm a Mauser guy, I have nothing against Mosin's I think they are great also, but I'll never be convinced that a Mosin is better than a K98 or any Mauser action for that matter. Its not worth fighting over which one is better, everyone has their own opinion, mine just happens to favor Mauser. Which is tougher? Again you'll find supporters on both sides with very convincing arguments to support their view. Personally I'd say the Mosin is probably tougher but I like the feel and the mechanics of the Mauser rifle more. JMHO

jem375
March 29, 2007, 04:35 PM
I had 2 M/N at one time....a 91/30 which I gave away at the gun range, piece of crap, and my M44 which shoots ok but is at the bottom of the list of military bolts I have....find a Swede M96 somewhere and forget the MN...

270Win
March 29, 2007, 04:38 PM
+1 to Cosmoline.

EricTheBarbarian
March 29, 2007, 04:59 PM
I like both rifles alot better than anything new I can afford. One thing I havent heard anyone mention is the sights. I like the stock sights on my mosin alot better than my mauser. The front sight post on my k98 seems too short while the mosin is taller and I even have that front sight hood.Theyre both a blast to shoot though.

DWARREN123
March 29, 2007, 05:03 PM
I like my Mauser M48A better than my M44 but both get out shot by my K-31.

cwdotson
March 29, 2007, 05:29 PM
Cosmoline, thanks to you and everybody else answering on this, although I didn't intend to pose said query as a "my favorite rifle" poll. Regarding extractors, I believe Koobuh stated, on an early thread of mine, that the Mosin extractors were "one of the parts prone to failure." That's were I got that. And, I may be reading between lines too much, but I have seen so many comments about the durability of the Mosin. For example, one respondent in the instant thread compares them (favorably) to a sledge hammer or such. Usually, such comments don't say something like "and so is the 98 Mauser." So, I reason (inductively, I admit) the Mauser is at least one rung below the Rooskie in Superman points. Again, perhaps faulty reading. No one had accused the venerable 98 of being a weak sister. But, the question remains, why is the Mosin a sledge hammer? Thanks again.

Oh, yeah, I was totally ignorant of the gas system in the Mosin-thanks!

rugerdude
March 29, 2007, 05:32 PM
Well, I know the mosin makes a much better javelin.

JesseL
March 29, 2007, 05:40 PM
I think a lot of the Mosin vs Mauser durability/strength perceptions come from the way they are viewed aesthetically.

The Mauser is usually seen as a triumph of elegant engineering and fine craftsmanship.

The Mosin is seen as a testament to simplicity and overbuilding.

In reality either can withstand a great deal of abuse as a sledgehammer, tent pole, boat oar, and pry bar - but most of would feel worse about doing it to a Mauser.

Cosmoline
March 29, 2007, 06:10 PM
why is the Mosin a sledge hammer

As noted, I think both the 98 and Mosin are extremely tough rifles. As to *why*, it's because they were designed that way. Both use massive steel receivers and strong lugs. Both used case hardened steel that offers both hardness and flexibility. Both were made by master craftsmen at the best arsenals in the world. There are arguably substandard examples of each (midwar Soviet 91/30's, beat up Turkish Mausers), but even these are strong. There's enough overengineering in the designs to make up for most flaws in constrution.

rugerdude
March 29, 2007, 06:15 PM
Oh yeah, all of the spartans in "300" were sporting mosins. Not mausers.

cracked butt
March 29, 2007, 06:15 PM
Safety- the mauser's safety beats the mosins hands down. The mosin's safety is perfectly fine, especially for me, but 99% of the population doesn't have the grip strength that I do, that goes double for poorly fed peasant conscripts.

Another point favoring the mauser is that it doesn't have a split receiver bridge, making scope mounting a whole lot easier not to mention lighter in weight versus a side mount- it doesn't mean that the germans didn't use side rail mounts anyhow.

Loading- the Mauser is much easier to load whether chargers are used or not. The mausers are a lot less prone to jamming for the same reason - rimless cartridges.

Rough wartime finish? As far as I can tell, the roughly made wartime Mosins had more cosmetic flaws than functional flaws, whereas Mausers took a larger plunge in quality due to the war.

Sights- I prefer the sights on the Mosins- the front post sight is much easier to focus on than the german inverted 'v' sight.

3rd lug or lack of thereof- I've never seen or heard of an instance where a 3rd safety lug saved someone's noggin. I've seen many examples of kaboomed remington 700s, savages,pre- and post-98 mausers, and rugers- some with a 3rd lug and others without, and the 3rd lug never came into play

Bayonet mounting- The russians sort of did it right with the M44, not saying i'm at all fond of the M44, but I've never been able to mount a 91/30 bayonet without the use of a hammer and a brass drift. The downside fo the M44 bayonet is the M44s don't always shoot right without the bayonet extended which sort of defeats the purpose of a carbine if you need to add a foot to its length to make it shoot right. Mauser bayonets mount very quickly and easily and can be sharpened to use as a knife.

Empty magazine holdback- the bolt on a mauser will not cycle on an empty magazine, the mosin's will- another point in favor of the mauser.

Damaged or broken magazine parts will pretty much take a mauser out of commision- they are difficult to feed single rounds to without a magazine- point in favor of the mosin.

Trigger- the mausers trigegr if properly honed will yield a nice 2 stage trigger- if expertly honed will yield a superb trigger, with a mosin, the best you can hope for is to reduce the pull weight on a trigger that is creepy and has a lot of stacking before releasing.

Balance- the 91/30 rifles balance perfectly for me (m44 carbines have terrible balance)- I love shooting these offhand. However, if I want to hit somethign with regular consistancy, I'll take a mauser every time.

cracked butt
March 29, 2007, 06:19 PM
Oh yeah, all of the spartans in "300" were sporting mosins. Not mausers.


I always thought that mosins were something an orc would use. Orc weapons are always crude, somewhat ugly, but very effective. Elf weapons are always beautiful, well made, and effective. An elf would use a M1 garand or AR-15, while an orc would use a Mosin or AK-47. The Mauser falls somewhere in between. :D

kalashnikat
March 29, 2007, 06:26 PM
...is like comparing a polished steel sculpture to a sledgehammer, or an airplane to a locomotive...both can kill you...but one is much prettier.

If you're into Lord of the Rings stuff, Mausers are elvish, Mosins are the Orcish version.

I've got a couple of each. My 1908 M96, very seldom if ever fired, Swede is more consistantly accurate than my wartime ('42) Mosin sniper replica, but they've led very different lives...

Also, the Germans and some of the other nations that built mauser designs, typically had much better metallurgy than the Czarists and their Bolshevik successors...like surgical steel versus "barely could call it steel, produced by slave labor in hellish conditions while in fear of execution" steel.

kalashnikat

R.W.Dale
March 29, 2007, 06:59 PM
An essay on Mosin vs Mauser debate

Let us commence a journey into the much travelled topic of Mosin vs Mauser debate. In depth analysis of Mosin vs Mauser debate can be an enriching experience. While much has been written on its influence on contemporary living, it is yet to receive proper recognition for laying the foundations of democracy. It is estimated that that Mosin vs Mauser debate is thought about eight times every day by the over 50, many of whom blame the influence of television. At the heart of the subject are a number of key factors. I plan to examine each of these factors in detail and and asses their importance.

Social Factors

There is cultural and institutional interdependence between members of any community. When Sir Bernard Chivilary said 'hounds will feast on society' [1] he created a monster which society has been attempting to tame ever since. While the western world use a knife and fork, the Chinese use chopsticks. Of course Mosin vs Mauser debate helps to provide some sort of equilibrium in this world of ever changing, always yearning chaos.

Recent thought on Mosin vs Mauser debate has been a real eye-opener for society from young to old. Society says that every man must find their own truth. While one sees Mosin vs Mauser debate, another may see monkeys playing tennis.

Economic Factors

There has been a great deal of discussion in the world of economics, centred on the value of Mosin vs Mauser debate. We shall examine the Simple-Many-Pies model, which I hope will be familiar to most readers.
Annual Military budgethttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y96/krochus/graph_down_1.gif

Mosin vs Mauser debate

It is apparent from the graph that the influence of Mosin vs Mauser debate is strong. What is the secret to its strength? Recent studies indicate that the annual military budget has always depended upon Mosin vs Mauser debate to a certain extent, but now more that ever. In the light of this free trade must be examined.

Political Factors

Politics was once a game featuring competitors from elite classes. Comparing international relations since the end of the century can be like observing Mosin vs Mauser debateilisation, as it's become known, and one's own sense of morality.

To quote nobel prize winner Bartholomew Skank 'A man must have his cake and eat it in order to justify his actions.' [2] He was first introduced to Mosin vs Mauser debate by his mother. If our political system can be seen as a cake, then Mosin vs Mauser debate makes a good case for being the icing.
The question which we must each ask ourselves is, will we allow Mosin vs Mauser debate to win our vote?

Conclusion

In conclusion, Mosin vs Mauser debate plays a large part in the lives of all. It collaborates successfully, invades where necessary and is always fashionably late.

As a parting shot here are the words of super-star Shania Beckham: 'I wouldn't be where I am today without Mosin vs Mauser debate.' [3]

[1] Sir Bernard Chivilary - Interestingly... - 1904 Badger Books

[2] Skank - Politics for Dummies - PV6 Media

[3] It Magazine - Issue 302 - Spam Media Group

geojap
March 29, 2007, 07:48 PM
I've owned quite a few of both Mausers and Mosins from many different manufacturers. All were very nice and totally functional (even my Turk Mauser I got for $39 about 7 years ago). But for me nothing can ever come as close to the "ultimate rifle" like one of my unissued Finn Mosin B-Barrel M39s can. I think those are the pinnacle of surplus arms for many reasons. Incredible accuracy, extreme durability, incredibly well-tuned (trigger pull, etc), extremely functional, and fascinating history (arsenal markings, receiver provenance, receiver stampings, etc). I have Swedish, Persian, and WW-2 German Mausers, and have owned or shot a lot more at one time, but nothing comes close to B-Barrel M39's.

Have fun collecting and shooting the different varieties, cwdotson. They are all great rifles and well-made.

rugerdude
March 29, 2007, 07:50 PM
HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Okay, so where is that essay template at?!?!?!

silverlance
March 29, 2007, 10:19 PM
I have to agree with geojap.

90% of mosins are crude minute of hairy fat man boomsticks compared to 90% of mausers. Any mauser, even the turk ones, are finer and more accurate than your run of the mill wartime mosin - which is what 90% of mosins are (I forget the numbers of mosins built during the wartimes, but they are way in the millions)

HOWEVER

that last 10% of mosins, into which fall many of the early russians, all of the Finn captures, and (believe it or not, as I found out today http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=265606) Chinese T-53 mosins - far exceed what 90% of those mausers can do in accuracy, fit, forethought, and beauty (think of tiger striped artic birch stocks).

Cosmoline
March 29, 2007, 10:31 PM
While one sees Mosin vs Mauser debate, another may see monkeys playing tennis.

I see monkeys making Albanian 54R. I mean all the time. Over in the corner of the room.

Hoppy590
March 29, 2007, 10:43 PM
SHHH cosmoline, you wernt supposed to tell them about the Cosmolinistan surplus Ammo until we had packaged it!!

its seriously sad, but i do think about Mosins (and guns in general ) during my day. several times.

krochus - hilarious

cwdotson
March 29, 2007, 11:27 PM
I don't know if I offended anybody by asking what I asked, but it sure seems like it. I feel I had a legitimate inquiry and thought maybe we could talk about firearms on a firearms forum...I did err in typing my thread line as "m v. m," acknowledging that in general it had been tossed about but hI ave not seen any specificically looking beyond and really detailing why the Mosin is so oftne mentioned as "unbreakable, even by peasants" and such while the Mauser, when discussed in the same breath, isn't. Didn't mean to waste anyone's time, but...
(1) Got some good technical data in one post, although I would like a little more about the extractor vulnerability with the Mosin--I really did read that somewhere!
(2) One post nailed what I really think, that there is not much differnece if any in "tuffness" between the two, it is just easier to think about abusing a Mosin for its being less polished and sophisticate than a Mauser 98, at least the good ones.

Frankly, even the Finns I've looked at seem junky. Right now, the only big advantage would seem to be the cheap ammo.

Hoppy590
March 29, 2007, 11:38 PM
(1) Got some good technical data in one post, although I would like a little more about the extractor vulnerability with the Mosin--I really did read that somewhere!

there is none. the extractor will outlive you, and probibly is already older than you. you will rip the rim off the cartridge before you break the extractor. the down fall of the MN extractor is its a PITA to remove.

geojap
March 30, 2007, 12:06 AM
Frankly, even the Finns I've looked at seem junky. Right now, the only big advantage would seem to be the cheap ammo.

You've probably seen the worn out ones, which is common in mil-surps. But get a few years of collecting under your belt before saying something like that and report back then. You will have had thousands of Finn-fanatics up in arms with a statement like that. :D ;) Just playing, but it's not too far from the truth.

The variances within the group of "Mausers" or within the group of "Mosins" can be so large that trying to describe them as a group by making a broad statement about "Mausers" will not get you very far, as the nuances between the different types of Mauser and Mosins are very great. They need to be discussed in terms of "Mexican Mausers" and "small ring German Mausers" or "Remington M1891 Mosins" versus "91/59 Mosins", which are all very different from one another. "Mausers" is such a broad term, so broad that you can't really have a discussion like this about Mauser specifics (and vice versa for Mosins) unless you narrow down the field somewhat to individual Mauser models, as there is just too much to talk about in one thread. That may be why most posts are a little vague here. Cosmoline pretty much answered your questions with the best answers that you will get anywhere.

Don't rely on books only. You need to experience first hand all of these models of which you speak. Take the rifles apart, reassemble them and then go shoot them to see how they behave. You will discover the little defining characteristics of a K-98k German Mauser versus a Yugo M-48a Mauser. They are quite different, trust me. Just as a M91/30 Mosin is very different than a M39 Mosin. All these folks here are replying from years of experience shooting these rifles.

You didn't offend anyone, don't sweat it. We come here to help others in their pursuits in this hobby. Don't be bashful, post whatever you need to so that you can learn what you need to. Happy shooting. :D :D

Eleven Mike
March 30, 2007, 01:26 AM
Empty magazine holdback- the bolt on a mauser will not cycle on an empty magazine, the mosin's will- another point in favor of the mauser.


Has nothing to do with the thread topic, but the bolt-hold-open is found on some Mausers, but not on others.

cracked butt
March 30, 2007, 02:12 AM
Has nothing to do with the thread topic, but the bolt-hold-open is found on some Mausers, but not on others.

Its found on just about all of them except turks and yugos.

Hoppy590
March 30, 2007, 03:27 PM
to be honest i find the Bolt Hold open on mausers to be annoying. and even so. its no hard feat. simply change the design of the mag follower. nothing inherently superior in the mauser design

Dr.Rob
March 30, 2007, 03:44 PM
The bolt hold open feature also is found on the 1903. It's a bit wierd at first but hardly a design flaw.

(This is the part where I say elves are fascists? And does that mean that orc society is collectivist? In a reversal of Tolkein, the orcs WON.)

Back on topic...

I've heard many people complain that the Moisin action is slower... I don't know if they are talking about the older 91/30 or the M44. I'm sure practice can resolve this as I got pretty fast with a 1903 and 98K. The Moisins I've handled certainly seemed slower to ME, but there are a lot of factors that could contribute to that.

On 'wartime' MFG... late war Mausers are a mixed bag... one member here even discovered he may have a rifle made with concentration camp labor. Crude laminated stocks, gate latch triggers etc. are the norm.

Cosmoline
March 30, 2007, 05:41 PM
It's a bit wierd at first but hardly a design flaw.

Exactly. It has a very practical purpose, since when a soldier is in the thick of it he may not be counting or paying attention to how many rounds are left. It's a quick way of avoiding that horrible "CLICK."

The Deer Hunter
March 30, 2007, 06:02 PM
Havent even held a Mauser, but I know for sure the MN is simpler. Besides the bolt, its got like what 7 moving pieces?

Eleven Mike
March 30, 2007, 08:32 PM
The bolt hold open feature also is found on the 1903. It's a bit wierd at first but hardly a design flaw.

Who said it was a design flaw? If anything, the lack of bolt-hold-open could be considered a design flaw.

The Deer Hunter
March 30, 2007, 08:39 PM
7.62x54R is real cheap.

Like real cheap.

Cheaper than my .22WMR.

skypirate7
March 31, 2007, 07:46 AM
Alright, I'm going to jump into this with my personal opinions and experience. My milsurp bolt-actions consist of two Mosin Nagants (a 1939 Russian laminated 91/30 and a regular 1948 Russian M44), a Yugoslavian M48A Mauser, and an Indian Enfield 2A. I know you want to focus on Mauser versus Mosin, but I'm going to add my thoughts on the Enfield too since it's another major bolt action design of the era. In fact, it would probably be fair to say that the Mauser, Mosin, and Enfield are the "big 3."


Bolt:

Mauser-- The Mauser bolt is very strong and you can feel it when you work the action. Operation is fairly smooth too. The extractor is without a doubt one of the strongest extractor designs in history. I've heard that German's had trouble with their Mausers' bolts locking up in the extreme cold in the Russian winters, which is likely due to a combination of lubrication and the Mauser's tight action. Bolt disassembly is simple and straight forward.

Mosin Nagant-- The Mosin Nagant bolt feels somewhat "clunky" but it can be operated at the same speed as the Mauser bolt (some people argue it is actually faster to work than the Mauser bolt, but if there's a difference, it is very small). The extractor seems to be a weak point in the Mosin's design. It is a small, one-piece claw. I wouldn't be surprised if its spring tension wears out over time. I've also heard of a few people who broke their extractors. Bolt disassembly is a bit more complex than the Mauser and takes more time (particularly the firing pin disassembly).

Enfield-- The Enfield bolt is even smoother than the Mauser bolt. Opening the bolt is very easy because unlike the Mosin Nagant and Mauser, the Enfield cocks on closing. Bolt operation is very quick, and for this reason the Enfield has a reputation of the highest rate of fire of any bolt action rifle. There are videos on youtube of guys getting off more than 30 rounds per minute of aimed fire. The Enfield's bolt doesn't have a forward lug so it *seems* weaker (in terms of handling excessive pressures) than the Mauser and Mosin bolt. The extractor appears stronger than the Mosin Nagant but not as strong as the Mauser. Unlike Mausers and Mosin Nagants, disassembling the Enfield's firing pin from the bolt requires a special tool.

Magazine and Feeding:

Mauser-- The Mauser has a double-stack magazine which holds 5 rounds. It can be unloaded from the bottom but it is somewhat cumbersome since you have to insert the tip of a round to press the spring-button. The rounds will spill out. The Mauser has a controlled-feed. Rounds must be fed from the magazine so they slip under the extractor of the bolt. You cannot simply dump a loose round into the chamber and close the bolt. The magazine can be loaded quickly with stripper clips.

Mosin Nagant-- The Mosin Nagant has a single-stack magazine which holds 5 rounds. It can be unloaded pretty easily from the bottom by pressing a tab. The rounds will spill out. The Mosin Nagant has an interupter mechanism which prevents rim-lock (a type of jam when the rim of one round catches on the rim of another round). This isn't a factor for the Mauser since it shoots 8mm (which is rimless), though it is a factor for Enfields in .303 British. The cool thing about the Mosin Nagant is that you can dump a loose round directly into the chamber and close the bolt. The magazine can be loaded quickly with stripper clips.

Enfield-- My 2A has a double stack magazine which holds 12 rounds of 7.62x51 NATO. Enfields in .303 British only have a magazine capacity of 10 rounds. Aside from the capacity, another advantage the Enfield 2A has over traditional Enfields in .303 British is that you don't have to worry about rimlock (7.62x51 NATO is rimless). Enfield magazines are detachable which is good since your rounds won't spill out if you do have to unload from the bottom for some reason. Technically, you can reload the Enfield with spare magazines but this wasn't the practice in WW1 and WW2. Enfields are meant to be loaded from the top with stripper clips. Like the Mauser, the Enfield has a controlled-feed which means rounds must be fed from the magazine.

Ejection:

Mauser-- Mausers have a strong ejection system. I've never heard of anyone who had problems with a Mauser's ejection.

Mosin Nagant-- Some people have problems with weak ejection since the ejector/interuptor assembly has a spring. If the spring is weak, bent, or worn out, ejections could be weak.

Enfield-- Some people have problems with weak ejection. The Enfield depends on an ejector screw in the receiver. If the ejector screw doesn't protrude far enough, the back of the spent round won't hit it and it won't eject. If the screw protrudes too far, then it will interfere with the bolt's operation.

Safety:

Mauser-- Mausers have a simple but effective safety at the rear of the bolt on the bolt shroud. A cool feature is that when the safety is in the middle "safe" position, it blocks the shooter's view of the iron sights (alerting him that the safety is still on).

Mosin Nagant-- The Mosin Nagant safety is so difficult and cumbersome to use that most people pretend that there is no safety. "Safety? What safety?" Russian troops didn't bother to use it, nor do most shooters today.

Enfield-- The Enfield's safety is on the left side of the receiver and can be quickly engaged with the shooting thumb (right-handed shooters).

Ergonomics:

Mauser-- The Mauser has by far the best balance of the three designs. It is sleek and has a smooth bottom since the magazine is fully inside the rifle. This enables you to comfortably put your second hand anywhere along the length of the stock. The iron sights (rear v and forward inverted v) are somewhat hard to see.

Mosin Nagant-- The Mosin Nagant has a slim, sleek design. However, the magazine protrudes out the bottom of the rifle. The safety is an ergonomic disaster. The iron sights are simple and easy to use (rear notch and forward post). The carbines (such as M38 and M44) are short and handy, but the full length rifles (such as 91/30) are very long... at least they can be used as an oar if necessary.

Enfield-- The Enfield looks and feels like a battle rifle (read: heavy). The magazine protrudes out the bottom and the wooden stock is thick. The safety is well positioned though. Most importantly, the placement of the bolt so far back enables the shooter to grip the bolt with his thumb and forefinger and shoot with his middle finger on the trigger if he wants to fire as rapidly as possible. My Enfield 2A's iron sights are simple and easy to use (rear notch and forward post). The Enfield doesn't have a sight hood for the front sight post like the Mauser and Mosin Nagant. Instead, it has large ears offering protection for both the front sight post and rear sight ladder. This basically means that you have increased visibility when looking at the front sight. I should add that some Enfields have a rear peep sight.

Disassembly:

Mauser-- Mauser disassembly is pretty simple. A few screws and locking screws (redundant but useful insurance). Cleaning the receiver bridge is a bit of a challenge.

Mosin Nagant-- Disassembly is ridiculously simple. Do you even need directions? Cleaning is a breeze.

Enfield-- SO. MANY. SCREWS. :eek:

Accuracy:

This varies on so many factors (rifle condition, rifle make/model, ammo, shooter, etc).

Ammo:

Mauser-- Recoil is managable. 8mm surplus is widely available and cheap but its days are numbered and some people expect it to dry up soon.

Mosin Nagant-- Recoil from the carbines (such as M38 and M44) is strong and the muzzle flash is a sight to behold. Recoil from full-length Mosins (such as 91/30) is more managable. The great news is that 7.62x54R is widely available and dirt cheap. The only round I can think of that's cheaper is .22LR. 7.62x54R is the oldest military round still in production and it'll probably be around for quite a while longer since it is still in service in Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa.

Enfield-- Well my Enfield 2A shoots 7.62x51 NATO instead of .303 British (which is good since .303 British is drying up and becoming pricey). The recoil of 7.62x51 NATO is easier on the shoulder compared to 8mm Mauser and 7.62x54R. Despite the fact that 7.62x51 NATO is the standard machine gun, sniper round, and battle rifle round for Western forces, surplus 7.62x51 NATO isn't that widely available right now and is expensive (compared to 7.62x54R). Hopefully it's just a dry spell. The round is in production in many countries so I'm guessing it's just a matter of time before more surplus ammo comes in.

Conclusion:

With that all said, I'm not going to say one rifle is particularly "better" than the other. They are all interesting designs which have their strengths and weaknesses.

The Mauser has the strongest action overall and it's very sleek and well-balanced. It would make a great hunting rifle.

The Mosin Nagant is very affordable (both the rifles and the ammo) and is a simple but highly effective design. It is a "people's rifle" which would be well suited for almost any task.

The Enfield is quick-working and has a high capacity. Among bolt-actions, it is the best battle rifle.

silverlance
March 31, 2007, 10:41 AM
like a chicken that walks about with no head, the mosin nagant can continue to load and fire without a magazine.

Eleven Mike
March 31, 2007, 11:03 AM
like a chicken that walks about with no head, the mosin nagant can continue to load and fire without a magazine.

OK, but who has a problem with losing the fixed magazines on their Mausers? :confused:

gm
March 31, 2007, 11:44 AM
:D

Aha! another wonderful use for duct tape:D and zip ties.

Hoppy590
March 31, 2007, 01:17 PM
again. alot of assumptions about the Mosins extractor.

The extractor seems to be a weak point in the Mosin's design. It is a small, one-piece claw. I wouldn't be surprised if its spring tension wears out over time. I've also heard of a few people who broke their extractors. Bolt disassembly is a bit more complex than the Mauser and takes more time (particularly the firing pin disassembly).


youv heard of a few people? is this like, a friend of a friend SWEARS his extractor broke?

so the fact that the extractor SEEMS weak on the mosin, is a negative.
but that the enfields actions SEEMS weak, is dismissable?

theres rifles cant be compared. they all had differant rolls. the closest we can do is compare them to the roll they were meant to fill.

and the mosin fufills its roll valiantly. a cheap, easy to produce rifle to arm millions of people. no more. no less.

the mauser work well for the begining of the war. but by the end shortages, poor labor, and a change in doctrine make the mauser sub par

Cosmoline
March 31, 2007, 02:09 PM
The extractor seems to be a weak point in the Mosin's design. It is a small, one-piece claw. I wouldn't be surprised if its spring tension wears out over time. I've also heard of a few people who broke their extractors. Bolt disassembly is a bit more complex than the Mauser and takes more time (particularly the firing pin disassembly).

I'm not sure where you're getting your information. I've owned and shot many dozens of Mausers and Mosins of all types. I've never seen a busted claw on a Mosin. If the ejector gets weak after half a century or so, you can replace it in about five minutes or just bend it some more. My problems have been with weak magazine springs, not with the ejector/interruptor. As far as disassembly, it may take longer for *YOU*, but that doesn't mean it's a design flaw. I suspect you're not doing it properly. You need to press the pin into a soft block and ram down on the bold handle, then when the mainspring tension is off the top you spin it around and a few seconds later it's free. Nothing to it.

Mosin Nagant-- The Mosin Nagant safety is so difficult and cumbersome to use that most people pretend that there is no safety. "Safety? What safety?" Russian troops didn't bother to use it, nor do most shooters today.

I've been using mine for many years. It's quick and easy, you just need to learn how. Do a search function on this issue, as it comes up frequently.

1911JMB
March 31, 2007, 02:17 PM
I currently have one of each, and I prefer my Mauser. The magazine blowing out on the Mosin is very annoying, as is the heavily rusted barrel. The Mosin Nagant looks cooler as far as I'm concerned, but I just like shooting my Mauser more.

Eleven Mike
March 31, 2007, 04:10 PM
It's spelled "role."

skypirate7
March 31, 2007, 08:16 PM
youv heard of a few people? is this like, a friend of a friend SWEARS his extractor broke?

Go to the forums of www.russian-mosin-nagant.com
They are dedicated to-- you guessed it-- Mosin Nagants. Do a search and you'll find pictures too. I had extraction problems (not to be confused with "sticky bolt syndrome") and ended up buying a replacement bolt head. This isn't a myth. It happens.

so the fact that the extractor SEEMS weak on the mosin, is a negative.
but that the enfields actions SEEMS weak, is dismissable?

Someone SEEMS to be really defensive today. Chill out. I was simply going over my thoughts of each rifle design so quit the fanboy frenzy. I'm not taking score. I'm just doing an overview for those who are interested in buying a milsurp and want to know what to expect from the three designs. If I thought the Mosin Nagant was a poor design, why would I own two of them?

I'm not sure where you're getting your information. I've owned and shot many dozens of Mausers and Mosins of all types. I've never seen a busted claw on a Mosin. If the ejector gets weak after half a century or so, you can replace it in about five minutes or just bend it some more.

True enough.

My problems have been with weak magazine springs, not with the ejector/interruptor.

I have personally seen a Mosin with a weak magazine spring which didn't feed rounds high enough for the bolt to feed them. But I didn't think it was common. I imagine it would be a quick fix as well.

As far as disassembly, it may take longer for *YOU*, but that doesn't mean it's a design flaw. I suspect you're not doing it properly. You need to press the pin into a soft block and ram down on the bold handle, then when the mainspring tension is off the top you spin it around and a few seconds later it's free. Nothing to it.

I've disassembled my Mosins on numerous occasions and I use the method you describe. Disassembling the bolt head is a piece of cake. Disassembling the firing pin isn't difficult per se but it DOES take more time than disassembling the Mauser's firing pin. With the Mauser, you press down and there's one half turn and that's it. It's very simple.

With the Mosin Nagant, you have to twist it multiple times... and during reassembly, you have to make sure you twist it in the right amount so that back of the firing pin is flat with the back of the cocking piece.

I certainly didn't say that the Mosin Nagant's bolt sucks because of a slightly more time consuming bolt assembly/disassembly process. I'm just stating the facts.

Look, I love Mosin Nagants too and they are great rifles but I'm also truthful about their design.

ir3e971
March 31, 2007, 09:55 PM
I don't know if I have any further points to add, but will second much of what skypirate has written.

Mauser -

- Beautifully machined and gorgeous. Terrific fit and finish, looks great.
- The bolt and reciever assembly seem very strong
- Has never failed to function.
- However, the sights are not very good, at least for me. The design of them leaves a lot to be desired.

Mosing 91-30

- Not gorgeous. They look like they were built out of wood from an old barn, then dipped in shellac.
- The action is stout as hell
- The trigger mechanism a marvel of simplicity.
- The sites on are very effective.
- They are like an ugly duckling, and I can't help but love my 91-30s.

M-44

- Same as above, but with a very impressive hinged spike. I wouldn't want to be on the business end of one. Probably the most ominous looking of the lot. - When shot in low light, the 5 feet of flame and noise scare livestock and small children. Amusing as heck. I really like my M-44.
- Same sites as the 91-30.

Finn

- Not ugly
- Extremely accurate. The Finns kept all the good points of the Mosins and made many improvements to the rifle.
- This is a fantastic rifle.

Enfield 2A1

- Neat rifle, and if you ran out of ammo, it would make the best club.
- Fantasticly smooth action, really fast bolt.
- Dissassembly is complex, and requires a lot of tools.
- Bolt and Reciever looks like it was designed by Rube Goldberg
- Mine occasionally does not feed correctly

I shoot the Mauser less than all of these rifles, mostly because of its sites.

Bob

Coronach
March 31, 2007, 10:21 PM
Enfield-- SO. MANY. SCREWS. :eek: OK, who else here just choked back a cackle?

...if you didn't, I think you've never disassembled an Enfield. ;)

Mike

Hoppy590
March 31, 2007, 10:58 PM
Someone SEEMS to be really defensive today. Chill out. I was simply going over my thoughts of each rifle design so quit the fanboy frenzy. I'm not taking score. I'm just doing an overview for those who are interested in buying a milsurp and want to know what to expect from the three designs. If I thought the Mosin Nagant was a poor design, why would I own two of them?

I’m getting "defensive" because your making implications that the Mosins extractor is inferior based on what I can only imagine amounts to " a friend of a friend knows a guy who once broke an extractor." story

its not "fanboy frenzy". its criticism of standards and doubt of the basis of claims

cwdotson
April 1, 2007, 06:55 PM
I was especially interested in the extractor issue because I have heard/read/same difference that they had issues but have no first-hand knowledge of same (don't own a Mosin-YET) and no one I know has had any such issues. I really don't know-I mean, the device doesn't look to me as impressive as the same on the 98, but as pointed out that ostensible inferiority is in now way dispositive. I started a thread some time back on the K31 & concerns over it's lacking extraction power since it was not a full-tilt traditional rotary bolt and NO ONE answering had any problems with GP11, reloads, or commercial ammo. Point being, in analogy, the concernseemed rational, but no empirical data presented yet-and, actually, looks loke that bolt rotates, anyway! All things made by made can fail, but at least for me part of the fun is analyzing the systems and seeing the potential weak spots, then looking for any data one way or the other. I admit the concept may be juvenile to a degree, but who hasn't (1) spent a lot of time on the wild and (2)held in interest in these old weapons, designed and built to, frankly, protect lives by taking lives under the worst possible conditions without thinking over (preferably with a good cigar and a single-malt) contigencies and comparisons and such. Thanks for all the information and observations.

pipboy
April 1, 2007, 08:18 PM
why doesnt the 98 get anything for influence? it had much more influence on world arms than the mosin

Hoppy590
April 1, 2007, 09:00 PM
why doesnt the 98 get anything for influence? it had much more influence on world arms than the mosin

:scrutiny: meaning what? ya lost me

skypirate7
April 1, 2007, 09:36 PM
Well, Mosin Nagants are still in limited production in almost original form (different stock) in Russia though they aren't in official military service. Militia groups all over the world still use Mosin Nagants from the WW1/WW2 era.

Enfields are still in military service in India as reserve weapons. There were pictures of a bunch of Indian soldiers carrying them last year in the aftermath of some terrorist attack. I think a company in Australia still manufactures some Enfields for collectors. Various militia groups still use Enfields, such as in Afghanistan and the Solomon Islands.

As for Mausers, their design has been copied and modified in a wide variety of sporter and military bolt actions. However, the Mauser in its original form is no longer produced nor in official military service, and old Mausers do not seem to be common with militia groups.

Was the Mauser design influential? Certainly. Many modern bolt-actions base their designs around the principles of the Mauser 98. But Mosin Nagants and Enfields can boast that their designs are still used today in their original unaltered form.

Eleven Mike
April 2, 2007, 12:37 AM
why doesnt the 98 get anything for influence? it had much more influence on world arms than the mosin

Firstly, because it has nothing to do with the thread topic. To wit:

WHY is the Mosin considered, from what I have seen, to be the toughest or whatever of the two?


But, this being the internet, the thread has naturally drifted to the general question of which is better. And the Mauser's influence on other designs doesn't make it better than the Mosin.

JesseL
April 2, 2007, 12:46 AM
But Mosin Nagants and Enfields can boast that their designs are still used today in their original unaltered form.

I think that more an accident of history than a reflection of the merits of any of the rifle designs under discussion. How many colonies or member states did Germany control after WWII?

skypirate7
April 2, 2007, 12:53 AM
Good point. I didn't consider that.

Damien45
April 2, 2007, 01:11 AM
I did not read through all of the posts. I stopped when I realized that the general thought is "it's a matter of your opinion." I agree with that, and here is mine.

A while back my friends and I all got into restoring and firing (very regularly) old WWII rifles. There were 3 of us who argued this to no end. One was a MN fan, another was an Enfield fan and I was the devout Mauser guy. What it all boiled down to was preference. If they had their way, someone would have taken my mauser away from me. I shot a quarter at a 100yrds with the open sights. I loved my mauser!

Not to say the other rifles couldn't do it, just the people shooting them! lol :neener:

Damien45
April 2, 2007, 01:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by skypirate7
But Mosin Nagants and Enfields can boast that their designs are still used today in their original unaltered form.

I think that more an accident of history than a reflection of the merits of any of the rifle designs under discussion. How many colonies or member states did Germany control after WWII?

Let's not forget that there are many rifle companies that still use the Mauser Action as the basis for their rifles. What's that say about durability and manufacturing?

cwmcgu2
April 2, 2007, 01:21 AM
This is a...
Ford Mustang or Chevrolet Camaro
Marlboro or Camel
Budweiser or Miller
Blondes or Brunettes
... kind of question.

Expect only technical data, "i've heard that...", "my buddy's gun...", and strong personal feelings compiled within every answer.

That put aside - I like the Mosin, I've heard that the Mauser...

schmidtbender
April 2, 2007, 01:32 AM
Get a swede 96 Match rifle or an unissued Persian long 8X57 and the debate is over. Both are sub MOA rifles and don't look like a farm tool.
The swede kicks less and the 98 with 196 ball blows the mosin round away.
Last point is look at what the market is paying for them vs the commie clunker.

If you enjoyed reading about "mosin v. mauser" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!