standard garand or standard 91/30 mosin, whos more accurate?


PDA






FlyinBryan
March 3, 2009, 11:10 PM
pretty simple poll.

between the two vintage infantry rifles, which is the more accurate?

assuming of course both are in perfect working order with nice sharp rifles and good fitting wood.

the popular mosin nagant 91/30?

or the "greatest battle implement ever devised", according to old blood and guts, general Patton.

the M1 garand?

If you enjoyed reading about "standard garand or standard 91/30 mosin, whos more accurate?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Nugilum
March 3, 2009, 11:17 PM
I'd say Garand, since you don't have to take the rifle off your shoulder to cycle the action like the 91/30.

For service-issue accuracy, That's a tough call. The rifles are far more capable than the operators who used them. :o

helz_mcfugly
March 3, 2009, 11:21 PM
well when we get our garands we will see wont we.

helz_mcfugly
March 3, 2009, 11:23 PM
but then again you wouldnt think a Glock 21 would be more accurate then a Kimber 1911. go figure.

helz_mcfugly
March 3, 2009, 11:34 PM
Top is the rifling on a Garand, bottom is a Mosin/Nagant. they are both pretty beafy but the Garand is a little smoother. reminds me of a meat grinder. I would love to see a bullet on high speed vid when it come out of the barrel of one of these. I bet you can see the deep groves carved into the bullet from the rifling. that Mosin is a bullet butcher :eek:

http://wetlands.simplyaquatics.com/d/22754-2/m1_rifling.jpg
http://necropimp.home.insightbb.com/borepics/1941_VKT_M91.jpg

FlyinBryan
March 3, 2009, 11:35 PM
looks like dr evils time machine

lionking
March 3, 2009, 11:46 PM
Garands without anything wrong to effect accuracy are 1 or 1-1/2 MOA capable rifles,Standard 91/30 Mosin maybe 2 MOA,from what I have experienced and also seen other people do.With no scope.More than likely on both usually will be 2 MOA and more.I have SA that does 2 MOA and a HRA that does 3 or 4 MOA almost always both with same condition barrel.

Now Finnish Mosin's on the other hand can rival or surpass a Garand.

helz_mcfugly
March 3, 2009, 11:54 PM
whats a Finnish Mosin lionking?

Funderb
March 3, 2009, 11:56 PM
really? I thought everyone knew a what a finish mosin was! dang!

I second that notion though, finish mosins, which were standard to the finish, are more accurate than a garand.


http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinTheOp.htm#Finnish

2RCO
March 3, 2009, 11:58 PM
You can buy 8 91/30's with minty bores for one fair Garand. So bang for the buck is on the Mosin.

The garand is an autoloader so it's got the advantage for multi shot accuracy. But 1 shot at a time I'd say they are about even.

lionking
March 4, 2009, 12:05 AM
helz,this is a Finnish M39 Mosin,got this one in DEC,this was my test targets for it.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/fin%20m39%20sky/th_012.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/fin%20m39%20sky/?action=view&current=012.jpg)
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/fin%20m39%20sky/th_003.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/fin%20m39%20sky/?action=view&current=003.jpg)

lionking
March 4, 2009, 12:11 AM
The question isn't about price or bang for your buck,but inherent accuracy for both.I saw a guy with a bubba Mosin 91 scoped that got 1 MOA,but stock with iron sights more often a Garand will shoot smaller than a run of the mill Mosin.

This is one of the best groups I have got with my SA M1.But it usually does almost as good when I shoot it right.With my 2 91/30's I don't think I have ever got less that 3MOA with any type of ammo.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/th_002.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/?action=view&current=002.jpg)

FlyinBryan
March 4, 2009, 12:21 AM
lion king, did you get that from cmp? and if so what grade is it?

lionking
March 4, 2009, 12:43 AM
Bryan,this SA I bought at a gunshow in May 07 from a guy that is a milsurp dealer.He had the SA and a HRA,I bought them both.Both have all parts as correct.They have replacement stocks.Both have muzzle wear gauging at 2.

That SA is really a beautiful looking rifle.I normally am skeptic of M1's at shows but that guy was square with me,didn't try to pawn them off as something they were not and sold them for a decent price accordingly.I haven't done anything to the SA to get better accuracy it is as is as I bought it,it just shoots good.

I have only bought ammo from the CMP,but I finally sent in a notorized paper to them 3 weeks ago so now if I choose I can get one from them.But honestly the only Garand's I was interested from the CMP were collector grades and by the time I was able to afford one those were long gone.But I scored a collector grade HRA off gunbroker a few months ago with paperwork for the same price they were selling for at the CMP.


http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/th_013.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/?action=view&current=013.jpg)

doubs43
March 4, 2009, 02:31 AM
My vote goes to the Garand for several reasons.

On average the Garand trigger will be smoother and easier to let off. Balance of the Garand is better IMO.

The biggest single advantage of the Garand IMO is the far and away superior sights that allow precise adjustments. There is simply no comparison between the aperture sights of the Garand and the crude open sights of the M-N.

General Geoff
March 4, 2009, 02:36 AM
In as-issued form, there is no contest. The Garand has far better sights and is arguably manufactured to tighter tolerances.

If we're talking pure mechanical accuracy from two hand-picked ringer rifles, then the Mosin wins (see also: Finnish M39).

Funderb
March 4, 2009, 11:14 AM
Remember, accuracy is hitting your point of aim, precision is hitting it over and over in a ity bity group.

My vote was

precision, mosin.

accuracy goes to the garand, it has adjustable sights.

krs
March 4, 2009, 01:56 PM
Remember, accuracy is hitting your point of aim, precision is hitting it over and over in a ity bity group.

Really? You mean like this?:
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p263/twagger/guns/81900.jpg

Garand gets my vote.

PT1911
March 4, 2009, 01:57 PM
definitely a garand for accuracy, but for 129 bucks, I would gladly go with the mosin...

husker
March 4, 2009, 02:10 PM
i go with garand just for the fact that its made in the USA. Gen. Patton would of liked to have put this pole to the real test in 1945

Duke of Doubt
March 4, 2009, 02:14 PM
The M91 surpasses the M91/30, and not just because of the additional barrel length and sight radius. The sights on the M91 were better than the M91/30, for some applications, and the machining was better. My Garand outshoots all my Mosins except my 1894 Chatellerault M91.

Funderb
March 4, 2009, 02:34 PM
you can't pole vault with a grarand.
:neener:


krs, what range is that?

Duke of Doubt
March 4, 2009, 02:37 PM
Policing up the empty beer cans is easier with the M91 and bayonet, too. As is changing the channel without getting up off the couch.

doubs43
March 4, 2009, 03:34 PM
My Garand outshoots all my Mosins except my 1894 Chatellerault M91.

I few years back I picked up a Chatellerault at a pawn shop for $75 as I recall. The date on the action, hidden by the stock, was either 1893 or 1894 I believe. There is a stamp on the top of the receiver indicating that the rifle was captured by the Austrians at some point. It was later acquired by the Finns and has a Tikka barrel marked with the "SA" in a box.

I haven't shot it.

Duke of Doubt
March 4, 2009, 03:50 PM
doubs43, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess yours is missing its upper handguard, too. NICE deal, if yours is in original military configuration. The date 1894 is right on top of the barrel base with the "C" and other markings.

SlamFire1
March 4, 2009, 05:09 PM
I have shot groups through both. All rifles had good barrels. The Russian rifles were shot with ball ammo, the Garands were shot with loads with good bullets.

A M1891 is more accurate than a rack grade Garand.

A M1891 will shoot close to 3 MOA, a rack grade Garand will shoot around 4 MOA.

The specifications for NM Garands were 3.5 MOA. This was based on a population of 800 or so newly built NM Garands that were test fired for accuracy by Springfield Armory in the 50's. About 80% of the rifles would shoot 3.5 MOA or better.

If there is a rack grade Garand that consistantly shoots 1-1.25 MOA, it is a rare collectable.

Match Garands, with commerical match barrels, and all the modifications, will shoot close to 1 MOA.

It is the rare gas gun that is more accurate than a bolt rifle. Even amoung service rifles.

krs
March 4, 2009, 05:21 PM
krs, what range is that?

100 yards.

doubs43
March 4, 2009, 05:46 PM
Here are some pictures of my Chatellerault Mosin. It's obviously been through a Finn arsenal or arms plant for a refurb. The actual date on the original Chatellerault receiver in, I believe, on the inside of the lower tang and hidden by the stock. I've only had it apart once to check. The bolt matches the new barrel and has an Izhevsk Arsenal marking (bow & arrow) as does the magazine box.

The rifle.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosin.jpg

Barrel & Receiver marks. Other than the original serial number on the left side, the receiver has only the marks seen here.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosinBarrelandRxMarks.jpg

Original receiver serial number.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosinOrigSerNo.jpg

Rear sight and "SA" mark.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosinRearSightandRXMa.jpg

Austrian capture marks stamped over what I think is the Imperial Russian Eagle.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosinCaptureMarks.jpg

Stock splice. I'm not sure if this is an original Russian stock or a Finn stock.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i99/doubs43/Chatellerault%20Mosin/ChaterlleraultMosinStockSplice.jpg

lionking
March 4, 2009, 09:13 PM
As far as sights if I had to say my best choice is thin front post with rear peep like on a M1903a3 and Enfield No4.

Mosin sights aren't the best,in general most military rifles with rear notch and front post aren't but overall I shoot just as good with them (notch and blade) as I do Garand style sights,it depends on the specific rifle more than the design.I do about the same if I average every time I shoot with a Swedish mauser or m39 Mosin as I do with a Garand.

The worst sights on a milsurp I have are on my Springfield m1903.For one there are several styles on it,and the notches are soooooo small that lining up with the front sight makes my eyes get tired.The sunlight and time of day plays a big part with me on that rifle.

No doubt current prices for a Mosin 91/30 make it a great rifle to get,it's fun,reasonably accurate with a wide array of ammo available.But the Garand is a rifleman's rifle when in excellent working condition compared.

Farnham
March 4, 2009, 09:25 PM
I'm lucky if I can hit the ground with my Russian 91/30.

My Garand (1943 SA) is about 3.5 MOA.

With plenty of time between shots, and some luck, I've put up 5 shot 2 MOA groups with my Finn Mosin.

So I voted Garand. :neener:

If you enjoyed reading about "standard garand or standard 91/30 mosin, whos more accurate?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!