Mauser VS Mosin Nagant


PDA






WolverineFury
July 12, 2013, 12:20 AM
Howdy, I just signed up on this forum, and had a question I wanted to ask.

In your opinion, which is the better military surplus rifle. The Mosin or the Mauser. I'm wanting to buy one of them sometime in the next 6 months, and could use some advise. I know that they both go for about the same price, but beyond that, I really don't know a terrible lot about either system. (I don't reckon the exact model makes a ton of difference, but I will probably get either a K98 or a 91/30. It just depends what is available when the time comes.)

Thanks in advance.

P.S. Any insight as to what to look for when purchasing the rifle would also be appreciated.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mauser VS Mosin Nagant" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Tolkachi Robotnik
July 12, 2013, 12:23 AM
K98 Mausers have been higher priced for about a hundred years.

I do not believe you will find any of the original form K98's as inexpensive as an 1891/30 Mosin, which are still numerous and relatively easily found.

OARNGESI
July 12, 2013, 12:23 AM
Go with the Mauser.

Tolkachi Robotnik
July 12, 2013, 12:25 AM
As for what to look for?

See if you can find a Mosin with all matching numbers. They are usually a better deal in the long run and hold value better.

The Mausers have a better reputation.

The Mosins are not bad rifles. I have had one a long time and have shot it more than any other center-fire rifle.

WolverineFury
July 12, 2013, 12:27 AM
K98 Mausers have been higher priced for about a hundred years.

I do not believe you will find any of the original form K98's as inexpensive as an 1891/30 Mosin, which are still numerous and relatively easily found.
Well, I wouldn't know, but from what little research I've done, I haven't seen them going for more than $200 on GunBroker and Armslist.

Tolkachi Robotnik
July 12, 2013, 12:31 AM
I do not see as many K98's listed so do not know what their price would be. I am not looking either though...

Actions from the K98 are used a lot in custom rifles, and those hold their value okay especially compared to custom Mosin rifles, which are usually hard to move at all even at low prices.

Jackal
July 12, 2013, 12:48 AM
At the current cost and availability of Mauser ammo vs Mosin ammo, the Mosin wins all day long on that basis alone.

funnelcake
July 12, 2013, 12:49 AM
Both are tough & serviceable designs. For me, the Mauser for many reasons. Specifically the Swedish and "contract" (my favorite being the Chilean) small ring variants. In their original calibers!

Funnel

greenlion
July 12, 2013, 01:27 AM
I've owned both. I think the Mauser is a better rifle, but both are practically indestructible, and shoot well. I like the sights on the Mosin much better. The thinner stock on the Mosin feels better to me too. The Mosin is a VERY long rifle, and can be awkward. The bolt and action on the Mauser are more refined.

Surplus ammo for the Mauser has pretty much dried up, but is still available for the Mosin. Both rounds are powerful. Around here the Mauser goes for about 250-300 and the Mosin around 160-200. Mosins in good condition are much easier to find. The Yugo M48 is another good Mauser variant.

Dentite
July 12, 2013, 01:30 AM
I would say the Mauser is a bit more refined than the MN but the MN is a better value with good inexpensive ammo available.

The different varations can make a difference as well.

A Swedish Mauser will blow a run-of-the-mill MN 91-30 out of the water in refinement and construction but a Finnish M39 MN variant is nicer and more desirable to me than a beat up Turk Mauser.

The short answer if you are into surplus or you appreciate military rifles then get both. Buy the MN 91-30 with a couple cans of surplus ammo right now and shoot it and enjoy it and then start looking for a Mauser.

planetmobius
July 12, 2013, 01:39 AM
You know that before long, you will own them both.

fpgt72
July 12, 2013, 08:21 AM
I think he is talking about other Mauser pattern rifles then the 98k....some of those can still be had for not much more than a nice 91/30. I also think like the SKS the days of the $89 91/30 are behind us. That said you will have a much more easy time finding ammo for the 91/30, and it will be MUCH cheaper. As to what is better...it is going to depend on the rifles you are looking at....I have mosin's that will start to key hole at 25yards.....others that will put 5 into a group the size of your fist at 200...same with Mausers....these are surplus rifles and no two are taken care of in the same way. I bought a arasaka (Japanese rifle) from a vet...it sat next to his fireplace for 50years....you could not even get a cleaning rod down the barrel it was just so gooked up....I also have a Krag that looks like it was made last week. But if both rifles are in like shape they will shoot about the same. Personally I like shooting the Mauser a little better...its butt pad is a little wider and is better on my shoulder....but I shoot them all from a pad now...so that does not matter.

Get the best one you see.

Hanzo581
July 12, 2013, 08:36 AM
Is Mauser ammo $80 for 440 rounds?

HexHead
July 12, 2013, 08:42 AM
Keep in mind the M-N was sighted in at the factory with the bayonet ON.

baz
July 12, 2013, 09:14 AM
This is a frequently debated topic. You may find some useful information here (http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=373968) and here (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110215162753AAIPbYh).

It would help if you said a little more about your purpose. Are you just wanting one as a collectible, or do you plan to shoot it? Will you hunt with it?

The K98 is probably the "better" gun, overall, from a technical perspective. And probably worth more as a collectible. But the Mosin is certainly a serviceable weapon, and there's lots of cheap ammo (but corrosive -- no big deal, just clean appropriately after each use) for it. I acquired an M44 Carbine and lots of ammo as a SHTF weapon several years ago. I've since put a forward mounted scope on it, and hope to take it hog hunting sometime. It gets regular range time, and shoots decent, if not spectacular, at 100 yards. I've since acquired several other rifles, but it is still one of my favorites.

For me, the availability of cheap ammo gives the Mosin an edge. But that consideration aside, the K98 is probably the "better" of the two.

VegasAR15
July 12, 2013, 12:46 PM
There is going to be a huge price difference between a K98 and a 91/30. I have about ten 91/30s and three K98s. I have a ton of Mosins, so obviously I like them a lot, but the K98 is just a better, more refined, much more collectible rifle. You are going to spend a lot less on ammo for the Mosin. If you have a K98 budget, a good buy might be a nice M39 Mosin.

WolverineFury
July 12, 2013, 12:46 PM
This is a frequently debated topic. You may find some useful information here (http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=373968) and here (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110215162753AAIPbYh).

It would help if you said a little more about your purpose. Are you just wanting one as a collectible, or do you plan to shoot it? Will you hunt with it?

The K98 is probably the "better" gun, overall, from a technical perspective. And probably worth more as a collectible. But the Mosin is certainly a serviceable weapon, and there's lots of cheap ammo (but corrosive -- no big deal, just clean appropriately after each use) for it. I acquired an M44 Carbine and lots of ammo as a SHTF weapon several years ago. I've since put a forward mounted scope on it, and hope to take it hog hunting sometime. It gets regular range time, and shoots decent, if not spectacular, at 100 yards. I've since acquired several other rifles, but it is still one of my favorites.

For me, the availability of cheap ammo gives the Mosin an edge. But that consideration aside, the K98 is probably the "better" of the two.
Thanks for all the insight.

@baz: It won't be a collectible, it'll mostly be used to have fun shooting a relatively high power rifle round and maybe some hunting if I get it before November comes around.

@Hex-Head: What difference would the bayonet make?

fpgt72
July 12, 2013, 12:55 PM
Soviet doctrine was to have the bayonet on the rifle at all times....that little bit of extra weight will make a difference on where the rifle hits.

From what you say I would start with the 91/30 and get one with the best bore you can find. For a fun introduction to high powered battle rifles it is I think the best thing for you.

There is a reason so many have them....they are inexpensive (not cheap made) good quality rifles, the ammo for it is the cheapest center fire rifle round you are going to find....and good rifles can be very accurate.

It is the best bang for your buck.

happygeek
July 12, 2013, 01:12 PM
But the Mosin is certainly a serviceable weapon, and there's lots of cheap ammo (but corrosive -- no big deal, just clean appropriately after each use) for it.


There's relatively unexpensive new production non-corrosive ammo for it too. I just picked up 200 rounds of new Russian made 7.62x54R back in early March on aimsurplus.com for $6.20 a box.

akv3g4n
July 12, 2013, 01:20 PM
Get an M44. Much easier to maneuver than the 91/30 and still rock solid. Seem to be going for ~$250 locally with ammo back around $99/440 rounds. Lots of fun for not a lot of money.

HexHead
July 12, 2013, 01:23 PM
Soviet doctrine was to have the bayonet on the rifle at all times....that little bit of extra weight will make a difference on where the rifle hits.



A famous quote from a Soviet General said "The bullet is foolish, the bayonet wise".

The peasants were more likely to find their target with the bayonet than the bullet.

And yes, it does affect POI.

HexHead
July 12, 2013, 01:24 PM
Get an M44. Much easier to maneuver than the 91/30 and still rock solid. Seem to be going for ~$250 locally with ammo back around $99/440 rounds. Lots of fun for not a lot of money.

They also make a good flame thrower.

morcey2
July 12, 2013, 01:24 PM
I've got several of both. They all go bang when you pull the trigger. Ammo is definitely cheaper for the mosins. The current batches of refurb M91/30s are almost all good shooters, as are the Yugo M48s and M24/47s. You can still find in-the-cosmo M24/47s for between $200 and $300 online. If it were me, I'd pick up an M91/30, a spam can of surplus ammo, and see if you like it. Learn to clean up after corrosive ammo and you'll be all set. You can also find Chinese T-53s for between $100 and $150, but the wood on those isn't great.

Matt

Centurian22
July 12, 2013, 01:29 PM
Definitely a Mosin fan here (just got my second) but never looked at Mausers. Check out 7.62x54r.net for any and all possible info on Mosins. They are pretty good as is, can be made great with less than $5 and a trip to the hardware store, and an hour or two worth of fine sanding / polishing of certain parts. You can also customize them to your hearts content as there are many stocks, sights, scope mounts etc available many of which are reversible mods for if / when you want to return it to its original glory.

HoosierQ
July 12, 2013, 01:56 PM
Touchy subject. All but the most "last ditch", slave-built Mausers are going to be much more nicely built and finished guns. In some aesthetic senses, the best of the Mosins are only going to match mediocre Mausers (excluding the ones noted). Mausers have conventional safeties wherease Mosins have the cocking piece hook thing which works very well if a bit awkward.

The Mauser has a much simpler bolt design than the Mosin.

Now in terms of real world function, under the most adverse of conditions and with the most rudimentary maintenance, the Mosin is one of the most rugged, tried and true, reliable, and accurate rifles of the type ever made. So too is the Mauser for that matter.

Scores of sporting gun designs have been based to one degree or another on the Mauser. The Mosin is a one-off design.

The Mosin shoots a round that is (or at least was very recently) very common, very plentiful, very powerful, very accurate, and very cheap. Billions upon billions of that round were manufactured and I'd expect a fair proportion of that number still sit somewhere un-fired. Whereas supplies of 8mm have long since been shot through and while good surplus 8mm still turns up, it is neither plentiful nor cheap.

20 years ago a surplus Mauser was about the same price as a Mosin. Today, no.

One thing about the Mosin, despite it's large size (I had a 91/30), it has a very short length of pull. I wish mine had been two inches or more longer in the stock. My thumb collided with my face on many occasions...one reason I sold it. I am 6'7".

At the end of the day, they are both superb rifles. You will see more Mosins by maybe 4 to 1 at gun shows and shops than old Mausers and the Mausers will cost more.

ford8nr
July 12, 2013, 02:13 PM
They are what they are - military suplus and unless you know what to look for as far as bore, chamber throat and crown it's a toss up as to what one is better. As a rule of thumb I'd say the Mauser is a better rifle DESIGN. I own a Mosin and can hit a 12" steel plate at 200yds with open sights. Mosins will shoot HIGH without the bayonet, mine was almost a foot high at 100yds. You can get replacement front sight pins on ebay really cheap. If you're looking for a range gun with hunting capabilities either will suit you fine.

Cosmoline
July 12, 2013, 03:25 PM
In your opinion, which is the better military surplus rifle. The Mosin or the Mauser.

There is no such thing as "the Mosin" or "the Mauser" when it comes to buying. Even if we restrict this to Mauser '98's, there are a bunch of makes, models and subtypes to choose from. There are ratty old Mosins and ratty old Mausers. And there are pristine Persian Mausers and awesome Finnish Mosins. There are some inherent advantages to each design, and some weaknesses. But both are proven rifles. So it really comes down to which you prefer to shoot. Mosins tend to be more exotic for most American shooters. Mauser '98's have been the basic pattern for our own military rifles since the Springfield '03, as well as the pattern for most bolt action hunting rifles. So they're much more familiar in the hand for most Americans. But that also means much of what gets reported about Mosins is inaccurate.

the M-N was sighted in at the factory with the bayonet ON

"The" Mosin-Nagant at "the" factory? This gets overplayed enormously, and does not apply at all to many Mosin types.

All but the most "last ditch", slave-built Mausers are going to be much more nicely built and finished guns.

I've owned many Mosins and many Mausers. The Mausers have been fun, but have also included some real dogs with bad headspace, cruddy bores and poor accuracy. I've also owned Mosins that are among the finest military rifles ever made. Even the humble 91/30, when built well, is a fantastic rifle on par with any K98k. Of course there are many ratty ones that were never really sighted in and had only the crudest finishing done in 1943 or 44. With all of these rifles you have to know what you're looking for and learn how to separate wheat from chaff.

carbine85
July 12, 2013, 05:55 PM
I'm not to sure you can compare the 2 rifles. The Mauser by all measures is a better weapon. I can't think of any Mosin knockoffs mbut I can come up with a few Mausers. Gotta be something about the Mauser.

Numeric
July 12, 2013, 07:53 PM
Is Mauser ammo $80 for 440 rounds?

Nope, it's $144 for 1200rds ;)

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z190/ianumeric/turkish_carpet.jpg

The_Armed_Therapist
July 12, 2013, 07:58 PM
For me, it depends on the Mauser. There are some Mausers that I'd greatly prefer to an Mosin. However, if we're just talking a standard K98 vs. a standard 91/30, I'd probably go Mosin ONLY because of cost. I also like the longer barrel, though.

Sergei Mosin
July 12, 2013, 08:17 PM
It depends on what you want to use it for. If you're looking for an inexpensive blaster, you're better off with a Mosin. If you want fine Old World craftsmanship, you probably want a Mauser, preferably a Swede, although there are some Mosins (particularly the Finnish models) that qualify. If you want to fend off the Fascist hordes with a conscript army, you want a Mosin. If you want to become a collector, the answer is...whatever floats your boat, and if you're anything like me you'll end up with multiples of both (and other types too.)

Tcruse
July 12, 2013, 09:24 PM
I recently came into two M48A mausers, both appear to be like new. One has the teak wood turned dark the other looks like brand new. These apparently were Yugo models made from Jun44 to Jan47. I suspect that they are closer to M48B models based on trigger guard. Matching serial numbers, one with accessories. Found new 8mm ammo at Cabelas. Not sure if I want actually fire them or just keep them in the "new condition" I can find no marks on bolt or barrell that indicates they have ever been fired. I found a scope mount that would not require any drilling, but have not purchased yet. Triggers seem very smooth and light, not much over travel. Apparently the triggers are the versions used in the sniper versions.
Any advice from people that might know something about them?

YZ
July 12, 2013, 09:26 PM
Sergey,

In your opinion, how do the Finnish models qualify for the Old World craftsmanship?

Sergei Mosin
July 12, 2013, 09:40 PM
YZ, I have found that the Finnish rifles tend to be much more nicely fitted and finished than their Soviet contemporaries. Even Finnish wartime production tends to be nicer than Soviet peacetime production. That said, the Imperial arsenals also produced some very nice guns, particularly in peacetime. Wartime standards were not the same, and for good reason.

It can also be very difficult to judge the original quality of a rifle decades or even a century after it was produced. There are very, very few untouched examples out there. But the Finnish arsenals tended to do a much neater job of refurbishing battle-worn rifles than did the Soviet arsenals, too.

YZ
July 12, 2013, 09:50 PM
Which parts of the rifle get a better fit and finish? The receivers are nearly all Soviet/Russian production, aren't they?

Sergei Mosin
July 12, 2013, 10:06 PM
Finland did not produce receivers. All Finnish Mosins are built on Russian/Soviet receivers. Finnish barrels and stocks are usually very nicely done. Barrels can be a mixed bag (Tikkakoski produced the finest barrels, in my opinion) but I've never seen a Russian stock that could rival a Finnish stock.

The workmanship found in Russian/Soviet Mosins, in my opinion, was at its finest during the Imperial era. Production from 1891 to 1914 is quite nice, quality drops off somewhat in 1914-17 and very sharply 1918-23. It then picks back up after the Civil War and Soviet rifles from 1924-40 are pretty good, though not quite the equal of Imperial production. 1941-43 production is extremely rough until things get better starting in 1944. By the end of production in about 1948 (I say about because Soviet rifles dated 1949 and 1950 are known to exist) prewar standards had been regained.

morcey2
July 12, 2013, 10:15 PM
Finland did not produce receivers. All Finnish Mosins are built on Russian/Soviet, American, or French receivers.

Fixed it for you.

Remington, NEW, and Chatellerault receivers show up on Finnish mosins also.

Sergei Mosin
July 12, 2013, 10:18 PM
Oops - don't know how I forgot about those!

morcey2
July 12, 2013, 10:30 PM
I've got a rare Finn-Captured Chinese T-53 that was used in the continuation war if you want it! :)

Seriously, though, I've got a finn-captured Tula M91/30 that has a part from every arsenal that made mosins prior to WW2. Tula(obviously), izhevsk, sestroretsk, chattelerault, NEW, and Remington. It's one of the reasons that I like Finns. You never know what you're going to get.

Matt

Lj1941
July 12, 2013, 11:21 PM
:mad:I think the Mauser is like a fine watch-while the Mosin is a cheap alarm clock.This is from a person who owns 3 rifles from the USSR and zero Mausers.It is apples and oranges.Buy whatever floats your boat and you can afford.:evil:

YZ
July 12, 2013, 11:42 PM
Trivia aside, the ones that really matter are the Russian/Soviet Mosin rifles, including the Finnish upgrades.

Sergei, from which factory was the pre-1914 production Mosin you owned or examined?

natescout
July 13, 2013, 12:06 AM
Mauser, that's my pick.. have 2 K98s one in .270 and other in 25-06... great rifles , lots of after market parts.. Don't know much about Mosin, can you get after market parts or re-barrel them ?

YZ
July 13, 2013, 12:10 AM
Yes. Parts are plentiful and cheap. Rebarreling is not likely to be cost effective, considerong a new condition barrel plus the effort vs. a new $120-150 rifle.

Elkins45
July 13, 2013, 12:24 AM
The Mauser is the better rifle if you already have or can make your ammo. The Mosin wins if you want to stockpile ammo and are on a budget.

morcey2
July 13, 2013, 12:32 AM
If you want aftermarket parts, get a Remington 700 or a Savage. It's not cost effective to customize a mauser or mosin. And this is from guy who's having a couple of mausers built into customs. I'm having them built because I have already-butchered rifles that aren't restorable. One is a 1918 Oberndorf Gew98. It was enough to make a grown man cry seeing what they did to that thing. If it was restorable, I'd have done it in a heartbeat. But instead, I'm going to turn it into something for one of my kids. Maybe a 7mm-08 or 7x57.

Anyway, if you're looking for a shooter, you can't go wrong with either of them if you know what to look for. The refurbs are pretty much a sure-thing.

Matt

Dean1818
July 13, 2013, 07:47 AM
I would reccomend the Yugo 24/47 mauser

Cheaper than the K98

Nice rifle and most of them have been shot very little

I did the bubba work on mine and bedded the action and scoped it and its a tack driver

Its not a war rifle so the collectability is limited so... Less expensive

Some of the surplus stuff has been beat to death and shot with many rounds of corrosive ammo and may not be worth getting

If you cant inspect you are taking a risk


I would also agree. I did the bubba work.....it came out great...but. I would not do it again


If you are planning on scoping..... Its cheaper ...and easier to go with a savage or something similar

Carl N. Brown
July 13, 2013, 08:09 AM
Mauser VS Mosin Nagant

The 1898 Mauser is a more modern design, the 1891 Mosin is probably the best rifle designed that year, but the Tsarist and Soviet military were real sticklers for maintaining quality of manufacture, arsenal maintenance, and culling any guns that failed to meet standards.

Mosin Nagants on the US market tend to be guns refurbished post-WWII to Soviet arsenal standards and put in storage as a bet against a Western invasion of the Motherland that never came.

Mausers on the market tend to be either (a) guns arsenal maintained and A-OK, or (b) abused battlefield pickups, siezures by conquering armies disposed as surplus, war trophies of doubtful maintaince. (yes, you can find Mosins in condition (b))

My preference would be a good individual specimen. Already have a good 91/30, so a good 98k would be cool, but for the complication of my ammo supply situation (no 8mm in my house right now).

Skyshot
July 13, 2013, 10:10 AM
You must own them ALL, before you can make your "own" judgment.

greenlion
July 13, 2013, 12:23 PM
Look at it this way. The Mauser imports have been dried up for a while now, so their price has already hit a stable selling price. The Mosins are still pouring in, so you can still find them for around 150 dollars. If you get the Mauser now, and wait to get the Mosin, you will definitely pay more for the Mosin later when supplies dry up. If you buy the Mosin now, the Mauser will probably still be at the same price a few years from now.

YZ
July 13, 2013, 02:12 PM
Too bad Sergei Mosin hasn't responded. I sure would like to hear his impressions of handling an imperial Russian Mosin from the man himself.

Archaic
July 13, 2013, 02:52 PM
As a devoted mauser guy who's collected, hunted with and restored them ever since I got my first one a 13, its not even a comparison. The quality and design of the mauser is superior to any of its peers.

BUT, everybodies comments about ammo cost are spot on, I generally have to buy my 6.5, 7x57, 8mm ammo in 20 round boxes from one of the 'big three' and I pay accordingly. If you want to shoot, and your not overly concerned about one minute groups - its hard to beat a Mosin. Just look it over and try to get a good barrel.

Happy shooting!

stubbicatt
July 13, 2013, 08:08 PM
It's funny sometimes how people prefer one product over another. I have never enjoyed the K98 with that funky pointy front sight that I can't see, but I love my modern CZ550 which is a Mauser action. And while I'm not a fan of the K98, I really do enjoy the Mosin Nagant rifles, except the sticky bolt issue. I find the quality to be on par, it is just a *different* design from the Mauser... not worse in design, just different.

There were different concerns in the design of each rifle, and the interrupter/ejector on the Mosin Nagant is pure genius. Both share a forward dual locking lug arrangement, with the lugs aligned 90 degrees apart between the designs, both work swell.

morcey2
July 13, 2013, 08:40 PM
I'm very much _not_ a fan of the stock sights on most mausers and the mosin sights are significantly better. I can shoot both of them, but there are times I strain on the mausers. I don't buy line that the mauser design is light-years ahead of Sergei Mosin's creation. I think it is better and it is definitely easier to mount a scope on it and make it look like what most people think of as a "deer rifle." I'm a huge controlled-round-feed fan.

I've heard several people complain that the mosin doesn't have a 3rd safety lug like the 98's do. It has one. It's called that freaking huge bolt-handle root. If that shears off, I think you've blown way past the "overpressure signs" and right into hand-grenade territory.

The stock triggers on both of them leave much to be desired, but the mauser 2-stage trigger isn't too bad. The mosin triggers can range from horrific to reasonably crisp. They were both designed as military rifles that would shoot to minute-of-man. They weren't intended to be 1/32 MOA to 1000 yards (or arshini :) ) but there are quite a few examples of both that are amazingly accurate.

I don't know. I like them both. I'll just have to continue buying both of them until I make a decision on which one is better. :)

Matt

Sergei Mosin
July 13, 2013, 09:00 PM
YZ, the real Sergei Mosin worked at Tula and Sestroryetsk, so I suppose I should be partial to those, but Izhevsk did good work too. All of the Imperial arsenals produced some rather nice rifles before the Great War. It's difficult to gain an impression of Chatellerault quality simply because there are so few survivors.

WolverineFury
July 13, 2013, 09:26 PM
Nope, it's $144 for 1200rds ;)

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z190/ianumeric/turkish_carpet.jpg
I'm jealous...

nathan
July 13, 2013, 09:37 PM
Both are very good rifles to have. In today's surplus ammo supply chain, the Mosin wins hands down. The 8mm surplus has dried up for the most part so if you want to have a good supply of ammo to practice and have fun, the Mosin is the way to go. But the Mauser still is the best looking bolt rifle out there. BTW the 8 mm cartridge has a lot of kinetic energy to bring down any NOrth American game including the grizzley bear.

YZ
July 13, 2013, 10:55 PM
Sergei

Bummer. From your post I thought you'd seen or handled a Tsarist Mosin to tell its quality. Many of the opinions I read before had been replicated from literature and from one another. Thank you for sharing anyhow.

Sergei Mosin
July 13, 2013, 11:46 PM
YZ, the opinions I have given in this thread are based on my own first-hand experience with the rifles.

YZ
July 13, 2013, 11:55 PM
OK, Sergei.

As a student of history I came to realize that the Mosin rifle was in every conflict of the bloody first half of the 20th century, from the Atlantic to the Far East. Its design reflects the military doctrine of its day and place, and the stampings often tell a story. The only reason it is cheaper than the Mauser or any contemporary battle rifle is not the quality of build, but the abnormally large supply.

fpgt72
July 14, 2013, 01:29 PM
As a devoted mauser guy who's collected, hunted with and restored them ever since I got my first one a 13, its not even a comparison. The quality and design of the mauser is superior to any of its peers.

BUT, everybodies comments about ammo cost are spot on, I generally have to buy my 6.5, 7x57, 8mm ammo in 20 round boxes from one of the 'big three' and I pay accordingly. If you want to shoot, and your not overly concerned about one minute groups - its hard to beat a Mosin. Just look it over and try to get a good barrel.

Happy shooting!
There is no doubt as to the quality of the mauser action....everyone has copied it. However if we are talking about the "best" WWII bolt gun I would give the nod to the last one designed....you have an advantage of looking at what everyone else has and then improve upon it. But there is one thing you can't get away from when messing around with surplus rifles.....and I said it before. These things are now knocking on the door of 100 years old....they have been around the block a few times. The "worst" rifle can shoot better then the "best" rifle...it is all going to depend on how it was taken care of....shape of the bore is the thing you are going to have to look at above all others. From the sounds of your posts you are looking for a fun starter rifle into the surplus hobby...there can be no doubt that the 91/30 is going to give you the best bang for the buck....add to that you can have 100 Mosins and no two will have the same history.

Ro1911
July 14, 2013, 05:12 PM
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.

morcey2
July 14, 2013, 05:52 PM
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.
Thank you for your opinion. That was a really stupid answer. For you, those statements may be valid for what you want in a gun, but they're not an accurate expression of reality.

At one point in time, mausers were just as cheap as mosins. Does that mean that the mausers magically became higher quality guns as the price increased relative to the mosins? As of right now, a refurb 91/30 is only slightly less expensive than a Yugo 24/47. Must mean that the Yugo's were machined by drunk 7-year-olds with dremels instead of the fine workmanship that goes into the more expensive Persian and Argentine mausers.

I agree that mausers (98s specifically) are in-general better designed than mosins. BUT, There is much more range of difference and quality top-to-bottom in mausers than there is between the average mauser and the average mosin.

Matt

fpgt72
July 15, 2013, 08:08 AM
At one time 98k's were cheaper than 91/30's....those communist guns where just not in the country, but every hardware store had a barrel of 98k's, the next barrel had 1093's, and the cheapo barrel had Krag's....I know my father in law bought a Krag out of the cheapo barrel because he could not afford the $25 for the 1903.

VegasAR15
July 15, 2013, 10:51 AM
Fixed it for you.

Remington, NEW, and Chatellerault receivers show up on Finnish mosins also.
Very true, I have a Westinghouse that was redone by the Finns.

YZ
July 15, 2013, 11:09 AM
What did the Finns do on your Mosin?

Joshua M. Smith
July 22, 2013, 07:30 PM
Hi YZ,

I'm late to the game.

I study the Finnish mods a great deal. They remind me a lot of Americans -- or did, when they were using Mosins.

First, they made sure the rifle shot on. This meant they'd usually modify the sights.

Then they'd start messing with accuracy.

Proper inletting is essential, and they'd do it. What they couldn't do with inletting, they'd accomplish with shims on the action and sometimes the barrel.

They improved the trigger pull greatly -- lots of two-stage jobs. My favorite is the M39, though there are others, like the M27 and M28, that benefited from different types of triggers.

Often, barrels would be changed out to make them slightly heavier, and new stocks were made. Just depended on the model of Mosin. Those captured from the Russians typically had the least done to them. They'd be looked over, sighted in, maybe shimmed, and sent back to the field.

Regards,

Josh Smith
Smith-Sights.com

Blue Brick
July 22, 2013, 08:40 PM
+ 1 on a 91/30

The Mosin Nagant has a rep for being the most accurate of the mass produced milsurp rifles due to the fact that when in battery, the locking lugs are vertical rather than horizontal or at an angle. This makes the action more rigid and results in less barrel vibration.
This one really shoots.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=258433

justice06rr
July 23, 2013, 07:31 AM
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.

That post actually did not help at all.

Its like saying the AR is better than the AK... apples and oranges.

Its not a stupid question; Not everyone will know the differences between the two rifles, which is why the question is posed by the OP. In general the Mausers are seen as the "better/nicer" gun, but Mosin's are more practical and cheaper. The aproppriate choice depends on what will work for each individual shooter based on his budget, shooting needs, etc.

If a newbie asks which rifle to get between the AR/AK, would you automatically suggest the AR??

stubbicatt
July 23, 2013, 10:07 AM
OK, Sergei.

As a student of history I came to realize that the Mosin rifle was in every conflict of the bloody first half of the 20th century, from the Atlantic to the Far East. Its design reflects the military doctrine of its day and place, and the stampings often tell a story. The only reason it is cheaper than the Mauser or any contemporary battle rifle is not the quality of build, but the abnormally large supply.
+1 YZ These two rifles are each one a study in design. The 13 parts in a Mosin Nagant make it the simpler design. Simplicity has its own virtue. The sights are superior to the Mauser. The rimmed cartridge is a definite minus in a bolt rifle, but a plus in a machine-gun so I have been informed. The interrupter on the Mosin Nagant is pure genius. The differences in price reflect a market bloated with one, and pretty much devoid of the other.

Lastly to say that price is a reflection of quality is like saying the gatorade I buy at 7-11 for $1 is of lesser quality than the gatorade I buy at the Venetian for $4.

fpgt72
July 23, 2013, 10:08 AM
There are no stupid questions...one could support that the mosin is a better gun...and list facts and stats to back up that statement. Everyone starts somewhere,

stanger04
July 23, 2013, 02:08 PM
mauser for custom builds the action is a tank. Mosin for shooting and eventually will go up as the sks and everything else has. As stated above depends on use.

YZ
July 24, 2013, 04:55 PM
Josh
Great review on the Finnish refurbs.

Stubbicat
Yep a llot of people think if they're so cheap then something has to be wrong with them. Which in turn keeps the prices low. Good for the rest of us.

fpgt72
July 25, 2013, 11:33 AM
Inexpensive is not equal to cheap, just like expensive does not equal quality. Mitchells Mausers anyone.

Goblin
July 25, 2013, 11:35 AM
I have both and the Mauser is a whole magnitude of quality above the Mosin.

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