I don't get sporterizing...

I mean, what does it do?

Click to expand...

Turns it into a hunting rifle instead of a club? I dunno.

Im generally of the exact opposite opinion. Generally i dont find the extra length of stock or barrel to be overly pleasing. Generally ive also found that the ergonomics on military stocks dosnt work for me as well as sporter stocks.

As always there are some exceptions. Guns with 24" or shorter barrels and stocks longer then 13" are fine for anything i want to do, personal preference on Looks aside.

oh and military rifles, unless sniper versions, very rarely come with scope mounting. I dont see open sights well enough to be willing to hunt with them.

Thats a beautiful krag.....

I can't understand why anyone would not want to sporterize an old military rifle. They're practically useless otherwise. Customization is where its at!

HDCamel said:

I mean, what does it do?

No sporter I've ever handled has been easier to use or better performing than its original military configuration. In fact, it's usually worse.

Click to expand...

How many have you handled? I've lugged an SMLE up the mountain after deer... I'll take my 1903 sporter .270 every time over that.

Gorgeous Krag

I've sporterized several from .303brit #4 MarkII to K98 Mausers and have found them to not only be more appealing to the eye (most anyway) to MUCH more efficient in the hunting field. Reduced weight, more accuracy (bedded action and barrel) better handling and just over all a better rifle to take into the woods.

How many .303brit #4 MarkII's have you seen, in original configurations, that could produce 1 MOA at 250yds? I have 3 that can. K98 actions are one, or have been in the past, of the most popular actions to build custom rifles on.

And I third that, gorgeous Krag!

I can't justify having a gun just for hunting, it seems ridiculous. I hit a buck with a thrown rock this evening walking the pasture checking for calves. Ruining a good collector rifle by hacking it up because you "need" something "suited" for killing deer is absurd to me.

When I do shoot a deer, if my Gew98 or Ross won't drop it, it's because it's not a clear, clean shot, not too far away.

HDCamel said:

I mean, what does it do?

No sporter I've ever handled has been easier to use or better performing than its original military configuration. In fact, it's usually worse. I'm not just talking about Bubba jobs either, but professional work too.

Also, they're usually fugly.

Click to expand...

Sporters are often lighter than the as-issued version and sometimes shorter. These changes make the rifle more convenient to carry.

The stock is often sized to fit the user, while military stocks are intentionally short.

The sporter's sights are often better for sporting purposes.

The trigger may be tuned up, or changed out for an aftermarket unit with a better pull.

The barrel may be replaced with a better one, or one for a different caliber that better serves the user's purposes.

For going after game, the sporterized Krag shown above is better than the issue rifle, I would say. I do not find it fugly, but very nice looking, though I have seen some abubbanations in that line, botched jobs on Krags, Springfields, Mausers, everything.

I can't justify having a gun just for hunting, it seems ridiculous.

Click to expand...

I can't justify having an ill-fitting, heavy rifle with poor sights sitting in my safe, seems ridiculous to me. My firearms are tools, for them to do their job they need to fit my purpose. I agree that a military rifle that has historical significance and the providence to back it up should be left as is. The other several million are fair game for sporterizing.

Most of the older bolt action and semi auto's designed in the first half of the last century where designed for a much shorter average male. The length of pull of most of them make it less than optimal for anyone approaching 6 foot or taller. The sights on many, such as the Mauser, leave much to be desired. The longer barrels and heavier stocks add weight without contributing anything. Many have worn muzzles from cleaning rods.

My Mauser is drilled and tapped for a scope, barrel is shortened to 21 3/4 inches with a target crown, the new stock adds enough lop to fit me properly. The rifle has shed about 7 inches in length and almost 2 pounds in weight. It has a QD 3 round hunting magazine, and a great Timney trigger as well as a much faster lock time. The bent bolt handle makes for a much more ergonomic motion as well.

All of the above is an improvement over the military version for a hunting or sport rifle in today's world as far as I am concerned.



And much of the same can be said for my 60's era M1 Carbine conversion...however it can be returned to military configuration in about 30 minutes. But the way it is set up as a sporter makes it fit better and the scope adds a degree of precision that the irons lacked...

Some of the rifes arent "collector grade". I was given a Krag Carbine that had been drilled and tapped, dark bore, minor pitting and missing the rear sight. Not alot of collector value there and not that visually stunning. So with some good experience and elbow grease, if it turns out like the krag above, its a win in my book.

Almost all of my mauser sporters were bought as stripped receivers or barreled receivers. I turned them into good looking/accurate hunting rifles. I do it because (1)I can,(2) I want to and (3)I can customize MY rifle to me and don't have to settle for a cookie cutter production rifle. I don't get buying an AR-15 and hanging pounds of tacticool junk on it or getting a 1911 .45acp and replacing everything but the frame. To each his own,I guess.

Ruining a good collector rifle by hacking it up because you "need" something "suited" for killing deer is absurd to me.

Click to expand...

What you seem to think as absurd, I find to be common ground in utilizing a rifle that would never be worth much in the real world. I find taking an old .303brit and breathing new life in her by UPGRADING her with a new stock that doesn't weigh 5 pounds, replacing the trigger with something that is crisp and clean, cleaning up the action so that it is nice and smooth, and actually getting some USE out of her in the woods rather than sitting is some dark safe collecting dust and no value is paying HOMAGE to the rifle makers of the past!

In other words, what you call absurd, I call VALUE!

also remember back in the old days mil-surps were much MUCH less expensive than a new commmercial rifle. Shaving the weight off and doing what was needed to make the rifle into something more akin to it commercial counterpart was still alot less costly.
I've seen some dog ugly sporterized military rifles and I've seen some beautiful functional works of art.
I guess its all in your taste.

In the old days, when surplus military rifles were cheap and new hunting rifles were expensive, it made a certain amount of sense. You could sporterize a military rifle for far less than the cost of a new Winchester.

Today, the cost gap has narrowed to the point where it's usually not economical to sporterize a surplus military rifle.

As a collector, I also cringe every time I see a hacked up relic. I have seen a few - very few - sporter jobs that were well done, but most I've seen appear to have been done by Bubba and his hacksaw. And Bubba's hacksaw doesn't know the difference between a 1942 Izhevsk (several million produced) and an 1893 Chatellerault (very few produced.) I've seen some very scarce rifles ruined by sporterizing.

Remember also, every time you chop up a cheap Mosin, that once upon a time 1903s and Lee-Enfields were plentiful and cheap. Now unmolested examples bring several hundred dollars or more and sportered examples are worth very little.

Putting aside my collector bias, when it comes to hunting I'd still rather have a nice old hunting rifle that was made for the purpose than a sporterized military rifle. My great-grandfather's Winchester 94, circa 1921, has been handed down to me, and it's still a fine deer rifle. But I like nice wood, blued steel, and iron sights. I have enough plastic in my life without putting it on a rifle.

Most milsurps do nothing for me...I can appreciate a properly done sporter conversion. I know a gunsmith that does it all from handmaking the stocks to turning down the barrel. One of his guns is generally a tack driving work of art. He builds 'em to shoot, though, not be admired.

I built my first one in 1963, 19 years old and right out of high school.

No way I had $149.95 for the Winchester Model 70 I wanted.
But I saved up $25.00 for a new 03A3 Springfield and some hand tools.
A blemished stock blank here, and a used scope there, and before I knew it, I had a pretty nice custom rifle if I do say so myself.

The one on the left is it.
The one on the right is a 98 Mauser 25-06 I also built myself.



Back in those days, no one had the foggiest notion that 03's & 98's would be the scarce & valuable collectors items they have become today.

The supply of cheap 98 Mauser's & 03 Springfield's seemed infinite to me at the time.
Kind of like $89.00 Mossy's are today.

rc

I can't understand why anyone would not want to sporterize an old military rifle. They're practically useless otherwise.

Click to expand...

How do you figure? Maybe if you can't shoot with iron sights, but otherwise I'd have to say there are a few million people that would disagree.

Unless you have an affinity for a caliber that's not available in a modern rifle configuration, I'll never understand it either. I have a perfectly fine modern Savage rifle for hunting. I would never consider ruining one of my milsurps by turning it into some bastardized rifle. YMMV

ohhh nice rifles RC,
I have a nagant i did a wonderfull job sporterizing.............ok i bubba'ed it. My 1903 was worked over by some one who was actually quite skilfull, and is a wonderful rifle, also my most consistent rifle. I come back to the fact that its all personal preference. I cant stand having guns i dont like shooting, and most milsurps fall into this category (for reason listed above), I still LIKE owning them, and tinkering with them. If you prefer to collect and never use your rifle, or use it for targets, or even hunt in its original furniture/setup thats great too.

Because most cheap, old mil-surps are just plain fugly?....

Sporterized by the Cinnabar Brother back in the 70's

The first go around was in the early 70's when I returned from SEA. I cut down the stock, and had the Cinnabar Brothers knock off the battle sight and install a Lyman peep, carried it like that for 2 deer seasons. Very accurate and deadly on those poor little blacktails. After I had saved up enough money I purchased a 2x7 var Leopold scope, mounts, trigger assy, aluminum floor plate, etc. the boys special order some wood. That's when the magic happened, they turned the barrel, bent/welded the bolt, special safety tang to clear the scope, mounted the scope and serendipitously refine a surplus 1903 into a work of art.

Beautiful, just beautiful

A little heavy (and too pretty) by todays standards, but she's still deadly and can still get 'em down range.....



ps. done on college kids budget using a GI bill to go to school.

there are only a handful of milsurps i wouldn't sporterize but the other 50 million or so i'm planing on whacking in the head and gutting out before i die.
if those collectors really cared about saving their precious milsurps from my workbench they would try a little harder to out bid me.