Need help identifying a rifle

You are off to a good start with pictures included in your first thread. Your dad picked a nice looking mosin. Some are very rough. They are not very ergonomic by today's standards but great rifles with a lot of history. Ever watch the WWII movie Enemy at the Gates. Go to your local gun shop and buy a few boxes of PPU , Red Army, Barnaul , or Wolf ($15-$20 box) and have some fun with your dad and the rest of the family. This thread reminds me that I have a few mosins in the gunroom that have not been shot in a few years. I don't think that I have ever gotten around to shooting the M39 since purchased 10+ years ago. Maybe today , but , waite, we have to go to the sons house today. Maybe later this week....

Not a bad specimen there at all . The crests and arsenal markings look good, I love that the hammer and sickle is easy to spot. I have seen some that looked like they were used as railroad ties for a while, others that were pretty much arsenal-fresh in cosmoline. That one is on the good side of the spectrum.

As you have probably figured out the steel buttplate makes for a long shooting day, but the gun will shoot and shoot and shoot until it physically falls apart...in about another 230 years. .

Have fun with that little piece of history, and stay safe.

To help with the recoil get a PAST strap on shoulder pad - straps to you.
After shooting 50rd vintage matches in summer wearing a t shirt, I'm a believer.

ford8nr said:

To help with the recoil get a PAST strap on shoulder pad - straps to you.
After shooting 50rd vintage matches in summer wearing a t shirt, I'm a believer.

Click to expand...

I second this recommendation. I went with the PAST Magnum pad. Not only does it spread the recoil over a wider surface area, with some guns with shorter LOP's, it also takes up that slack. The M-N 91/30 (and carbine variants) were made at a time when average size people were smaller than today's average, and you can figure winter clothing for that part of the world.

Partially correct. They were made with even shorter LOP than most European rifles of the day because the average Russian was shorter. The European Russians were the same average height as their Western European counterparts, but the Asiatic Russians were much smaller. As it is easier for a larger person to shoot a shorter LOP than the other way around, the solution was a shorter stock.

And you are right, winter clothing would make a shorter LOP better also.

Nice wartime production 91/30. Thats why the receiver has that crinkle look. I hold at 6 o'clock on a paper plate at 100yds and that puts the rounds close to center. If you want, get a straw from a spray can that slips over your front post. You can cut a taller piece to bring the point of impact down so you can hold center. Takes a little t&e but not hard. Then super glue it on. They are fun rifles. I think I have about 20 variations of them. They used to well under 100.00.

entropy said:

Enjoy, but beware. Mosins can be addictive. (just ask Gunny!)

Another excellent forum dedicated to the Mosin Nagant is https://russian-mosin-nagant.com/index.html I go by the same username on there, too.

Click to expand...

I don’t have that many Mosins just fifty or so.
The rifle in the OP’s pics is a Model 91/30 manufactured at the Ishevsk Arsenal is Russia. The day on the barrel shank is 1943r. The r behind the date stands for the year of God. To know the true date the receiver was made, you would have to take the rifle out of the stock and look at the date stamp on the bottom side of the tang.
In 1943 the war was eating up rifles faster than they could make them so, a lot of corners were cut to increase production. They had already gone to the round receiver, but in ‘43 the did very little to clean up the tool markings.
Also the left upper side of the receiver was not cut as low. If you remove the hand guard you will also see rings on the barrel from where it was turned for the profile. They just have the time to make them pretty.

A 1943 Ishevsk is the most common wartime production 91/30. But in today’s market they still bring $300 to $400 dollars.

You will have people tell you twenty different ways to clean after shooting corrosive ammo. Nineteen of those will have one thing in common, and that is water. I’ve been shooting corrosive ammo for over 30 years. All I do is punch the bore with two wet patches, then a dry one, and then an oil patch. That’s all that is needed. From this point, you just clean it like any other rifle.
I wish my dad was still around to talk shooting.

entropy said:

Partially correct. They were made with even shorter LOP than most European rifles of the day because the average Russian was shorter. The European Russians were the same average height as their Western European counterparts, but the Asiatic Russians were much smaller. As it is easier for a larger person to shoot a shorter LOP than the other way around, the solution was a shorter stock.

And you are right, winter clothing would make a shorter LOP better also.

Click to expand...

The underlined part... I disagree because I've had brief experiences with an SKS and a couple of kid-sized .22's. Even without 7.62x54R's recoil, I found the shorter LOP's to have negative effects. Sure, the shorter LOP probably solved it for the smaller guys, but not having heard opinions from the larger guys, I couldn't say that's true.

mustanger98 said:

The underlined part... I disagree because I've had brief experiences with an SKS and a couple of kid-sized .22's. Even without 7.62x54R's recoil, I found the shorter LOP's to have negative effects. Sure, the shorter LOP probably solved it for the smaller guys, but not having heard opinions from the larger guys, I couldn't say that's true.

Click to expand...

You were never a kid trying to shoot dad's duck gun? It's not easy; I had to coach kids trying to do that, which is why I went out and got a 20 Ga. autoloader for them to try for 4-H Trap. The only problem I ever ran into shooting short LOP guns is putting my thumb next to my nose. I am 5'11". You can always 'scrunch in' more to shoot a shorter gun, but your arms are only so long......

GunnyUSMC said:

If you remove the hand guard you will also see rings on the barrel from where it was turned

Click to expand...

My Mosin's barrel looks like a fine machine thread

mustanger98 said:

Well, how was it for accuracy?

Click to expand...

Depends on how well you can shoot. I can hit a 12x18" steel plate consistently at 200 yards with mine (I have a 1934 stamped hex receiver Tula ) using the sights the gun came with, but shooting at a paper bullseye target at that range, I want to quit and go home. It won't be a tack driver, but if you don't have a shot-out barrel, it's not too bad.
It's a fun rifle to shoot, for different reasons than a precision rifle is. The powder in the factory ammo you can find is relatively slow burning, and even with the long barrel, you generally get a pretty good muzzle blast, so lots of lightning if you shoot at dusk. The M44 carbine is even better, the barrel is almost 9" shorter than the 91/30. Both are ungodly loud; I can't even begin to imagine what the siege of Stalingrad sounded like.

These people did pretty well with the Mosin Nagant rifles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snipers_of_the_Soviet_Union

There is a list of the top snipers in the text of the link, read about a few of them, they were deadly.

entropy said:

You were never a kid trying to shoot dad's duck gun? It's not easy; I had to coach kids trying to do that, which is why I went out and got a 20 Ga. autoloader for them to try for 4-H Trap. The only problem I ever ran into shooting short LOP guns is putting my thumb next to my nose. I am 5'11". You can always 'scrunch in' more to shoot a shorter gun, but your arms are only so long......

Click to expand...

You need to re-read my comment... all of it. I still disagree with that part of your comment. It's not universally true. And I was a kid who learned on an adult-sized .22 rifle.

bangswitch said:

Depends on how well you can shoot. I can hit a 12x18" steel plate consistently at 200 yards with mine (I have a 1934 stamped hex receiver Tula ) using the sights the gun came with, but shooting at a paper bullseye target at that range, I want to quit and go home. It won't be a tack driver, but if you don't have a shot-out barrel, it's not too bad.
It's a fun rifle to shoot, for different reasons than a precision rifle is. The powder in the factory ammo you can find is relatively slow burning, and even with the long barrel, you generally get a pretty good muzzle blast, so lots of lightning if you shoot at dusk. The M44 carbine is even better, the barrel is almost 9" shorter than the 91/30. Both are ungodly loud; I can't even begin to imagine what the siege of Stalingrad sounded like.

These people did pretty well with the Mosin Nagant rifles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snipers_of_the_Soviet_Union

There is a list of the top snipers in the text of the link, read about a few of them, they were deadly.

Click to expand...

This might give the OP a better idea of the rifle he's dealing with, but there's a couple of things to keep in mind.

1- Back then, a sniper rifle was just a better shooting example of the infantry rifle, which was then modified to use a scope. It's not like hollywierd presents it.

2- One method the Soviets used to raise morale was to propagate inflated stories, so likely as not, it wasn't like their govt told it either.

.455_Hunter said:

As long as it shoots acceptably, the Mosin Nagant is a great rifle just to "keep around". Ammo is available for reasonable price, is powerful, and the gun's design is about the most rugged in history. Find a load it likes and pick-up a case and or two for a rainy day.

Click to expand...

That's what I do.
I actually have 250 pcs of new boxer type 7.62x54r brass that I can't remember where I ever got them. If I ever get a set of dies i'll tailor a load for mine. As it is the cheap 203 gr soft points run about 3.5 inch groups at 150yds. If I polished the trigger mechanism I bet I could do better.

mustanger98 said:

I disagree because I've had brief experiences with an SKS and a couple of kid-sized .22's.

Click to expand...

Oh, I got the bolded part of your quote.......I just happened to have shot a lot more of them- SKS's, kid-sized .22's and of course Mosins-a lot more times. But to make you happy, I will amend my statement to " It is easier for me to shoot a too short LOP than a too long one." There just happens to be a lot more people like me. As the saying goes, your mileage may vary.

Another sight trick if you're not staying 100% correct is take a very small round file and open the notch on the rear sight up to an U shape. Much easier to find the front sight.

entropy said:

As the saying goes, your mileage may vary.

Click to expand...

There's the part I agree with, which is true in most cases.

I have a range that has a 600yd 24" x 38" gong that I erected. I set the range adjustment on my Mosin's at the 6 mark and aim at the bottom of the plate and hit it nearly every shot. I have always been amazed at the accuracy of the European slide sight adjustments of the old war horses. It is not really practical for hunting rifles but is very useful for long range shooting for bragging rights.

If you want to read a lot about Mosin-Nagant rifles in general, take a look at this site. I've found it to be as comprehensive as anything else I've ever read on the history and makeup of these guns.

http://7.62x54r.net/

Steel Horse Rider said:

I have a range that has a 600yd 24" x 38" gong that I erected. I set the range adjustment on my Mosin's at the 6 mark and aim at the bottom of the plate and hit it nearly every shot. I have always been amazed at the accuracy of the European slide sight adjustments of the old war horses. It is not really practical for hunting rifles but is very useful for long range shooting for bragging rights.

Click to expand...

This target as described is roughly 4MOA wide and 9.5MOA tall... maybe a tad bigger than the average man.

Just some aside thoughts... The way I'm understanding it, these tangent sights are a holdover from WW1. At that time, they figured out... trenches vs open fields vs wherever else... they weren't shooting near as far as they thought they would be. To hear Ian (Forgotten Weapons) tell it, focusing on Italian rifles at the moment, the Italians did the same thing the Russians, Germans, and everybody else was doing and a lot of that was holdovers from Napoleonic stuff. The Italians simplified things on their end with the M38 Carcano's fixed sights and 150 or 200 zero. The other issue though was the (WW2) Eastern Front terrain as opposed to Italy, which also varies. I keep hearing the question of who can see the enemy out at 600-800 (yards or meters) to shoot irons accurately.

ford8nr said:

He looked pretty remote but he was getting ricochets off the water.

Click to expand...

That's out in the boonies of Boerne (burn EE), Texas. If memory serves that's the "small" ranch, only 320 acres or so. It's in a bowl of solid stone hills and proto-mountains (as is much of the area around Boerne). Young Matt has been blasting stuff out there for more than twenty years.
I've played 42 (dominoes) with his dad a time or two, as our under-grad time at Texas A&M overlapped.

That may very well be. But video's like that give others bad ideas. We have to remember as being influencers or ambassadors we need to set good examples. Watched a nationally broadcast hunting show that the host shot a Red Stag sky lined. I emailed him expressing my concern and the fact I was hunting the same ranch as him when the show was filmed. There is never an excuse or reason for unsafe gun handling.