Long-distance 7.62x54r rifle.

How would one of those "scout" type scope mounts that replace the rear sight work?

I'm also one who does his best to standardize on my calibers. It's especially helpful to me since I reload. My choice of caliber in the 7.62x54r class is .30-06 Springfield though so it's easier than your situation.

As for the ammo, it's not unsual for me to pick up a $10 box of 7.62x54R SP's.

Newer isn't neccesarily better.

My brother butchered a mosin m44 7.62X54 and put a long eye relief (aka pistol scope) in place of the rear sight. The result was a fairly accurate scout rifle that is cheap and fun to shoot. I left my m44 alone. Its also fun to shoot

I get consistant hits on the 200 yard gong withmy M38 and my M44.

http://www.rocksolidind.com/

For some neat goodies, including really nice turned-down bolt bodies and the best scope mounts I've ever seen. The Fin they show on their web page makes my mouth water...

u may want a 91 the rifle version more acccurate because of the longer sight radius

mine shoots aprox. 2moa (an 1891 westinghouse with finish marks and a great bore love that gun)

or get a cheap deer rifle

mauser http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=122070281

http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=122340929

and of course a good .30-30 will do anything you need it to ive take deer at 250yrds with mine and a 4.5x scope and they are easy to find for less than 300 i almost got a winchester 94 for 75 bucks because someone had chopped the stock but i had to make a truck payment just check the local used rack

I just read Utah's post asking about if Illinois "allows rifles" kinda pisses me off that we've degenerated so far as a country to even be able to casually refer to one our states allowing rifles or not. And though I don't know the answer to this, its just sad to think of a possibility in the near future of other states following suite. But that is off topic.
I think the Mosin is a fine instrument at long distance if *big if* your willing to go through a few to get the right one. Your willing to shell out some $$$ to get a decent setup for the glass/mount and take care of any bolt and bedding issues you may have. Finally as others have noted quality ammo can make ya or break ya with some rifles.
I wouldn't be discouraged though. The Mosin's a great gun and its more than possible to get one to make some long accurate shots, look at what the Finns did to the Russians when they invaded. Plus Zaitsev the Russian sniper who racked up quite a tally used a Nagant.

Well, I might end up picking up one of those for myself.

Click to expand...

You shoot x54 cause it's cheap, but you might end up buying an $800 rifle to safe money on ammo? That totally confuses me.


Get a good MN 91/30, then get a scope mount and turned down handle HERE Then get an ATI Monte Carlo stock. You just got a rifle that will meet the needs you listed. You just spent less than $300, if that's not enough money for your college budget, go spend the rest on ammo. Or an SKS and some x39.

I work in a gun shop and conversations like this are my biggest peeve. Here's the truth: Accuracy and durability are going to cost you. Trying to save money is just going to cost you more. You can start with a junk gun, upgrade it and screw with it for hours on end, and it will still be a junk gun that has cost you your time and has modifications that likely won't hold up. Throw some money at it and you can have a shooter, but you've defeated the purpose of using a junk gun and are still working with a caliber that is obsolete. A basic Savage or Remington in a common deer caliber is a better shooter that your gun will ever be regardless of how much effort you put into it, and it uses ammo that you can actually find what you need anywhere. If you can't afford the $400-$600 a good used deer rifle with a cheapo scope will cost you, then you shouldn't be taking your Saturdays to go hunting. A second job would be a good idea instead. You probably also can't afford ammo and range fees to go shooting either. Save your pennies, keep the surplus gun for kicks, and get something that you can trust and enjoy and keep.

exactly thats why AI are outrageous your paying for accuracy and durability

i think Deer Hunter is mistaken. it would only cost a few dollars to polish up the trigger and home-bed the stock. Even if you had to buy the dremel your total cost would still be under $200.

the only other rifle you could touch for the would be a used H&R handi rifle. :/

If you can't afford the $400-$600 a good used deer rifle with a cheapo scope will cost you, then you shouldn't be taking your Saturdays to go hunting. A second job would be a good idea instead.

Click to expand...

I am appalled that someone has the gall to suggest that this young man get a second job rather than go hunting on the weekends. He's already in school, and for all any of us knows, he may already have one, two, or even three jobs. We simply do not know. I reject as false the very idea that someone must necessarily shell out $400-$600 just to have an adequate hunting rifle. I also reject the suggestion that inexpensive rifles are necessarily "junk guns." In any event, I think Deus Machina has made it clear that expense is not the sole motivation for his inquiry regarding more accurate rifles chambered in 7.62x54R.

As many have already mentioned, most Finn Mosin-Nagants are exceptionally accurate and can be bought for under $300. And I dare say they are better quality than most of the $400-$600 synthetic-stocked, light-barreled budget rifles that are being sold new today. Granted, they are generally not compatible with optics, but if you don't insist on having a scope, the Finns WILL get the job done.

I work in a gun shop

Click to expand...

So, I say forget the second job notion and just go hunting with a good Finn. Why waste your Saturdays working just so you can unnecessarily spend money in someone's gun shop?

Minutemen, I think what your referring to is called a "fudd".

They are elite'ist snobs who think that hunting is a GAME for the WEALTHY. In their minds, you must look the part and have the proper equipment; Just like Polo or Golf.

THAT means you must spend $900 on a Steyr Manlicher Classic, or a Ruger International, and another $1,100 on a Zales or Schmidt & Bender scope.

And THATS just The beginning: Your going to need a walk in closet FULL of Columbia outdoor clothing, and a Lincoln pickup truck to haul everything to the field.

A hunter with a Mosin waring blue jeans?!?! RIff-Raff!

I don't recall suggesting that he has to buy high end stuff to hunt with. I merely suggested that trying to make a junker work like a quality piece is an exercise in futility. And I'll prove my point.

Let's say the OP starts with a rifle he paid $125 for. I don't actually know how much he paid but that can't be far off. He wants an accurate gun he can trust that also has a scope installed on it. I'm going to assume that the average college guy can make $8 an hour as a baseline.

Here's the math:

Rifle: $125
Bedding: $15 materials and 3 hours ($24)
Drill and Tap for Scope mount: $20 a hole for gunsmith work x 4 holes. Don't DIY!
Weaver base and rings that are worth having: $30
Or he could try to make a wrap around mount work for around $50. I haven't seen one yet that held zero, but to each his own.
Bolt handle mod or replacement: IDK- $50?
Scope that you can trust: $125

Total already spent: $430 if he does the scope mount properly.

And he's still shooting a gun that uses obsolete ammo that is hard to find with hunting appropriate bullets, likely still won't hold decent groups, and has a crappy military trigger. Add another $75-$100 for a trigger job and $50 for a recrown just to make it competitive with a basic Remington or Savage.

Or he could spend about the same money and buy used Remington 700 or Savage 110 in .270 or .30-06 with a Nikon or Leupold scope already installed. Both have better accuracy, better triggers, ammo is available anywhere, bores are in good shape and any competent gunsmith can work on them and get parts for them.

So I'll state the point again. If you are going to get accuracy and durability, you WILL pay for it. The only question is how. As for up front cost, it's not that hard to mow a few lawns and wash a few cars and make the money to buy a decent rifle as a one time investment. If he loses 3 or 4 Saturdays as a result, then that's not a high price to pay for a weapon that will serve him well for as long as he wants to take care of it.

Bedding: $15 materials and 3 hours ($24)

Click to expand...

Time spent working on a side project is free, and can be done for less.

Drill and Tap for Scope mount: $20 a hole for gunsmith work x 4 holes. Don't DIY!

Click to expand...

with a little basic knowledge, not hard at all. I've done it, and well.

Why can't you let the kid do a fun project, he's asking if it would be feasible to sporter another one.
And it is.

As for ammo being unavailable, it isn't. It can be bought at any gander or gun shop.

A lot of people hunt with obsolete ammo.

again, this is a fun project, if the op knows what he is getting into, and you're trying to frighten him away by astronomically high estimates of cost.

All said and done I could do this for $275 including the rifle.

I made a peep sight for my 91/30, and I love it. If I ever get pics of it, I'll send them to ya'.

But with that said, go for it, it will be fun, I did the same to, or with, as your preference lies, my yugo 24/47 mauser. I just need a better stock.

Why can't you let the kid do a fun project, he's asking if it would be feasible to sporter another one.
And it is.p

Click to expand...

Get a good MN 91/30, then get a scope mount and turned down handle HERE Then get an ATI Monte Carlo stock. You just got a rifle that will meet the needs you listed. You just spent less than $300, if that's not enough money for your college budget, go spend the rest on ammo.

Click to expand...

The issue isn't about not having fun, or about "elitism" (at least from me). The issue is that the guy wants a decent "long range" hunting rifle.

Ruining a historic rifle like a MN 91/30 with a bunch of aftermarket junk and JB Weld is silly. Sure there are a lot of MN 91/30s now, but there were a bunch of extra Krags 50 years ago, and ask any milsurp collector how they feel about finding a rare Krag variant that some yahoo hacked down with a hacksaw, painted with house-paint, and put some cheap Redfield-clone Japanese-made aperture sights onto back in 1950.

No matter what you do to an MN, it probably won't shoot as well as a $300 used Remington 30-06 from GunBroker or a pawnshop. If you modify an old MN (especially a Finn), you've essentially ruined whatever historical value it has.

I'm not at all against hunting with interesting rifles, and if you really want some quirky milsurp sporter there are tons of "ruined" milsurp sporterizations floating around, so you can just spend $250 on a Springfield '03 that some bubba cut up in 1960 (that would be worth $1000 today if he hadn't) and still have something cool. Or a sporterised Argentine Mauser, Carcano, etc.

I'm all for keeping things simple, but "saving money" by only stocking one kind of ammo doesn't make much sense when the ammo you use to plink with isn't good for hunting, and the ammo you hunt with (even 7.62x54) is too expensive to plink with.

Tarting up a Moisin Nagant is just ruining a tiny piece of history. If you can make non-permanent modifications, and want to hunt with it because you seriously want to hunt with a WWII rifle, cool. But tossing on a cheap plastic stock, drilling holes with a power drill, and slathering JB Weld is destructive and will not endear you to future generations.

Seriously, if you want to sporterise, but a milsurp sporter someone's already ruined. If you want a "long range" rifle, buy one of the thousands of affordable .270/.308/.30-06 used boltguns out there.

How would one of those "scout" type scope mounts that replace the rear sight work?

Click to expand...

They suck, badly. I got one of the $25 off of ebay, and it's all wobbly, won't hold zero, etc. I guess there are nice ones, but they cost about $100, and for that price you're just as well off getting a regular scope mount.

I'm not from Illinois or anywhere near it but the OP said he wanted to hunt deer there. Does Illinois allow rifles or is it limited to shotguns?

Click to expand...

Shotgun only.

but getting back to the question at hand I have thought about building a M44 myself I think it would be a good platform for about what ever you want.

Is there such a thing as an aftermarket re-formed bolt?

Click to expand...

Absolutely

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=122302317

http://www.mosinnagant.net/Boltman/Boltman.html

I also think it's quite disingenuous and...snobbish to suggest that if you don't spend "X" dollars on a hunting rig you're not dedicated or worthy to get out and hunt. I want to see everyone who has the means getting out, I don't want to sniff at their gear.

I once watched my grandfather knock over a moving buck at more than 500 yards with a 1917 Enfield with open sights. (He's gone, but I have the rifle.) I see guys carrying old, beat up rifles, and I think to myself, "They probably know what works and they're sticking to it." This makes them smart hunters. Just because they don't want new designs, obscure calibers, stainless hardware and camo furniture doesn't make them inferior.

I'm reworking my 91-30 into a peep-sighted, 18" barreled, Mannlicher-stocked toy for the following reasons:

I can.
I have the skills to do it.
I have a legitimate use for it.
And last, and most satisfying, the reaction I get from milsurp snobs and elitists when they see what I've done to one of their precious 'historic' 1942 matching-number Tula rifles, of which there's a zillion of anyway. I get an evil kick out of the way they consider all these rifles sacred, and not really the owner's property to use as he or she sees fit. Will I have a bunch of money tied up in it? Maybe the stock (about 300.00 I figure), but so what? It's my money. And I have several other rifles that will do the same job. Again, so what?
So you go for it, man. Have a ball and make that rifle uniquely yours, and if you ruin it, who cares, it was cheap learning, and next time you'll be better at it. It will be valuable experience one day when you need to work on some more expensive piece.

Here's the math:

Rifle: $125
Bedding: $15 materials and 3 hours ($24)
Drill and Tap for Scope mount: $20 a hole for gunsmith work x 4 holes. Don't DIY!
Weaver base and rings that are worth having: $30
Or he could try to make a wrap around mount work for around $50. I haven't seen one yet that held zero, but to each his own.
Bolt handle mod or replacement: IDK- $50?
Scope that you can trust: $125

Total already spent: $430 if he does the scope mount properly.

Click to expand...

125+15+24+20+30+50+125=389
or
125+15+24+50+50+125=389

So firstly your basic math is off. I personally don't think it matters all that much because the satisfaction of doing it yourself is of an incalculable value.

And he's still shooting a gun that uses obsolete ammo that is hard to find with hunting appropriate bullets, likely still won't hold decent groups, and has a crappy military trigger. Add another $75-$100 for a trigger job and $50 for a recrown just to make it competitive with a basic Remington or Savage.

Click to expand...

Obsolete ammo; I find that term to be out of place when discussing 7.62x54R. There are still rifles made for it today, several armies in the world still stockpile and issue it. It is still being manufactured, bought and used. It still does what it was designed and intended to do. How then does that make it obsolete? Just because there are other rounds that do the same thing at a higher price, does that make it obsolete? I also take issue with it being hard to find. I can go down to a number of stores in my area and find 180 SP BT in boxes of 20 for around $13. I think those are perfectly adequate for hunting. Finding rounds for my .300 Savage is a bit more difficult. Trigger job? recrown? You make assumptions and even then those assumptions are based on your own skills and prefferences.

Or he could spend about the same money and buy used Remington 700 or Savage 110 in .270 or .30-06 with a Nikon or Leupold scope already installed. Both have better accuracy, better triggers, ammo is available anywhere, bores are in good shape and any competent gunsmith can work on them and get parts for them.

Click to expand...

The cost in dollars does not reflect the experiences gained. Even if he does nothing more than establish a relationship with a gunsmith who does the work for him, the value of that relationship should not be underestimated.

So I'll state the point again. If you are going to get accuracy and durability, you WILL pay for it. The only question is how. As for up front cost, it's not that hard to mow a few lawns and wash a few cars and make the money to buy a decent rifle as a one time investment. If he loses 3 or 4 Saturdays as a result, then that's not a high price to pay for a weapon that will serve him well for as long as he wants to take care of it.

Click to expand...

What it seems like to me is that you are advocating that he do something he doesn't like, for people that he may not have anything in common with, so that he can avoid doing work on something that he does like, with people that he does share interests with. That and all for the sake of making his rifle come to him in a more convenient, readily available and altogether bland fashion. Has eschewing convenience and unoriginality really become such a sin?