3 rifle questions: Nagant/AR

[kestak]

Greetings,

I have 3 questions:

1 - Anyone knows about how many inches I must aim under the center of the target at 25 yards to hit the center of the target at 100 yards with a Mosin-Nagant 91/30?

2 - How safe is the safety on a Mosin-Nagant? Anyone knows what was the Modus Operandi for the Russian Army and hwo they carried their Nagant?

3 - AR question: How much less recoil the AR-15 Miculek muzzle brake removes compared to the standard bird cage brake?

Thank you

 

[memphisjim]

1 i have no idea what you just asked
2 i dont think they used the safetys
3 the bird cage isnt reall that much of a brake

 

[hatchetbearer]

1. you will have to wait for someone with more experience than i for 7.62x54R ballistics, but if you are trying to get a BZO with a mosin, I'd just gradually increase the distance out to 100 yards.

2. Its a widely known fact the MN safety is useless. I just loaded 4, and sent the bolt home on an empty chamber.

3. I have no experience with the JM brake. but the A2 birdcage is a flash hider, not really a brake.

 

[Cosmoline]

1--It depends on the ammo you're using. POI can vary *greatly* between bullet weights and cartridge make.

2--It's the safest safety I know of. I've had a 91/30 with a live round chambered, safety on, fly up in the air and land on river rocks many feet below (I did a pratfall on an old bridge). The rifle was somewhat dinged, but the safety didn't budge. I believe SOP in the Red Army was to ignore the safety. They also focused on the bayonet as the primary use of the rifle. That practice had more to do with their in-grained doctrines than the rifle.

3--AR's recoil?

 

[shenandoah]

1. About 12 inches, usually, American Rifleman had an article on this some time ago, about two years I think.
2. I agree with Cosmoline on the safety, but hey, it only takes a split second to work the bolt.
3. Recoil brake is what flash hiders are called so as not to upset the dems.

 

[HOLY DIVER]

3: i agree the a2 birdcage is a flash hider
the miculek reduces felt recoil significantly

 

[35 Whelen]

Greetings,

I have 3 questions:

1 - Anyone knows about how many inches I must aim under the center of the target at 25 yards to hit the center of the target at 100 yards with a Mosin-Nagant 91/30?

2 - How safe is the safety on a Mosin-Nagant? Anyone knows what was the Modus Operandi for the Russian Army and hwo they carried their Nagant?

3 - AR question: How much less recoil the AR-15 Miculek muzzle brake removes compared to the standard bird cage brake?

Thank you

1. It will vary greatly from rifle to rifle, but generally speaking, with a typical spitzer (pointed) bullet at 2500-2800 fps, point of impact (POI) at 25 yds. will be very close to the POI at 100 yds. This is because a bullet such as those in question at the typical velocities I mentioned, sighted in at 100 yds. first crosses the line of sight at about 25 yds. If you know about what the velocity is, and about what the ballistic coefficient (B.C.) of the bullet is, and .400 will get you in the ballpark, you can calculate it yourself here: Ballistic Calculator . My father told me when he was in he army and they performed the initial sighting in of their Garands, they shot at targets at 1000 inches, which is about 27 yards, because when their rifles were "on" at 1000 inches, they were very close to "on" at 100 yds.

2. I don't know how the Ruskies carried their rifles, but the safeties are quite safe as they completely disengage the firing pin sear from the trigger sear. On the other hand, the safeties are crude and a pain to engage and disengage.

3. As someone already said, the birdcage isn't a muzzle brake, it's a flash suppressor. And really, I personally don't see any need in reducing the recoil of an AR. Plus without a brake you'll irritate fewer people at the range without the added muzzle blast.

35W

 

[HOLY DIVER]

i disagree 35 whelen if your in a 3gun match the less felt recoil makes a big difference in getting back on target faster.

 

[35 Whelen]

i disagree 35 whelen if your in a 3gun match the less felt recoil makes a big difference in getting back on target faster.

I don't know about 3 gun matches, but I shoot competitive High Power and most of the guys shoot AR's and muzzle brakes are NOT allowed as per NRA rules. During the rapid fire strings, most of these guys have no problem keeping all their shots (10 )in 2"-3" circles at 100 yds. using nothing more than a sling to steady the rifle. In the sitting realy, that's 10 shots in 60 seconds with one mandatory reload. Prone rapid is 10 shots in 70 seconds with a reload. Then there's the guys who do the same thing with BOLT rifles, some shooting full-power 30-06 loads.

35W

 

[HOLY DIVER]

if the comp is allowed in the type of competitive shooting you are involved with i'd say it will help is it a must NO but it will help

 

[GD]

Mosins often shoot high so you will have to test fire it before you will know. If you have it sighted in at 100 yards at the 100 meter setting then the POI at 25 yards should be pretty close to the POA.
I actually like the safety on my mosins. The safety is quiet and very positive. The mauser safety is louder to disengage generally and some are downright hard to push. I hunt and so the quietness of the mosin safety is a real plus. The next quietest safety I have found is on the Enfields but again, they don't seem as reliable as the mosin.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

That practice had more to do with their in-grained doctrines than the rifle.

LOL at this.

Charging forward with a bayonet is hardly "in grained" in Russian military ideology. In fact, you can find literature that describes charging with a sword as "hardly the Russian kind of courage"

 

[Cosmoline]

Charging forward with a bayonet is hardly "in grained" in Russian military ideology.

I'm not sure what fiction or literature you're referring to, but the Russian and Red Army were notorious for throwing tens of thousands of men into the meat grinder, bayonets fixed. They even did it into the WWII era well after most nations had moved away from such tactics. Read up on the Winter War for some classic examples, particularly the repeated charges of the Mannerheim Line. Their losses were horrific, and after enough disasters they began adopting more modern styles of combat. Even still, the generals would sometimes fall back to launching waves of meat shields into the fray given the chance. The assault on the Seelow Heights in 1945 saw Zhukov himself resorting to sheer manpower after the artillery had failed. It cost many lives, as did the needlessly brutal invasion of Berlin as a whole.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

The winter war's losses were more attributable to the lack of leadership(after the good ones were killed, that is) than it is to bayonet charges

 

[Cosmoline]

Are you arguing that the Red Army wasn't doing human wave assaults, bayonets fixed? I suspect you're thinking of a bayonet charge as a lot of running, yelling, etc. Obviously that wasn't the Russian style. They went forward en masse and died en masse with what I've seen described as a remarkable lack of emotion or puffery. So perhaps I shouldn't call a line of an advancing line of troops, bayonets fixed, a "charge."

The point (ha ha) remains that as a standard practice they kept bayonets fixed on the Mosins. Even late in the war the M44 design incorporated a bayonet.

 

[Jeff82]

Jet Comp. http://www.tacticalshooting.com/merchandise.html (at bottom of page) Similar to the Miculek but with two upward facing nozzles.

Works as advertised. 100% reduction of muzzle rise, 80% reduction of recoil. Extremely happy with mine. On my 5.56mm CAR-15, put dot on target and bang away. Excellent for 3-gun competition. Like shooting a 22lr.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

That's the point I was making (the lack of emotion.) I think we're agreeing without realizing it.

The claim that they focused on the bayonet more on using bayonets than they did actually firing their rifles is what I'm contesting.

If that were true, I doubt they would've wasted time building millions upon millions of PPSH 41s

 

[Cosmoline]

The claim that they focused on the bayonet more on using bayonets than they did actually firing their rifles is what I'm contesting.

I think they just didn't do much training at all, esp. early in the war. I don't know of any rule, like the crazy British used to impose, about keeping "nothing up the spout" to keep the purity of a bayonet charge. But when you've got hordes of untrained recruits you end up relying less on their marksmanship. That obviously changed as the war went on. And they did learn from harsh experience in Finland about how important snipers could be and instituted sniper training for the better shots.

Part of the confusion is there was more than one Red Army during WWII. The Red Army of the Talvisota was all but annihilated in that war and the enormous losses of the initial German invasion. The Red Army that emerged from its ashes and eventually took Berlin was a different creature. The frontoviks were ruthlessly efficient fighters who did not hesitate to toss grenades around blind corners or spray down every living thing in a room. They did whatever they needed to do to stay alive and win. I remember one account from a Stalingrad vet about using a sharpened entrenching tool to bushwhack one German after another.

That said, the brass and political bosses still fell back on the bad old ideology of taking positions through sheer manpower. They were relying on such nonsense even into the Cold War. It was proof of their fundamental corruption. The lowly "comrade" conscripts were nothing to them, lower than dirt. If they lost thousands of veterans in a fruitless assault they didn't care about the deaths--just what Stalin would do to them for failure. Or even worse what he'd do to them for success LOL