Fair Trade or Steal?

[Pigspitter]

I made a private trade with a friend today in which we exchanged a pair of military surplus rifles. The offer a very nicely sporterized MkIII Lee-Enfield for a good condition Mosin Nagant 91/30. I had purchased the Mosin for $90 from the same friend who bought the Enfield for $100 who wished to trade for a "project rifle". I think I came out on top in this deal and I wanted to know your opinions. I promise I'll post pics once I pick up the rifle.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

You started with a Mosin and ended with a No. 1 Mk 3? Depends on condition, but probably you came out better'n he did.

 

[Animal Mother]

A Mosin, generally isn't as good of a rifle as an Enfield. However ammo is expensive for an Enfield, compared to the Mosin. The sporterizing will hurt collector value, but its still probably more collectable than a Mosin.

I think its a fair trade.

 

[fletcher]

Speaking on terms of $, you probably got the slightly better end of the deal. But, you both got what you wanted, so it seems fair enough.

 

[foghornl]

If both of you are satisfied, it is a fair deal.

$$$-wise, you probably got the slightly higher value.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

The Bubba'd Enfield loses value.

The Mosin Nagant still has cheap and plentiful ammo available. A huge advantage for someone who actually wants to shoot it.

The Enfield, even in poor condition is still a better rifle, more refined and with an action light-years smoother and better than the MN. Better sights too.

Tough call. If I wanted something to bang away with at the range ...the MN is the better choice due to ammo price and availability. If I want a rifle I will rarely shoot that has a better action ...the Enfield is the choice.

I like to shoot. So I would of kept the MN. Sorry, don't mean to be a "debbie downer".

 

[Pigspitter]

Here are the pics of the Enfield. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that I traded the 91/30 off primarily because I already own a M44, so I still have that to shoot. I believe in diversity.