Aaryq
Member
Howdy folks. I want 3 rifles, but my budget says 2. The 3 rifles are:
Enfield
Mosin Nagant
Mauser
Which 2 would you choose and why?
Enfield
Mosin Nagant
Mauser
Which 2 would you choose and why?
Help me make up my mind
- Thread starter Aaryq
- Start date
- Status
GreenFurniture
Member
Enfield and Mauser.
Why? Because they're the two best choices of the three you have to pick from.
Why? Because they're the two best choices of the three you have to pick from.
jrfoxx
Member
I'd have to agree with Greenfurniture: Enfield and Mauser, but more for the reason that Mosins are plentiful and cheap enough that you can pick one up later in good condition with no problem.For the Enfiled, I'd vote for a Savage U.S. property marked one, just for a little added uniqueness for minimal added cost.
Aaryq
Member
It seems that the Enfield is common ground. The Mauser has 2 vote and the Nagant has 1. I believe you might be correct about the commonality of the Nagant...
Kimber1911_06238
Member
enfield and mauser. just because i like both of them more than the mosins
Aaryq
Member
Eeeek. I did another budget review. I can get the Mauser AND the Mosin or else JUST the Enfield.
How expensive is .303 Enfield Ammo compared to the 7.62x54 and 8mm?
How expensive is .303 Enfield Ammo compared to the 7.62x54 and 8mm?
MrTwigg
Member
Get a Finn (SA) marked 91/30 or one of the carbines (M-38, M39 or the more desirable 91/59 ) 'iffin you don't want a five foot long rifle. 
Essex County
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2005
- Messages
- 1,247
I'd go for the Mauser and a 91-30 with the best bore I could find..Essex
mustanger98
Member
My two picks are Enfield and Mauser.
Enfield- No.4Mk1 or No.4Mk2 are both good rifles and IMO built like a tank. No.1Mk3 is also a great old rifle if you prefer the tangent sight over the later aperture. Sights are graduated in yards. They're good accurate rifles. Handloading cuts ammo cost and you can tailor the load to your rifle for enhanced accuracy.
Mauser- K98k and VZ-24 are my picks of all the Mauser variants. I own and shoot both. IMO they're also built like a tank. My comment on handloading applies here too. Those sights are set up to not need adjustment to 400m if the shooter knows what he's doing with surplus ball. With handloading, a load can be tailored to shoot to the sights at a given distance if needed.
Note: Mosins can be interesting too, but I personally can't get excited over them or the 7.62x54R. Those had major Belgian input in their engineering, but they don't seem to me like German engineering. One interesting point is that occassionaly you run across one that has the sight graduated in an archaic Russian unit of measurement rather than the later metric.
Enfield- No.4Mk1 or No.4Mk2 are both good rifles and IMO built like a tank. No.1Mk3 is also a great old rifle if you prefer the tangent sight over the later aperture. Sights are graduated in yards. They're good accurate rifles. Handloading cuts ammo cost and you can tailor the load to your rifle for enhanced accuracy.
Mauser- K98k and VZ-24 are my picks of all the Mauser variants. I own and shoot both. IMO they're also built like a tank. My comment on handloading applies here too. Those sights are set up to not need adjustment to 400m if the shooter knows what he's doing with surplus ball. With handloading, a load can be tailored to shoot to the sights at a given distance if needed.
Note: Mosins can be interesting too, but I personally can't get excited over them or the 7.62x54R. Those had major Belgian input in their engineering, but they don't seem to me like German engineering. One interesting point is that occassionaly you run across one that has the sight graduated in an archaic Russian unit of measurement rather than the later metric.
Aaryq
Member
Assuming you're a pretty good shot (Marine) and can hit center mass 10 out of 10 times with an M-16 at 500 yards, what's the max range I could hit a man-sized target with each of those 3 guns?
mustanger98
Member
Enfield- Where's MJ when we could use his input? Some of his posts, he's talked about keeping his rounds in a IIRC 12"x16" square at 800yds with the No.4T, but that's the sniper rifle prior to the L42A1(.308). With irons, probably about 600yds, but some guys can probably stretch that out to 800-900yds.
Mauser- I've heard accounts of Germans hitting our guys in WW2 out to 900yds with iron sighted K98k's. Take into account that 8mmMauser is a higher pressure round than .303British and US .30-06. Also note that the M1 Garand's sights go to 1200 with a 800-1000yd effective range, while the 1903A3's sight goes to 800yds, of course depending on who's doing the shooting.
Mosin- Hmmm. Anybody got that info? Based on the barrel, ammo and sights, it shouldn't be too much difference assuming we're talking about the 91/30.
I'm also noting that you said "hit a man sized target" as opposed to killing someone at that distance.
Aaryq
Member
I shoot man sized targets. My shooting buddies are all Marines, and that's our target preference...it's an easy way of figuring out who's the best shot of the day.
Aaryq
Member
Well I made up my mind. I origionally intended on getting a Rock Island 1911 and one or 2 of those rifles (I found someone who could get me a really good deal). I decided to get all 3 rifles and save up for a higher quality 1911 to buy later. It's funny though. I came home on vacation to buy a pistol and where I'm sitting now, I'm coming home with a bunch of rifles and no pistols. Strange how things work out...
rockstar.esq
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,475
Well there was a surplus rifle magazine article a few years back that did some long range testing compairing the Mosin to the K98. The Mosin won by a slight margin due to a few key factors.
1) The mosin mag design doesn't apply pressure to the top round causing it to feed easier & thereby slightly faster.
2) The mosin uses a plain post front sight which covers vastly less target area than the ubertarded triangle sight on the K98.
All the shooting was done from field positions at ranges from 100yds to 800yds.
As for the capacity of the rifle to hit stuff way out yonder, I'd say that ammo will be the single most discriminating factor. Cheap and crappy .303 British doesn't exist so newly made ammo is getting compared to Combloc Yugo export ammo from the 50's on the part of the Mosin and super old/ Persian made stuff from WWII on the part of the K98. Should you handload all three, I'd say the sighting systems will likely be the second most discriminating factor. Here I'd say the Enfield will have an advantage followed by the Mosin then the K98.
1) The mosin mag design doesn't apply pressure to the top round causing it to feed easier & thereby slightly faster.
2) The mosin uses a plain post front sight which covers vastly less target area than the ubertarded triangle sight on the K98.
All the shooting was done from field positions at ranges from 100yds to 800yds.
As for the capacity of the rifle to hit stuff way out yonder, I'd say that ammo will be the single most discriminating factor. Cheap and crappy .303 British doesn't exist so newly made ammo is getting compared to Combloc Yugo export ammo from the 50's on the part of the Mosin and super old/ Persian made stuff from WWII on the part of the K98. Should you handload all three, I'd say the sighting systems will likely be the second most discriminating factor. Here I'd say the Enfield will have an advantage followed by the Mosin then the K98.
- Status
