Mauser VS Mosin Nagant

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a devoted mauser guy who's collected, hunted with and restored them ever since I got my first one a 13, its not even a comparison. The quality and design of the mauser is superior to any of its peers.

BUT, everybodies comments about ammo cost are spot on, I generally have to buy my 6.5, 7x57, 8mm ammo in 20 round boxes from one of the 'big three' and I pay accordingly. If you want to shoot, and your not overly concerned about one minute groups - its hard to beat a Mosin. Just look it over and try to get a good barrel.

Happy shooting!
 
It's funny sometimes how people prefer one product over another. I have never enjoyed the K98 with that funky pointy front sight that I can't see, but I love my modern CZ550 which is a Mauser action. And while I'm not a fan of the K98, I really do enjoy the Mosin Nagant rifles, except the sticky bolt issue. I find the quality to be on par, it is just a *different* design from the Mauser... not worse in design, just different.

There were different concerns in the design of each rifle, and the interrupter/ejector on the Mosin Nagant is pure genius. Both share a forward dual locking lug arrangement, with the lugs aligned 90 degrees apart between the designs, both work swell.
 
I'm very much _not_ a fan of the stock sights on most mausers and the mosin sights are significantly better. I can shoot both of them, but there are times I strain on the mausers. I don't buy line that the mauser design is light-years ahead of Sergei Mosin's creation. I think it is better and it is definitely easier to mount a scope on it and make it look like what most people think of as a "deer rifle." I'm a huge controlled-round-feed fan.

I've heard several people complain that the mosin doesn't have a 3rd safety lug like the 98's do. It has one. It's called that freaking huge bolt-handle root. If that shears off, I think you've blown way past the "overpressure signs" and right into hand-grenade territory.

The stock triggers on both of them leave much to be desired, but the mauser 2-stage trigger isn't too bad. The mosin triggers can range from horrific to reasonably crisp. They were both designed as military rifles that would shoot to minute-of-man. They weren't intended to be 1/32 MOA to 1000 yards (or arshini :) ) but there are quite a few examples of both that are amazingly accurate.

I don't know. I like them both. I'll just have to continue buying both of them until I make a decision on which one is better. :)

Matt
 
YZ, the real Sergei Mosin worked at Tula and Sestroryetsk, so I suppose I should be partial to those, but Izhevsk did good work too. All of the Imperial arsenals produced some rather nice rifles before the Great War. It's difficult to gain an impression of Chatellerault quality simply because there are so few survivors.
 
Both are very good rifles to have. In today's surplus ammo supply chain, the Mosin wins hands down. The 8mm surplus has dried up for the most part so if you want to have a good supply of ammo to practice and have fun, the Mosin is the way to go. But the Mauser still is the best looking bolt rifle out there. BTW the 8 mm cartridge has a lot of kinetic energy to bring down any NOrth American game including the grizzley bear.
 
Sergei

Bummer. From your post I thought you'd seen or handled a Tsarist Mosin to tell its quality. Many of the opinions I read before had been replicated from literature and from one another. Thank you for sharing anyhow.
 
YZ, the opinions I have given in this thread are based on my own first-hand experience with the rifles.
 
OK, Sergei.

As a student of history I came to realize that the Mosin rifle was in every conflict of the bloody first half of the 20th century, from the Atlantic to the Far East. Its design reflects the military doctrine of its day and place, and the stampings often tell a story. The only reason it is cheaper than the Mauser or any contemporary battle rifle is not the quality of build, but the abnormally large supply.
 
Last edited:
Archaic said:
As a devoted mauser guy who's collected, hunted with and restored them ever since I got my first one a 13, its not even a comparison. The quality and design of the mauser is superior to any of its peers.

BUT, everybodies comments about ammo cost are spot on, I generally have to buy my 6.5, 7x57, 8mm ammo in 20 round boxes from one of the 'big three' and I pay accordingly. If you want to shoot, and your not overly concerned about one minute groups - its hard to beat a Mosin. Just look it over and try to get a good barrel.

Happy shooting!
Click to expand...
There is no doubt as to the quality of the mauser action....everyone has copied it. However if we are talking about the "best" WWII bolt gun I would give the nod to the last one designed....you have an advantage of looking at what everyone else has and then improve upon it. But there is one thing you can't get away from when messing around with surplus rifles.....and I said it before. These things are now knocking on the door of 100 years old....they have been around the block a few times. The "worst" rifle can shoot better then the "best" rifle...it is all going to depend on how it was taken care of....shape of the bore is the thing you are going to have to look at above all others. From the sounds of your posts you are looking for a fun starter rifle into the surplus hobby...there can be no doubt that the 91/30 is going to give you the best bang for the buck....add to that you can have 100 Mosins and no two will have the same history.
 
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.
 
Ro1911 said:
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your opinion. That was a really stupid answer. For you, those statements may be valid for what you want in a gun, but they're not an accurate expression of reality.

At one point in time, mausers were just as cheap as mosins. Does that mean that the mausers magically became higher quality guns as the price increased relative to the mosins? As of right now, a refurb 91/30 is only slightly less expensive than a Yugo 24/47. Must mean that the Yugo's were machined by drunk 7-year-olds with dremels instead of the fine workmanship that goes into the more expensive Persian and Argentine mausers.

I agree that mausers (98s specifically) are in-general better designed than mosins. BUT, There is much more range of difference and quality top-to-bottom in mausers than there is between the average mauser and the average mosin.

Matt
 
At one time 98k's were cheaper than 91/30's....those communist guns where just not in the country, but every hardware store had a barrel of 98k's, the next barrel had 1093's, and the cheapo barrel had Krag's....I know my father in law bought a Krag out of the cheapo barrel because he could not afford the $25 for the 1903.
 
Hi YZ,

I'm late to the game.

I study the Finnish mods a great deal. They remind me a lot of Americans -- or did, when they were using Mosins.

First, they made sure the rifle shot on. This meant they'd usually modify the sights.

Then they'd start messing with accuracy.

Proper inletting is essential, and they'd do it. What they couldn't do with inletting, they'd accomplish with shims on the action and sometimes the barrel.

They improved the trigger pull greatly -- lots of two-stage jobs. My favorite is the M39, though there are others, like the M27 and M28, that benefited from different types of triggers.

Often, barrels would be changed out to make them slightly heavier, and new stocks were made. Just depended on the model of Mosin. Those captured from the Russians typically had the least done to them. They'd be looked over, sighted in, maybe shimmed, and sent back to the field.

Regards,

Josh Smith
Smith-Sights.com
 
This is a really stupid question, first mausers cost anywhere from 2x-5x as much as a mosin 91/30. Second of course the Mauser is the better gun. and third the only real reason to buy the mosin instead is the much much cheaper ammo.

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

That post actually did not help at all.

Its like saying the AR is better than the AK... apples and oranges.

Its not a stupid question; Not everyone will know the differences between the two rifles, which is why the question is posed by the OP. In general the Mausers are seen as the "better/nicer" gun, but Mosin's are more practical and cheaper. The aproppriate choice depends on what will work for each individual shooter based on his budget, shooting needs, etc.

If a newbie asks which rifle to get between the AR/AK, would you automatically suggest the AR??
 
YZ said:
OK, Sergei.

As a student of history I came to realize that the Mosin rifle was in every conflict of the bloody first half of the 20th century, from the Atlantic to the Far East. Its design reflects the military doctrine of its day and place, and the stampings often tell a story. The only reason it is cheaper than the Mauser or any contemporary battle rifle is not the quality of build, but the abnormally large supply.
Click to expand...
+1 YZ These two rifles are each one a study in design. The 13 parts in a Mosin Nagant make it the simpler design. Simplicity has its own virtue. The sights are superior to the Mauser. The rimmed cartridge is a definite minus in a bolt rifle, but a plus in a machine-gun so I have been informed. The interrupter on the Mosin Nagant is pure genius. The differences in price reflect a market bloated with one, and pretty much devoid of the other.

Lastly to say that price is a reflection of quality is like saying the gatorade I buy at 7-11 for $1 is of lesser quality than the gatorade I buy at the Venetian for $4.
 
There are no stupid questions...one could support that the mosin is a better gun...and list facts and stats to back up that statement. Everyone starts somewhere,
 
mauser for custom builds the action is a tank. Mosin for shooting and eventually will go up as the sks and everything else has. As stated above depends on use.
 
Josh
Great review on the Finnish refurbs.

Stubbicat
Yep a llot of people think if they're so cheap then something has to be wrong with them. Which in turn keeps the prices low. Good for the rest of us.
 
Inexpensive is not equal to cheap, just like expensive does not equal quality. Mitchells Mausers anyone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

stchman
  • Locked
Mosin Nagant M91/30 vs. the Karabiner 98k
Replies
15
Views
2K
Maverick223
Maverick223
stchman
  • Locked
Trade Mosin Nagant M91/30 for Turkish Mauser.
Replies
13
Views
720
Red Tornado
R
A
  • Locked
Yugo M48 8mm Mauser?
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Sam1911
S
HB
  • Locked
First surplus bolt rifle?
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Ignition Override
I
T
  • Locked
8MM Mauser VS Finnish M39 Mosin Nagant
Replies
19
Views
4K
wojownik
wojownik
Back
Top