Mil-surp malice?

[Detritus]

I'm guessing most people aren't hunting beyond 200 yards. In that case, why use a scope at all

the proper accurate use of iron sights at any distance is a "learnable skill" using a scope is pretty much a "point and click" endevor.

Guess which method the average modern hunter- who btw grew up in suburbia not on a farm, and as noted only picks up a gun once a year- going to use...

as to the question posed in the OP, it's ignorance that occurs b/c of the above noted condition of the average american hunter's gun knowlege. human nature makes many denigrate that which they don't understand/lack experience with.

 

[MisterPX]

You failed to elaborate on teh guymwho called it a POS. If I got shot by one during the war, you can bet I'd call it a POS too.

 

[Caimlas]

Short answer: because they're idiots. They don't know better than the marketing slop they've been fed.

When you consider how much your average milsurp would cost today to manufacture, I'm willing to let them scorn them. They are typically sold well below what it'd cost to make in today's world. You can not get a decently accurate bolt action carbine with a removable magazine in a popular caliber (say, .308) today for shy of $1k, and yet such a milsurp can and does run under $400. Today, guns based on the Mauser don't have improved designs; they've got designs which have had corners cut in order to keep prices low (for the most part). It's no coincidence that a K98 action is (as near as I can tell) the preferred action to build up a 'new' rifle.

It just means more good, cheap guns for you and me. (Let's just hope the supply holds out until I can muster some more funds!)

 

[GigaBuist]

...using a scope is pretty much a "point and click" endevor.

I wish! I can't figure those things out for the life of me. Last year I was handed a very nice DMPS .308 with a 24x scope of some kind on it and I flat out missed an 8.5x11" piece of paper at 100 yards because I'm so inept when it comes to shooting with a scope.

Didn't help that the scope was zeroed for something around 375 yards, but I digress.

Had a fellow a few years ago plunk down next to me at the range and inquired as to what I was shooting. It was a K-31, and he was curious, so I told him what it was, gave a brief background, and proudly said that I only paid $130 for it at Dunhams. He lost interest at that point.

He regained interest when I pulled the trigger and only got a click. No bang.

"Guess that's why it cost $130, eh?"

Grumble. "I forgot to seat the mag properly." Tap. Rack. Bang.

The funny thing... he had, as I recollect, a WWII Jap Type 99 with him. I though I had a kindred spirit with me that day but he had very little knowledge about the rifle aside from his father taking it home in WWII.

 

[mr..plow]

Alot of newer shooters and youger ones have not aquried the "taste" that some of have..

Its either glock or AR15 for them..Thats fine, more cheaper Milsurplus for the guys who appreciate them.

 

[Mr White]

May I also add that I think the Fudds are pretty much confined to the Baby-Boomers and older crowd.

Not true. I know plenty of 20/30-something guys, all redneck hunter types, who think I'm stupid for spending money on "old guns that you can't hunt with".

But like someone said above, They are the kind of guys whose guns sit in the closet until 2 weeks before deer season and get maybe one box of shells run thru them in a year. A few of them are varmit hunters, so they shoot more, but to them, if it ain't got a 20x scope on it and can't shoot dime-sized groups at 100 yds, its worthless.

Screw 'em! I can't see spending $1000 on a gun and $500 on a scope that'll get used for 2 weeks out of the year and won't kill a deer any deader than my $75 M44, so I guess we're even.

 

[gyp_c2]

uhhhh...

...yer' gonna' need ta' dump that older guy, bubbatize, baby-boomer crap...
This is still THR...

 

[CajunBass]

Actually it's because they have different tastes than you do. What you see as a historically significant, and fascinating firearm, to them is just "an old gun."

It's not wrong or right, it's just different. I don't agree with them, but it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of what I own.

 

[Black Adder LXX]

^^^+1 - Definitely not an issue of right or wrong.^^^
I'm glad it creates less demand and corresponding lower prices for us collectors.
We really DO live in a consumer culture. Old is bad, new is good. New keeps the Dow Jones up at closing. I'm not saying that people that don't have their C&R license are duped or anything like that. Some people like the new stuff, and that's cool. So do I. I'm trying to explain the mentality behind those who bash on Milsurp like the OP's question.

But what do I know...

 

[trueblue1776]

Because folks with a 1500$ gun get pissed when you out shoot them with an 80 year old Nagant you got for 50$.

 

[TEDDY]

what to say

I find that colecting guns leads me to study history a very eluminating pastime at my age I have a lot of time.I used to think that the garand wasnt that great.(had a GEW 43)then I got one but its only a single shot with out the clip.and thats what they say about the carcano.however the cart always come in clips.think about how easy it is to load a garand and the same with a carcano or 88 commision rifle.I hope ignorance is not catching.I have japs /carcano/berthier/springfield/garand/fn49/SMLE.I study all.(i should learn to spell).
:banghead:

 

[DMK]

You failed to elaborate on teh guymwho called it a POS. If I got shot by one during the war, you can bet I'd call it a POS too.

I've read stories of guys shot by Mosin Nagants in Vietnam and Korea. Do they dislike them? Yes. But they have a lot of respect for what these guns can do and definitely do not refer to them as POS.

 

[jefnvk]

People look at my $500 Ford F150, and ask me why I would want such a beast. They then get into their Mercedes or Lincoln or whatever and drive away.

Tis the same thing with milsurps. I enjoy the effort it takes to keep myu truck working. I don't want something completely nice. I want somethign functional. Heated cup holders, leather, AC, working brakes, cars with those just aren't my style. Something with the bare necessities that is sturdy and beat-on able, is what I want.

I love milsurps. However, I have no reservations about what they are. They are battle rifles. Sure, some may be able to keep with new commercial. A few may outshoot new commercial rifles. An $89 milsurp is not going to win at Camp Perry though (minus the milsurp shoots).

My milsurps are my toys, just like my truck. Those that laugh at my truck and drive away in a $30,000 car, probably don't view their car as much more than transportation, and can't see why I would have such a toy. Those that would lauh at milurps, probably just aren't seeing that milsurps are toys, that I like to shoot, not a gun that I have for any specific function.

 

[john1911]

The more people that scorn C&R, the better for me.

 

[SteveS]

Why is it that so many gun-owners scorn mil-surps?

They do? I haven't heard any scorn and I know plnety of people that are only into 'sporting' guns. I have fixed up a few beat-up surplus guns and given them as gifts. Most people are fascinated by the history behind them and enjoy shooting them.

My guess is that you will find some scorn directed towards any gun if you look hard enough. Just look at any of the "what do you think of ________?" threads.

 

[Davo]

Those same naysayers dig Tec 9's and AR's with 3 backup flashlights.
Lots of guys dont want to except that it boils down to pratice and skill more than gear.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

It's all about taste and the arrogance of affluance. In a simmilar vein, I mentioned at a small party that I still held onto an old Chevy Chevette sub-compact. A fellow I just met--who owned a clasic Corvette looked down his nose as asked 'why??!'.

I told him because I liked the little car and it wasn't made of plastic like a #$%^&* Barbie Doll. That ended nicely our brief relationship.

It's the same with mil-surps and firearms (in general) of modest cost. A few people in the gun world get very hung up on the fetish of the $$$ value of the thing. And others the guns origin or vintage.

 

[Caimlas]

But like someone said above, They are the kind of guys whose guns sit in the closet until 2 weeks before deer season and get maybe one box of shells run thru them in a year. A few of them are varmit hunters, so they shoot more, but to them, if it ain't got a 20x scope on it and can't shoot dime-sized groups at 100 yds, its worthless.

I know a couple guys like (sorta) that. They use K98 receivers to build their 'race guns', usually in .243. Cost in parts and labor for them is about $600 IIRC (they've got a friend who builds the gun for them), but they use the rifles out past 300 yards to shoot prairie dogs. Between their prairie dog ammo, deer ammo, and plinking/shooting ammo, they went/go through two or three cases worth of reloaded ammo in a year, too (and that's just in their bolt actions, not including semi-auto and licensed full-auto - they're brother-in-laws and they do a lot of sharing/shooting together).

Yet, the last time I saw one of their 'starter rifles' (about 2 years ago), pre-disassembly and post-cleaning at the car wash, it was a very nice specimen: decent wood, little to no rust, a little bluing wear, good crown, and a clean bore. The rifle would've probably been able to hit prairie dogs at that range, and would've been less impacted by wind. Yet they had quite a bit of disdain for the ol' milsurp.

But I guess .243 was a hell of a lot cheaper to reload, and had more variety and availability for bullets and casings...

To each their own, I guess. Probably no point in stereotyping people, because it does no good and just alienates us from them even further. Aren't we supposed to stick together as gun owners? (I like milsurps and the modern stuff. They each have their benefits, disadvantages, and distinctly different qualities. For instance, my AR doesn't/can't rust (for the most part ), but a milsurp is more satisfying to refinish and/or clean up and make presentable, and has more of a 'solid' feel to it - regardless of the caliber itself.)

When it comes down to it, I imagine it's just a matter of quality assessment. Some people put more stock in cultural standing (new and wiz-bang), others more in quality, others in history, and others in the completely pragmatic nature of the beast. And certainly there are other things which can determine how someone values things, though short of a personal emotional investment, I'd wager those are the greatest.

 

[CarpenterCrack]

just compare targets to your foes, and you will feel much better. Few things compel a gun snob to pack up and leave the range in a huff than to be soundly thrashed at the 100 yard line by a man wielding a $190.00 battle rifle. Just one of life's golden moments that can be enjoyed nearly every outing to the range.

 

[SteveS]

Granted, I'm no hunter, but I'm guessing most people aren't hunting beyond 200 yards. In that case, why use a scope at all? It kind of cheeses me off that the $1000 hunting rifles don't even have iron sights. I mean, cripes, if I'm paying $1000 give me some back-up sights at least!

I know this is off topic, but if you do a search on iron v scopes, you'll find some spirited debate. As a hunter, with aging eyesight, I can say that I prefer a scope, especially when there is little light. Most of the guns I use for hunting have scopes, so I don't want sights on them.

This forum has a wide variety of gun owners, so where are all the mil-surp haters?

 

[pacodelahoya]

This forum has a wide variety of gun owners, so where are all the mil-surp haters?

The guys that snub thier noses at others guns are not the kind of people that would post on thr. I would wager they are not even "gun nutz" but "fuds" for lack of a better word. Trust me , I know plenty of "hunters" that just can't fathom the need for any type of non hunting firearm.

I've had to bite my tongue whilst loitering at my buddys gunstore because of such gun bigotry.

Personally, I see no need for hunting arms as I can buy fresh meat at the piggly wiggly(if we had them here in PA).

Just kidding, most hunting rifles make fine sniper rifles.

 

[tinygnat219]

eastwood44mag,

Why is it that so many gun-owners scorn mil-surps?

Why do people prefer Ford over Chevy? It's often not their interest. Some are gunsnobs, some are Tacticool Tommies, etc.

I just heard someone the other day, while looking at a K98 with full German markings, say 'well, that's worth $20.' Goes on to call various another mauser a POS, etc. Kind of irritated me, so I just left.

Ahhh, take advantage of the ignorant. Offer him 20 bucks for his rifle and see if he bites. Otherwise, I'd just ignore him. Sounds like he was trying to get a deal.

But seriously, why is it that mil-surps are so despised by so many? They serve as the basis for MANY "sporting" firearms. No one would call a Colt 1911 a POS, yet a Mauser, whose action is the basis for most hunting rifles, is garbage according to these characters.

Ask how much their Remchesterby cost them, then state that your 98K was a third of that. Or, have a custom rifle built on the 98K action. Smile, walk away.

I don't get it. Sure, they're not pretty, and they're old, but they work REALLY well, they don't cost as much as a new equivalent, and they're battle-proven. I think that says something for them, but it seems like I'm alone.

This is where you take advantage of the low price, grab as many as you can afford (different types of course) and run for the hills.

 

[GlowinPontiac]

i like milsurps because i just like the older stuff better and im not exactly rich so the more bang for the buck the better!
on that note i think i should start filling out my C&R application that came yesterday.....

 

[Sistema1927]

Some people are ignorant, and they can be cured.

Some people are stupid, and that can't.

Some people are both ignorant and stupid, that combination is terminal.

 

[SteveS]

The guys that snub thier noses at others guns are not the kind of people that would post on thr. I would wager they are not even "gun nutz" but "fuds" for lack of a better word. Trust me , I know plenty of "hunters" that just can't fathom the need for any type of non hunting firearm.

I guess my point is that you could take any firearm, even one that was very popular, and I guarantee that there would be 'haters'. There are certainly no shortage of opinions when it comes to guns.