Mosin-Nagant as a defense rifle

[Cosmoline]

Sure they all spit lead out the muzzle, but they're designed to be optimal for specific missions.

Where did you get that from? The rifles of the Mosin's era were not specialized for specific missions. They're all-around rifles, good for everything from hunting to mass charges. I wouldn't argue that a Mosin is better than a carbine specialized for home defense, but the Mosin will still work in that role just as it will work in many other roles. It's been tested in a wide array of conditions and roles and passed the tests, which is more than many more specialized modern rifles can boast.

But I don't see anyone advocating a Remington 700 CDL as a good choice for a defensive weapon, either.

My only problem with using a 700 for home defense is the scope, which causes troubles at short ranges. If iron sights or an EER scope are used I'd take the Remington over any handgun. Accuracy is excellent, power is excellent. Cylcing is a tad slower than a tuned Mosin, but still functionally adequate.

 

[Funderb]

He's trying to say that you wouldn't use a sledge hammer to build a computer.
He's not saying that any rifle is bad at anything else, just that some situations are appropriate for different tools.

And the M/N was initially designed to be faster, and more convenient than a muzzleloader.
Then redesigned as a cheap, quickly produced steel tube + wood that would kill germans. Emphasis on cheap and quick.
Then redesigned again to be lighter, and shorter to save material, and still serve as an early version of a leatherman multi-purpose tool.
When it comes down to it they really weren't designed at all after 1891.
just chopped down a bit.

 

[Timthinker]

Obviously, the Mosin-Nagant is not an ideal choice as a self-defense weapon for the reasons listed previously. Yet, the sight of a firearm, any firearm, has deterred thugs in the past. Now, I do not mean to imply that brandishing a gun will automatically cause a BG to flee, but it can. Should this fail, then the good guy, or gal, will need a reliable and powerful firearm. The Mosin-Nagant seems to fill this category.

I close with an interesting story. An eldery lady my family knew once faced a frightening situation. She discovered three young men entered her home with the intent of doing no good. She immediately called for her husband to come out of the back bedroom with his gun. The intruders fled. What these punks did not realize was her husband had been dead for some time. I guess God still performs miracles these days.


Timthinker

 

[Cosmoline]

And the M/N was initially designed to be faster, and more convenient than a muzzleloader.

It actually replaced the Berdan, but I understand the point. The problem comes with assuming theres' been some stellar advance made in small arms since 1891 that has made the Mosin a relic. There hasn't been. You can take one smokeless centerfire rifle or another. One may be shorter or use a lower powered cartridge, another may be semiautomatic. But they're all variations on the same theme. Consequently the bolt action war rifles of the 1890's may be old, but they're not in the same class as a musket.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

can you imagine the movie "enemy at the gates" featuring a Brown Bess instead of the Mosin?

 

[Cosmoline]

... or Häyhä using one.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

 

[tube_ee]

Leave out

Discussions of effectiveness in war, as they're beside the point. Although the experience of the Red Army in Afghanistan before we started supplying the Mujaheddin with Stingers and such might make you rethink the effectiveness of the bolt-action battle rifle as a guerrilla weapon against a modern technological Army.

Still, for one man alone, defending hearth and home, with no thought to the offensive, it's hard to come up with a scenario that would be survivable with an AR / AK / FAL that would not be survivable with an M44. In extremis, the disadvantages of the lone gunman are much more likely to be due to his aloneness than to whatever weapon he is carrying.

If it's what you have, get as good with it as you can, and consider yourself as well-defended as you're likely to be. Because, really, you are.

--Shannon

 

[ArmedBear]

The problem comes with assuming theres' been some stellar advance made in small arms since 1891 that has made the Mosin a relic. There hasn't been.

Well, other than the perfection of compact, lightweight, reliable autoloaders, with large detachable magazines, since WW II, I guess there haven't.

Max rate of fire of a Brown Bess is about 3 rounds per minute. A Mosin, 15 rounds per minute. An AK or AR series fired semiauto with 30 rounders is good for what, 75 rpm, with each shot fired about as accurately as the Mosin's 15 rpm?

If you're going to say that a Mosin is a significant advance over a musket, and it is, then a modern general-issue rifle is about the same advancement over a Mosin. And the differences between, say, a Mosin and an AR are exactly the differences that matter for defensive use. We are NOT talking about sniping. Home defense is not sniping.

Furthermore, the bolt action was essentially perfected in 1898 WRT speed, ease and reliability of the action. True, even some of the best bolt actions to this day are copies of the Mauser's engineering. But even THAT was after 1891.

OTOH, I suppose you're right that a pretty effective defensive rifle was designed by 1891. It wasn't the Mosin, though. The 1866 Winchester predated the Mosin by 25 years, and was a superior defensive weapon from its inception, as was the improved, steel-framed 1873.

If iron sights or an EER scope are used I'd take the Remington over any handgun.

That would depend on the situation. A 9mm semiauto would probably work better against, say, 3 home invaders, than the Remington 700, especially indoors in close quarters. You'd have to know how to shoot it fast, but that's true of anything. Note that that doesn't mean a semiauto carbine wouldn't be better still, and it also doesn't mean any number of other things that I didn't write.

 

[ArmedBear]

it's hard to come up with a scenario that would be survivable with an AR / AK / FAL that would not be survivable with an M44

Actually, it's really easy, and it's not an unthinkable scenario.

Start with this one: two home invaders, with pistols in their pockets.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

you there! yes you, the bear with the gun! i get the strange feeling you just hate bolt guns.

 

[atek3]

my main problem is that operating a mosin on the shoulder is very tricky, whereas operating an enfield on the shoulder is easy... it makes the enfield a hands down better choice

 

[KiltedClaymore]

but this is a mosin thread!!!!!

 

[ArmedBear]

i get the strange feeling you just hate bolt guns.

Yeah, that's it...

 

[KiltedClaymore]

knew it....

 

[Noxx]

I own several mosins, and I lerv the heck out of em. However in case of the front door getting kicked in, it's last on my list right behind my shotgun, every handgun I own, and the SKS.

I can't even imagine the effects on sight and hearing of popping off an M44 in the house.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

noxx, read my earlier post of my experiance with the boomstick and enclosed spaces.

 

[ArmedBear]

Hell, I own two Mosins, and more bolties than anything else. My go-to hunting rifle is a bolt gun. Love it.

A Mosin is not just any bolt gun, though.

The Mosin is not my LAST choice for home defense, though. I would choose a Mosin over at least one long gun I have, for home defense use. It's a sidelock muzzleloader. Actually, there's another: an old straight-pull Mannlicher. Straight-pull sounds quick and easy, until you actually try it.

 

[TimboKhan]

I mean, the Brown Bess helped sustain a vast empire, too, but I wouldn't want to face one guy with a modern weapon if I had 20 with muskets.

Boy, speaking only for me, I would take those odds in a heartbeat.

Armedbear, your scenario of two BG's in the house with pistols isn't necessarily unwinnable with a Mosin, just as it isn't necessarily winnable with an AR. If you will recall, I said that author David Fortier did some testing, and was able to achieve one aimed shot every 2-3 seconds. Provided that the BG's don't have the drop on you (which would be bad news regardless of weapon) and provided that you have practiced with your rifle, I see this as case where the enormous boom works in your favor. The surprise of the giant flash/boom, followed by BG#1 dropping to the floor with a sucking chest wound would likely generate enough spare time to chamber another round and fire at BG#2. You might only get 1 shot at each, but you might only get 1 shot with the AR too.

I tend to agree that the abundance of tacticool rifles has made people forget the forest for the trees. Multiple bad guys broke into homes in the 40's, 50's and 60's, and people certainly didn't have AK's, AR's or SKS's then. I am not saying that as an argument for the M/N, as much as to point out that people have successfully been repelling invaders for a long time without the aid of an AR.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

plus BG#1 would be on fire, as well as breathing thru the fist sized exit wound in his back....

 

[ArmedBear]

TimboKhan, of course you can come up with some scenario where a Mosin might work.

However, the practice and skill it would take to shoot both BG's with the Mosin, indoors in close quarters, before either of them can pull out a pistol and/or grab your rifle and point it away from them, would allow you to shoot each of them 3 times with an AR, alternating between them. Add a third guy, and you can really go through some mental gymnastics imagining how you'd hit all of them with your Mosin in close quarters.

Sure, if you hit each with the Mosin, the shot would be effective. But with the AR, you can even afford to miss once or twice.

But hey, go ahead, close your eyes and imagine your way to home defense nirvana with your Mosin.

Milsurp yoga! (Although I think my Ishy would be better for yoga for some reason.)

 

[CajunBass]

I close with an interesting story. An eldery lady my family knew once faced a frightening situation. She discovered three young men entered her home with the intent of doing no good. She immediately called for her husband to come out of the back bedroom with his gun. The intruders fled. What these punks did not realize was her husband had been dead for some time. I guess God still performs miracles these days.

My mother told me once that when she and my dad first got married, he told her, "If I ever yell for you to "get the gun," don't you yell back "We don't have one.".

If you take a half million Mosin's, and give them to a half million conscripts, you can defend a half million homes.

 

[KiltedClaymore]

oh, and bear, i was joking. as for thinking you would miss using a Mosin indoors, how big is your house?!?!?!??! i know if i step into my hallway with any gun you put in my hands, i can hit whatever is there. my narrow hall makes a great shooting lane.

 

[ArmedBear]

It's not always safe to interpret something that seems like a joke, AS a joke, around here. I did think you were joking, though.

I wouldn't miss the first guy, unless he grabbed the rifle and pushed it out of the way. That would be pretty easy to do with a 91/30 in close quarters. Of course, if you shoot it, the effect will be like a flash-bang. Probably on everyone in the room, including the shooter.

 

[tube_ee]

OK...

Start with this one: two home invaders, with pistols in their pockets.

You shoot one, the other one shoots you. Guess what... even if you shoot the other one on your way down, you still lose. Or, you shoot one, the other one runs. You win. If you take a round, you lose. Period. Of all the scenarios offered as proof of the superiority of the high-cap / high ROF weapon (for one person alone), the multiple-attacker scenario is the most-frequently presented, and the least convincing. If one person is up against multiple people, and assuming equal motivation to kill or be killed, the solo person is going to die. If the bad guys haven't beat feet when the first one takes a round, it's game over for the solo.

Dying is losing, regardless of how many of them also die.

--Shannon