Mosins vs. Mausers

Status
Not open for further replies.

jagdpanzer347

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
744
Location
Southwest Ohio
Greetings all. Just curious as to what my fellow THR members prefer and why. I seem to have never met a surplus rifle I didn't like, so I have some of each.
Both are so rich with history and so fun to shoot, I really can't decide which I like better. I can say of the rifles in my modest collection, the FR8 is my favorite Mauser and the Finn M39 my favorite Mosin. Thoughts?

-jagd
 
The only examples I have are a 1945 M44 Mosin and a 1927 M93 Spanish Mauser (7x57). Definitely prefer the Mauser. Smoother, faster action by far.

Now between a Finnish M39 and a German K98 or Yugo 24/47, I dunno. Probably still go for the K98
 
Owned and shot many of each. I like them both, but my heart belongs to the clunky old Mosin. They have their own pros and cons. The biggest difference is in their distribution and history. The Mausers spanned the world, and were used everywhere from Argentina to Siam. Each nation had its own particular model--and I include our own Springfield '03 among them. The engineers at Mauser were constantly upgrading the design, which created further complexities. The net result is a complex mix of rifles with limited parts interchangeability between models and subtypes.

The Mosins, OTOH, were developed in Czarist Russia and remained in orbit around Russia and the USSR. Most subtypes came from Russia's neighbors, most notably the Finns and East European nations. Some captures made it to Austria and Turkey, and of course our own nation had its share, but these never became anything more than obscure remnants. Plus, the Mosins never had a Mauser-like sales team pushing them. Nor did anyone bother trying to improve on the basic system. It worked well enough. Even the Finns couldn't find a cost-effective way of making it better. Their limited efforts with the infamous M-27 "wings" were a notable failure. It's the old Russian proverb, "The best is the enemy of good enough." The upside is interchangeability of parts between models is excellent.

Both Mauser and Mosin actions are tough, though Mauser didn't have anything as tough as the '91 Mosin until the '98. Mosin actions get a bad rap for sticking because people fire horrific ammo out of old parts rifles from the bargain bin. But I've had more and worse jams by far out of old Mausers. When you use bad ammo and add poor bolt fit and headspace issues, the jams are going to happen with any action. A smooth Mosin is as fast as a smooth '98--though neither is as fast as a Swede.

The Mosin uses big, archaic rimmed cartridges. Only the Siamese Mauser does likewise. The advantage of this design is it tends to be more forgiving of headspace variations, but it also means rimlock is a threat. And it makes most stripper clips for the Mosin worse than useless, since even if they work they're likely to insert the cartridges with locked rims.
 
Very well said Cosmo, as usual. I figured I could pencil in a vote for Mosins for you.

On an unrelated note, I have been following your posts regarding the M1895 Nagant over on GB. I picked up a 1931 Tula last week and hope to try it out tommorrow with some .32 S&W ammo.

-jagdpanzer
 
These are just my opinion.

  • Mauser would win the beauty pageant; I've seen some beautiful examples of this kind of rifle.
  • An excellent example of each would be pretty close as far as consistent accuracy, and I don't mean one of the Big5 specials.
  • I own several Mosins and no Mausers, so I've made my choice.
jm
 
Personally, I like both of them very much. The biggest differences to me are the actions, and the sights. I really dislike the Mosin actions I've handled, whereas I do like the Mauser actions. The sights are a definite winner for the Mauser, hands down. They are the best iron sites I've EVER used, peep sight have nothing on them IMO.

The accuracy is superb with both, they tie in that area. The looks go to the Mauser, but that view can go both ways from person to person. I just feel like the durability of the Mauser is on a high level, whereas I don't get the same impression of the M44.

What goes for Mosin's M44 for me is that it "jammed" less than my Mauser. Sometimes, the 8mm cartridges single stack two in a row, making it extremely difficult to get them out of the magazine. There you have it, both are great but let's face it, I'm a Mauser man...
 
My Mosin rocks. My Spanish Mauser rocks. Between the two of them, though, I'd be tempted to pick the Mosin. I don't know why, but the long, slender rifle (yes, 1891/30) just appeals to me.
 
Im thinking Mauser, cause it is a awsome abolt action, can be deadly accurate & dependable.

Enfeild, has the best trench rifle,cause of it rear locked lugs, it can handle the worse of feild conditions.

Mosins, never bothered to buy one.:scrutiny:

TG
 
I have had a Finnish Mosin, several Enfields, several Mausers.
Right now, I have a 1939 Vz24 Mauser, a very used beater bought for $130. The bore cleaned up very nicely, and it shoots better than I hoped it would, so right now I like the Mausers.

Mark
 
The Mauser gets my vote... this week.

The Mosin bolt at best feels almost homemade compared to the Mauser; it just doesn't have the same feel.

They both have tons of history- got a Dragoon MN- but every Mauser "byf" and "ce" just talks to me. Both rifles involve Russia, no matter what you pick. :evil:

If only the Finn M-39 had a smooth-turning Mauser bolt...

91/30's feel like a Kentucky rifle. M-38's just feel mass-produced (duh).

The Mauser has many children- the 03, Remingtons, etc. but the MN's time came and went when the Soviet wars ended.

The Mauser will never be out of style, or outdated to me.
 
Well, I think there's a reason (other than geo-politics) why the mauser action is still the basis for lots of modern rifles, whereas the mosin nagant action isn't (as far as I know) in production anywhere.

Jackal said:
I personally prefer the Mosins slick action(Note: I have a long sniper bolt on mine).

That must be the first time I've ever heard a Mosin action described as "slick." Effective, sure, reliable, uhuh. But not slick. "Hit with a 2x4 when it gets stuck, and no harm done" is the more common description, I think. :evil:

All that being said, I've got several of each and love shooting 'em all. My favorite's probably a Westinghouse manufactured M1891 (dated 1915, but I've heard that doesn't mean it couldn't have been manufactured in 1916) that the Finns captured at some point and put one of the Finnish stocks on it. So, if you're going to play with it at the range, I'd probably say Mosin (cheap is the tie-breaker). If you're going to take it hunting, Mauser.
 
Mauser...I've have/had an M-44 and 2 91/30s--just a bit crude for my tastes.

The Mausers I have on the other hand, feel/act nearly as good as many production rifles (and while we're mentioning it, how many commercial actions were ever patterned after a Mosin? How 'bout after the Mauser?)

But, my biggest complaint about the Mosins is the "safety"--not even sure it really qualifies as one, as you have to put the gun into battery, before you can engage it.

Mosins are fun guns, especially the 44s and 38s, but I'm sticking with Mausers from here out. There's so many different permutations/varieties of Mausers out there, you could spend a lifetime (and more $$$$ than I have) collecting them.
 
The "safety" is the biggest reason I don't care for the Mosin-Nagant. I've had several Mausers, but no M-Ns.

John
 
That safety, once you learn to properly work it, is the most positive, quietest, and safest safety around that I know of.
 
Almost every commercial bolt action around today has a big dose of Mauser engineering. I don't know of any with MN backgrounds.

It seems the marketplace has spoken.
 
It's not even a contest. Mausers are head and shoulders above Mosins. Now, compare Mausers and Enfields and we might have a discussion.
 
Mosins are far better than Mausers!

Why you ask?

Everytime I pull a Mauser out of the safe, I dig out a Brownells Catalog and a calulator and start figuring the cost of turning my 98/22 into a custom masterpiece. I have spent thousands of fake dollars building my ultimate gun.

Mosins don't fill me with that kind of inspiration.

ZM
 
The metal machining on the Mauser is superior to the MN. But the funtionality of both seems pretty much a draw, at least in my case. I've sent a lot of ammo (surplus ammo) down range with both. No real problems to speak of with either. The Mauser seems to be built with better materials metal grade/ wood stock, but again I really can't say that it makes the big difference to the old soldiers who fought with both. All they want is funtional, reliable, and accurate enough. Both rifles fit this bill. Both share a rich history.
 
In general the mauser shows a bit better craftsmanship than the moisin, but comparing like rifles, (low end mil surps) I prefer the moisin nagat.

You can find low end mausers, you can find mid grade mausers, and you can find beautifull high end mausers, but you'd be hard put to find a moisin that would would be much better than a high midgrade.

If you're looking for a shooter you can't go wrong with a moisin nagat. I've never seen one that wasn't a shooter.

I did have a turk mauser that would occasionally ftf, the front sight fell off, and the barrel was rusted badly from where the acids in the stock wood had cut into the barrel (hidden from view or I wouldn't have boughten it)

It was the same 100$ as the nagat sitting next to it, and looking back at it, I would have been better served going with a nice long barreled russian.

cest la vie.
 
this is the same arguement of AK47 vs AR. its "percision and smooth" versus cheap, simple and reliable. mausers may have been all over the world. but i garentee you. some where in southeast asia, or in the middle east. there is a bicycle shop and in the basement they are still making mosin's. :cool:

my vote is MN. K.I.S.S.
 
but you'd be hard put to find a moisin that would would be much better than a high midgrade.

Not true! These comments about the low grade of Mosin workmanship are based on the wartime Soviet production rifles. Just as there are Turkey Mausers that look like they were constructed by apes with ball-peen hammers, there are mid 40's 91/30's and hacked up M38's that have rough machining and rough fit.

But if you learn a little more, you will find that there are some truly phenomenal Mosins. The superlative M-28 and 28/30 of the Civil Guard, for example.

http://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/MosinNagant-M2830rifle-introduction.asp

MOA or sub-MOA accuracy, expert workmanship, improved trigger and a butter smooth action. With an M-28 and iron sights alone, Häyhä racked up over 500 confirmed kills over the space of a few months. These rifles are getting harder to find, though I've scrounged up two over the years--one marked as a "Russian rifle" for $100 and the other for $200 as an M-39. Sold both to collectors, as I don't have the space to store them properly. But I did get to have a little fun with them, and they're real death ray rifles. With D166 ball they'll outshoot most modern production hunting rifles.
 
My Mosin M44(all origional, not re-arsenal) has the smoothest bolt slide/throw of any rifle I own. It is smoother than my Winchester M70, Ruger 77, Ishapore Enfield or my M48 Mauser. It's also a great shooter after I reworked the trigger. Like said above, there are good Mosins and good Mausers. I personally have not felt a smooth sliding Mauser military bolt, ever.
 
They are both great rifles. Go with your heart. My heart has fallen for mausers, but it's only what I like, not what necessarily works best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top