My complaint against milsurp rifles

[jimmyraythomason]

"5. Ammo is becoming an issue" HB,name ANY firearm that that isn't true about in some respect.

 

[minutemen1776]

My milsurps have been a waste of my limited resources.

Those are strong words. I hate that your milsurp experience has been so negative.

I think that, like a lot of things, some shooters just don't "get" milsurps, and that's OK. Personally, I don't "get" 1911s, DA revolvers, and hard-kicking magnums, but I do "get" milsurps. For me, it's the history, and I suspect that's the case with most true gun lovers who get into milsurps. Really, their only other appeal (and market) is for the highly "value conscious" gun buyer. There are quite a few of these guys, but I doubt that many of them are truly gun afficionados. For many, there's a desire to simply have a gun, but there's no desire to spend much to get one. In that case, milsurps offer a cheap ticket to gun ownership, and that is also OK. The problem, though, is when someone buys a milsurp with false expectations. Most are reasonably accurate, but for the guys I see at the range who love to shoot four-leaf-clover-sized groups with heavy-barreled bolt guns off a rest, a milsurp just won't do. In the end, if you want new performance just get a new gun and be done with it.

 

[HB]

There are quite a few of these guys, but I doubt that many of them are truly gun afficionados. For many, there's a desire to simply have a gun, but there's no desire to spend much to get one. In that case, milsurps offer a cheap ticket to gun ownership, and that is also OK. The problem, though, is when someone buys a milsurp with false expectations. Most are reasonably accurate, but for the guys I see at the range who love to shoot four-leaf-clover-sized groups with heavy-barreled bolt guns off a rest, a milsurp just won't do. In the end, if you want new performance just get a new gun and be done with it.

That probably hits the nail on the head. I really don't see much value in mil-surps, outside of mosins. For $79 you get reusable fireworks I guess
I look at it like this. When I go to the CMP store, I pick up a 30-06 that is beat to hell and very dirty. It may or not be a good shooter, but it will probably shoot into 4-5'' at 100 yards. TO ME, that is not really a good deal, considering it will cost $500...
They are fun to look at and fire on occasion, but aren't practical for the vast majority of my shooting. Kind of fit into the pistol grip shotgun, AR pistol, .500 S&W, and MAC-10 category. Fun Toys.

 

[JTW Jr.]

see if there are any VMBAR shoots in your area. ( Vintage Military Bolt Action Rifle )

That will open your eyes to the ways of the milsurps. While I like my AR's , Tikka's , etc.. I love my Mausers and Enfields. No fancy do dad's , gadgets , hickey ma doos , optics , etc , just a rifle , a sling and some ammo.... color me happy with my milsurps.

 

[Loanshark]

My only milsurp experience is with the K31. I have two. I liked the first one so much I had to get a second... I can get better than 4" groups @ 50 yards out of both of my samples all day long, in a hurricane if need be. That doesn't mean there are not bad samples out there.

It's not a particularly handy rifle when compared to modern hunting rifles. It's heavy and long, but I still like it. I feel I can count on it. It wouldn't bother me to throw it in the back of my truck or strap it to my ATV. I shoot lefty so it's not the most comfortable gun for me, I wouldn't want to go to a gun fight with it. But then I'm not a gunfighter!!

 

[dkk73]

Well, I've got an SKS sitting in the safe next to a POF 20" .308 AR, because I've felt both ways about this.

I got the POF after spending a lot of time and money (for me) trying to make a functional and accurate M1A platform. I know that that M1A is "military-pattern" rather than mil-surp, but some of the issues were the same for me.

Mil-surp and military-pattern copy guns have enormous historical and esthetic value. A lot of the (for lack of a better term) "older" shooters I like really like and respect have an affinity for them. They represent history, heritage, and an interest in guns other than as tools or toys to optimize for modern goals.

That said, I think I have been "sold" too much on how accurate these guns are. Some examples are, in some hands, but even when they are in spec it is to military standards. Which is not always real satisfying when you are trying to push your skills on the range and don't want to wonder if it's you or the gun.

I think 8 MOA at 50 yds is a pretty generous limit.

There are other practical reasons to own them (e.g. the Mosin stock pile example), but I think too much info is out there implying that they will do all things for all people.

That said, I like them! But, I sure understand where the OP is coming from.

Cheers,
David

 

[Deckard]

so my guess is user error

+1 I've put a lot of shooters with modern rifles to shame with my 104 year old Swedish Mauser. I'm looking to pick up a K31 next...wonderful rifles in my opinion. And I would rather have any, that's right any, milsurp than a soulless Remchester.

That said I wouldn't spend my hard earned cash on a Mosin Nagant or a wartime K98, but show me a nice SMLE, K31, or an FN 49 (which I have been lusting after) and my money is down and I'm out the door.

 

[61chalk]

All hope is not gone 50.caliber123, take a deep breath, relax, an realize your biggest problem was not buying a CMP M1 Garand. CMP sell the 30/06 ammo for 75.00 for 194 rds. in the enbloc clips. Your still young grasshopper, now go forth down this path until you hear the "PING"......

 

[lencac]

I'm surprised you're not mad they don't come with a warranty.

Now that is funny chit and I don't care who you are

I have a K31 and it is an absolute tack driver. If you had one and it didn't shoot there is only 2 possibilities 1: your K31 didn't have any rifling left in the bore and being that is a near impossibility it must be choice No.2: you are a terrible shot.
I put my money on No. 2

Come on guys, this guy must be pulling our collective legs. He can't really be serious
Kind of like buying an LS6 Chevelle and complaining about the fuel mileage.

 

[armoredman]

I have had a Springfield 1903A3, a Mauser K98, M-1 carbine, and Enfield No4Mk1*, and I only sold any of them due to financial issues. I still have the Enfield, and it will shoot MOA with one handload, great rifle, paid $50 for it, got WAY more than my moneys' worth. But, if someone doesn't like them, that's OK, too, more for me to buy when the finances change. Go get the generic Remmys and Savages, no big deal, 'cause I leave those to you, no use for them.

 

[Col. Plink]

I have a Garand and a Yugo SKS M59, and have been impressed with the accuracy, and rest assured they are in good condition and ready to throw down if needed. They were built to meet that need and they do it with authority.

Hey Loanshark: Those guys weren't fathers, they were...MOTHERS!

 

[fireflyfather]

I have a run-of-the-mill 1943 izzy Mossin. My only accuracy complaint was a loose front sight. I was going to get micro-click sights anyway, so it was no big deal. I can routinely get 2"-2.5" groups at 50 yards using my crappy reloads (cast lead bullets, very small charges of very fast powder). I can hit a man sized target at 200 yards using those same rounds (meant for 25 yard practice. Had to dial in the sights at about 700 yards). With the new sights, it's a LOT better, but even with the old ones, 200 yards with surplus 70's czech ammo? no problem. If the sight hadn't been loose? 400 yards probably would have been doable. With the new sights, full power loads, etc, I'm betting 3-4 moa if I do my part. This has been pretty typical of most mosin shooters I have met.

You DO have to tweak these rifles, though. Make sure that they are screwed in tightly to the stock (that right there can make a big difference!), that you have gotten all the cosmoline out of them, and that you are (hopefully) using fireformed cases neck sized for that rifle. Do that and watch those groups close up. Sure, if you want moa groups with factory ammo, most milsurps aren't going to do that, but that's not what they are for. Those factory rifles also cost 7 times as much as my mosin did, 3 times if you include the new sights and a few reloading tools for the new caliber.

 

[DMK]

I will certainly never understand people who buy mil-surps expecting them to be amazing tack drivers. They are one of the worst choices for a first rifle as well.

Two words: Unreasonable expectations

If one has little interest in history then milsurp collecting is a waste of time and money.

Unfortunately, most folks are drawn to low cost and ignore all reason.

 

[HB]

I also always love it when Mil-surp guys call modern rifle "generic" and "soulless"... Can you imagine anything more generic than the 30 million Mosins

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Ditto what DMK said.

 

[ArmedBear]

WRT history: I don't need to OWN everything ever made, to appreciate history. I found that it's probably not healthy for me to need to own tons of stuff I don't even want to use.

WRT accuracy: I don't expect milsurps to be really accurate. I'm also not really interested in hucking lead in a general direction.

WRT utility: They make lousy hunting rifles, and if they were really good for anything, they wouldn't be available cheap.

WRT rifle ranges: BORING. Working up a new handload renders them necessary, but otherwise, I have no desire to go to a formal rifle range and do anything, or sit on my butt and shoot, one way or another. Shooting off sticks at 300 yards or more in the brush, at improvised targets, is more fun and better for hunting practice.

WRT heavy barrels and benchrest: See above, under "rifle ranges."

Milsurps just don't offer anything I really use. Sure, it's neat to have a closet full of old rifles. I like to hold them sometimes. If you don't want the space or money for anything better...

If I want to shoot corrosive ammo, I'll shoot black powder. If I want to shoot a long way with a rifle, I'll shoot handloads in a rifle that's worth loading for (Swedish Mausers aren't exactly "milsurps" any more, BTW). If I want to have fun at a range, I'll shoot Sporting Clays. If I want to compete, I belong to a little pistol club that shoots in the Winter when it's dark and cold.

Milsurps became just about "owning" crap. I'm kinda sick of quantity over quality. I'd rather have one more really nice shotgun than the pile of smelly old junk in my closet. I can only shoot and clean so many guns.

And there's more to life than shooting, too...

 

[Dazen]

My M1 garand, 1917 enfield and my 2 1903a3's shoot great. Your nuts if you think the craftsmanship that went into them are poor and the same go for the sights too.

 

[junyo]

You're buy surplus rifles in chamberings that haven't been in active service in decades. Exactly one nation on earth has ever used the K31, exactly how available do you expect the ammo to be? If you're buying milsurp in anything other than 7.62x39, 7.62x54, maybe 30-06 or 7.62x51 then you're not buying it for economy.

That said my first Enfield was under a hundred bucks, is "baseball bat reliable" as the saying goes, and more accurate than me. Also it also has some of the finest sights ever put on a rifle. Thanks to stocking up back when ammo was cheap, ammo cost isn't a huge issue, yet. So I'm good with the purchase.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Best mil-surp I ever picked up was a Brno made Kar98k. I am positive this rifle was purchased in the states via mail order somewhere between the late 40's early 60's and the origional owner cut the stock in half to make a cheap 'sporter.' It had an ugly winter trigger and was in dure need of a cleaning, but hey it was free to me for the taking. After a good scrubbing and a few phone calls to get a military stock, I had maybe $50 in the rifle. With Yugo surplus ammo (196gr) that rifle outshoots my Remington 1903A3, which I think everyone will agree were very well made.

Sorry your experiences have been so awful. In my experience military small arms are some of the BEST designed and manufactured pieces out there. There are exceptions of course (Chauchat, late was Japanese pistols, and anything French ) but overall making rifles is NOT a place governments cut corners UNLESS its late war and they are on the losing side.

PS I like France, and the French in general but their firearm designs often just leave me puzzled.

 

[jws527]

I have a modest collection of seven weapons, four of which are milsurp. Thing is, I don't hunt and I rarely shoot (once per month, at most). The only public shooting range in my area is off a poorly maintained dirt trail in the middle of a national forest, and my low-slung sport sedan doesn't appreciate the trip.

This means that I ultimately derive most of the satisfaction that I get from actually owning these weapons by looking at them or showing them off to close friends and family members. And guess which of these generate (by far) the most interest? I'll give you a hint: not the Savage .22.

P.S. - average price of said milsurps was $145 each, and all have retained 100% of their value relative to inflation (some have even appreciated). I wouldn't consider that a particularly expensive investment, let alone a "waste of resources."

 

[mgkdrgn]

but if I could do it over, I would have gone for quality instead of quantity

That is a -very- good lesson to learn. You should consider yourself lucky to have learned it so early in life.

Buy quality, take care of it, and it will serve you well for many many years. It is, in the long run, much more economical then buying cheap and replacing it when it breaks. It's true for just about anything mechanical you care to mention.

 

[Lightning12]

I love the history of milsurp rifles, but I went thru a similar learning curve of deciding that they were not the best tools for shooting at the range, which is the only place I have to shoot. I have had 3 enfields, a 1903, a sporterized 1903, a 1903a3, a FAL, and an SKS. The only ones I still own are the 1903a3 and an enfield no. 4. I don't think I will part with these two either. I don't shoot them often, but I like having them. They are icons of another time in history.

Chaz

 

[cowhide1]

I just like the fact that all of my milsurps have at LEAST doubled in value in the last 3 years!! Oh, and my swedish mauser outshoots my modern guns all day long.

 

[ArmedBear]

Haven't found any surplus Swedish Mausers lately.

Colt SAAs were milsurps once, too.

I think that, by "milsurp", people usually mean the guns that are readily available for cheap at the moment, not collectibles that were once sold off by the military but haven't been seen at surplus outlets for a very long time.

 

[50caliber123]

If I'm a terrible shot, then I wonder how I can shoot my remaining six rifles off hand and beat the pants out of those other rifles I mentioned. From a rest, my ishy jungle carbine usually prints 2" groups at 100 yards with the notch rear sights. I consider myself decent, regularly shooting my remaining guns and happy that I no longer get frustrated with crappy milsurps. My yugo sks is also an example of a budget gun that can shoot tight groups all day. That being said, I think that I should have dropped money on an M1 garand or M1 Carbine instead of all those others. I do appreciate history, but like armedbear said, it has been a drain on my limited resources. I recently paid 500 for a nib blackhawk convertible pistol and couldn't be happier with it. I regularly shoot at 25 yards (not feet) as that is the shortest distance at the range that I go to.

My remaining guns are the yugo sks and enfield ishy carbine mentioned earlier, as well as a hi-point carbine, a marlin odel 60, a ruger mini thirty, and that blackhawk convertible. I recently parted with an 870, hate the ergonomics and prefer the mossberg 500, but the lop is about an inch too long for me to comfortably shoot. I like history and used to be able to appreciate just having historic guns, but after shooting since age 10, I come to expect some accuracy or have guns that fill a need. I deer hunt, so accuracy is important, I don't want to wound any animal and it suffer unneccesarily on my behalf. The reason I mentioned the AK variants was to highlight their shortcomings: The saiga had a lousy trigger. The MAK-90 had a great trigger for an AK, but rattled too much in the woods. Any guns that clunk around like that scare all the game away. I wish my luck would have been better than it has been, but I am thankful for the lessons learned, that I was able to part with the guns that never could shoot for me, and that perhaps they will be appreciated by someone else. n some ways, less is more.