Quantcast

Odd Bannerman Nagant

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by AfroSGT, Jan 19, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AfroSGT

    AfroSGT Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    So i was perusing the gun shop back home and i happened across what i realized was a Bannerman converted Mosin for $160. paid cash on the spot for it, since i am starting to collect older military oddities, and im having trouble identify what this rifle started its life as. all the info im finding online references remmington and new haven rifles being converted, but this gun most definately is neither. the markings are all Cyrillic, and the rear sight is its original military sight, not the flip leaf sight, and its the sporter style, but it has the black finish from the military style. the marking can be seen in this image, far left, third down:

    http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/BarrelPoster.jpg

    did i do ok as a purchase? any help would be appreciated.
     
  2. Ash

    Ash Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    5,357
    Location:
    Anywhere but here
    That's a Sestrorysk rifle (which was being run by Mosin himself at the time). If you'll post some photographs we can help you even further. At that price, you did fine no matter what.
     
  3. caribou

    caribou Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,101
    Location:
    North West Alaska
    Bannermans also imported and reworked Mosin's from alot of post WW1 countrys.

    A picture would be nice.
    Most Bannermans have a turned down bolt, a shortened and re-chambered barrel and new iron sights.

    Very collectable, indeed...


    Bannermann.....the original milsurp man.... :D
     
  4. AfroSGT

    AfroSGT Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    unfortunately i dont have a camera to get some pictures of it. it has the turned down bolt, trimmed stock, heavy barrel band and modified magazine characteristic to the bannerman conversion. on one side of the barrel shank, whats left of it, its stamped us, the other cal 30 06, and it has the older m1891 style rear sight, but it looks like the sporter front sight. also not many parts seem to match, almost as if the gun was converted by trial and error, maybe an early attempt by bannerman? the stock is stamped 1908
     
  5. Panzerschwein

    Panzerschwein member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,124
    Location:
    Desert
    It is insultong to Sergei Mosin's legacy to call it a "Nagant" rifle.

    Leon Nagant contributed little to the overall design.
     
  6. kBob

    kBob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,678
    Location:
    North Central Florida
    Many moons ago NRA said do not shoot .30-06 in these rifles.

    The .30-06 cartridge extends beyond where the barrel steps down and there are pressure concerns.

    Back in the late 1960's I tried to find a MS modified for .30-06 for use with blanks only. The only one I found the guy would not sell me because he felt he could not trust a teen to not shove a round of M2 ball in there and try it.

    Still sounds like a neat rifle.

    -kBob
     
  7. jobu07
    • Contributing Member

    jobu07 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2004
    Messages:
    1,991
    Location:
    Adams County, PA
    I believe he contributed the magazine interrupter that makes rim lock impossible on a Mosin Nagant. That's a far cry from little.
     
  8. Ash

    Ash Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    5,357
    Location:
    Anywhere but here
    Actually, Nagant himself did not contribute at all. His rifle was rejected. Mosin's design called for a tubular magazine in the butt, which was also discarded. The Russians took some ideas, mainly the interrupter, and incorporated them into Mosin's design. However, they never used Nagant's name in any model designation.

    However, Mosin didn't design the rifle in a vacuum. Many features of the Mosin are evolved from the Berdan II. The bolt is, in essence, just a Berdan bolt with forward locking lugs added on. The receiver is more or less a Berdan receiver with a cut-out for the magazine. In truth, Berdan had more influence on the design than Nagant ever did.

    Indeed, in no small irony, the Mosin is, as such, an evolved American design.

    It is more Mosin Berdan than Mosin Nagant. In any case, the Russians merely gave Mosin credit and called it good enough.
     
  9. WardenWolf

    WardenWolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,884
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    DON'T SHOOT THAT GUN!

    Please see this old post and thread for details:

    http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8850473&postcount=26

    I've seen a cross-section of the Bannerman .30-06 conversions (can't find it now, though). They are indeed unsafe. The case extends beyond the receiver and into the barrel. There is very little material to handle the pressure. Furthermore, the .30-06 cartridge generates around 5.5% more pressure than 7.62x54R. Normally this would not be a problem, as the Mosin is a very strong action, but this combined with the above means the risk of failure is quite high.

    The only "good" news is that any such failure would be directed forwards so your face should survive unscathed; your support arm might not be so lucky, though.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2016
  10. Slamfire

    Slamfire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,684
    Location:
    Alabama
    This is my take on Bannerman Conversions. Bannerman Mosin Nagant conversions were sold to the public well before the concept of consumer protection and product liability were conceived. Back then, it was strictly, buyer beware! It was a time when fatalities were expected at work. As a data point, the ship builder Harland and Wolff, one man died per 10,000 tons of ship production. Since an average ship was about 15,000 tons, one man died per ship launched. Payoff for the dead was a funeral and 100 pounds. That was the way it was, and if you did not like it, there was no alternative. Employer's considered employee's as consumable items, something to be discarded when broken. If you did not accept their terms, you did not have to show up for work. Not working meant no money for anything and since there were no social safety net things got tough quickly.

    The Imperial German Army had hundreds of thousands of captured M1891's and they sent theirs off to be converted to 8mm Mauser. One of Dr Dieter Storz's books show a picture of the conversion. It was dangerous as heck, as probably the Bannerman conversions are. Here is an example of a Bannerman conversion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI7BCToQhRc The problem with both the German and Bannerman conversions is the chamber was reduced in length. What is not understood by most Americans, Hatcherities and Ackley ites, and especially not the guy in the video, is that a rifle chamber carries much more load than the locking lugs. The surface area of the chamber is greater, therefore the load carried by the chamber is much greater, than the load on the bolt face. This explains why there is so much metal over the cartridge area, and why it tapers as the pressure curve drops. For the Bannerman conversions, the cartridge is supported by a barrel section that is too thin, in terms of hoop stress, for the pressure at that point. You can see how much chamber has been cut away around minute seven of the video, and since the 30-06 is longer, you can imagine just how much of the cartridge case is sticking into the thinnest barrel section.

    The Germans found that their 8mm conversions would blow and they never allowed live ammunition to be fired in their conversions. They ended up using the things as drill rifles only. Bannerman conversions, those that have not blown yet, will, given enough load cycles. I am of the opinion that the steel is dangerously overstressed. I took some measurements from a M1891/30 Sniper that I own. My measurements have error, the dial caliper is likely out of calibration, and my measurements are crude. I measured the forward chamber shoulder on my Mosin and it is 1.80" in diameter. The barrel tapers aggressively forward of the chamber, and I measured the barrel diameter at the base of the rear sight, just in front of the sight blade. I was very lazy, I did not uncork the action from the stock and take more exact measurements. The 30-06 case is 2.494" long, I don't know just how much of the Nagant barrel was cut off in the conversion, so I did not try to estimate how much of the 30-06 case would be in the thin barrel section. I just made a SWAG that the case shoulder would be located at the rear sight base. The barrel actually tapers more, the taper slightly increasing towards the muzzle, so, if the barrel was cut back more, the chamber reamed deeper, the barrel only gets thinner. The diameter of my barrel at the rear sight base is 0.765". Plus or minus the inaccuracy of my caliper. The chamber dimension I have, the 30-06 reamer cuts the shoulder diameter to 0.443". I will use these numbers later, but I am going to address period materials.

    30-06%20case%20and%20chamber%20dimensions_zpspspgdcwb.jpg

    It is a total mistake to assume vintage guns used contemporary materials. So many people who lack an understanding of history project back today's technologies and just assume the ancients had cell phones, satellite data, modern materials, CNC machines and grooved to Rock Music. This was not so. Millions of Mosin Nagants were made before vacuum tubes were invented. The material technology of the era was quite primitive. Plain carbon steels were state of the art and that is what was used in vintage rifles and pistols. These are data points I found about metal history, and they show the relative primitive state of metallurgy prior to WW1.

    Silicon Steel patented in 1886

    Manganese Steel licensed to use in US in 1890

    Nickel Steel Armor adopted in by US Navy1891,

    1910 Monnartz & Borchers patented Stainless Steel


    Those steels and dates won't mean much to many, neither will the reference to vacuum tubes, infact, I expect the comparisons will be puzzling for many. So many people were born after vacuum tube technology ended, born after the era of six transistor radio's, in fact were born well after integrated circuit chip technology, that using vacuum tubes or transistors as examples of technological advancements won't make any impression at all. But I remember vacuum tube radios, and I remember the cat's eye tuner on the front of my Sears Silvertone vacuum tube shortwave radio.

    I don't know what materials were used in Mosin Nagant barrels and receivers. I am going to make the assumption they used the same plain carbon steels the US Army used in the manufacture of the M1903 rifle. I have no reason to assume the Russians used alloy steels at any time during what has to be a century of manufacturing Mosin Nagants. If someone has metallurgical data contradicting this, please put it out in the public domain.


    Source: July-Aug 1928 issue Army Ordnance, “Heat Treatment and Finish of Small Arms at Springfield Armory"

    Springfield Armory used steels they called "Class A, Class C", etc in the manufacture of the various components of the M1903 rifle. Class C steel was used for receivers and bolts, and Class A for barrels.

    Code:
    		Carbon	Manganese	Max Phos	Max Sulpher Component
    
    Class C Steel   .20-.30	1.0-1.30	.          .050   .050    	Receivers
    
    Class A         .45-.55	1.00-1.30	  .050       .050	Barrels
    							
    
    
    This is from the article:

    The yield strength is 75,000 psia, you would expect an alloy steel to be around 90,000 lbs, if not more. Alloy steel yield varies considerable by what alloys are used, and what hardness is desired but it turns out that barrels are in fact fairly soft. Toughness is more desired than hardness and yield strength is traded for increases in toughness. Brittle is not a desired barrel material characteristic.

    I used a thin walled pressure vessel calculator I found on the web to calculate hoop stresses. So based on these dimensions, the yeild strength of Class A materials, and assuming a 30-06 in the chamber, I get these numbers for hoop stress.



    30-06 case shoulder at forward edge of Mosin Nagant chamber

    Wall thickness (1.80"-0.443")/2 = 0.6785"

    Cartridge Pressure =50,000

    Material Yield = 75,000

    Hoop stress= 66,273 psia.

    30-06 case shoulder just at Mosin Nagant rear sight base

    Wall thickness (0.765"-0.443")/2 = 0.161"

    Cartridge pressure = 50,000 psia

    Material Yield = 75,000 psia

    Hoop stress= 118,788 psia.


    There are known unknowns in this calculation. Pressures vary quite a bit, what we see given as a pressure in a reloading manual is an average. Maximum pressures are typically 20% higher than the average, sometimes higher than that. Material values have uncertainty, no metal will have an exact yield strength of 75,000 psia, or 100,000 psia, because metal strength varies. That is why margins are used in the design of mechanical items. Designing something with a calculated hoop stress of 75,000 psia and using a material with a yield of 75,000 is a guaranteed path to a catastrophic failure. There are rash, irresponsible people who would do this, and get away with it for a while, but metal fatigue will catch up with them. The calculated hoop stress of 118, 788 psia, which is based on the assumption that the 30-06 case shoulder is forward of the original Nagant chamber, with a material that stretches at 75,000 psia, ought to be a clue that Bannerman conversions were not structurally well thought out. I have not looked at a S/N curve to estimate the fatigue life of any of these potential situations, and I really don't want to. I expect the best case stress situation would have a predicted fatique life in the hundreds of cycles, assuming good metal. Given that Imperial Russian steel was pre vacuum tube technology, and Soviet steel was awful (based on discussions with a West Point Metallurgical Teacher) I would not trust a Bannerman conversion, or a Bannerman conversion of a WW2 era Mosin.
     
  11. AfroSGT

    AfroSGT Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    i really thank everyone for their input. to put up front, i did not buy this rifle with the intention of shooting it, which kind of goes against my own attitude about firearms, but i am aware of the dangers of the conversion. if i ever did shoot it, it would be handloaded down to such a point that it might as well be a 22. light cast boolits, and something like a half charge of trail boss. 600 fps shouldnt hurt anything, unless the gun was in remarkably bad shape, which its not. but, as i said, it is unlikely to ever be shot, even though i know the action is sound (well, as sound as it can be). i was more curious about it being a conversion and not a remmington or new havent rifle, and it also seeming to be an early attempt at it, due to it being less refined and kind of hodge podge.
     
  12. desidog

    desidog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,532
    AfroSGT, you could use one of these for a little plinking.
     
  13. WardenWolf

    WardenWolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,884
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Hmm, I wonder if a .308 chamber adapter would be acceptable. I'd think it would be. It'd shorten the chamber to acceptable limits, and the Mosin is more than strong enough to take the slightly increased pressure, as destructive testing has shown.
     
  14. AfroSGT

    AfroSGT Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    desidog i actually just came accross that idea and was going to ask if it would work XD and wolf the problem wit that is 308 isnt much less pressure than 30-06 so the problem of its structural integrity still remains. i like the idea of these 32 acp adapters, and since this is a x54R barrel rechambered, the bore is a near perfect fit, and the adapters are cheap enough to buy a few and fill the magazine.
     
  15. AfroSGT

    AfroSGT Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2016
    Messages:
    5
    also i found a company that makes semi permanent adapters for 30-06 to 7.62x39. comes with locktite, you insert the adapter with a empty casing in it, slather in loctite, chamber in the gun, and after 12 hours open bolt and it ejects only the empty casing. this would possibley reinforce the chamber where the weak point is
     
  16. caribou

    caribou Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,101
    Location:
    North West Alaska
    Do not forget that the Finns also shortened the barrel shanks and rechambered the remaining barrel.
    They did this to recycle the barrels and keep repair costs low.
    They marked them with the characteristic "Christmas tree" stamp on the barrel itself, a triangle imposed on a line , and they issued and fired them. Ive never heard of a Finn Military recall of them, either.
    M24ChristmasTree_zpsty819p2r.jpg
    I think that Bannermans did the same as the Finns in other aspects; stripping the guns down to parts and sorting out the crap, keeping/using the good ones. Hence, the mixed and matched numbers.

    Siberians I have met called my Mosins I had on hand at the time "Tree lenny", Sibersk' for "Three line rifle" the original name for the Mosin M-91, as it was the mesurment of the bore, 3 lini.
     
  17. rszwieg

    rszwieg Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    WI
    I saw this post and remembered Frank de Haas calling them "boobytraps".

    You may get away with a chamber insert. I have one from MCA to fire 32 acp from a 30/06. Those 71 gr slugs will go through a fairly thick phone book at 75 yards.
     
  18. WardenWolf

    WardenWolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,884
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Not really. Remember that the chamber adapter is still technically adding meat to the action. Sure, it may not be the original material, but it's still metal that takes the force. I believe a .308 chamber adapter would make it safe.

    Look at this picture. The shoulder length is almost identical to 7.62x54R, actually slightly less. It would definitely be safe if you added the adapter. It'd be just as strong as it was originally, and the Mosin can easily take the extra 5k of pressure. And the cartridge dimensions are so close that it should have no problems feeding from an unmodified magazine, either.

    [​IMG]
     
  19. desidog

    desidog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,532
    Unfortunately they don't feed well enough to do that. Try cycling a couple empty casings from the magazine; without a big bullet to ride into the bore, it will hang up. It's a single shot proposition.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice