Rebuilding an antique military action to a modern rifle
- Thread starter atek3
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
atek3
Member
6.5x54R would have better ballistics.
atek3
Sam Adams
Member
Jim Keenan
Well, in fact, you ARE wrong.
There's not a thing wrong with owning a non-papered gun. I don't get into the "tactical" stuff at all - I prefer a firearm that puts lead on target, whether it is fresh off of the assembly line or 100+ years old. It so happens that there are lots of Finnish M-39s out there with pre-1899 receivers that shoot 1.5-2 MOA. One can want one because the gun's history (both because of age and use against hordes of Soviets), cheap accuracy (try under $200, including shipping, for a damned accurate rifle that shoots rounds that cost $0.10 each or less), or because it is unpapered. Or maybe all three reasons apply (as is the case with me).
I can buy whatever gun I'd like to, so long as I've got the money (and my wife doesn't squawk too much, which is another matter). I have a carry license, and I'm a licensed professional. I want a non-papered gun because one never knows what will happen in the future, and I like keeping my honestly-acquired property.
Well, in fact, you ARE wrong.
There's not a thing wrong with owning a non-papered gun. I don't get into the "tactical" stuff at all - I prefer a firearm that puts lead on target, whether it is fresh off of the assembly line or 100+ years old. It so happens that there are lots of Finnish M-39s out there with pre-1899 receivers that shoot 1.5-2 MOA. One can want one because the gun's history (both because of age and use against hordes of Soviets), cheap accuracy (try under $200, including shipping, for a damned accurate rifle that shoots rounds that cost $0.10 each or less), or because it is unpapered. Or maybe all three reasons apply (as is the case with me).
I can buy whatever gun I'd like to, so long as I've got the money (and my wife doesn't squawk too much, which is another matter). I have a carry license, and I'm a licensed professional. I want a non-papered gun because one never knows what will happen in the future, and I like keeping my honestly-acquired property.
jefnvk
Member
Why don't they just get a cheap Savage and build it up to their likings? Old Swedish mausers will never be made again.
Mannlicher
Member
Its a waste of time and effort, not to mention, (you said not to) the expense.
rbernie
Contributing Member
This was my first paperless rifle build, and I defy ANYONE to show me how this project was a waste of time or money or effort.
This rifle (1895 Chilean Mauser in 7x57) is used regularly to put food on my family's dinner table, and in addition it puts several thousand rounds a year downrange in the pursuit of killing paper and other inanimate objects. It'll put five Barnes 120gr .284 TSXs into a .75" group at an average velocity just shy of 2900fps @ 50F, and it'll use that load to drop any thin-skinned game closer than 300 yards like it was hit with the Hammer of Thor. It's made of nothing but steel and wood, and it displays a build quality that no garden variety Savage or Win or Remington can approach. All told, I have about $300 in the rifle (Timney and scope mounts and all of the machine work included). This rifle is a working tool, and yet (courtesy of its lack of paper and its 'old world' fit and finish) it also is part of a legacy that I intend to leave to my children.
I don't necessarily advocate that folks chop up antique rifles willy-nilly, but at the same time it's not automatically a crime or a guranteed money pit. In fact, it's largely been my experience that most folks that decry the conversion of a paperless rifle into a useful arm based on cost, ROI, or ethical reasons are (IMO) largely talking out of their rear end.
This rifle (1895 Chilean Mauser in 7x57) is used regularly to put food on my family's dinner table, and in addition it puts several thousand rounds a year downrange in the pursuit of killing paper and other inanimate objects. It'll put five Barnes 120gr .284 TSXs into a .75" group at an average velocity just shy of 2900fps @ 50F, and it'll use that load to drop any thin-skinned game closer than 300 yards like it was hit with the Hammer of Thor. It's made of nothing but steel and wood, and it displays a build quality that no garden variety Savage or Win or Remington can approach. All told, I have about $300 in the rifle (Timney and scope mounts and all of the machine work included). This rifle is a working tool, and yet (courtesy of its lack of paper and its 'old world' fit and finish) it also is part of a legacy that I intend to leave to my children.
I don't necessarily advocate that folks chop up antique rifles willy-nilly, but at the same time it's not automatically a crime or a guranteed money pit. In fact, it's largely been my experience that most folks that decry the conversion of a paperless rifle into a useful arm based on cost, ROI, or ethical reasons are (IMO) largely talking out of their rear end.
cracked butt
Member
If you want to build something, I would leave it in the original caliber. Millions of manhours of design work and manufacturing went into these rifles, a person with a ballistic chart a pen and paper, a budget, and 5 minutes of thought into the project isn't going to equal the original design.
There are a lot of things to think about. Converting a mauser action to a rimmed cartridge? Why oh why? Just changing the chambering of a mauser to a longer or shorter catridge or one with slightly different exterior dimensions can bring a whole host of feeding bugaboos about you.
Mauser 98s lend themselves to experimentation and flexibility, but trying to build a rifle to shoot a more modern cartridge out of a pre-98 action is like taking a Model T Ford and trying to build it to go 150 mph. More $$s than sense.
There are a lot of things to think about. Converting a mauser action to a rimmed cartridge? Why oh why? Just changing the chambering of a mauser to a longer or shorter catridge or one with slightly different exterior dimensions can bring a whole host of feeding bugaboos about you.
Mauser 98s lend themselves to experimentation and flexibility, but trying to build a rifle to shoot a more modern cartridge out of a pre-98 action is like taking a Model T Ford and trying to build it to go 150 mph. More $$s than sense.
Ok,
I did up a 1893 Turk (beater), left it in the original caliber 8x57, and have had no problems shooting modern US, European and handloads (Mid range hot). No pressure signs, and I've probably put 500 rounds through it, so far. And, since I "scrounged" alot of the parts (think Ebay), my total cost INCLUDING a new 6-24x scope is $180. Currently shoots around 1 MOA, but I'm working on that (barrel is currently free floated, gonna pillar bed the front.) Was a fun project, and my first experiment on semi-major gunsmithing(shorten and re-crown barrel, bend the bolt, mount the scope, bed the action, etc.).
I did up a 1893 Turk (beater), left it in the original caliber 8x57, and have had no problems shooting modern US, European and handloads (Mid range hot). No pressure signs, and I've probably put 500 rounds through it, so far. And, since I "scrounged" alot of the parts (think Ebay), my total cost INCLUDING a new 6-24x scope is $180. Currently shoots around 1 MOA, but I'm working on that (barrel is currently free floated, gonna pillar bed the front.) Was a fun project, and my first experiment on semi-major gunsmithing(shorten and re-crown barrel, bend the bolt, mount the scope, bed the action, etc.).
Ash
Member
What makes no sense and is a stupid concept is that a martial arm in original condition is useless, that adding a sporter stock, refinishing the metal, and putting a scope on it suddenly makes it so. Unless the bore is shot out, the old rifle, even if the stock is ugly, is every bit as effective. To thine own self be true. It is fun to tinker and to sporterize, it tapps into the well of creativity that so often seeks an outlet. But, a sporterized rifle is no more useful than one in original configuration. To say otherwise is silly. And, if mounting a scope is what is required to make it useful, then by all means, mount a scope. But where does a sporter stock, rebluing, and cutting a barrel down make one more useful? It appeals to the eye to many, but is absolutely unrelated to usefulness.
And, how does putting $400 into a $100 rifle that will shoot 2 MOA at best make good monitary sense when a used Savage at the gunshow will run $200? Now, I enjoy hunting with milsurps, I use a SAKO M39 made in 1943 on a WWI era reciever. Milsurps have history, they have interesting function, and they are just plain fun and cheap to shoot. But don't waste breath on saying sporterizing makes a rifle useful. It's malarky.
Ash
And, how does putting $400 into a $100 rifle that will shoot 2 MOA at best make good monitary sense when a used Savage at the gunshow will run $200? Now, I enjoy hunting with milsurps, I use a SAKO M39 made in 1943 on a WWI era reciever. Milsurps have history, they have interesting function, and they are just plain fun and cheap to shoot. But don't waste breath on saying sporterizing makes a rifle useful. It's malarky.
Ash
Ash
Member
Now, this is my ASS talking, as in my rear end making a responce. Ever priced a sporterized Enfield 1853 or Springfield? Compare that to an original. BIG price difference. BIG difference in demand. Ever gone to a pawn shop? BIG difference in the chop-shop rifles collecting dust over the milsurps that don't last as long on the racks. I can tell you of a nice VZ-24 in a really nice walnut stock with cut checkering and a nice blue job that is languishing while other commerical rifles come and go. The rifle is only $200 or so, and is apparently more useful than the Yugo VZ's that pass through. Why does it collect dust? Or, a similarly stocked Swedish M96 at another shop 30 miles from here for a paltry $150 that is equally dusty.
The fact of the matter is that a sporterized rifle loses its value. FACT, there, FACT. Somebody might pay more for it, but usually not. A Remington 700 will out sell a sporter mauser every time.
Ash
The fact of the matter is that a sporterized rifle loses its value. FACT, there, FACT. Somebody might pay more for it, but usually not. A Remington 700 will out sell a sporter mauser every time.
Ash
jefnvk
Member
Thinking about this quote, taking an antique rifle, ripping it apart and using the reciever to make a new rifle, that new rifle has no history. No more so than taking an engine out of a Model T and putting it into a new F150 would make that a historical truck.
And Ash, yes. I had a 1917 that was drilled and tapped right over all the markings, to the point where they wern't readable (Not the SN though, just the US and 1917 and manufacturer). Had a hard time selling that thing for $150 (what I paid for it), it was not worth anything to them. This was at a gunshow where all the other 17's were going for $350+, in nowhere as nice of shape.
Sam Adams
Member
jefnvk
" One can want one because the gun's history (both because of age and use against hordes of Soviets),"
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my original post - I will NOT be ripping apart any antique or otherwise historically significant rifle. I have a Swiss K-31 and will shortly receive my M-39. History means a LOT to me, and the most that I'll ever do to them is get a set of Mojo sights (which don't detract from the looks, let alone require drilling and tapping, unlike a scope mount and scope). My rifles were made to be shooters, and I will honor that fact by shooting them (and the Mojo sights just make me a better shooter).
My post was about slamming the attitude that purchasing an unpapered (i.e. an antique) gun somehow indicates that you can't buy guns legally, or that you have some kind of evil intent. Heck, how many of us have non-antique guns that were acquired in private party sales - and were also never recorded?
" One can want one because the gun's history (both because of age and use against hordes of Soviets),"
Perhaps I wasn't clear in my original post - I will NOT be ripping apart any antique or otherwise historically significant rifle. I have a Swiss K-31 and will shortly receive my M-39. History means a LOT to me, and the most that I'll ever do to them is get a set of Mojo sights (which don't detract from the looks, let alone require drilling and tapping, unlike a scope mount and scope). My rifles were made to be shooters, and I will honor that fact by shooting them (and the Mojo sights just make me a better shooter).
My post was about slamming the attitude that purchasing an unpapered (i.e. an antique) gun somehow indicates that you can't buy guns legally, or that you have some kind of evil intent. Heck, how many of us have non-antique guns that were acquired in private party sales - and were also never recorded?
Ash, apparently, has never seen an R.F. Sedgley Springfield...
or priced one lately. I'll give you a hint, they're sporterized. Same goes for some original Ackleys out there.
Where is that $200 Czech VZ-24 Sporter? I want it. Seriously.
I have a 1916 C.G. Haenel 98 action that I rebuilt into a 1000-yard target/tactical rifle. A book publisher has offered me over $3K for it, considerably more than I spent building it. I used the finest barrel, trigger, striker, and other parts to build it into a 1/4 MOA rifle. It ended up in a magazine article after it hit a golf ball first cold shot at 500 meters. So a sporter is at best a 2 MOA gun? Feh.
Nobody builds a custom sporter with the intent of getting rich on the sale. They shape the gun to fit thier unique purposes, and are quite happy with that intrinsic value. Myself included, I refused to sell the Haenel.
Great grandfathers home from the Spanish-American War didn't care to lug a full-weight Krag around in the woods in the pursuit of venison, so they cut them down and made them lighter. While the collector in me cringes to see the results some 100+ years later, I understand why they did so.
This was a 1917 U.S. Enfield when it left the Eddystone plant for WWI. Sometime in the 1960's, a fellow named B.E. Cottrell decided he wanted an ultra-accurate .236 Super wildcat. This is one gun I've decided not to restore back to full military condition, it's more valuable in it's present condition:
or priced one lately. I'll give you a hint, they're sporterized. Same goes for some original Ackleys out there.
Where is that $200 Czech VZ-24 Sporter? I want it. Seriously.
I have a 1916 C.G. Haenel 98 action that I rebuilt into a 1000-yard target/tactical rifle. A book publisher has offered me over $3K for it, considerably more than I spent building it. I used the finest barrel, trigger, striker, and other parts to build it into a 1/4 MOA rifle. It ended up in a magazine article after it hit a golf ball first cold shot at 500 meters. So a sporter is at best a 2 MOA gun? Feh.
Nobody builds a custom sporter with the intent of getting rich on the sale. They shape the gun to fit thier unique purposes, and are quite happy with that intrinsic value. Myself included, I refused to sell the Haenel.
Great grandfathers home from the Spanish-American War didn't care to lug a full-weight Krag around in the woods in the pursuit of venison, so they cut them down and made them lighter. While the collector in me cringes to see the results some 100+ years later, I understand why they did so.
This was a 1917 U.S. Enfield when it left the Eddystone plant for WWI. Sometime in the 1960's, a fellow named B.E. Cottrell decided he wanted an ultra-accurate .236 Super wildcat. This is one gun I've decided not to restore back to full military condition, it's more valuable in it's present condition:
rbernie
Contributing Member
Are you telling me that you believe that fitting a Timney trigger, for example, to a 1893 Spanish Mauser action doesn't add to the utility of that rifle? Is it OK to add a tang-mounted peep sight to a pre-'98 Winnie/Browning? What if I put a repro stock on it so that the original one doesn't get all beat up in the field - does that pass your litmus test for acceptability? At what point am I crossing the line between making good use of an old arm into the realm of whatever it is that offends you? When I take a 29+" barrel on a 1891 M/N and cut it down to 20"? Well, heck - don't look now, but the Russians started doing that during arsenal refurbs of their old 1891/30's back in 1959 and didn't think too badly of themselves for having done so.
First off, these are your numbers and nobody elses. In my example, I have less than $300 total in a rifle that will outshoot any $200 used Savage, which is far better made than any $200 Savage, AND WHICH IS PAPERLESS, unlike the Savage. How much more plainly should I write it so that you'll understand these concepts?
I don't know anyone in this day and age who has or would sporterize a black-powder weapon (if only because I can get a new-production Knight inline for less money and with the same paperless qualities). Moreover, that's not what was being discussed. What was being discussed was the refurbishment and possible sporterization of a commonly-available pre-1898 rifle already chambered for smokeless ammunition.
While this is a tangential argument relative to the thread, I think that it's worthy of discussion. Your statement is actually not a FACT - it's your OPINION based upon your observations. And my observations are not much different from yours, but I've also seen the flip side of this.
I've most commonly seen the phenomenon you describe relative to hack jobs on common rifles (M/N, M48s, No1Mk3s, etc.). After all, nobody wants to buy a rifle that's been hacked on unless they can quantify the quality of the work. On the other side of this, some of the most breathtakingly beautify and coveted rifles I've seen have been professionally altered MilSurps. Most of the truly exotic dangerous-game rifles have been built on large-ring Mauser actions, and many established names in the business hung up a shingle first and foremost to 'sporterize' Obendorf Mausers.
While anyone looking to buy a $100 Mosin Nagant and sporterize it should expect to wind up with a rifle worth no more than what they paid for it, I do not believe that it's fair to categorically state that the rifle will be worth less than $100. And if the value of being paperless is greater in their mind than the cost of the sporterization - how can I (or anyone else) tell them that they're wasting their money?
My point here is that we should not paint everything out there with the same brush. Not everyone trying to work on a rifle is an idiot, not everyone is gonna take a hacksaw to any ol' MilSurp that crosses their path, and not every rifle is fit to be maintained in its present condition without work. And yes - in my opinion, anyone that attempts to paint everything that they see with the same brush is talking out of their rear end. If this doesn't describe you, then don't sweat the comment. If you take offense at this, then perhaps you should wonder why.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Well, I know of more than a few folks that would give their eyeteeth for such a $150 M1917. After all, if you want a custom rifle capable of shooting high-pressure chamberings in a cock-on-close action - the M1917 is pretty much your only choice....
Sam Adams
Member
Thanks for pointing that out to those who seem to not understand the concept. I paid probably $40 more for my M-39 because it has a pre-1899 receiver, and I was happy to do so, since having that degree of privacy in today's world is worth $40 to me (though I'd have been happier to pay less
). Even with that extra cost, the thing ends up at less than $200, and it shoots ammo that costs under $0.10/round. Also, the reason that the rifle is unpapered is because it is OLD - older than any of my grandparents. Putting cheap lead into a 1.5" or 2" diameter spot on a target with such an old "non-gun" will be a source of great joy for me.As for sporterizing it, as mentioned above I will not do so - Mojo sights are the most I'll do.
longrifleman
Member
I've been debating modernizing a milsurp myself so this has been interesting. One thing to keep in mind about Springfields, Enfields, Krags and such is the reason they are so expensive is the large numbers that have been sporterized. If NONE of them had been modified, their current value would be much less that they currently are. So, when you chop up that old Nagant think of the favor you are doing for the value of everybody else's collection.
I have a Turk Mauser with no bluing left, some pitting under the wood, and the stock is well, wood. I don't think the world will last long enough for this rifle to ever have collector value beyond just going bang. It does shoot amazingly well. If I do all the work myself, and I can, I can make this the equilavent of most off the shelf rifles and I will have about the price of your used Savage with a stock fitted to me.
I would also have the satisfaction of doing the project. It wouldn't make strict financial sense but then owning more than one each rifle, pistol and shotgun doesn't either. And I do.
I have a Turk Mauser with no bluing left, some pitting under the wood, and the stock is well, wood. I don't think the world will last long enough for this rifle to ever have collector value beyond just going bang. It does shoot amazingly well. If I do all the work myself, and I can, I can make this the equilavent of most off the shelf rifles and I will have about the price of your used Savage with a stock fitted to me.
I would also have the satisfaction of doing the project. It wouldn't make strict financial sense but then owning more than one each rifle, pistol and shotgun doesn't either. And I do.
Ash
Member
"Are you telling me that you believe that fitting a Timney trigger, for example, to a 1893 Spanish Mauser action doesn't add to the utility of that rifle?"
The previous trigger does not make the rifle useless.
"First off, these are your numbers and nobody elses. In my example, I have less than $300 total in a rifle that will outshoot any $200 used Savage, which is far better made than any $200 Savage, AND WHICH IS PAPERLESS, unlike the Savage. How much more plainly should I write it so that you'll understand these concepts?"
These are not my numbers. And, you are FOS if you think a Chilean Mauser will out shoot a commercial Savage. Ain't gonna happen.
"I don't know anyone in this day and age who has or would sporterize a black-powder weapon (if only because I can get a new-production Knight inline for less money and with the same paperless qualities). "
Obviously, you are not capable of linear thought. A sporterized Enfield or Springfield from the Civil War was sporterized. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHEN! When it was done, such muskets were "plentiful." You are doing the same thing today what was done 100 years ago. Nothing new.
You can call a pile of dog crap sirloin, but no matter how loud you shout it, it is still just crap. And if anybody wants to waste their breath on famous-name conversions selling for a lot of money, there are always exceptions to the rule. But, don't be a moron. Custom guns might sell well (oft they don't), but a big name custom gun might sell well, but they sure as hell cost a bunch in the first place. But hey, it ain't me. Everyone here has been to gunshows. The emperor has no clothes and sporterized milusurps sell for much less.
Ash
The previous trigger does not make the rifle useless.
"First off, these are your numbers and nobody elses. In my example, I have less than $300 total in a rifle that will outshoot any $200 used Savage, which is far better made than any $200 Savage, AND WHICH IS PAPERLESS, unlike the Savage. How much more plainly should I write it so that you'll understand these concepts?"
These are not my numbers. And, you are FOS if you think a Chilean Mauser will out shoot a commercial Savage. Ain't gonna happen.
"I don't know anyone in this day and age who has or would sporterize a black-powder weapon (if only because I can get a new-production Knight inline for less money and with the same paperless qualities). "
Obviously, you are not capable of linear thought. A sporterized Enfield or Springfield from the Civil War was sporterized. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHEN! When it was done, such muskets were "plentiful." You are doing the same thing today what was done 100 years ago. Nothing new.
You can call a pile of dog crap sirloin, but no matter how loud you shout it, it is still just crap. And if anybody wants to waste their breath on famous-name conversions selling for a lot of money, there are always exceptions to the rule. But, don't be a moron. Custom guns might sell well (oft they don't), but a big name custom gun might sell well, but they sure as hell cost a bunch in the first place. But hey, it ain't me. Everyone here has been to gunshows. The emperor has no clothes and sporterized milusurps sell for much less.
Ash
Ash
Member
And, that VZ sporter is at Quickcash Pawn, phone number 601-736-7200.
Ash
Ash
Ash
Member
A sporterized rifle, by the way, need not be dog crap. There have been decent jobs to be sure. Bubba, though, is more common and making a tactical rifle out of an antique rifle is pretty silly no matter what you might say. Might as well add racing stripes and a spoiler to a model T. Yeah, that'll work.
Custom sporters, as I said, cost a whole lot, a lot more than a commerical rifle, and could thus sell for more. A sporter you or I do, on the other hand, still costs more to make than a commerical rifle but will sell for much less than a sporter when you try. These are facts, not opinions. This is the real world.
Ash
Custom sporters, as I said, cost a whole lot, a lot more than a commerical rifle, and could thus sell for more. A sporter you or I do, on the other hand, still costs more to make than a commerical rifle but will sell for much less than a sporter when you try. These are facts, not opinions. This is the real world.
Ash
Keep it civil or move on, folks.
You know I got my hands on a Springfield 1903-a3 for $50 with TWO stocks, a 'sporter' that wasn't fit very well, and the original military stock.
I'm really really glad I didn't 'bubba' it.
Taking a pre 99 rifle and sporterizing it... I don't have problem with. Rebarreling it in an odd-ball european caliber? You are likely asking for problems.
Then again, Century frequently puts up rebarreled Mausers in 30-06, 270 etc for sale for under $200. I don't know if they'll shoot MOA... but you never know.
You know I got my hands on a Springfield 1903-a3 for $50 with TWO stocks, a 'sporter' that wasn't fit very well, and the original military stock.
I'm really really glad I didn't 'bubba' it.
Taking a pre 99 rifle and sporterizing it... I don't have problem with. Rebarreling it in an odd-ball european caliber? You are likely asking for problems.
Then again, Century frequently puts up rebarreled Mausers in 30-06, 270 etc for sale for under $200. I don't know if they'll shoot MOA... but you never know.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Ash - my sig adds all I can offer at this point to you. Stating something to be so doesn't automatically make it true, and repeating it over and over ad nauseum doesn't make it any truer. You bring your $200 Savage and I'll lend you my 1895 7x57 and let you personally and firsthand determine which is a better shooter. I'll even throw in a round of your beverage of choice if your $200 Savage wins. And that's a gentleman's promise.
Atek3 - your original question addressed cleaning up and sporterizing a pre-1899 Mosin. If your friend wants to go down this road and spend the money to do so, it's his call and nobody (including myself or Ash) has the right to say anything otherwise. On to your original questions:
1) I've not seen any pre-cut aftermarket Mosin barrels. He'd have to get a barrel blank and have it cut down as a true custom barrel if he really wants to rebarrel it. Were this me, I'd be tempted to just clean it up and leave the chambering as-is. After all, the 7.62x54R round has plenty of punch for just about any task, is still in modern production, and should be available for some signficant period of time to come. I can see no compelling reason to want to switch chamberings other than for local SHTF ammo availability...
2) The trigger could likely be cleaned up by a competent gunsmith, but there is no drop-in aftermarket trigger (a la Timney) that I know of to help out on that. Huber Concepts has a replacement trigger out - it's not as nice as a good Timney, but it's worth looking into if you don't want a gunsmithed solution.
3) ATI makes a drop-in stock, but I'm not partial to 'em. Boyds used to offer a walnut sporter stock for the M/N, but their current catalog doesn't show one available. However, it does look like makarov.com has some in stock if that's of interest.
4) B-Square makes a scount-style scope mount - I've used them in the past on projects and found their construction to be a bit, ah, lacking. The current favorite for scout mounts on the M/N seems to be the Darrell's Mount. Alternately, you can mount a Mojo rear peep sight.
Hope this helps.
Atek3 - your original question addressed cleaning up and sporterizing a pre-1899 Mosin. If your friend wants to go down this road and spend the money to do so, it's his call and nobody (including myself or Ash) has the right to say anything otherwise. On to your original questions:
1) I've not seen any pre-cut aftermarket Mosin barrels. He'd have to get a barrel blank and have it cut down as a true custom barrel if he really wants to rebarrel it. Were this me, I'd be tempted to just clean it up and leave the chambering as-is. After all, the 7.62x54R round has plenty of punch for just about any task, is still in modern production, and should be available for some signficant period of time to come. I can see no compelling reason to want to switch chamberings other than for local SHTF ammo availability...
2) The trigger could likely be cleaned up by a competent gunsmith, but there is no drop-in aftermarket trigger (a la Timney) that I know of to help out on that. Huber Concepts has a replacement trigger out - it's not as nice as a good Timney, but it's worth looking into if you don't want a gunsmithed solution.
3) ATI makes a drop-in stock, but I'm not partial to 'em. Boyds used to offer a walnut sporter stock for the M/N, but their current catalog doesn't show one available. However, it does look like makarov.com has some in stock if that's of interest.
4) B-Square makes a scount-style scope mount - I've used them in the past on projects and found their construction to be a bit, ah, lacking. The current favorite for scout mounts on the M/N seems to be the Darrell's Mount. Alternately, you can mount a Mojo rear peep sight.
Hope this helps.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
