meanmrmustard
Member
I do not need Golds Gym. I was Russian in another life!
What is it about Soviet Rifles...
- Thread starter InkEd
- Start date
- Status
cal30_sniper
Member
*Red's Gym
meanmrmustard
Member
In Russia, Gym goes to you!*Red's Gym
Anyway, J&G supposedly has gotten M44s in if anyone is interested. Thought I'd pass that along.
Thanks Sniper.
Speaking of the M44s, many I think are sold unfired. The Mosin production figures dropped sharply after WW2, and only the carbines were made for a while. They were warehoused just in case throughout the cold war. I don't think there is any other military rifle in a pristine unfired condition, half a century since out of production, that can be bought today for about $250. You can even choose the Tula factory rollmark (red star) or Izhevsk (a shield).
Speaking of the M44s, many I think are sold unfired. The Mosin production figures dropped sharply after WW2, and only the carbines were made for a while. They were warehoused just in case throughout the cold war. I don't think there is any other military rifle in a pristine unfired condition, half a century since out of production, that can be bought today for about $250. You can even choose the Tula factory rollmark (red star) or Izhevsk (a shield).
Last edited:
InkEd
Member
The thread title was about how we all love Russian rifles... you didn't see how it was going to be a bunch of Mosin and AK lovers talking about their favorite commie guns? :wow:
I agree with you that a better trained military with a more accurate rifle is a better fighting force than a bunch of guerillas with surplus weapons.
However, I think it is arrogant to so easily dismiss the courage and determination of those people (especially the young ones) fighting for freedom in some forsaken corner of the globe.
Are they a skilled and highly effective task force? No. Are they fighting for a cause they believe in enough to give their lives? Yes. Nobody claimed they were
I don't feel the blood they shed is filled with any less bravery than any other soldier. Whether or not, one believes they are smart or correct in doing so, is object. A rebel and freedom fighter are the same guy. It just depends on your point of view.
IMHO an untrained 14 year boy in Africa joining a rebel militia to overthrow the dictator, who's army raped his mother and then sliced off his brother's hand with a machete, is WAY MORE BRAVE than me or many other people in this world. He KNOWS he will probably DIE but it is a cause WORTH his life.
Those kids and poor people "spraying rounds over their heads" are fighting for something! Skilled or not they are BRAVE. That is the point I am trying to make here. That's all really.
To discuss Vietnam specifically, I am not a historian but from all accounts a lot of M-16s were "spraying rounds" into the jungle... basically the EXACT same way as the AK. Plus, I don't think WE can call it an outstanding success either to be honest. (The whole thing was messed up in several ways from the beginning. It was NOT the fault of soldiers. It was a lot of political mess.)
Lastly, let's not forget that we fought against mainly Soviet weapons in the Korean War too.
We (the U.S.) win most our wars because of our better trained soldiers. Our better equipment helps a lot too. However, the better equipment is more like the airplanes and high tech stuff rather than the M-16 just being so much better than the AK. Just my .02
I agree with you that a better trained military with a more accurate rifle is a better fighting force than a bunch of guerillas with surplus weapons.
However, I think it is arrogant to so easily dismiss the courage and determination of those people (especially the young ones) fighting for freedom in some forsaken corner of the globe.
Are they a skilled and highly effective task force? No. Are they fighting for a cause they believe in enough to give their lives? Yes. Nobody claimed they were
I don't feel the blood they shed is filled with any less bravery than any other soldier. Whether or not, one believes they are smart or correct in doing so, is object. A rebel and freedom fighter are the same guy. It just depends on your point of view.
IMHO an untrained 14 year boy in Africa joining a rebel militia to overthrow the dictator, who's army raped his mother and then sliced off his brother's hand with a machete, is WAY MORE BRAVE than me or many other people in this world. He KNOWS he will probably DIE but it is a cause WORTH his life.
Those kids and poor people "spraying rounds over their heads" are fighting for something! Skilled or not they are BRAVE. That is the point I am trying to make here. That's all really.
To discuss Vietnam specifically, I am not a historian but from all accounts a lot of M-16s were "spraying rounds" into the jungle... basically the EXACT same way as the AK. Plus, I don't think WE can call it an outstanding success either to be honest. (The whole thing was messed up in several ways from the beginning. It was NOT the fault of soldiers. It was a lot of political mess.)
Lastly, let's not forget that we fought against mainly Soviet weapons in the Korean War too.
We (the U.S.) win most our wars because of our better trained soldiers. Our better equipment helps a lot too. However, the better equipment is more like the airplanes and high tech stuff rather than the M-16 just being so much better than the AK. Just my .02
cal30_sniper
Member
Very well put Ink. We are lucky here in the states to have a life where even the idea of such horrible circumstances as you describe is foreign to us. It is the blood of patriots that has secured that life for us, and the blood of patriots who retain it. Let us hope that we never lose it.
From what I have studied, you are dead on in the employment of the M16 in Vietnam. You get into a very basic fire control difference between the US Army and the US Marine Corps and their employment of the primary infantry weapon. Completely different doctrine has led to very different usage of the same weapon. Most would think I was getting biased if I started comparing the combat results of each method...
Interesting aside on the aircraft too. Some of the late-WWII Soviet stuff was outstanding in performance. Give them a few years, and we struggled throughout the Korean War to keep pace with the Mig 15. It's amazing what some German technology injection can do
From what I have studied, you are dead on in the employment of the M16 in Vietnam. You get into a very basic fire control difference between the US Army and the US Marine Corps and their employment of the primary infantry weapon. Completely different doctrine has led to very different usage of the same weapon. Most would think I was getting biased if I started comparing the combat results of each method...
Interesting aside on the aircraft too. Some of the late-WWII Soviet stuff was outstanding in performance. Give them a few years, and we struggled throughout the Korean War to keep pace with the Mig 15. It's amazing what some German technology injection can do
InkEd
Member
LOL! Very true about the Nazi technology... it was the basis for both the US and USSR space programs too.
The early Migs were superior in Korea to our aging planes. Many say the Japanese Zero was better than some of our planes in WWII. The latter statement is debatable in my opinion.
The early Migs were superior in Korea to our aging planes. Many say the Japanese Zero was better than some of our planes in WWII. The latter statement is debatable in my opinion.
Last edited:
I just got into rifle shooting and collecting on my own in the last two years. I bought my first AR-15 last year and was absolutely hooked. I love the ergonomics, the simple field stripping, the performance, and the ability to add accessories and customize it. I bought another on Black Friday because I couldn't pass up on the price. This one out performed my first, adding to the satisfaction of my new addition of my collection.
I recently came across a guy who had a WASR 10-63 package for very nice price, and thought back to history class and all the gun shows I watched and thought, why do I need a communist rifle for? Lol my grandpa always hated them and swore he would never have one of those damn things in his house!! But I also remembered everyone saying how reliable they were and watching videos of torture testing them to the extreme.
So I did some research on the old Romaian WASR 1063. I found a mix of good and bad reviews on the rifle, most complaints were, canted sights, wobbly mag wells, & action sticking open. I decided to take a chance, especially since the guy wasn't price gouging. I finally got a chance to shoot it last weekend and man, this thing is a hoot to shoot!! I was only using iron sights and was shooting better groups than I thought I was capable of. Whoever said the AK isnt accurate isnt that good of a shot apparently. The rifle ran flawless with three different types of ammo (including surplus) and was very enjoyable to shoot.
The only thing I regret is not giving it a chance a lot sooner. This will be one that will be in my collection for a long long time and I could not be happier about it.
Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
I recently came across a guy who had a WASR 10-63 package for very nice price, and thought back to history class and all the gun shows I watched and thought, why do I need a communist rifle for? Lol my grandpa always hated them and swore he would never have one of those damn things in his house!! But I also remembered everyone saying how reliable they were and watching videos of torture testing them to the extreme.
So I did some research on the old Romaian WASR 1063. I found a mix of good and bad reviews on the rifle, most complaints were, canted sights, wobbly mag wells, & action sticking open. I decided to take a chance, especially since the guy wasn't price gouging. I finally got a chance to shoot it last weekend and man, this thing is a hoot to shoot!! I was only using iron sights and was shooting better groups than I thought I was capable of. Whoever said the AK isnt accurate isnt that good of a shot apparently. The rifle ran flawless with three different types of ammo (including surplus) and was very enjoyable to shoot.
The only thing I regret is not giving it a chance a lot sooner. This will be one that will be in my collection for a long long time and I could not be happier about it.
Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
The US historically has had a pattern of letting it slide for a while, until the time of reckoning. The latest examples are still fresh in the memory. The Zero is described as super agile compared to its adversaries at the outset of the war. It lacked armor protection. It was completely outclassed eventually when the sleeping giant arose.
A little different with the jet propulsion and missile technology. That was among Hitler's priorities. The US put its money on the atomic bomb. By the way, victorious nations have picked up advanced weaponry and tactics from the defeated enemy since the Roman times. The Nazis had been hammered with increasing force since 1942. Their small weapons research was fueled by dire necessity. So they pioneered the sturmgewehr and the RPG. The Allies and the Soviets were advancing with their SMGs and M1s, but also with more heavy weapons and manpower. One can even make a case that the Allies forced the Nazis into accelerated weapons research, to capture its results later.
Last edited:
Deer_Freak
Member.
I like the Mosin Nagant chambered in 7.62x54 but I don't care for the 7.62x39. I have two SKS's they are accurate and a lot of fun to shoot. But when hunting I prefer a larger cartridge.
stubbicatt
Member
I thought Britain supplied the technology of the MiG 15? The Rolls Royce engine?
I guess the innovation of the swept wing has its aegis in Nazi Germany...
I guess the innovation of the swept wing has its aegis in Nazi Germany...
You are looking down a whole other can of worms. Yes the British gave Stalin the Rolls Royce engine. From the insider memoirs, the Soviet Government placed the request expecting it to be denied. Stalin was lukewarm to the idea, saying why in the world would they do it for us. The new Labour Government did. One has to remember, at the time there were strong advocates of sharing the atomic bomb blueprints too. Only the Korean conflict cooled it off.
"For the right price the capitalists will sell us rope on which we shall hang them". Lenin, in my translation.
InkEd
Member
That is a great quote. I don't like it but it is powerful.
Cosmoline
Member
This highlights one of the main reasons east bloc guns have a mixed rep stateside. And it has little to do with quality control in the former Warsaw Pact. The problem comes because US law makes it extremely difficult to just build these firearms and ship them over. They have to be assembled here or re-assembled to include new US made parts, non-auto receivers, etc. The stateside assembly plants run by certain importers have a very mixed record with these things. It's in the assembly that you end up with badly canted sights, wobbly furniture and even the wrong barrels. The image of angry apes with ballpeen hammers comes to mind when you pick some of these guns up. But really it's a matter of importers who don't really want to be in the gun making business and try to cut corners on it.
If you can get to a quality outfit building off quality receivers, then you can judge the final product in its intended form--or at least the semiauto version of its intended form. I just picked up an AK-74 clone from Waffen that's very nice. The sights are square and the parts all fit together. Best of all it doesn't keyhole the bullets.
Last edited:
- Status
