What's the point of sporterizing mil-surps?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 27, 2012
Messages
915
It used to be a very common thing to take an old surplus rifle, chop it up, perhaps refinish it, and so forth to turn it into a hunting rifle.

As someone who appreciates history, I don't understand why anyone would even try to do that except for the cost savings, but what I really want to know is:

How does sporterizing something make it more suitable as a hunting gun?
 
Most sporterized guns have had the bayonet and front hand guards removed. You won't be bayoneting a deer after getting your barrel roasting hot while shooting waves of charging deer, so that extra weight came off.
Remember, back in the day those guns were only worth what you could get someone to pay, and you could get more for a "hunting rifle" than you could for a surplus battle rifle.
 
The 1903 Springfield was an example, as were various Mausers.

I believe these had iron sights, as that was the norm for a military rifle. There was no provision for mounting a scope.

The "better" 1903 Springfield sporters I've seen addressed this by providing a decent scope mount and a safety modification so the safety didn't hit the scope bell.

The "rifleman's rifle" (Winchester Model 70) really doesn't look a whole lot different than a well-executed '03 Springfield sporter.
 
I agree with silicosys4, "back in the day" these milsurp rifles were a dime a dozen. Even the local hardware store sold M1 Carbines for dirt cheap. Unfortunately at that time I had no idea they would be worth much in the future. Nowadays it seems a shame to sporterize these classic rifles which ooze history. Some low end current factory built rifles can be bought at milsurp prices. They shoot well and work well for hunting.

I was at a gun show today and prices have definitely gone up on milsurp rifles. Beatup SMLEs for $350 plus, authentic K98s for $1,000 plus, Grandes, K-31, Mosins, etc. All going up in price and rightly so as they become more scarce.
 
Although some people still do, I think that in the 1950 and 1960s (Wasnt alive, using what I learned) surplus guns were record cheap, and new production guns cost significantly more (% of income). Currently, if you buy a mosin for 120.00, spend 60.00 on a mount, then 100 on a scope, you have a 2-4" (@100yds) sporterized mosin, worth less than what you paid, and shoots worse than the same price will buy you a savage axis or ruger american, both 1" rifles...

The simple explanation: the market has changed.....


I like my mil surps in orig. condition as well.
 
At the height of the panic, while everyone was paying $2,200 dollars for a Bushmaster, I bought a Norinco SKS on an ATI stock for $400. After getting a couple of steel 30 round preban duckbill magazines for another $120 I had a reliable, easy to handle, high-capacity rifle for defense, hunting, and sport shooting. Not bad for $520 all total in the middle of the panic:

Oh, and $400 for a stock SKS was typical pre-panic in Massachusetts.

IMG_1278_zps99327e1a.gif
 
Perceptions have also changed. You did not go into the woods in 1950 wearing combat fatigues and carrying a 15 year old main battle rifle. You would not be cool. You would be the laughing stock back at the bar. A red plaid wool coat and a sporting rifle was the way to go. If you were low on funds a sporterized milsurp would still be acceptable at deer camp. If you were poor you did the sporterizing (bubbaizing) yourself to try and fit in.
 
What's the point of sporterizing mil-surps?

So you can look like you know what your doing and not like some milsurp looney getting ready for a reenactment of the defense of Stalingrad.
 
Springfield 1903 MarkI made in 1917. Made into a real nice hunting rifle which is what its used for.

attachment.php

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
As others said, the market changed. It used to be a great way to turn something cheap and almost value-less (an old war rifle) into something acceptably close to (or sometimes BETTER than) a commercially made hunting rifle. When a Winchester might be $150 or even more, and a Springfield '03 might be $15, and a gunsmith's time was cheap...

These days there's a large market for period-correct vintage military rifles (because originals are now so scarce) and there are many cheap and quite accurate commercial hunting rifles on the market that will cost you FAR less than a quality "sporterizing" job (EVEN IF YOU DO IT YOURSELF)!

So the "sporterizing" game now has devolved into little more than hacking up cheap Mosin-Nagant rifles as a means of staving off boredom (or to create YouTube content), or bolting bits onto SKS carbines.

Actually, the newest and most appealing trend is "UN-Sporterizing." i.e. finding bubba'd military rifles with the important parts still intact and rebuilding them into the fine weapons they once were. I've got a Model of 1917 in progress right now... :)
 
People like to fiddle and can't leave well enough alone. How many people purchase extended mag releases, rubber grips, butt plugs, etc. for their Glock before they every even shoot it?
 
"Sporterizing" was really just re-purposing something of limited use into something more useful. Re-purposing warehouses full of unused war surplus rifles into useful hunting/target/sporter rifles was a good if not noble endeavor. It is probably what saved millions of rifles from the smelter. Had that market not developed, the majority of surplus rifles would have been turned into scrap. In addition it is what drives up the value of non-sporterized rifles that remain.
 
alright I'll tackle this in bullet point form because otherwise I'll probably just end up rambling.
1. priceless pieces of history. I do not understand the historical value placed on firearms. the way I see it a rifle is a tool. it was a tool used by soldiers to win a war. a trench shovel has just as much historical value as a K98 Mauser, it was used in battle, under fire and saved many a troop from death. I would not get bent out of shape if someone hacked up a milsurp folding shovel and I do not get bent out of shape when I see someone with a hacked up enfield. it's their property and they can do as they see fit with it, I have no place to judge or criticize them for what they do with their own stuff.

2. what does sporterizing accomplish? by cutting down the forward portion of the wood and removing the handguard you remove a great deal of weight, on some rifles this can be as much as 2 and a half pounds of weight that you remove. most hunters are not fit, combat hardened soldiers that are used to carrying a 10 pound rifle everywhere, every pound you can take off means less weight that you are packing across creeks, over mountains and hillsides and in general just less exertion on yourself. why is it so necessary to get the base rifle as light as possible? because once you drill and tap the receiver and put a scope on it for long range shooting you are slapping that weight right back on. not everyone can use iron sights very well and a magnifying scope not only helps increase precision but also aids in identifying game at the last minute and can help prevent firing on the wrong species(IE mistaking a white tailed deer for a mule deer or mistaking a Blonde black bear for a grizzly). yesterday I took my Arisaka type 44 carbine to the range to test out some hunting loads, I rang an oxygen tank at 400 yards on my first try and my little brother nailed it a couple times too but I started a conversation with another fellow that had been doing pretty good with his hunting rifle and I let him shoot mine, he missed a 200 yard oxygen tank by about 2 feet to the left... some people just aren't good with irons...

3. why sporterize? because for one, back in the 50s, 60s and 70s these rifles were dirt cheap when enfields, german mausers, 1917s, and 1903 springfields were $20 at the local sears there was no reason no to, nobody ever imagined that these rifles would one day jump over $1000 in good condition. millions were hacked up and the number of collectable rifles dwindled until now they are so scarce that it's hard to imagine anyone doing that just because of resale value. however when I look at a SKS where there are about 11 million worldwide or a mosin nagant where there were over 18 million I see no reason why not? it's a dirt cheap rifle and it gives you a thorough idea of how your gun functions, operates and just a better respect for it.

I have what I am starting to see as a respectable collection including mosin nagants, enfields, an M1 garand, springfield 1903, couple arisakas, an SKS, and a MAS36. the SKS, one of the mosins and one of the enfields are bubba'd and all by me. the mosin is a POS, it was a budget expiriment that failed miserably. the enfield is a work in progress converted to 45ACP. and the SKS is actually becoming one of my favorite rifles despite how poor of condition it was in when I bought it and how low my expectations for it were. I would take my bubba'd SKS over an original condition SKS of similar origins any day of the week and if I didn't take the time to make the modifications then I would never have known just what these rifles are capable of and that can be said for any military surplus rifle.
 
Much has already been said, but I'll second some of it.

Sporters (good sporters) handle better, look better, and generally shoot better than the military guns they came from. I have an '03 sporter and a commercial Mauser, I woudlnt trade either of them for a boatload of original condition guns if I had to actually use them. To me, the original guns are heavy chunky clunkers compared to good sporters.
 
authentic K98s for $1,000 plus

Is that just typical gun show price because the seller thinks he can pull one over on uninformed buyers or was it an all #s matching non-Russian capture non import stamped specimen? Mitchells charges less than half that. I just bought one from Wideners less than 2 months ago for $360, and it still had all the German markings on it.
 
Is that just typical gun show price because the seller thinks he can pull one over on uninformed buyers or was it an all #s matching non-Russian capture non import stamped specimen? Mitchells charges less than half that. I just bought one from Wideners less than 2 months ago for $360, and it still had all the German markings on it.
I hate to pee all over your parade but...
mitchels are not in any way shape or form an authentic K98 mauser. they have brand new stocks, rings, bayonet lugs, butt plates and IIRC even new finish. there is nothing authentic at all about a mitchel's mauser other than the steel was forged into the shape of a rifle in germany.

a VZ24 is closer to being a authentic K98 than a mitchels K98.

a German, original condition K09K with proofs and markins intact is worth well over $1000 and can go for dang near $2000 as they are a serious rarity.
 
Oh I've read all about how Mitchells are overpriced Russian capture K98s that they cleaned up and refinished, and I bought a un-molested Russian capture one from Wideners not from Mitchells. My question is whether the $1,000 gun show K98 is a #s matching, non-Russian capture specimen to command that price.

I'm wondering if the gun show seller was basically doing what Mitchells does, but charging even more than they do.
 
For the OP, at the time that most of them were sporterized, they were extremely cheap and decent actions. Most people hunted with iron sights, so they weren't turned off by the sights. I don't see how anyone could hunt with stock mauser sights, but that's another story. Very few people thought of the historic value because they weren't interested in that. Many people, my father included, got started in hunting with cheap sporterized mausers and 1903s.

As for the $1000 K98, a provable GI bring-back or very early import, non-RC, non-Yugo capture, it'll easily go for $1000 even if it's been duffle cut. The problem comes with the number of fake waffenampt stamps and Sig stamps that are out there. Single-Sig K98s are one of the most faked guns out there. I almost picked up a very, very poorly faked Nazi-captured M91 mosin, just because of how bad it was done. They're all over the place.

Mitchell Mausers are one of the worst offenders. Nothing they sell has any historical value at all. Everything has been peened, restamped, refinished, restocked, and destroyed. They're probably good shooters, but the way they're represented is totally dishonest. When they're claiming that their M48's served in WWII, they must have a time machine to take them back a couple of years from their date of manufacture to have them serve somewhere.

Matt

ETA: Sporterized Mausers and 1903's have served me well as a source of receivers for more custom-style rifles or as restoration projects.
 
Sporterized vs. bubbarized

Sporterizing military rifles is a far cry from hacking off the barrel and removing the forearm and shortening the stock. That in itself is the definition of "bubbarizing", not sporterizing. Certain military rifles, i.e... bolt actions, are the basis of quite a few of todays most desirable bolt guns, Ruger, Winchester, Kimber, Montana, etc...

Take a look these...

http://www.mccabeguns.com/mccabegallery.html

http://www.skaggsgunsmithing.com/photo_gallery.shtml

Sometimes you cannot find the rifle you want in the caliber you want and sometimes you just "want" something thats diifferent. Here are two of mine, an old world 7.92x57 and a 45-70 Siamese Mauser.

I grew up on these "sporterized" rifles and learned to love them, they are dependable, all steel, made for me, rifles.
 

Attachments

  • photo1_small.JPG
    photo1_small.JPG
    64.9 KB · Views: 24
  • photo3.JPG
    photo3.JPG
    68.8 KB · Views: 24
All good points. Keep in mind that after the war, there were 10s of millions of obsolete bolt action rifles worldwide. K98s were $10 in the 50s. One could get an excellent Mauser based hunting rifle that was affordable for anybody. I have a " sporterized" Mauser K98 that was made in Jan. '44 by Oberndorf, in .22-250. I have shot 0.31 MOA with it. Remember many barrels were shot out, damaged or pitted from corrosive ammo, what may appear to be a Bubba'd gun may have saved the action from a blast furnace. ;)
 
The older Gun Digest annuals books used to have a section of custom guns. They had so many truly stunning custom rifles, many built on Mausers, and a few on 03 Springfield actions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top