Which 7.62X51 NATO MIlsurp?

[engravertom]

hello all,

I'm thinking of taking a break from acquiring more Mosins. I am looking at either a Spanish 1916, A Chilean M95, or an Ishapore 2A, in 7.62 NATO.

Assuming the prices will be comparable, what would your collective wisdom be?

The Ishapore will give me more capacity, and the best issue sights. the 1916 is compact. The Chilean mauser would be the best in absolute quality, I would think.

I do have quite a few mauser stripper clips, and a fair amount of what looks like Military brass.

I have never owned a Chilean mauser, but have owned a couple of Swedes over the years. i did own each of the other two at one time. I will probably like the M95 best from a handling standpoint. My heart leans that way too, although the Ishapore seems to be the best practical option. The 1916 would be my last chioce of the three, but I can be persuaded otherwise.

The detatchable mag of the Ishapore may be a plus, but the security of a flush fit fixed mag appeals to me also.

Getting a semi auto is not an option right now.

Thanks for any input!

Tom

PS, I am familar with the .308 vs. 7.62 NATO situation, but if anyone has informed opinons about the relative strengths of those three rifles, I would appreciate hearing about that also. I would plan to use only NATO spec ammo, or equivalent handloads.

 

[nalioth]

The detatchable mag of the Ishapore may be a plus, but the security of a flush fit fixed mag appeals to me also.

Why do you feel it "a plus"?

It was not designed with modern tactics in mind (i.e. change empty mag to reload).

 

[engravertom]

Some seem to consider the detachable mag a plus, even though it wasn't deisgned to be used that way.

I suppose that is where I need the input. I didn't find changing the mags to be all that quick with my last Ishapore, but maybe I didn't practice enough. My thought is if a detachable mag is not to be used like more modern mags, I would rather stay with a fixed mag system.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Tom

 

[Threeband]

Definatly go for the Ishapore.

You already have Mausers and Mosins. Go for something different.

The Lee Enfield will open up worlds of wonder for you. Once you lose your Lee Enfield virginity, you'll start selling off those crappy, clunky Mosins (yeah, keep a couple) to buy more Lee Enfields.

Am I being too subtle? I suggest you opt for the Ishapore.

 

[engravertom]

Well, I am starting to lean that way. I had forgotten that the Chilean conversions were done by adding a chamber insert.

The Ishapores were built for the NATO round from the beginning, so that is a strong point in their favor.

Thanks,

Tom

 

[jonnyc]

Is there even a question here? The Ishapore is twice the usable rifle that the others are.

 

[stubbicatt]

I remember some years ago when the Ishapore 7.62 Enfields were debuted here on the surplus scene that there were some serious issues with headspace in that chambering. Assuming you can verify headspace with the proper gages, it might be worth looking into.

IIRC, the action was made of a lower grade alloy, and prone to stretching. Some saw this as an advantage to the 303 for which the action was designed, as the rifle supposedly sort of self regulated itself for longer distance shooting. If the actions stretch on the lower pressure imperial cordite loadings, I can imagine that with the nearly 8,000 psi increase from the NATO round, one would see potentially catastrophic stretching and flexing in that action.

I think I might find something else to capture my interest.

YMMV.

 

[Nero_Atrum]

Hunt down a FR-8. Thats what Im doing.

 

[nalioth]

I remember some years ago when the Ishapore 7.62 Enfields were debuted here on the surplus scene that there were some serious issues with headspace in that chambering. Assuming you can verify headspace with the proper gages, it might be worth looking into.

IIRC, the action was made of a lower grade alloy, and prone to stretching. Some saw this as an advantage to the 303 for which the action was designed, as the rifle supposedly sort of self regulated itself for longer distance shooting. If the actions stretch on the lower pressure imperial cordite loadings, I can imagine that with the nearly 8,000 psi increase from the NATO round, one would see potentially catastrophic stretching and flexing in that action.

I think I might find something else to capture my interest.

I believe you are confusing the rechambered .303 Enfields with the redesigned Ishapore Enfields.