The-Reaver
Member
The mosin has been around a lot longer, but been seen in almost every battle field the AK has. My vote goes to the Mosin just based on age and ease of access.
Which of these 2 rifles has seen more Combat?
- Thread starter TrickyDick
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
TrickyDick
Member
i think alot of people forget that just about every conflict involving the AK, the M/N was there with it.... I would go with M/N
Deus Machina
Member
Agree with Tricky Dick and and all the ones like that.
Very few wars since WW2 have been between solid standing armies with well-equipped troops. I doubt there's a single one that hasn't used the AK, but these scrabble-up fighters use whatever's around, and there's not a country on this planet without Nagants that could wind up in their hands.
Very few wars since WW2 have been between solid standing armies with well-equipped troops. I doubt there's a single one that hasn't used the AK, but these scrabble-up fighters use whatever's around, and there's not a country on this planet without Nagants that could wind up in their hands.
Kachok
Member
While the Mosin has seen it's fair share of fighting remember the AK is still the hot ticket item for every violent bad guy group across the globe and has been for many many years now, if you start doing the body count on the numerous and endless wars all across the middle east, Korea, Vietnam, tribal wars in Africa, Chechnya, communist factions/drug cartels in south America, and absolutely countless skirmishes across the globe very often the AK being the standard rifle on both sides I think it is safe to say that the AK has seen more violence then any other firearm ever invented.
To look at it in another perspective there were 37 million MN rifle made, in contrast there were over 75 million AK47s made, supposedly the total made around the world (counting knockoffs) exceeds 100 million but still trying to verify that number, the Mosin and all bolt actions became very obsolete as a main battle rifle when the AK came about and has been a "leftover" military rifle since then. AK for the win absolutely no doubt about it.
To look at it in another perspective there were 37 million MN rifle made, in contrast there were over 75 million AK47s made, supposedly the total made around the world (counting knockoffs) exceeds 100 million but still trying to verify that number, the Mosin and all bolt actions became very obsolete as a main battle rifle when the AK came about and has been a "leftover" military rifle since then. AK for the win absolutely no doubt about it.
Last edited:
I couldn't disagree with your more. The AK has never seen combat on the scale of WWI and WWII, 3/4 of the German army was on the Eastern front during WWII. The Eastern front in in WWII was ~1800 miles wide, the siege at Leningrad lasted 900 days. The Eastern front was the largest and bloodiest confrontation in human history with the loss of ~10.6 million Soviet soldiers, yet there were close to 7 million Soviet soldiers in uniform in 1945.
During a 15 day period in 1942 there were ~340 trains supplying ammunition, all types, to the front, those numbers work out to 8200+ tons/day.
The AK has never been subjected to the sheer magnitude and intensity as was witnessed at Leningrad, Stalingrad, Kursk and the drive to Berlin.
Simply because the AK has has been manufactured in larger numbers than the Moisin doesn't mean it's been used more. Start cranking out the combat numbers and the AK doesn't come close to the Moisin usage, and we haven't even included WWI and the other Russian/Soviet wars.
Last edited:
Deus Machina
Member
Not to mention that the Mosin Nagant was standard issue for most of Stalin's reign, including his purges.
Not sure that's considered combat, though.
Not sure that's considered combat, though.
Both world wars were massive in scope compared to any other war in the history of man. Nothing else comes close. The Soviets had 27 MILLION casualties in WWII. Only half of those (only?) were soldiers but think about how many of those soldiers were carrying MN's. And then there was WWI. The Russians had about 3.5 million casualties in that war. But they were far from being the only country using the MN.
The plain fact is that aside from the Chinese Civil War nothing since WWII has produced massive casualties. And that Chinese War ended long before the AK became standard fare for the communists. And since many of the Chinese were fighting against the commies it's pretty unlikely they had any AK's.
I'd venture to say that the number of casualties inflicted by the MN would be at least 10 times as high as the AK has produced and possibly as much as 100 times as high. It's a massive divide with the AK far on the short end of that stick. Name a single war that produced the kind of casualties from WWII where the combatants used the AK. It can't be done because it hasn't happened. Sure there have been some devastating wars but nothing, I repeat, NOTHING compareseeer to what happened in WWII. And the country with the most soldiers involved by far carried the MN. The same is true in WWI. The AK47 doesn't come anywhere near the total number of MN's used in battle.
The plain fact is that aside from the Chinese Civil War nothing since WWII has produced massive casualties. And that Chinese War ended long before the AK became standard fare for the communists. And since many of the Chinese were fighting against the commies it's pretty unlikely they had any AK's.
I'd venture to say that the number of casualties inflicted by the MN would be at least 10 times as high as the AK has produced and possibly as much as 100 times as high. It's a massive divide with the AK far on the short end of that stick. Name a single war that produced the kind of casualties from WWII where the combatants used the AK. It can't be done because it hasn't happened. Sure there have been some devastating wars but nothing, I repeat, NOTHING compareseeer to what happened in WWII. And the country with the most soldiers involved by far carried the MN. The same is true in WWI. The AK47 doesn't come anywhere near the total number of MN's used in battle.
Kachok
Member
No that is not combat, that is genocide, and he usually used starvation to kill rather then wasting bullets.
I lived in Russia for years, the Russians have the utmost respect for Lenin they call him grandpa, there is no such love for Stalin, they hardly mention him, kind of like how we don't talk about the Carter years much.
Granted the battle for Stalingrad (Leningrad/Saint Petersburg) was one of the most intense battles in human history, but put that few years plus a few small wars up against the decades of continues conflicts the AK has seen all over the world and the AK trumps everything else. Today as we speak there are wars/revolutions being fought in several countries with the AK as the weapon of choice on BOTH sides.
BTW Germany lost 3.5 million soldiers in Russia, even if every one of them had died as the result of a Mosin (Russia had several other issued firearms as well, not to mention tanks and artillery) I would still say the AK holds a sizable advantage. It is currently estimated to be responsible for aprox 250,000 deaths a year with no major wars going on. It is indeed an overly efficient tool of death in the wrong hands
Last edited:
I did a quick wiki browse for the major battle rifles used in the 20th century:
They are listed first showing the numbers built, then the rifle model, then the number of countries that are know to have used it (in battle, for familarization trg., etc) no matter how few or many were on hand.
As expected, the AK-47 and the Mosin-Nagant win the numbers produced sweepstake.
75 mil AK-47 93 countries
37 mil Mosin-Nagant 43 countries
17 mil Lee-Enfield SMLE 37 countries
15 mil SKS 42 countries
14.6 mil Mauser K98 29 countries
10.2 mil AKM 90 countries
10 mil M-16 74 countries
6.5 mil M1 carbine 60 countries
6.2 mil M1 Garand 29 countries
5 mil AK-74 26 countries
2 mil FN-FAL 88 countries
1.5 mil M-14 24 countries
? HK-G3 73 countries
They are listed first showing the numbers built, then the rifle model, then the number of countries that are know to have used it (in battle, for familarization trg., etc) no matter how few or many were on hand.
As expected, the AK-47 and the Mosin-Nagant win the numbers produced sweepstake.
75 mil AK-47 93 countries
37 mil Mosin-Nagant 43 countries
17 mil Lee-Enfield SMLE 37 countries
15 mil SKS 42 countries
14.6 mil Mauser K98 29 countries
10.2 mil AKM 90 countries
10 mil M-16 74 countries
6.5 mil M1 carbine 60 countries
6.2 mil M1 Garand 29 countries
5 mil AK-74 26 countries
2 mil FN-FAL 88 countries
1.5 mil M-14 24 countries
? HK-G3 73 countries
Surely you aren't suggesting that Leningrad and Stalingrad are the same city, are you? It seems that way. Of course St. Petersburg is Leningrad's current name but Stalingrad is a long way from that city.
BTW no one said the measure of which rifle had "seen more combat" was determined by how many people were killed by the rifle. All those Russians were carrying MN's for the most part in WWII. Or at least a large percentage of them are. And you seem to have ignored WWI in this conversation not to mention the fact that both sides used the MN in the Winter War. In fact there are a great many wars that included the MN as a common weapon for the troops. It dates back to 1891. Two Russian Wars with Japan, the Finnish Civil War, and the Communist Revolution all the way up to the Iraq War - the MN has been in all those conflicts and many, many more besides including the two great wars. Those 2 wars alone were so much bigger in scale that it is staggeing
Also a lot of the deaths attributed to the AK in recent decades have also been more about genocide than combat.
The MN was one of the most common rifles in both World Wars and it has factored into many major conflicts in the 130 years it's been in service. From Korea, to Turkey, to Cambodia, to Poland, etc. etc. etc. it's a rifle that has seen a LOT of combat. There's just no way the AK47 could have seen as many fire fights.
Also I have to question the validity of the numbers listed here. I'm sure they were found by the poster but the person that put the list together may not have had the facts straight. For one thing I've heard there more AK's produced than are listed. Also I've seen other numbers like 17.5 million 91/30's produced during WWII for the largest army ever assembled. Yes there were other rifles but the MN was the primary rifle.
Last edited:
Kachok
Member
No, confusing name changes over the years, just poking fun. Stalingrad was Tsaritsyn and is now Volgograd. Leningrad was Petrograd and is now Saint Petersberg, love how they do that depending on the political climate LOL
WaywardAce
Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2009
- Messages
- 67
The Mosin has seen combat from the Victorian era until today. The AK 47 has seen combat from the late forties until today. Mosin for the win ..... it's an easily answered question.
BulletArc47
Member
Hmmm pretty tough question. Now I'm not fully studied in the complete history of either of these two fine weapons, but my vote goes to the Mosin Nagant for its sheer service life; hell I'm pretty sure the insurgents in Afghanistan are using Mosin Nagants right now.
jaysouth
Member
Grossly hijacking your thread:
The MN and its many variants in the hands of Vietnamese peasants working fields and going about their daily lives shot down as many multimillion dollar US planes as did their ground to air missles furnished by the Russians.
The MN and its many variants in the hands of Vietnamese peasants working fields and going about their daily lives shot down as many multimillion dollar US planes as did their ground to air missles furnished by the Russians.
They shot down more than a few helicopters with the MN but planes? I would have to see proof of that. I know there were the slow and low flying planes but they weren't going to shoot down any B-52's.
Kachok it's amazing that people in those cities sometimes still want to use the different versions of their names too. I have some friends that live in St. Petersburg and it's a whole other way of life than what we know. I came close to going over there to work for a while but I didn't. My wife convinced me I was too old and my health wasn't good enough for such a strenuous place to live and she was probably right.
Kachok it's amazing that people in those cities sometimes still want to use the different versions of their names too. I have some friends that live in St. Petersburg and it's a whole other way of life than what we know. I came close to going over there to work for a while but I didn't. My wife convinced me I was too old and my health wasn't good enough for such a strenuous place to live and she was probably right.
- Status
